A Secret History of the Monarch: How the Biotech Industry Conspired to Knock Off One of the World’s

[Judi Lynn]

December 31, 2015
A Secret History of the Monarch: How the Biotech Industry Conspired to Knock Off One of the World’s Rarest Butterflies

by Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn



On May 20 1999, Nature magazine sounded what might have been the death knell of the biotech food industry. A short paper in the respected British science magazine by John Losey, an assistant professor of entomology at Cornell University, reported the ominous results of his laboratory study on the effects of pollen from genetically modified corn on the Monarch butterfly. Losey found that that Monarch caterpillars fed on milkweed leaves dusted with genetically modified corn pollen ate less, grew more slowly and suffered a higher mortality rate than those fed on leaves with normal pollen, or with no pollen at all. Nearly half of the GM pollen-fed caterpillars in the study died.

The corn in question is “Bt” corn, modified by genetic engineers in corporate labs to produce Bacillus thuringiensis, a soil bacterium and natural pesticide that organic farmers have for years been spraying on crops, if and when threatened by insects. In contrast to the intermittent doses of the organic farmers, however, the GM variety exudes Bt all the time, at a level of toxicity 10 to 20 times that deployed by the organic sprayers and is distributed via wind-blown pollen. The target of this laboratory-bred plant is the dreaded European corn borer, pending the inevitable evolution of a Bt resistant borer.

By early 1999, Bt corn appeared to be fulfilling the wildest hopes of its developers. First approved for sale by Clinton’s EPA in 1996 (without any requirement that it be tested for effects on “non-target” species, such as butterflies) the genetically altered seeds were being sown on 20 million acres in 1998. The companies hoped for a doubling in sales by the following year.

At the time, Cornell was a dangerous place for the untenured Losey to pursue his investigations, given that the university’s agriculture school has long enjoyed carnal relations with agri-chemical corporations, such as Monsanto and Novartis. Indeed, one member of the faculty, apprised of its dangerous implications, sent a draft of Losey’s paper to Monsanto. A tremulous executive rushed to Ithaca and issued a stern warning against publication of the research, exclaiming that the publicity would “ruin” the GM industry. Losey stood his ground.

More:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/12/31/a-secret-history-of-the-monarch-how-the-biotech-industry-conspired-to-knock-off-one-of-the-worlds-rarest-butterflies/

[tecelote]

1. Many argue that GMO are healthy...

Not enough testing yet but, that may be so for our bodies.

But, they are devastating to our planet.

[dixiegrrrrl]

2. Just finished watching Merchants of Doubt

which is about how the huge corporations attack citizens who identify problems caused by the corporations.
Going back as far as 1953 in the case of Big Tobacco, on up to GMOs and climate change denial, teh SAME types of arguments are used, often successfully:

1. Not enough testing

2. The testing that has been done is called into question, or attacked.

3. False testing is offered as proof of no problem.

4. Corporations try to deflect the problem, by saying that the REAL problem is...........
.( the tobacco industry used this one by helping to create a market for flame retardant furniture so that cigarette smoking would not be blamed for deadly fires)

5.. downright lies (the tobacco industry KNEW since late 1950's that nicotine was addictive, but lied about it for decades afterwards, even to Congress. Phillip Morris later admitted to deliberately putting MORE nicotine into cigarettes to make them MORE addictive)

Excellent documentary, much recommended.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

3. calling all clowns

hurry and show your support for monsanto

[MisterP]

4. WHAT?!