Quotable Quotes from Scientists and other Folks on the Dangers of
Genetically Engineered Foods and Crops



"The perception that everything is totally straightforward and safe is
utterly naive. I don't think we fully understand the dimensions of what
we're getting into."

Professor Philip James (author of the "James" report on the structure and
functions of the proposed UK Food Standards Agency to oversee national food
safety standards), Director of the Rowett Research Institute, Aberdeen, on
genetically engineered food.
Rowett Research Institute
The Foods Standards Agency
Covered up US study shows damage to rats from BST

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Well, I agree with you in the sense that when you use these methods you
don't know what part of the chromosome that the new gene is being
introduced into and that is, you know, what I would say is a drawback to
the technology."
Professor Bevan Mosely, former head of the Institute of Food Research,
Reading, and a current member of the United Kingdom's Advisory Committee on
Novel Foods and Processes (ACNFP) responsible for reviewing the safety of
genetically modified foods, in a response to the question - "So how can we
know that something isn't really going to go horrendously wrong?" - put to
him by Charles Colett of Radio Wey Valley, Hampshire, United Kingdom,
February 1998.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"But we realize that with any new and powerful technology with unknown, and
to some degree unknowable - by definition - effects, then there necessarily
will be an appropriate level at least, and maybe even more than that, of
public debate and public interest."

Bob Shapiro, Chief Executive of Monsanto, admitting that the effects of
genetic engineering are unknown and "to some degree" unknowable (SWF News
interview, San Francisco, 27 October 1998).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The genetic modification of food is intrinsically dangerous. It involves
making irreversible changes in a random manner to a complex level of life
about which little is known. It is inevitable that this hit-and-miss
approach will lead to disasters. It must disrupt the natural intelligence
of the plant or animal to which it is applied, and lead to health-damaging
side-effects."

Dr Geoffrey Clements, leader of the Natural Law Party, UK.
Tryptophan toxicity incident - $2 billion in claims for deaths and disease

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"An ecosystem, you can always intervene and change something in it, but
there's no way of knowing
what all the downstream effects will be or how it might affect the
environment. We have such a miserably poor understanding of how the
organism develops from its DNA that I would be surprised if we don't get
one rude shock after another."
Professor Richard Lewontin, Professor of Genetics, Harvard University

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"ŠGM crops really do carry theoretical dangers that could be ironed out,
given time, but will not because the companies that develop them cannot
afford to wait.
Šit is entirely unsurprising that GM crops could be toxic. Most domestic
crops have poisonous relatives (potatoes and tomatoes belonging to the
nightshade family, Solanaceae) or are descended from poisonous ancestors
(potatoes, tomatoes, parsnips etc). The modern crops may still contain the
genes that make the toxins: not lost, but merely dampened down. Most genes
are pleiotropic - they have many different and often unrelated effects.
Many genes affect the function of other genes.
Thus an alien gene parachuted by genetic engineering into the genome of a
potato or a tomato could well reawaken the ancient genes of toxicity. Now
and again we should expect this. We can test to see if this has happened
but we cannot do this in one generation. Genes combine through sexual
reproduction; a gene that has no effect in one combination may make itself
felt in another. We would need to breed a GM crop for many crosses before
we plumb the possibilities of any freshly introduced gene. How long would
this take? How long can a company wait for returns on its investment? The
pressure to cut corners is constant and inevitableŠ"
Colin Tudge, Research Fellow, London School of Economics

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"[Most scientists] warn that it is likely to be impossible to enforce
[labelling] laws once many [GM] food products enter food processing
systems... I don't think many scientists would oppose labelling of
something clearly
modified, but the problem arises in the use of overseas ingredients which
may have been modified."
Sir John Scott, President of the Royal Society, New Zealand.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We don't know what genetic abnormalities might be incorporated into the
genome [the individual's DNA]. I'm more worried about humans than about the
environment, to be honest. One of the problems is that because it's a
long-term thing, you need to do long-term experiments."
Gordon McVie, head of the Cancer Research Campaign.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I see worries in the fact that we have the power to manipulate genes in
ways that would be improbable or impossible through conventional evolution.
We shouldn't be complacent in thinking that we can predict the results."
Colin Blakemore, Waynflete professor of physiology at Oxford University and
President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"If it is left to me, I would certainly not eat it. We are putting new
things into food which have not been eaten before. The effects on the
immune system are not easily predictable and I challenge anyone who will
say that the effects are predictable."

