As a result of the Governing Council of the American Public Health Association voting against genetically engineered rBGH milk, as well as meat adulterated with sex hormones, the Cancer Prevention Coalition is happy to announce. The Cancer Prevention Coalition developed and published scientific and public policy information over the last two decades that informed this decision.
It’s safe for cows, and it’s safe for consumers, according to the dairy industry. About 20% of U.S. dairy cows are injected with this hormone to increase milk production.
Posilac (rBGH) is an injection given to cows that increases milk production. Monsanto has admitted to about 20 toxic veterinary side effects, including mastitis.
Mastitis, an udder infection commonly caused by rBGH, and antibiotics used to treat it lead to contaminated rBGH milk.
There’s a chemical and nutrient difference between natural milk and rBGH milk.
When people drink milk from cows injected with rBGH, traces of the hormone are absorbed into their bloodstreams through their guts.
rBGH milk has a high concentration of IGF-1, a natural growth factor that’s easily absorbed.
IGF-1 levels are linked to breast, colon, and prostate cancer, according to the Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition in well-documented scientific publications. The IGF-1 block natural defenses against early submicroscopic cancers, too.
According to Samuel S. Epstein, MD, Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, “The warnings, along with other related information, were revised in my 2006 book What’s in Your Milk (TRAFFORD Publishing) supported by over 320 references, and endorsed by Dr. Quentin Young, Past President of the American Public Health Association and Jeffrey Smith, Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology.”
National Family Farm Coalition, which represents 30 organizations, and the Campaign Against rBST, which represents 10 organizations, have endorsed warnings about these risks provided by the Cancer Prevention Coalition in 1990.
Organic Consumers Association, Farm Defenders, and the Institute for Responsible Technology endorsed a 2007 petition from the Cancer Prevention Coalition asking the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to withdraw the application for rBST as a new animal drug. This petition was endorsed by the Organic Consumers Association, Family Farm Defenders, and Institute for Responsible Technology, but the FDA did not respond to or act on it.
A 1986 House Committee on Government Operations report titled “Human Food Safety and Regulation of Animal Drugs” demonstrates FDA indifference to these risks despite longstanding Congressional concerns. Consequently, the FDA “has consistently failed to live up to its responsibility… by putting veterinarians’ and livestock industry’s interests ahead of its legal obligations to protect consumers, it is jeopardizing the safety and health of meat and milk consumers.”
Consumer products containing cancer-causing ingredients are a particular concern for infants and children because of their high susceptibility.
It is possible to avoid these risks by consuming organic milk, which is among the first organic products that consumers buy, according to The Hartman Group, a prominent Seattle consulting firm. As organic milk becomes more available, its consumption declines by 10%, while its annual growth rate is approximately 20%.
Nevertheless, organic milk is scarcely available in schools, nor are there any organic milk programs under low-income food programs, especially SNAP for Women, Infants, and Children.”
There are currently four major sellers of certified organic milk: Wal-Mart, Horizon Organic, owned by Dean Foods, the nation’s largest dairy producer, and Groupe Danone, the largest dairy producer in France. It is likely that Wal-Mart’s competitive pricing will resolve the problem of higher organic milk prices, despite the fact that growth in this market has been hindered by these prices.
The European Union nations, Norway, Switzerland, New Zealand, Japan, and Canada have all banned hormonal milk consumption and importation, in sharp contrast to the United States.
As part of a recent outreach to state governors, senior officials of all 50 state health departments, senior federal officials in all relevant agencies, and staff members of relevant congressional committees, the Cancer Prevention Coalition has sent this information to them.
As the newly appointed Commissioner of the FDA, Dr. Margaret Hamburg is expected to take prompt actions to protect the public from the dangers of rBST milk.
There is a high prevalence of sex hormone contamination in beef produced in the United States, which is linked to an increased risk of cancer in children and the reproductive system.
In the United States, reproductive cancers have been increasing since 1975 due to increased levels of sex hormones – 60% for prostate cancer, 59% for testis cancer, and 10% for breast cancer, according to the Cancer Prevention Coalition.
Natural estrogens, progesterones, and testosterone are used in past and present, along with zeranol, trenbolone, and melanocortin.
During the 100-day fattening period before slaughter, pellets of these hormones are implanted under the ear skin of beef cattle, increasing carcass weight, resulting in an extra profit of over $80 per cattle.
“Not surprisingly, but in contrast to longstanding claims of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), meat residues of these hormones can be 20-fold higher than normal, according to the Cancer Prevention Coalition.
A not uncommon illegal practice of directly implanting a needle into muscle results in higher residues. Further, despite misleading assurances, hormone residues are still not monitored in meat.” However, the FDA and USDA continue to claim hormone residues in meat are within “normal levels,” despite waiving any requirement to test for residues.
Meat residues of estrogen and progesterone were up to 20-fold higher than normal following a single ear implant in steers of Synovex-S.
Since young children’s natural hormone levels are very low, the amount of estradiol in two hamburgers eaten in one day may increase their total hormone levels by as much as 10%. A 38% increase in childhood cancer incidence since 1975 is not surprising, according to the coalition.
USDA inspections and FDA residue-tolerance programs are in near-total disarray, exacerbated by brazen denials and cover-ups, as evidenced by a number of General Accountability Office investigations and Congressional hearings.
According to a report released in 1986 by the House Committee on Government Operations, “Human Food Safety and the Regulation of Animal Drugs,” “the FDA has consistently ignored its responsibility – put what it believes to be veterinarians’ and livestock industry’s interests above the legal obligation to protect consumers.” As a result, consumers of meat, milk, and poultry are at risk of health and safety..”
In 1989, the European Community banned the import of meat from animals injected with growth-inducing hormones. This directly affected the U.S. beef industry, which injections of hormones were used in more than half of the cattle sent to market every year.
There was a long-standing dispute over hormone-treated beef between the European Union and the United States that ended on May 6, 2009. In exchange for the four-year deal, the EU will continue to ban hormone-fed beef while increasing the amount of hormone-free beef it can import without any duty from the United States.
In countries that do not permit the sale of hormonal beef, American women have a higher risk of breast cancer.
Subscribe to Email Updates :