In May 2007, I and four other leading national experts on genetically-engineered, recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) milk filed a Petition to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), "Petition Seeking the Withdrawal of the New Animal Drug Application Approval for Posilac-Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH)."
In the absence of any response, on January 12, 2010, I resubmitted this Petition to Michael Taylor, Deputy Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. As detailed in this Petition, Posilac poses major public health hazards. I requested his review and support of an early ban of Posilac.
This Petition requested the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Commissioner of Food and Drugs to take the following action:
Suspend the approval of rBGH, a genetically engineered bovine growth hormone, and require milk and other dairy products produced with its use to be labeled with a warning such as, "Produced with the use of rBGH, and contains elevated levels of insulin-like growth factor, IGF-1, which poses major risks of breast, prostate, and colon cancers."
STATEMENT OF GROUNDS
1. THE VETERINARY TOXICITY OF rBGH
Evidence of these toxic effects was first detailed in confidential Monsanto reports, based on records of secret nationwide rBGH veterinary trials, submitted to the FDA prior to October 1989 when they were leaked to one of the petitioners, Dr. Epstein. He then made these reports available to Congressman John Conyers, Chairman of the House Committee on Government Operations. On May 8, 1990, Congressman Conyers issued the following statement, "I find it reprehensible that Monsanto and the FDA have chosen to suppress and manipulate animal health test data." Details of these toxic effects were subsequently admitted by Monsanto, and by the FDA, and were disclosed on the drug's veterinary label (Posilac) in November, 1993. These toxic effects include injection site lesions, a wide range of other toxic effects, and an increased incidence of mastitis requiring the use and antibiotics, with resulting contamination of milk.
2. ABNORMALITIES IN rBGH MILK
A January 1994 Monsanto Executive Summary on rBGH, claimed that "natural milk is indistinguishable" from rBGH milk, and that "there is no legal basis requiring its labeling." However, there are a wide range of well-documented abnormalities in rBGH milk. These include: reduction in short-chain fatty acid and increase in long-chain fatty acid levels; increase in levels of a thyroid hormone enzyme; contamination with unapproved drugs for treating mastitis; and frequency of pus cells due to mastitis.
3. INCREASED LEVELS OF IGF-1 IN rBGH MILK
A wide range of publications have documented excess levels of IGF-1 in rBGH milk, with increases ranging from four- to 20-fold. Based on six unpublished industry studies, FDA admitted that IGF-1 levels in rBGH milk were consistently and statistically increased, and that these were further increased by pasteurization. These increases were also admitted by Eli Lilly, in application for marketing authorization in the European Community. It should also be noted that pasteurization increases IGF-1 levels.
4. IGF-1 IS READILY ABSORBED FROM THE INTESTINE INTO THE BLOOD
IGF-1 is a small protein component known as a peptide. As such it is readily absorbed into the blood. It survives digestion, and has marked growth promoting effects following short-term feeding tests in rats.
5. INCREASED IGF-1 LEVELS IN MILK INCREASE RISKS OF BREAST, COLON AND PROSTATE CANCERS
Increased levels of IGF-1 have been shown to increase risks of breast cancer in 19 scientific publications, risks of colon cancer in 10 publications, and prostate cancer in 7 publications.
6. INCREASED IGF-1 LEVELS INHIBIT "APOPTOSIS"
Of critical importance is the fact that increased IGF-1 levels block natural defense mechanisms, known as apoptosis, against early submicroscopic cancers.
7. rBGH INCREASES TWINNING RATES
An increased rate of twinning in cows injected with rBGH was admitted by Monsanto on its November 1993 Posilac label, and the incidence of fraternal twins. Monsanto also admitted that it increases "and complications such as premature delivery, congenital defects and pregnancy-induced hypertension."
8. THE INTERNATIONAL BAN ON THE USE AND IMPORTS OF U.S. rBGH DAIRY PRODUCTS
Based on well-documented veterinary and public health concerns. In June 30, 1999, the United Nations Food Safety Agency, representing 101 nations worldwide, ruled unanimously not to endorse or set a safety standard for rBGH milk. Effectively, this has resulted in an international ban on U.S. milk, approximately 20 percent of which is rBGH.
9. FDA POLICY ON LABELING rBGH MILK
The FDA continues to mislead dairy producers and consumers with regard to its requirement for labeling of rBGH milk, with its deliberately false claim that "No significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rBST-treated and non-rBST treated cows."
In fact, rBGH milk continues to pose major cancer and other risks to the entire U.S. population.
