Look at photos of the
gigantic udders on rBST treated dairy cows and it's not hard to imagine the
artificial hormone's role in increasing U.S. rates of breast and prostate
cancer, precocious puberty and obesity.
But U.S. milk
producers and agricultural officials continue to say Monsanto's Posilac, which
has been used unlabeled in much of the U.S. public milk supply since 1994, is
safe. [1]
Even as they jump
all over each other to ban it.
Last year, Oregon's
Tillamook County Creamery Association, the nation's second largest maker of
chunk cheese, renounced rBST. [2]
This year, Dean
Foods and H.P. Hood, New England's two largest milk processors, Arizona's
Shamrock Farms and Northwestern Dairy Association's Darigold did. [3, 4]
And Dean Foods in
Texas and Prairie Farms Dairy in Carlinville, IL, are leaning in that
direction. [5]
Even Vermont
Agriculture Secretary Steve Kerr has come out against rBST as his state moves
toward zero tolerance. [6]
Created by
combining cow DNA with E coli, (yes, that E coli) Monsanto's recombinant bovine
somatotropin, rBST, designed to make cows produce more milk, was one of the
first genetically modified substances approved for U.S. consumption by the FDA
in 1993.
But its Frankenfood
roots, hormonal actions, unlabeled status and expediency approach to
agriculture -- squeezing more profit out of each animal "unit" -- earned
it the ire of farmers, consumer groups, environmental organizations and animal
advocates. Even Mario Cuomo declaimed it when he was New York governor. [7]
To this day rBST
remains banned in Canada, Japan, the EU, Australia, New Zealand and all but 19,
mostly nonindustrialized, countries though Monsanto says that's because of
"an oversupply of dairy products" not safety concerns. [8]
In fact the more
you learn about rBST, the more you wonder why anyone would think it is safe.
Take the
unpublished rat study Monsanto supplied to the FDA for drug approval. Monsanto
claimed no rats absorbed rBST in their blood stream -- hence there was no need
for long term toxicity studies -- but Canadian scientists who obtained the
study discovered that 20 percent to 30 percent of the rats did absorb rBST with
biggest concentrations in (you guess it) the prostate. There were also thyroid
cysts. [9]
This inspired
Vermont Senators Patrick Leahy and James Jeffords to ask the U.S. Health and
Human Services Department to formally investigate the FDA's approval of rBST in
1998. [9] Especially since the FDA employee in charge of labeling guidelines
for rBST, Michael R. Taylor, had been a Monsanto vice president. And the FDA
researcher charged with evaluating rBST levels in milk had done the same work
at Monsanto. [10]
And how about
IGF-1, insulin-like growth factor-1, the rBST byproduct that's associated with
breast, prostate and colon cancer and may be in the milk? [11]
"IGF-1 is [a]
naturally occurring human hormone commonly measured in our saliva," writes
Trent Loos, columnist for the Agribusiness weekly Feedstuffs on the rBST
supporting web site, www.igf-1-and-milk.com.
"Every person who has ever been diagnosed with cancer has also had saliva.
Does that mean that saliva causes cancer? NO. Furthermore, if parents are
worried about the impact of milk consumption on their kids, are they keeping
the kids locked away from the sun? Malignant melanoma [is] the most serious
form of skin cancer." Reassured? Me too.
Then there's the
mastitis.
Occurrences of
mastitis -- udder infections -- and lameness are so increased under rBST, a
Canadian Veterinary Medical Association panel's report found, "Treated
cows were at higher risk of being culled," and rBST was banned. [10]
John Shumway, a
Lowville, New York, dairy farmer told an Albany newspaper he had to cull a
quarter of his cows after using rBST for eight weeks. [12]
And "cull
chronically-infected cows," is actually one of the "general
recommendations" Monsanto offers for mastitis management on its web site.
Not only does
mastitis introduce antibiotic residues in milk and encourage antibiotic
resistance, it has contributed to the wave of dairy downers seen in
slaughterhouses in the last decade, food activists say. [13]
Some even claim the
hopped up metabolic needs of rBST cows are what induced dairymen to feed downer
cows to live ones in the macabre practice that transmitted mad cow disease.
As anti-rBST
sentiment builds in the U.S. and the public says, "We're drinking
WHAT?" Monsanto executives contend that the new rBST-free milk offerings
are a marketing ploy.
They know a little
about marketing ploys.
[1] Rutland Herald
June 12, 2005
[2] AP Feb 19, 2005
[3] St. Louis Post-Dispatch Nov 6, 2006
[4] Captial Press Oct 20, 2006
[5] New York Times Oct 7, 2006
[6] Rutland Herald, Oct 7, 2006
[7] The Buffalo News March 9, 1994
[8] www.monsantodairy.com/
[9] Capital Times Dec 18, 1998
[10] The Oregonian Feb 27, 2005
[11] New York Times Nov 9, 2005
[12] Wisconsin State Journal Aug 14, 1994
[13] www.omafra.gov.on.ca
Martha Rosenberg is a Staff Cartoonist at the
Evanston Roundtable. Her work has appeared in the Chicago Tribune, LA
Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Boston Globe, Providence Journal. Arizona
Republic, New Orleans Times-Picayune and other newspapers. She can be
reached at: mrosenberg@evmark.org.