FLASHBACK: Veteran Reporter Fired after refusing to back off of Monsanto
Since this story broke we have learned a great deal more about Monsanto’s insidious tactics & thuggery in the legal arenas.
(JOEL LORD) Since this story broke we have learned a great deal more about Monsanto’s insidious tactics & thuggery in the legal arenas. Typically they hire the best lawyers in the world and have systematically crushed their competition. These journalists were correct in their assertions and thus saw their careers go up in flames. Many have tried to resist this Big Agra Giant to no avail. Some like Saskatchewan farmer Percy Schmeiser went the distance & came away with something just as effective in defeat, that the truth came out. Please vist our Groundswell site for access to detailed analysis of Codex Alimentarius as it relates to Monsanto and this Bovine Growth Hormone. Very important. Also check out the Percy Schmeiser link on here.
By Peter Montague, PhD, is director of the Environmental Research Foundation in Annapolis, Maryland, USA
Two journalists in the US are thwarted in their efforts to tell an important public health story — that Monsanto’s genetically engineered milk hormone may promote cancer in humans. Their story is killed by the very TV station that had commissioned the story, caving in to threats by Monsanto.
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 24 February 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 cancelled 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 12 April 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 licence 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 athttp://www.foxbghsuit.com for all to see.
No one will be surprised to learn that powerful corporations can intimidate TV stations into rewriting the news, but this case offers an unusually detailed glimpse of specific intimidation tactics and their effects inside a news organisation. 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.
The US 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.
Monsanto is notorious for marketing dangerous products while falsely claiming safety. The entire plant is now contaminated with hormone-disrupting, cancer-causing PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls), thanks to Monsanto’s poor judgement and refusal to be guided by early scientific evidence indicating harm.
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 judgement and failure to heed scientific evidence to prevent harm. Critics say rBGH is just one more example of Monsanto’s monumentally poor judgement. When Wilson and Akre asked Monsanto officials to respond to these allegations of past poor judgement, 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 the 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 the FDA but was never published. The FDA has refused to allow anyone outside the FDA to review the raw data from this study, saying it would ‘irreparably harm’ Monsanto. 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 the 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, the 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 labelling their milk as ‘rBGH-free’. But this is definitely not true. Monsanto brought two lawsuits against dairies that labelled their milk ‘rBGH-free’. Faced with the Monsanto legal juggernaut, the dairies folded and Monsanto then sent letters around to other dairy organisations announcing the outcome of the two lawsuits – in all likelihood, for purposes of intimidation. (Conveniently, the FDA regulations that discourage labelling 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.)
At the web site http://www.foxbghsuit.comwww .foxbghsuit.com, you will find the version of the Wilson/Akre rBGH series as it was rewritten 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 publicise the relationship between rBGH and human cancer because new evidence has come to light.
In January 1998 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 four times as likely as average men to get prostate cancer. 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, hardworking 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. – Third World Network Features