this is our team with you twenty four seven well our breaking news story today a russian oil rig off the country's far east coast capsized through a storm more than sixty people on a search operation is in full swing fourteen people confirmed rescued two dead. fresh clashes flare up in the west and started just days after a demonstration but ended with people dead. in. the west and its allies mount pressure on the syrian regime as russia fights to prove through its draft resolution. aimed at solving the crisis peacefully.

the wait is finally over as russia's accepted as a fully fledged member of the world trade organization of the eighteen years of tough talks. up next in our special report we ask when the future of scientific freedom is under threat it was revealed that ninety five percent of research into genetic engineering is paid for by the industry.

come on i want to live to a fellow. don't be shy. to. come on. these little fellows have been fed. diets containing genetically are there by potatoes at the all these experiments. income pad is with. genetically modified potatoes that you get to pick up any difference we already investigated these days growth development immunity and they were supposed to have been touched. but it's that pace of change that's worrying of the scientists as well they say g.m. food is being rushed on to the market and on times without adequate safety tests

and that we have a lot of want to hear taxpayer. sixty thousand pages of internal documents and in these internal documents it was very clear that the scientists inside the agency said we need to test these foods for toxicity allergenicity immune response lower nutrition and for environmental contamination page after page of study they said we need none of this was done. today around a third of the soil from the u.s. is genetically altered and when it gets to the factory it's mixed together with ordinary soil and you never know which is which. in precautionary science of genetic engineering it means one question means one

career you ask one question you get the answer and you might or might not be able to publish it but that's the end of your career. what's i think very unique in my case is that i survived. the attack on scientists is very well structured by the bout it can destry it's systematic it's worldwide it's very coordinated it's part of the way that they do business so anywhere in the world at any time if someone finds a problem they're jumped on if the problem is really severe they get jumped on even more whenever there's something that comes up that can threaten this biotechnology empire.

companies exist to make money they don't exist to. entirely for the public good they are exist. to give profit back to their shareholders. as missouri has been a patron to dreams was the monsanto chemical company was four point five billion dollars profit in two thousand and seven. in its report to shareholders mum from terry predicted b.'s profits would double in the next five years to more than one point five billion. this is jefferson if.

you're one of the more than two dozen farmers that gave him a call describing problems with pigs they could get pregnant big. because of the g.m. corn is all right. so so. what i may do it another time i'm on my cell phone now but i might actually have to we talk a bit i might actually email you and tell you exactly what i've written down about what we've talked about to make sure it's accurate. all right. thank you very much. so that was good news he said that he was willing to talk his cell phone was dying on the battery and he said first thing he said was is my name going to be in the article you're writing so i had to put him at ease and tell him no it's not if you don't want it to be in the article it would be in there. that's that's the truth that's why we don't have

a lot of whistleblowers if farmers farmers are not interested a lot of scientists are scared about it and that's the whole state of the art right now where almost all scientists focused on genetically engineered research are funded directly or indirectly by industry so we're going to very dangerous situation because there's no real there's no real independent science. about ticket history says all we're doing is adding a gene into the d.n.a. it's like a lego where they snap into place but that's very untrue when the single process of insertion can change the natural d.n.a. in many ways that are unpredictable and they could lead to toxins and allergens a new diseases an antibiotic resistant diseases a nutritional problems most of the soil grown in united states is monsanto's round

a pretty soybeans where they take the soybeans and they put into the d.n.a. a gene that allows the plant to be sprayed with. those roundup herbicide and it will kill all of the weeds around the plant but the soybean plant will survive so eighty six percent of the soybeans in united states are genetically engineered to withstand one sandoz herbicide. miracle of science or frankenstein food how safe is the new and gradient in your diet professor push ties labs at scotland's rabbit institute one of the leading food research centers in europe scientists here are trying to find out whether the long term consumption of g.m. foods may affect health the professor is so concerned about the implications of his discovery he's decided to publicize his findings as

