RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #593 Milk, rBGH, and Cancer---April
9, 1998---
MILK, RBGH AND CANCER
Two veteran news reporters for Fox TV in Tampa, Florida have been fired
for refusing to water down an investigative report on Monsanto's
controversial milk hormone, rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormone).
Monsanto's rBGH is a genetically-engineered hormone sold to dairy
farmers, who inject it into their cows every two weeks to increase milk
production. In recent years, evidence has accumulated indicating that
rBGH may promote cancer in humans who drink milk from rBGH-treated cows.
It is the link between rBGH and cancer that Fox TV tried hardest to
remove from the story.
In the fall of 1996, award-winning reporters Steve Wilson and Jane Akre
were hired by WTVT in Tampa to produce a series on rBGH in Florida milk.
After more than a year's work on the rBGH series, and three days before
the series was scheduled to air starting February 24, 1997, Fox TV
executives received the first of two letters from lawyers representing
Monsanto saying that Monsanto would suffer "enormous damage" if the
series ran. WTVT had been advertising the series aggressively, but
canceled it at the last moment.
Monsanto's second letter warned of "dire consequences" for Fox if the
series aired as it stood. (How Monsanto knew what the series contained
remains a mystery.) According to documents filed in Florida's Circuit
Court (13th Circuit), Fox lawyers then tried to water down the series,
offering to pay the two reporters if they would leave the station and
keep mum about what Fox had done to their work. The reporters refused
Fox's offer, and on April 2, 1998, filed their own lawsuit against WTVT.
Steve Wilson has 26 years' experience as a working journalist and has won
four Emmy awards for his investigative reporting. His wife, Jane Akre,
has been a reporter and news anchor for 20 years, and has won a
prestigious Associated Press award for investigative reporting.
The Wilson/Akre lawsuit charges that WTVT violated its license from the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) by demanding that the reporters
include known falsehoods in their rBGH series. The reporters also charge
that WTVT violated Florida's "whistle blower" law. Many of the legal
documents in the lawsuit --including Monsanto's threatening letters --
have been posted on the world wide web at http://www.foxbghsuit.com for
all to see.
No one will be surprised to learn that powerful corporations can
intimidate TV stations into re-writing the news, but this case offers an
unusually detailed glimpse of specific intimidation tactics and their
effects inside a news organization. It is not pretty.
It has been well-documented by Monsanto and by others that rBGH-treated
cows undergo several changes: their lives are shortened, they are more
likely to develop mastitis, an infection of the udder (which then
requires use of antibiotics, which end up in the milk along with
increased pus), and they produce milk containing elevated levels of
another hormone called IGF-1. It is IGF-1 that is associated with
increased likelihood of human cancers.[1] (See REHW #381, #382, #383,
#384, #483, but especially #454.)
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved rBGH for use in cows
in 1993, but the approval process was controversial because former
Monsanto employees went to work for the FDA, oversaw the approval
process, then went back to work for Monsanto. (See REHW #381.)
Monsanto is notorious for marketing dangerous products while falsely
claiming safety. The entire planet is now contaminated with
hormone-disrupting, cancer-causing PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls),
thanks to Monsanto's poor judgment and refusal to be guided by early
scientific evidence indicating harm. (See REHW #327, #328.)
The 2,4,5-T in Agent Orange --the herbicide that has brought so much
grief to tens of thousands of Vietnam veterans --is another example of
Monsanto's poor judgment and failure to heed scientific evidence to
prevent harm. Critics say rBGH is just one more example of Monsanto's
monumentally poor judgment. When Wilson and Akre asked Monsanto officials
to respond to these allegations of past poor judgment, Monsanto had no
comment.
The Wilson/Akre rBGH series (a script of which is available on the web
site www.foxbghsuit.com) makes the following points:
** rBGH was never properly tested before FDA allowed it on the market. A
standard cancer test of a new human drug requires two years of testing
with several hundred rats. But rBGH was tested for only 90 days on 30
rats.
This short-term rat study was submitted to FDA but was never published.
FDA has refused to allow anyone outside FDA to review the raw data from
this study, saying it would "irreparably harm" Monsanto.[2] Therefore the
linchpin study of cancer and rBGH has never been subjected to open
scientific peer review.
** Some Florida dairy herds grew sick shortly after starting rBGH
treatment. One farmer, Charles Knight --who lost 75% of his herd --says
on camera that Monsanto and Monsanto-funded researchers at University of
Florida withheld from him the information that other dairy herds were
suffering similar problems. He says Monsanto and the university
researchers told him only that he must be doing something wrong.
** The law required Monsanto to notify the FDA if they received
complaints by dairy farmers such as Charles Knight. But four months after
Knight complained to Monsanto, FDA had heard nothing from Monsanto.
Monsanto's explanation? Despite a series of visits to Knight's farm, and
many phone conversations, Monsanto officials say it took them four months
to figure out that Knight was complaining about rBGH.
** Monsanto claims on camera that every truckload of milk is tested for
excessive antibiotics --but Florida dairy officials and scientists on
camera say this is simply not true.
