Monsanto's rBGH

Phila of Bouphonia notes:

Monsanto's profits are down on rBGH:

Monsanto Company recently announced that profits from its genetically modified bovine growth hormone, Posilac, also known as rBGH, will fall 16% in 2007 due to “pressure in the dairy business,” according to chief financial officer, Terry Crews.

Many US dairy companies, including Dean Foods, Stonyfield Farms, and California Dairies, as well as retail supermarkets, such as Safeway, Kroger and Publix are prohibiting use of the GM hormone due to consumer demand.

Something to celebrate. rBGH is in everything dairy we eat, ice cream, yoghurt, milk, cheese:

The classic Monsanto combination of bad science, misleading claims, the silencing and rubbishing of opponents and the hushing-up of problems, is abundantly evident in the case of the corporation's first commercially-available genetically-modified product: bovine growth hormone.

Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH - also known as Bovine Somatotropin, or BST) is a genetically engineered copy of a naturally-occurring hormone produced by cows. The purpose of rBGH is to enable cows to produce more milk than they naturally would. It works by altering gene expression of glucose transporters in the cow's mammary gland, skeletal muscle and omental fat. The gene facilitates the repartitioning of glucose to the mammary gland, which in turn produces more milk.

Cows injected with a daily dose of Monsanto's rBGH - marketed under the brand name Posilac - are generally expected to increase their milk yield by between 10 and 20%. However, the problems and side-effects associated with rBGH are legion. Such are its actual and potential dangers that it is banned in Canada, the European Union and a number of other countries, despite the best efforts of Monsanto to prise open those markets. However, rBGH has been in use in other countries - most notably the USA - for some years. And it is from there that the bad news has been emerging.

And it is not harmless. It hurts cows:

For a comprehensive list of the potential ill-effects of rBGH on cows, one need look no further than the warning label which the US Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) requires Monsanto to include in every shipment of Posilac. The label outlines 21 health problems associated with the use of Posilac, including cystic ovaries, uterine disorders, decrease in gestation length and birth weight of calves, increased twinning rates and retained placentas.

Potentially the most serious problem, however, is the increased risk of mastitis, or inflammation of the udder. A cow with mastitis produces milk with pus in it. Dairies will not accept milk which has an abnormally high somatic cell count (ie, a high proportion of pus), and mastitis can thus be a serious source of lost revenue to the dairy farmer. Many farmers seek to treat the problem with antibiotics, but antibiotic residues in milk are suspected of causing health problems in humans who drink it, as well as contributing to the development of antibiotic resistance amongst bacteria.

And may cause cancer in humans:

Even leaving aside the health problems caused by antibiotic residues in milk - a side effect of an increase in mastitis - the effects of rBGH on human health could be devastating. Most worrying are scientific studies linking rBGH to cancer.

When a cow is injected with rBGH, its presence in the blood stimulates production of another hormone, called Insulin-Like Growth Factor 1 (IGF-1), a naturally-occurring hormone-protein in both cows and humans. The use of rBGH increases the levels of IGF-1 in the cow's milk. Because IGF-1 is active in humans - causing cells to divide - some scientists believe that ingesting high levels of it in rBGH-treated milk could lead to uncontrolled cell division and growth in humans - in other words, cancer.

Monsanto have naturally been keen to deny that IGF-1 levels in rBGH treated milk could be high enough to pose a threat. Writing in The Lancet in 1994, the company's researchers claimed that "there is no evidence that hormonal content of milk from rBST treated cows is in any way different from cows not so treated." Yet in a later issue of the same journal, a British researcher pointed out that Monsanto had admitted, in 1993, that "the IGF-1 level [in milk] went up substantially [about five times as much.]" when rBGH was used.

Thanks for looking out for us, Monsanto.

Update: 11/15 Speaking of which, Susie of Suburban Guerrillas mentions another set back:

Wheeeee! Better living through chemistry! Monsanto, of course, is the corporate heavyweight who fights any indication that a chemical-free existence might have its health advantages:

HARRISBURG, Pa. - Pennsylvania is stopping dairies from stamping milk containers with hormone-free labels in a precedent-setting decision being closely watched by the industry.

Synthetic hormones have been used to improve milk production in cows for more than a decade. The chemical has not been detected in milk, so there is no way to test for its use, but a growing number of retailers have been selling and promoting hormone-free products in response to consumer demand.

State Agriculture Secretary Dennis C. Wolff said advertising one brand of milk as free from artificial hormones implies that competitors’ milk is not safe, and often comes with what he said is an unjustified higher price.

“It’s kind of like a nuclear arms race,” Wolff said. “One dairy does it and the next tries to outdo them. It’s absolutely crazy.”

Agricultural regulators in at least two other states, New Jersey and Ohio, are considering following suit, the latest battle in a long-standing dispute over whether injecting cows with bovine growth hormone affects milk.