Professor Arpad Pusztai, of the Food, Gut, and Microbial Interactions
Group, Rowett Research Institute, on the health risks associated with
genetically engineered food.
And on the ability of the regulatory system to cope with prospect of the
arrival of large numbers of GM crops:

"Once the floodgate was opened, it's almost impossible. A committee cannot
deal with it."

No faith in GM approvals system

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The fact is, it is virtually impossible to even conceive of a testing
procedure to assess the health effects of genetically engineered foods when
introduced into the food chain, nor is there any valid nutritional or
public interest reason for their introduction."

Professor Richard Lacey, microbiologist, medical doctor, and Professor of
Food Safety at Leeds University, world famous for his accurate prediction
of the dangers of " Mad cow disease". Professor Lacey has spoken out
strongly against the introduction of genetically engineered foods, because
of 'the essentially unlimited health risks'
And additionally with reference to the BSE crisis,
"We know to our cost that an organism which was utterly unknown to science
30 years ago, the prion, is capable of jumping from species to species, and
changing its own physical characteristics each time it crosses the barrier.
This shows that it is impossible to forsee what dangers lie in store... If
we continue to create new life forms artificially, we lay ourselves open to
the possibility of similar unimaginable dangers."
New Scientist - BSE's hidden horror

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Over the last fifteen years, I and other scientists have put the FDA on
notice about the potential dangers of genetically engineered foods. Instead
of responsible regulation we have seen bureaucratic bungling and
obfuscation that have left public health and the environment at risk."

Dr. Philip Regal, Professor of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior at the
University of Minnesota and an internationally recognised plant expert, on
the decision (May 1998) by concerned scientists and consumers to sue the US
Federal Department of Agriculture (FDA) for failing to protect public
health and provide consumers with relevant information about GM foods:
Details of FDA lawsuit launched May 1998
More information on the work of Professor Regal

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The FDA has placed the interest of a handful of biotechnology companies
ahead of their responsibility to protect public health. By failing to
require testing and labelling of genetically engineered foods, the agency
has made consumers unknowing guinea pigs for potentially harmful,
unregulated food substances."

Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director of the International Center for
Technology Assessment (CTA), commenting on the same FDA court action.
International Center for Technology Assessment
Andrew Kimbrell interview on the hazards of human and animal cloning

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our
interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is
the F.D.A's [Food and Drug Administration] job."
Phil Angell, Monsanto's director of corporate communications, in an
interview with the New York Times Sunday Magazine

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"[The release of novel GM rape plants] may pose unique risks to human
health and the environment, which could include toxicity and allergenicity
to humans, gene transfer to other oilseed rape crops, and effects on other
species."

UK junior environment minister Angela Eagle's warning to MPs, which was
reported in Farmers Weekly 23rd January 1998 as being in conflict with the
Government's own advisory committees on GMOs.
GM OSR cross pollination found up to 2.5 km away - Scottish Crop Research
Institute

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"There are a lot of people in Europe in favour of biotechnology, who are
prepared to take risks, but a considerable number are resistant and see no
benefits. Many people see biotech taking us into the realm of unknown
dangers. ...This is a Pandora's box and a lot of people wonder whether it's
worth opening it."

George Gaskell, professor of social psychology at the London School of
Economics

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"If it's safe, then prove it."

Editorial headline on genetically engineered foods, New Scientist 4th
January 1997
Media cover up on gmo cancer threat

------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Information provided to governments and food suppliers by the
biotechnology industry is not fully representative of the technical
limitations of genetic engineering, and therefore does not give a complete
picture of the potential dangers in its use."