** Monsanto says on camera that Canada's ban on rBGH has nothing to do
with human health concerns --but Canadian government officials speaking
on camera say just the opposite.
** Canadian government officials, speaking on camera, say they believe
Monsanto tried to bribe them with offers of $1 to $2 million to gain
approval for rBGH in Canada. Monsanto officials say the Canadians
misunderstood their offer of "research" funds.
** Monsanto officials claim on camera that "the milk has not changed"
because of rBGH treatment of cows. As noted earlier, there is abundant
evidence --some of it from Monsanto's own studies --that this is
definitely not true.
** On camera, a Monsanto official claims that Monsanto has not opposed
dairy co-ops labeling their milk as "rBGH-free." But this is definitely
not true. Monsanto brought two lawsuits against dairies that labeled
their milk "rBGH- free." Faced with the Monsanto legal juggernaut, the
dairies folded and Monsanto then sent letters around to other dairy
organizations announcing the outcome of the two lawsuits --in all
likelihood, for purposes of intimidation. (Conveniently, the FDA
regulations that discourage labeling of milk as "rBGH-free" were written
by Michael Taylor, an attorney who worked for Monsanto both before and
after his tenure as an FDA official. (See REHW #381.)
At the web site www.foxbghsuit.com, you will find the version of the
Wilson/Akre rBGH series as it was re-written by Fox's attorneys. It has
been laundered and perfumed. Most importantly, nearly all of the
references to cancer have been removed from the script. Instead of cancer
we now have "human health effects" --whatever those may be.
The Wilson/Akre lawsuit comes at an especially good time to publicize the
relationship between rBGH and human cancer because new evidence has come
to light.
When a cow is injected with rBGH, its milk production is stimulated, but
not directly. The presence of rBGH in the cow's blood stimulates
production of another hormone, called Insulin-Like Growth Factor 1, or
IGF-1 for short. It is IGF-1 that stimulates milk production.
IGF-1 is a naturally-occurring hormone-protein in both cows and
humans.[3] The IGF-1 in cows is chemically identical to the IGF-1 in
humans.[4] The use of rBGH increases the levels of IGF-1 in the cow's
milk, though the amount of the increase is disputed. Furthermore, IGF-1
in milk is not destroyed by pasteurization. Because IGF-1 is active in
humans--causing cells to divide --any increase in IGF-1 in milk raises
obvious questions: will it cause inappropriate cell division and growth,
leading to growth of tumors?
The Council on Scientific Affairs of the American Medical Association
formally expressed concern about IGF-1 related to rBGH in 1991, saying,
"Further studies will be required to determine whether ingestion of
higher than normal concentrations of bovine insulin-like growth factor
[IGF-1] is safe for children, adolescents, and adults."[5]
Monsanto's public position since 1994 has been that IGF-1 is not elevated
in the milk from rBGH-treated cows --despite its own studies to the
contrary. For example, writing in the British journal, LANCET, in 1994,
Monsanto researchers said "...IGF-1 concentration in milk of rBST-treated
cows is unchanged," and "...there is no evidence that hormonal content of
milk from rBST-treated cows is in any way different from cows not so
treated."[6] [Monsanto calls rBGH rBST (recombinant bovine somatotropin),
thus avoiding use of the word 'hormone.'] However, in a published letter,
the British researcher T. B. Mepham reminded Monsanto that in its 1993
application to the British government for permission to sell rBGH in
England, Monsanto itself reported that "the IGF-1 level went up
substantially [about five times as much]."[7] The U.S. FDA acknowledges
that IGF-1 is elevated in milk from rBGH-treated cows.[4] Other
proponents of rBGH acknowledge that it at least doubles the amount of
IGF-1 hormone in the milk.[8] The earliest report in the literature found
that IGF-1 was elevated in the milk of rBGH-treated cows by a factor of
3.6.[9]
Does IGF-1 promote cancer? In January of this year a Harvard study of
15,000 white men published in SCIENCE reported that those with elevated
--but still normal --levels of IGF-1 in their blood are 4 times as likely
as average men to get prostate cancer.[1] The SCIENCE report ends saying,
"Finally, our results raise concern that administration of GH [growth
hormone] or IGF-1 over long periods, as proposed for elderly men to delay
the effects of aging, may increase risk of prostate cancer." By analogy,
Monsanto's current efforts to increase the IGF-1 levels in America's milk
supply raise the question: if little boys drink milk from rBGH-treated
cows over long periods, will the elevated levels of IGF-1 increase their
prostate cancer rates? This is not a question that should be answered by
a wholesale experiment on the American people --but that is precisely
what Monsanto is currently doing. It is difficult to put a happy face on
this, try as Fox might.
The Wilson/Akre story is one of talented, hard-working journalists trying
to tell an important public health story, exposing lies and corruption by
Monsanto, by the FDA, and now by Fox, too. If nothing else, perhaps the
courage of Steve Wilson and Jane Akre will awaken many more of us to the
potential dangers of Monsanto's latest experiment on America's children
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.