a scientist looking at it actively working on the field. i find that. it's very very fair to use. get it big. expending better because better we started did i did i did five there was not a single publication or. potential order effects of genetically modified. bettine or as with any species rats mice. or humans. even though that the humans for

all of the eating it. this is the same good idea of potato. that we used for genetic engineering get nine hundred ninety five. and this is the particular potato variety which is one of the easiest to genetically engineer and the point of the whole genetic modification experiment was to protect the potato a gate state feeds one of the major pests it scotland of they attacked the potato they could have parts of the potato and we observed that that particular

elected which we used which we take to crop. the snowdrop. did to protect the snowdrop bulbs against all sorts of pests attacks and we had hoped that if we had to take the that particular gene and transferred it educate it into the potatoes that would also be protecting the potato against insect attacks which in fact it did. after the animals were killed at dissected we found out that it compatible with the genetically modified potatoes there is eterno or get developed

differently some of the internal whole gets such just for example the got increased in size. even doing that itself was not good. for some of the other issues. the kid is where. develop as well as the controls and the. this is a part of the they found those days thirty six thirty six. the significate different the the g.m. . at the g.m. at. philadelphia u.s. physicians criticize that after more than ten years there is still no long term

studies concerning the consumption of genetic modified food due to the fact that there is no initial experimental data recorded and labeling has not been permitted so. even though i'm not a scientist i worked with more than thirty scientists over two years to document the known health risks of genetically engineered foods and the first part of the book is the documented health risks and there are sixty five different health risks divided into sections now the first one that i chose to highlight with an evidence of reactions is dr proust ties work and the reason why is that our part pointed out that it was basically the process itself of genetic engineering that cause the significant damage so only the genetically engineer potatoes caused the problem. the rats that were fed the natural potatoes along with the same insecticide did not

have the same problems so his brilliant design showed that it wasn't the insecticide that caused the problems it was somehow the process of creating the genetically engineered potato and he used the same process it's used to create all the other genetically engineered crops on the market if i had the choice i would certainly don't eat it till i see at least compatible experimental evidence which we producing genetically modified potatoes those one hundred fifty seconds were boom boom boom and they got everybody got the message everybody got the message they asked me would you eat it i said no certainly not that day it is we worked on it if i could avoid it i would certainly avoid it. the the other piece of the message was that so what to do we want and i said that what we want is to be more testing more biological

testing and we should not use that they got that this is the message already generated from us that they should use shadows citizens as human guinea pigs when he was asked to speak on television he had enormous pressure he was one of the few people on earth that realised that the g.m. crops on the market might be causing all that damage in the garden in the brain in the organs of the entire population. and so with permission from his director he was interviewed and then he was a hero for about two days at the rout institute the director praised his work took over all the press work put out his own press release praising it as world class research and then the two phone calls allegedly place from the u.k. prime minister's office for to the through the receptionist to the director. the

next morning our pipe was tight was fired after thirty five years and silenced with threats of a lawsuit and. it is only when the we think there was political pressure coming from the top that the whole situation changed and then the director to save his own skin decided that the best way to deal with the situation is to destroy me be to make me shut up so day they invoke the contract to whatever they did see on t.v. radio and the truth in the newspapers i could not deny it i could not connect it i couldn't see what was the video situation. and then we looked at the submissions of applications by the biotech companies

produce products which were already eating and we fand add that they were flimsy and they were not scientifically well founded and certainly not. the work which was deported they did not compare. well at school with our very extensive studies. he said it was a turning point. in my life he said jeffrey what i realized what i was doing and what they were doing was diametrically opposed i was doing safety studies they were doing as little as possible to get their foods on the market as quickly as possible so the turning point in his life was realizing that there were other scientists in the world who were not taking care of the health of the world we're not treating science properly he is he's on the top level of the world he expects other