"Once released into the environment, unlike a BSE epidemic or chemical
spill, genetic mistakes cannot be contained, recalled or cleaned up, but
will be passed on to all future generations indefinitely".
Dr Michael Antoniou, senior lecturer in molecular pathology from London,
biotechnology advisor to the farming and food industries, and chief
biotechnology advisor to the Natural Law Party
Dr Antoniou on Genetic Engineering
NLP wins vital soyabean genetics case against major Dutch retailers
Dr Antoniou on GM crops

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The process of genetic engineering always involves the risk of altering
the genetics and cellular functioning of a food organism in unanticipated
ways. These unanticipated alterations can result in GE foods being
allergenic, toxic, or reduced in nutritional value".

Professor John Fagan, award-winning Geneticist, Maharishi University of
Management, Iowa, USA.
Dr Fagan on the dangers of genetically modified food

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Millions of ordinary people are very worried about genetically modified
foods and I am one of them....With genetically modified foods I believe we
have reached the thin edge of the wedge, we are messing with the building
blocks of life and it's scary."

Malcom Walker, Chairman and Chief Executive of Iceland Foods, 26th December
1996
Iceland Foods ban GMOs
French supermarket boycotts suppliers who do not label GM foods

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The huge arrogance of the companies developing GMO crops and their
determination to destroy the line of accountability which links the
developer to the product is breath-taking. When something goes wrong, as it
inevitably will, there will be a great benefit to those who have taken a
stance against genetically modified organisms."

Jonathan Porritt, patron of The Soil Association
Illegal GM soya beans planted in Brazil
US imports illegal GM maize into Europe
Mistake leads to unauthorised release on GM oilseed rape in Swedish trials
Monsanto sends genetically modified sugar beet to Dutch sugar refinery by
mistake
Biotech company releases unapproved genetically modified plant material
into Canadian environment

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There are still hungry people in Ethiopia, but they are hungry because
they have no money, no longer because there is no food to buy ....we
strongly resent the abuse of our poverty to sway the interests of the
European public."
Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher of the Institute of Sustainable Development
in Addis Ababa, in response to a comment in late 1997 by a British
scientist who claimed that those who want GMOs banned are undermining the
position of starving people in Ethiopia.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Monsanto claims in its letter to me that there is no difference between
ordinary soya beans and what it calls round-up soya beans, and therefore
that they should not be segregated. I maintain that members of the public
who notice what is going on simply do not believe that, and will
increasingly demand to know what is in the food they eat - roundup or
otherwise... the Government and the EU should resist the power of the giant
food companies in the United States, which are effectively dictating what
we must eat, without giving any convincing estimates of the long-term
effects."

Colin Pickthall, Member of Parliament for West Lancashire, speaking in the
House of Commons, 13th December 1996
Canadian Government report on toxic effects of BST
Canadian government scientists claim BST approval coercion
BST background
Milk composition of cows fed on gm soya changes
Leaked document on biotechnology industry public relations strategy

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"At the moment, as is so often the case with technology, we seem to spend
most of our time establishing what is technically possible, and then a
little time trying to establish whether or not it is something we should be
doing in the first place."

HRH the Prince of Wales on genetically engineered food 19th September 1996
Royal support for genetic food withdrawal

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"rBGH poses an even greater risk to human health than ever considered. The
FDA and Monsanto have a lot to answer for. Given the cancer risks, and
other health concerns, why is rBGH milk still on the market?"

Samuel Epstein, M.D., Professor of Environmental Medicine at the University
of Illinois School of Public Health and Chairman of the Cancer Prevention
Coalition, author of report which concludes that milk from cows in the US
injected with recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) increases risks of
breast and colon cancers in humans.
BST (rBGH) cancer link
BST background
genetically engineered Bovine Growth Hormone scandal

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Probably the greatest threat from genetically altered crops is the
insertion of modified virus and insect virus genes into crops. It has been
shown in the laboratory that genetic recombination will create highly
virulent new viruses from such constructions. Certainly the widely used
cauliflower mosaic virus is a potentially dangerous gene. It is a
pararetrovirus meaning that it multiplies by making DNA from RNA messages.
It is very similar to the Hepatitis B virus and related to HIV."

