The following article is reprinted from the April 9, 1998 edition of Rachel’s Environment & Health Weekly.
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 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.
The Wilson/Akre rBGH series (a script of which is available on the web site [url]www.foxbghsuit.com[/url]) 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. Therefore, the linchpin study of cancer and rBGH has never been subjected to normal scientific peer review.
* Some Florida dairy herds grew sick shortly after starting rBGH treatment. One farmer, Charles Knight — who lost 75 percent 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.)
At the web sit [url=http://www.foxbghsuit.com,]www.foxbghsuit.com,[/url] 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.
Rachel’s is available by subscription ($25 a year for individuals and citizen groups; $400 for businesses) from the Environmental Research Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036.
Volume 9, Number 9 March 1999
Leave a Reply