scientists to do so so more than being fired from his job more than than these shocking moments in his life his greatest shock was to discover that there was this whole world of scientists that would basically allow foods on the market for economic purposes. so we have here is sixty thousand pages of documents of internal documents a fifty a day. in these boxes here. on the what happened when they suppress the

science of g m o's you know there's one document here that i think is especially important that really shows this history probably better than any other and this had to do with their compliance in looking at the studies and here's what the f.d.a. scientists their own scientists said you know the thing is i'm paid eighteen thousand seven hundred seventy seven you know right here and they say you know what we need to look at how these crops change how much how much pesticides we put in here we need to see how they change want to use how much water they need all long term studies that were needed down here we need to see what about the loss of nutrients in the food what about loss of nutrition none of that was done without loss of diversity in seeds long term studies recommended by the scientists never done here look at this changes in toxin or chemicals in the foods study recommended a long term study never done so the scientists asked for the study said let us do them we think there's a problem here we've taken a preliminary look we there's a problem but the politicians at the f.d.a.

and in the administration of that time said no they suppress the science and these questions these studies have never been done never been done. the flavor saver tomato was the first genetically engineered food to reach the public cal gene the corporation that produced the tomato had done three voluntary feeding studies on rats and found lesions in some other rat stomachs. the question that you're asking is. about the flavor saver tomato and what went into that curiously enough i was actually one of the outside consultants that was in the last meeting on the flavor saver to me which wasn't terribly successful commercially but the f.d.a. scientist went through a long present taishan about all the analyses they had done and her concluding slide was the flavor saver tomato is a tomato so they had not found any substantial differences except for the addition

of the one extra gene that actually decreased the rate at which they went soft so they extended the shelf life and indeed that was the conclusion so they had no reason to regulate it on the basis of safety. no one gets up in the morning saying i want to go buy a genetically engineered food they offer no benefits no more nutrition no more flavor no nothing they only offer risks that's all they offer to the consumer and so the average person of course rational person would say why would i buy a food that offers me no new benefits but only risks so it was critical critical for the industry to get these foods out without anyone knowing because if they knew they were obviously choose not to buy them. i don't know how many years of testing you would feel comfortable with but if i told you it was twenty five years would

you feel comfortable if i told you it was twelve years would you feel comfortable six years at what point how many years of testing and how many different kinds of tests would make you feel comfortable i will tell you as as i've said before that because these foods are tested more than any other any other new kinds of foods that have come on the market i am more confident about these than i am about picking up a new package of something. that the ingredients of which i don't know.

the problem was. to tell them so when we started thinking we should really prepare a tree with capacity to detect the presence of organisms and that's where i was helping them. and the person who came to train them was my student david quist.

we were training to train you would have to have a positive control and negative control for the positive control. from the us and from the negative control we thought we should just use the local corn which of course is going to be clean and. wonderful. came when the negative control started coming out. that means we started finding transgenic materials where they were not supposed to be for. the reason why our findings were so astounding was because it was thought that there was no corn being planted in mexico at all. and people wanted it that way the

government the local communities the people who lived in the city they all wanted to have it that way that they would need to make why because mexico is the center of origin of corn and mexican government. montagne the integrity of the land racist international. so it was illegal to plant. it is still illegal today. this is these german fans. it's essentially

a very very large seed library. see elections raise my. shelf. there are twenty four thousand samples. examples of maize seed. most of this is landry's right is that were developed by farms for thousands of years this selection. and they're quite diverse. these collections are also a source of useful traits for breeders who are looking for things like insect resistance drought tolerance grain quality all kinds of other characteristics and so sometimes these can these almost land races can be sources of genes and those kinds of those kinds of characteristics these things are slowly disappearing from the countryside is farmers adopt new or prove readies and also as farmers leave the

country said because now as you know there's a big problem of rural migration people from africa going to be trying to get into people from latin america going to cities are going to states looking for work so as these farmers leave the countryside the varieties that they grow disappear. wealthy british. markets. find out what's really happening to the global economy in these kinds of reports.

please please. please please. please .