Dr. Joseph Cummins, professor emeritus in genetics from the university of
West-Ontario
The use of Cauliflower Mosaic Virus, Joseph Cummins.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...the allergic potential of these newly introduced microbial proteins is
uncertain, unpredictable and untestable,..."
Warning from The New England Journal of Medicine in 1996 against the use of
micro-organisms rather than food plants as gene donors

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Such intervention must not be confused with previous intrusions upon the
natural order of living organisms; animal and plant breeding, for example;
or the artificial induction of mutations, as with X-rays. All such earlier
procedures worked within single or closely related species. The hub of the
new technology is to move genes back and forth, not only across species
lines, but across any boundaries that now divide living organisms.The
results will be essentially new organisms. Self-perpetuating and hence
permanent. Once created, they cannot be recalled.


Up to now living organisms have evolved very slowly, and new forms have had
plenty of time to settle in. Now whole proteins will be transposed
overnight into wholly new associations, with consequences no one can
foretell, either for the host organism or their neighbors. It is all too
big and is happening too fast. So this, the central problem, remains almost
unconsidered. It presents probably the largest ethical problem that science
has ever had to face. Our morality up to now has been to go ahead without
restriction to learn all that we can about nature. Restructuring nature was
not part of the bargain. For going ahead in this direction may be not only
unwise but dangerous. Potentially, it could breed new animal and plant
diseases, new sources of cancer, novel epidemics."

Dr. George Wald, the professor emeritus in biology from Harvard and Nobel
laureate in medicine
BST link to prostate cancer

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It's never been easy to safely introduce genes into cells Š.It has
involved attaching genes to viruses with possible harmful side effects.
Getting the gene - once it's in the cell - into the right place, then
finally getting it to behave itself - to produce the right amount of
material in the cell, to produce it at the right time during a person's
lifetime, in developmental stages and then making absolutely sure that the
gene, because it's not in its usual place, doesn't interfere with any other
genes that are near to it - we haven't really made much progress in any of
these phases yet."

Professor Weatherall, Regis Professor of Medicine at Oxford University
speaking on BBC Radio 4 Medicine Now, 27 August 1996 on the experimental
nature of genetic engineering
Medical problems and fatalities with genetically engineered insulin

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"My worry is that other advances in science may result in other means of
mass destruction, maybe more readily available even than nuclear weapons.
Genetic engineering is quite a possible area, because of these dreadful
developments that are taking place there."

Joseph Rotblat, the British physicist who won the 1995 Nobel Prize after
years of battling against nuclear weapons
Viral risk from GMOs

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Gene technology is driven by bad science. It may well ruin our food
supply, destroy biodiversity and unleash pandemics of antibiotic resistant
infectious diseases."

Dr Mae-Wan Ho, head of the Bio-Electrodynamics laboratory at the Open
University in Milton Keynes, UK
"The Unholy Alliance" by Dr Mae-Wan Ho

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"We do not believe that such companies or gene technologies will help our
farmers to produce the food that is needed in the 21st century. On the
contrary, we think it will destroy the diversity, the local knowledge and
the sustainable agricultural systems that our farmers have developed for
millennia and that it will thus undermine our capacity to feed ourselves."

Statement by 24 leading African agriculturalists and environmental
scientists representing their countries at the UN in response to claims by
Monsanto that GM crops will help feed the world's growing population.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"History has many records of crimes against humanity, which were also
justified by dominant commercial interests and governments of the day.
Despite protests from citizens, social justice for the common good was
eroded in favour of private profits. Today, patenting of life forms and the
genetic engineering which it stimulates, is being justified on the grounds
that it will benefit society, especially the poor, by providing better and
more food and medicine. But in fact, by monopolising the 'raw' biological
materials, the development of other options is deliberately blocked.
Farmers therefore, become totally dependent on the corporations for seeds".
Prof. Wangari Mathai of the Green Belt Movement Kenya

------------------------------------------------------------------------




"We were the experts. We didn't have many of the answers ... Rather than
explain that to a general public it was thought better to give the
impression that we had everything under control, which we didn't and which
we never have."

