1. Genetically modified wheat: Class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of Northwest wheat farmers
2. How did genetically altered wheat end up in Oregon field?
3. GM wheat health effects not properly tested for - GMWatch comment
---
---
1. Genetically modified wheat: Class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of Northwest wheat farmers
By Scott Learn
The Oregonian, June 6, 2013
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2013/06/genetically_modified_wheat_cla.html

Several Washington wheat growers and the Center for Food Safety filed a class-action lawsuit Thursday against Monsanto after unapproved genetically modified wheat was found in an eastern Oregon field last week.

The lawsuit claimed the discovery damaged the sale of exports. Japan suspended some imports and South Korea said it would increase its inspections of U.S. wheat following the announcement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

"We farmers cannot stand idly by while companies like Monsanto destroy our export markets and our economy," said Tom Stahl, a fourth-generation Washington wheat farmer Tom Stahl said in the news release. Stahl, part of the suit, is from Waterville and an opponent of genetically modified food.

The genetically modified wheat matched one designed by seed giant Monsanto to be resistant to the herbicide Roundup, which was tested through 2005 in Oregon and other states. No genetically modified wheat has been approved for U.S. farming.

On Wednesday, Monsanto called the wheat an isolated occurrence and blamed it on an accident or deliberate mixing of seeds. The St. Louis-based company added on Thursday that the lawsuits were premature given that the strain was limited to one field in Oregon and that none of the wheat had entered commerce. Kyle McClain, Monsanto chief litigation counsel, said the company's process for closing out its wheat development program was government directed, rigorous, and well documented.

"Given the care undertaken, no legal liability exists and the company will present a vigorous defense," he said in a statement.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Spokane and also named Joe Ludeman of Waterville, Dreger Enterprises of Creston, Wahl Ranch of Lind, and The Center for Food Safety, a nonprofit that also opposes genetic modified food.
---
---
2. How did genetically altered wheat end up in Oregon field?
By Ben Tracy
CBS News, June 6 2013
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57588150/how-did-genetically-altered-wheat-end-up-in-oregon-field/

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has sent investigators to find out how genetically modified wheat ended up growing in Oregon. It is not approved for commercial use, and many countries won't buy American wheat if there is a chance it's been genetically modified.

Monsanto, which developed it, does not know how it happened but would not rule out sabotage.

Clint Lindsey sells almost all of the wheat he grows near Portland to countries in Asia. The discovery of genetically modified wheat in eastern Oregon has his customers worried.

"Our company sells to a grain exporter that was dealing with Japan and has had its next shipment put on hold," Lindsey said. "So unless that gets started up again, we could potentially be sitting on a lot of conventional wheat this fall."

Lindsey said it costs them "hundreds of thousands of dollars a year."

The problem began when a farmer who has not been identified noticed that wheat he treated with herbicide did not die. Researcher Carol Mallory-Smith tested the plants at Oregon State University.

"I found that they were Roundup-resistant transgenic," she said, meaning they are genetically modified.

Mallory-Smith said she was surprised at the find, adding, "To me, it's still a real mystery about how it got there."

The samples have the same genetic trait found in wheat that seed company Monsanto began testing in Oregon and 15 other states in 1998. It was being developed to resist Monsanto's weed killer Roundup. The variety was never approved for commercial use.

But those field tests ended in Oregon in 2001, so the question now is, more than a decade later, where did the genetically modified seed come from?

Monsanto declined our request for an interview, but the company says tests on 30,000 plant samples in Oregon and Washington state did not find any other signs of genetically modified wheat.

The Food and Drug Administration says the modified wheat would be fit for human consumption, but Japan and South Korea have suspended some U.S. shipments. Those countries have strict bans on genetically modified wheat.

"The question is, how many other fields are contaminated?" Lindsey said. "I think it's probably a matter of time before they find more."

While investigators look for answers, Clint Lindsey is looking for storage space. He needs somewhere to put his wheat if he can't send it overseas.
---
---
3. GM wheat health effects not properly tested for
GMWatch comment, 7 June 2013

MON 71800 is believed to be the unapproved GM wheat variety that's been found contaminating US wheat.
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/when-will-governments-learn-that-ge-crops-are/blog/45372/

Here you can read the safety assessment conducted by Monsanto on its GM Roundup tolerant wheat MON 71800.
http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodScienceResearch/Biotechnology/Submissions/ucm155777.htm

As usual with GM crops, statistically significant differences were found between the GM wheat and the non-GM parent variety. However, these were dismissed in the usual fashion, by introducing comparative data from a range of unnamed distantly related wheat varieties grown in different conditions, probably from the database constructed and maintained by the GM industry-funded group ILSI specifically for this purpose.

By using this unscientific dodge, Monsanto concluded that the differences found in the GM wheat when compared with the non-GM parent fell within the range of values drawn from all these distantly related wheat varieties and thus do not matter.

For more on this tactic, see section 2.1.7 of GMO Myths & Truths:
http://www.earthopensource.org/index.php/2-science-and-regulation/2-1-myth-gm-foods-are-strictly-regulated-for-safety

Monsanto performed no animal feeding studies beyond acute oral toxicity tests in mice. As is typical for industry studies on GMOs, no details are given of how many doses were administered for how many days. It could have been a single dose!

No details were given of the numbers of mice tested or of the parameters (effects) measured.

Even the short subchronic 90-day feeding tests in rats required by EU law on single event GM crops were not performed. These tests are weak, lasting for an equivalent of only 7-9 years in human terms, and differences found in GM-fed rats are typically ignored. But evidently Monsanto didn't even want to do these most rudimentary tests on its GM wheat.

Monsanto performed a digestibility/allergenicity in vitro (test tube) test on its GM wheat and concluded "the transformation process did not significantly alter endogenous allergens in event MON 71800".

The FDA reported on Monsanto's test:

"In experiments performed with the purified E. coli-produced alternatively processed form of CP4 EPSPS, 98% of the protein was digested in SGF [simulated gastric fluid] within 15 seconds. The enzymatic activity of this form of CP4 EPSPS was lost following SGF treatment for 15 seconds. In addition, purified E. coli-produced alternatively processed form of CP4 EPSPS was degraded within four to eight hours of SIF [simulated intestinal fluid] treatment."

A scientist who needs to remain anonymous commented to GMWatch: "This is no good. The enzyme should have been purified from the plant (bacterial recombinant proteins are not identical to the natural version). Degradation in SIF in 4-8 h is not good. The small intestinal transit time is about 2 h in most animals and humans."

Regarding Monsanto's allergenicity test in human serum, the scientist commented that if a new allergen had been formed during the GM transformation process - a process that has been found to occur in other studies on GM crops - this test would not detect it: "If a new allergen is formed during transformation, in the existing allergic patients' blood pool there is no antibody against it." Therefore any potential new allergens present in the GM wheat would be missed by the serum test.