• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Bovine somatotropin

Free episodes:

nameless

Paranormal Adept
cow growth hormone law suit scuppered

"Lawsuit against WTVT

In 1997, the news division of WTVT (Channel 13), a Foxowned station in Tampa, Florida, planned to air an investigative report by Steve Wilson and Jane Akre on the health risks associated with Monsanto's bovine growth hormone product, Posilac.[37] Just before the story was to air, Fox received a threatening letter from Monsanto, saying the reporters were biased and that the story would damage the company.[37] Fox tried to work with the reporters to address Monsanto's concerns;[37] Akre stated that she and Wilson went through 83 rewrites over eight months.[38] Negotiations broke down and both reporters were eventually fired. Wilson and Akre alleged the firing was for retaliation, while WTVT contended they were fired for insubordination.[37] The reporters then sued Fox/WTVT in Florida state court under the state's whistleblower statute. In 2000, a Florida jury found that while there was no evidence Fox/WTVT had bowed to any pressure from Monsanto to alter the story, Akre, but not Wilson, was a whistleblower and was unjustly fired.[37] Fox appealed the decision stating that under Florida law, a whistleblower can only act if "a law, rule, or regulation”" has been broken and argued that the FCC's news distortion policy did not fit that definition.[39] The appeals court overturned the verdict, finding that Akre was not a whistleblower because of the Florida "legislature's requirement that agency statements that fit the definition of a “rule” (must) be formally adopted (rules). Recognizing an uncodified agency policy developed through the adjudicative process as the equivalent of a formally adopted rule is not consistent with this policy, and it would expand the scope of conduct that could subject an employer to liability beyond what Florida's Legislature could have contemplated when it enacted the whistle-blower's statute."[39]"
 
What are you going on about Nameless?
- Well I'll tell you. via cutting n pasting from the arbiter of truth that is Wikipedia.

What is Bovine Somatotropine?

Well;
Bovine somatotropin or bovine somatotrophin (abbreviated bST and BST), or BGH, is a peptide hormone produced by the cow's pituitary gland.[1] Like other hormones, it is produced in small quantities and is used in regulating metabolic processes.[1] After the biotech company Genentech discovered and patented the gene for BST in the 1970s,[2] it became possible to synthesize the hormone using recombinant DNA technology to create recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST), recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH), or artificial growth hormone. Four large pharmaceutical companies, Monsanto,American Cyanamid, Eli Lilly, and Upjohn, raced to develop commercial rBST products and submitted them to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval.[3][4] Monsanto Corporation was the first firm approved in the United States (and worldwide). Other countries (Mexico, Brazil, India, Russia and at least ten others) have also approved rBST for commercial use.[5] Monsanto licensed Genentech's patent,[2] and marketed their product as "Posilac".[6][7] In October 2008, Monsanto sold this business, in full, to Lilly for a price of
$300 million plus additional consideration.[8]
rBST has not been allowed on the market in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Israel and all European Union countries (currently numbering 27), by 2000 or earlier.
In the United States, public opinion has caused a number of products and retailers to become rBST-free.[9][10][11][12]
 
In 1937, the administration of BST was shown to increase the milk yield in lactating cows by preventing mammary cell death in dairy cattle. Until the 1980s, there was very limited use of the compound inagriculture as the sole source of the hormone was from bovine cadavers. During this time, the knowledge of the structure and function of the hormone increased.[13] With the advent of biotechnology, one of the pioneering biotech companies, Genentech succeeded in cloning the gene for BST.[14] Monsanto had been working along the same lines and struck a deal with Genentech in 1979 to license Genentech's patents and collaborate on development of a recombinant version of BST – a process on which Monsanto would invest $300 million.[2] The two companies used genetic engineering to clone the rBST gene into E. coli. The bacteria are grown in bioreactors, then broken up and separated from the rBST, which is purified to produce the injectable hormone. They published their first field trial results in 1982.[15][16]
Lilly, American Cyanamid, and Upjohn, and Monsanto all submitted applications to market rBST to the FDA, and the FDA completed its review of the human safety component of the these applications in1986 and found food from rBST-treated cows to be safe; however strong public concern led to calls for more studies, investigations, and public discussions, which included an unprecedented conference on the safety of rBST in 1990 organized by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) at the request of Sen. Patrick Leahy.[17] FDA approved Monsanto's application in 1993.[18] Monsanto launched rBST, brand-named Posilac, in 1994.[19]
 
Potential Public Health Impacts Of The Use Of Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin In Dairy Production-Part 1

"Introduction: Goals of the JECFA Review

The task of assessing the safety of widespread commercial use of recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST) is far more complex and difficult than assessments of most food additive safety questions. In this case there is no food additive involved, nor is the central issue residues of rbST itself in meat or milk. Establishment of a Maximum Residue Level (MRL) for rbST is not appropriate.
The central human health questions are, to what extent does rbST use increase the level of the hormone Insulin-like Growth Factor I (IGF-I) in milk, and what possible risks to public health might be associated with consuming milk with increased IGF-I levels? We present below a review of what we believe is sufficient credible evidence that average IGF-I levels are increased in milk from rbST-treated cows. We present further recent evidence that IGF-I survives digestion and passes into the intestinal tract, and we review evidence that associates exposure of the intestinal epithelium to IGF-I at levels within the range found in milk with cellular growth responses linked to the risk of colon cancer. While this evidence is provocative, it falls short of providing an adequate basis for a quantitative risk assessment."
 
as from 3rd april;
Monsanto raises full-year earnings outlook after 2Q profit exceeds Wall Street expectations - Washington Post
"The St. Louis company said it earned $1.48 billion, or $2.74 per share in the three months ended Feb. 13, up from $1.21 billion, or $2.24 per share, in the same quarter a year ago.
Monsanto Co.’s sales increased 15 percent to $5.47 billion, led by genetically modified corn seeds, the company’s best-selling product.
The results topped Wall Street predictions of $2.56 per share on sales of $5.27 billion, according to FactSet."
 
Back
Top