Jim Hope, a scientist at the Neuropathogenics Unit, Edinburgh, on the
earlier BSE crisis.
Scientists warned of BSE human health risks eight years before CJD link
established, BBC report - February 1998

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is still no positive proof of a causal relation between the use of
thalidomide during pregnancy and malformations in the new-born."
Frank Getman, President Merrill Company, Feb 2nd 1961

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"As hon. Members have said, some of the new [genetically engineered] wonder
drugs have been accepted, and I think rightly so. There is some comfort in
the regulatory process for medicine which, I admit, is not in place for
food and agriculture."
Jeff Rooker, Minister of State for Food Safety, House of Commons, July 30 1998

Eminent Scientists Comment

on the Dangers of Genetically Engineered Foods
* Professor Richard Lacey, microbiologist, medical doctor, and Professor
of Food Safety at Leeds University has become one of the best-known figures
of food science since his prediction of the BSE (mad cow disease) crisis
made more than seven years ago. Recently Professor Lacey has spoken out
strongly against the introduction of genetically engineered foods, because
of 'the essentially unlimited health risks' -- "The fact is, it is
virtually impossible to even conceive of a testing procedure to assess the
health effects of genetically engineered foods when introduced into the
food chain, nor is there any valid nutritional or public interest reason
for their introduction." * Professor Mae Wan-Ho, of the UK Open
University Department of Biology says, "Genetic engineering bypasses
conventional breeding by using artificially constructed parasitic genetic
elements, including viruses, as vectors to carry and smuggle genes into
cells. Once inside cells, these vectors slot themselves into the host
genome. The insertion of foreign genes into the host genome has long been
known to have many harmful and fatal effects including cancer of the
organism." * Professor Dennis Parke of University of Surrey School of
Biological Sciences, a former chief advisor on food safety to Unilever
Corporation and British advisor to the US FDA on safety aspects of
biotechnology writes: "In 1983, hundreds of people in Spain died after
consuming adulterated rapeseed oil. This adulterated rapeseed oil was not
toxic to rats". Dr Parke warns that current testing procedures for
genetically altered foods including rodent tests are not proving safety for
humans. He has suggested a moratorium on the release of genetically
engineered organisms, foods, and medicines. * Dr Peter Wills, theoretical
biologist at Auckland University writes: "Genes encode proteins involved in
the control of virtually all biological processes. By transferring genes
across species barriers which have existed for aeons between species like
humans and sheep we risk breaching natural thresholds against unexpected
biological processes. For example, an incorrectly folded form of an
ordinary cellular protein can under certain circumstances be replicative
and give rise to infectious neurological disease". * Dr Joseph Cummins,
Professor Emeritus of Genetics at the University of Western Ontario warns:
"Probably the greatest threat from genetically altered crops is the
insertion of modified virus and insect virus genes into crops. It has been
shown in the laboratory that genetic recombination will create highly
virulent new viruses from such constructions. Certainly the widely used
cauliflower mosaic virus is a potentially dangerous gene. It is a
pararetrovirus meaning that it multiplies by making DNA from RNA messages.
It is very similar to the Hepatitis B virus and related to HIV. Modified
viruses could cause famine by destroying crops or cause human and animal
diseases of tremendous power." * Dr John Fagan, an award winning
molecular biologist and cancer researcher, Professor of Microbiology at
Maharishi University of Management, has renounced $3 million in US
government research grants to publicise the dangers of misuse of
biotechnology. He advocates a science-based precautionary approach
requiring the labelling of all novel foods. He says "without labelling it
will be very difficult for scientists to trace the source of new illness
caused by genetically engineered food". * The British Retail Consortium
which represents over 90% of food retailers in the UK has issued a policy
statement calling for clear labelling of foods produced using genetic
engineering: "Retailers in the UK and Europe as a whole are clear that the
preservation of consumer choice is paramount, and that substantial work
over several years on product ingredient traceability should not be
compromised". The Consortium has decided to boycott suppliers of raw
ingredients who cannot guarantee that natural foods are kept separate from
those produced using genetic engineering. * Dr Norman Ellstrand,
Professor of Genetics at the University of California, is one of the
world's leading authorities in genetic engineering. He comments on the
economic implications for farmers of gene exchange between crops and weedy
relatives. "We see this as a multi-million dollar problem. In Europe, there
is already a big problem with gene flow between wild beet and cultivated
beet. Oil-seed rape also has close relatives and is going to cause problems
in the future. One would expect that the kind of genes that are now being
engineered are going to be the ones that have a higher potentiality for
causing trouble". * Dr Michael Antoniou, Senior Lecturer in Molecular
Pathology at a London teaching hospital says, "The generation of
genetically engineered plants and animals involves the random integration
of artificial combinations of genetic material from unrelated species into
the DNA of the host organism. This procedure results in disruption of the
genetic blueprint of the organism with totally unpredictable consequences.
The unexpected production of toxic substances has now been observed in
genetically engineered bacteria, yeast, plants, and animals with the
problem remaining undetected until a major health hazard has arisen.
Moreover, genetically engineered food or enzymatic food processing agents
may produce an immediate effect or it could take years for full toxicity to
come to light."