The 2007 Petition has been endorsed by four other leading experts on genetically-engineered, recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) milk. We look forward to a response.
Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.
Professor emeritus Environmental and Occupational Health
University of Illinois School of Public Health
Chairman, Cancer Prevention Coalition
Chicago, IL
epstein@uic.edu
Ronnie Cummins
National Director
Organic Consumers Association
Finland, MN
ronnie@organicconsumers.org
John Kinsman
President
Family Farm Defenders
Madison, WI
jepeck@students.wisc.edu
Arpad Pusztai, PhD, FRSE
Consultant Biologist
Scotland
a.pusztai@freenet.co.uk
Jeffery Smith
Executive Director
Institute for Responsible Technology
Fairfield, IA
jeffrey@seedsofdeception.com
To receive news from the Cancer Prevention Coalition via email, please subscribe to our newsletter.
Bad for digestion (most people are lactose intolerant and don't know it), bad for sinuses (I eliminated dairy and my twice-yearly sinus infections ceased), bad for allergies (many people are allergic), bad for causing diseases like diabetes and breast cancer, bad for weight (cows lactate milk for their calf babies) and bad for cows who are kept in stalls and perpetually force-inseminated by machine, fed hormones and antibiotics because their udders become so large they scrape the cement floor and become infected and are hauled off to slaughter when they are spent where they are usually so sick they are "downer" cows that cannot move and are electrically prodded, dragged and sometimes forklifted to their brutal death after being subjected to a brutal existence.
Lay off the animal milk people and substitute soy, almond, rice or hemp milk.
Now that does a body, mind and soul, GOOD.
You are so right though "milk does a body bad".
There seems to be a lot of hysteria without recognition of the facts.
"In fact, rBGH milk continues to pose major cancer and other risks to the entire U.S. population."
This should be very easy to demonstrate. The epidemiology please?
just vote with your fork, everyone.
the US has the worst food in the developed world.
Where did you get your profound distrust of our socio-political system? Oh yeah, the first amendment protected internet sites. Where people can say........whatever, and take it as truth (as long as it corroborates their world-view).
I think if everyone took a closer look at what they were consuming, we could address some of these epidemics taking place with health, how much do we know about what we consume?
Confused. You will be.
Vicky
Author of art, adventure, pop culture and life blog http://www.anticelebrity.net
Forget about the FDA, they spend all their time trying to ban substances like vitamin B6, so the pharmacuetical companies can turn it into a profitable drug. They have no credibility, after deaths from Vioxx, etc., etc.....
They are bought and paid for by big pharma.
I use growth hormones and IGF-1 all the time in the lab. The bovine hormones of concern here will absolutely not work on human cells! Period!
....and of course, as expected, it digress into a conspiracy theory. Go figure.
Unfortunately, this is a topic that attracts a HUGE amount of anti-science fanaticism. Mention the word "Monsanto" and a lot of people go completely nuts.
This author sounds like a qualified, reasonable person. I read this post with interest, but I'll withhold judgement until I get a wider range of information.
As for milk? When will the FDA ban PASTEURIZED milk? It totally kills the living essence of the milk. Turns it into something akin to food, but not food. Fake milk, is that what you feed your children?
Raw milk!!!!
http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm079516.htm
http://pediatrics.about.com/od/milk/a/0807_raw_milk.htm
http://www.news-medical.net/news/2008/12/16/44337.aspx
http://www.usnews.com/health/family-health/articles/2009/03/20/raw-milk-is-gaining-fans-but-the-science-says-its-dangerous.html?PageNr=1
Science is about information, not propaganda.
1. The first is to simply avoid eating dairy, which is high on the list of the top ten most allergenic foods worldwide. Cow milk is designed for calves, is a lousy source of calcium for bone strength (unless you supplement with magnesium , B6 and K2), and contains sugars and proteins that promote a variety of auto-immune conditions in a portion of the population. It is also turned into a Frankenfood with pasteurization, homogenization, and GMO feed. If you need infant formula recipes that are free of animal milk, see:
http://www.westonaprice.org/Recipes-for-Homemade-Baby-Formula.html
2. If you are a calf, or have an ethnic background (Northern Europe, Caucauses) that leads you to believe you are neither allergic to nor intolerant of dairy, then buy only raw milk products, which are neither pasteurized, homogenized, nor hormone laced. For details on the health properties of raw milk, and a reasoned refutation of the dairy industry-promoted nonsense that it is contaminated, see:
http://www.realmilk.com/
For those interested in the ethical treatment of animals, dairy farming is not high on the list. It usually requires maintaining a cow in a perpetual state of pregnancy, separating her from her calves, and hooking her up to machines for hours daily.
Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com
I grew up in SE Wisconsin among organic dairy farms and to this day my family lives there among farmers, who not only are organic and offer "raw milk", but also treat their livestock very well. By the way, the people who live in this area and consume high amounts of dairy locally and happen to be very healthy, strong and don't have the trend of "natural" diseases that those without access to "pure" dairy have. My husband also grew up in a similar region as I, but in Holland. Interestingly, our regions share the same farming ethics and the locals have a similar health status.
To suggest that humans reject dairy altogether, is absurd.
Rather, Americans should be examining and addressing what went wrong with our dairy supply and compare it with America's decline in health.
Growing up in the 80's, no one I knew was lactose intolerant, the term didn't even exist. But when factory farms and hormone-contaminated milk start taking over, people I know that ate dairy before, suddenly became allergic (lactose intolerant) or had unusual weight gain. Their young daughters started aggressive puberty at a very early age(age 8).
I think you get the point.
This is all happening on the FDA's watch and at Americans' and farmers' expense.
As a mentioned in my original comment, I encourage those who are ethnically tolerant of dairy to consume it. That includes those of Northern European descent, who are uniquely dairy tolerant, and for good reason. Historically, dairy was a staple required for survival. Those who were allergic or intolerant to dairy have long since died out, along with their genetic predispositions.
Wisconsin is known for its large population of Northern Europeans such as Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Swiss and Dutch, most of which do fine with dairy. They are experts in dairy farming and I applaud them for their ethical treatment of animals. Then there are the rest of us.
An MD colleague who just returned from a medical conference in Prague, announced that dairy is now the number one allergenic food in Europe. For references, Google: European dairy allergy.
A book entitled "The China Study" demonstrated that a majority of those of Asian descent are allergic to casein, which was certainly no surprise to Asians. Historically, they shunned the consumption of cow milk as unnatural. Only recently have they begun to consume it, with questionable health outcomes.
I do agree that the Frankenfood that passes for dairy today probably increases the ranks of those who suffer health problems from it.
I wish you the best of health.
Let's get the entire GMO and BGH out of our food system.
We have known for decades that chemicals that enter our food supply through antibiotics, leaching from plastics, water infiltration, artificial products in the food chain will disrupt our endocrine system. This one is major but read about BPA's in our food chain through the lining in metal cans. It is against the law in France since 1998 yet our FDA and Congress continue to drag their feet because of the lobbyist from the chemical industry. They have to be re-electioned...don't you know!
For consumers: check labels. There are several non-organic suppliers that do not use rGBH and state so. Interestingly, they must also carry the mandated message that "no significant difference has been found in milk from cows treated with rGBH..." . Apparently, you should not believe that message.
Or maybe education (and I mean schools). Reverence for corporations and conformism are embedded.
Because inner work is the only solution proposed for every ill by our practitioners ,psychologists and spiritual counselors?
With all due respect, as I'm a thirty year practitioner of such methods and have been tremendously helped by them-- but- but - but-- hello? systemic solutions to systemic problems? Worth considering?
Look where this blog is located and what surrounds it-- look at the constant flow of mend your own mind solutions.
The masters I studied with didn't bolster people with uplifting sayings, or give tips to manage your mood, sleep, or ya-yas. They went to the burial grounds, to see the worst horrors that could befall humanity and allowed their hearts to break.They wed compassion with activism.
It's doubtless terribly impolitic for me to say this-- but there it is. Dr. Epstein, I've followed your work for over ten years. Keep it coming. You are a giant.
www.organicconsumers.org for actions about rBGH
Health insight, action, and information at www.HealthJournalist.com
twitter@healthattitude
And exactly what power do 'we the people' have when we have regulatory agencies like the FDA and the USDA - who are owned by the corporate lobbys......
And yes, the European Union had very strict guidlines on what food is allowed out to the publice, and what additives are allowed, and what foods are imported from where (i.e. China and other countries)..........
I wish I had the money to move to Europe - at least the mentality there is about prevention and maintaining your health.........with employers paying their employees 'paid vacations' at health resorts to take care of themselves and guard against heart attacks and cancer - our country and it's profit-hungry entites should be ashamed of themselves - but they have no shame.....and we have not protection from them....
Most all of the time - we don't even know what we are eating or drinking.....whether genetically engineered, full of hormones, full of chemicals, full of parasites..........or where it is imported from.....we pretty much have to take what we get - and be happy we have it!.
Alison
Have you ever thought what would happen to the economy in this country if there were a cure for cancer? Think about it.