* Dr Erwin Chargoff, eminent biochemist who is often referred to as the
father of molecular biology, warned that all innovation does not result in
"progress." He once referred to genetic engineering as "a molecular
Auschwitz" and warned that the technology of genetic engineering poses a
greater threat to the world than the advent of nuclear technology. "I have
the feeling that science has transgressed a barrier that should have
remained inviolate," he wrote in his autobiography, Heraclitean Fire.
"Noting the 'awesome irreversibility' of genetic engineering experiments
being planned, Chargoff warned that, "...you cannot recall a new form of
life...It will survive you and your children and your children's children.
An irreversible attack on the biosphere is something so unheard of, so
unthinkable to previous generations, that I could only wish that mine had
not been guilty of it."
.....................

Thanks to Dr. John Fagan for forwarding the following
quotes from the late Dr. George Wald.




Dr. George Wald
* Nobel Laureate in Medicine (or Physiology) 1967
* Higgins Professor of Biology, Harvard University.

"Recombinant DNA technology [genetic engineering] faces our society with
problems unprecedented not only in the history of science, but of life on
the Earth. It places in human hands the capacity to redesign living
organisms, the products of some three billion years of evolution."
" Such intervention must not be confused with previous intrusions upon the
natural order of living organisms; animal and plant breeding, for example;
or the artificial induction of mutations, as with X-rays. All such earlier
procedures worked within single or closely related species. The nub of the
new technology is to move genes back and forth, not only across species
lines, but across any boundaries that now divide living organisms. The
results will be essentially new organisms, self-perpetuating and hence
permanent. Once created, they cannot be recalled."
"Up to now, living organisms have evolved very slowly, and new forms have
had plenty of time to settle in. Now whole proteins will be transposed
overnight into wholly new associations, with consequences no one can
foretell, either for the host organism, or their neighbors."
"It is all too big and is happening too fast. So this, the central problem,
remains almost unconsidered. It presents probably the largest ethical
problem that science has ever had to face. Our morality up to now has been
to ho ahead without restriction to learn all that we can about nature.
Restructuring nature was not part of the bargain. For going ahead in this
direction may be not only unwise, but dangerous. Potentially, it could
breed new animal and plant diseases, new sources of cancer, novel
epidemics."
From: 'The Case Against Genetic Engineering' by Georege Walt, in The
Recombinatnt DNA Debate, Jackson and Stich, eds. P. 127-128. (Reprinted
from The Sciences, Sept./Oct. 1976 issue)


Organic Consumers Association (OCA)
6101 Cliff Estate Rd., Little Marais, Minnesota 55614
Activist or Media Inquiries: (218) 226-4164,  Fax: (218) 226-4157
Ronnie Cummins E-mail: alliance@mr.net    http://www.purefood.org

Save Organic Standards -- Break Corporate Control -- Genetically Enginered Food -- Toxic Food
Current Alert/Upcoming Events -- Food Slander-- Food Irradiation -- Mad Cow & Pig Disease
Cloning & Patenting -- rBGH -- Links -- Legislation

To subscribe to our free electronic newsletter, send an email to:
info@organicconsumers.org with the simple message:
subscribe pure-food-action

Webmaster: steve@purefood.org