alt="Sustainable Table Issues: Artificial Hormones" width="428"
height="50">
 In 2005,
32.5 million cattle were slaughtered to provide beef for US
consumers .i Scientists believe about two-thirds of
American cattle raised in for slaughter today are injected with
hormones to make them grow fasterii and
America’s dairy cows are given a genetically-engineered
hormone called rBGH to increase milk production. These measures
mean higher profits for the beef and dairy industries, but what
does it mean for consumers? Although the USDA and FDA claim
these hormones are safe, there is growing concern that hormone
residues in meat and milk might be harmful to human health and
the environment.
What's in the Beef?
According to the European Union’s Scientific Committee on
Veterinary Measures Relating to Public Health, the use of six
natural and artificial growth hormones in beef production poses
a potential risk to human health.iii These six
hormones include three which are naturally
occurring—Oestradiol, Progesterone and
Testosterone—and three which are synthetic—Zeranol,
Trenbolone, and Melengestrol.
The Committee also questioned whether hormone residues in
the meat of "growth enhanced" animals and can disrupt
human hormone balance, causing developmental problems,
interfering with the reproductive system, and even leading to
the development of breast, prostate or colon cancer.iv
Children, pregnant women and the unborn are thought to be
most susceptible to these negative health effects. Hormone
residues in beef have been implicated in the early onset of
puberty in girls, which could put them at greater risk of
developing breast and other forms of cancer. The European
Union’s Committee reported that as of 1999, no
comprehensive studies had been conducted to determine whether
hormone residues in meat can be cancer-causing.v
Scientists are also concerned about the environmental
impacts of hormone residues in cow manure. Growth promoting
hormones not only remain in the meat we consume, but they also
pass through the cattle and are excreted in their manure. When
manure from factory farms enters the surrounding environment,
these hormones can contaminate surface and groundwater. Aquatic
ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to hormone residues.
Recent studies have demonstrated that exposure to hormones has a
substantial effect on the gender and reproductive capacity of
fish, throwing off the natural cycle.vi
Despite international scientific concern, the United
States and Canadavii continue to allow growth
promoting hormones in cattle.viii The European Union,
however, does not allow the use of hormones in cattle
production, has prohibited the import of hormone-treated beef
since 1988, and has banned all beef imports from the US. The ban
has been challenged by the US at the World Trade Organization
and debate still rages between the US and the EU over its
validity.ix
How Wholesome Is Your
Milk?
Industrial farms use a number of methods for increasing milk
production in dairy cows, including selective breeding, feeding grain-based diets (instead of
grass), and exposing cows to longer periods of artificial light.
Yet, one of the most common and controversial ways to force
greater milk production is to inject them with rBGH
(recombinant bovine growth hormone), a genetically engineered
artificial growth hormone. Developed and
manufactured under the brand names Posalic® by
Monsanto Corporation, rBGH has been controversial from the
start. (rBGH is also referred to as rBST, or recombinant Bovine
Somatotropin.)
FDA approval for rBGH came in 1993, in spite of strong
opposition from scientists, farmers and consumers. According to
detractors, rBGH was never properly tested. The FDA relied
solely on a study done by Monsanto in which rBGH was tested for
90 days on 30 rats. The study was never published, and the
FDA stated the results showed no significant problems. But a
review by the Canadian health agency on rBGH found the 90 day
study showed a significant number of issues which should have
triggered a full review by the FDA.x
Read more about the FDA’s shady approval
of rBGH…
By the summer of 1994, the Wisconsin Farmers Union and
the National Farmers Union set up a joint hotline for dairy
farmers to use when reporting problems with the artificial
growth hormones in cattle. One lifelong New York dairy farmer
reported losing a quarter of his herd to severe mastitis after
beginning rBGH injections. He also reported a drastic drop in
production after taking his cows off rBGH; they suddenly
produced less milk then they had before going on the drug. A
year later, he had to replace 135 of his original 200 cows.
Other farmers using rBGH have reported similar problems, in
addition to hoof diseases, open sores and cows that died from
internal bleeding.xi
A 1991 report by Rural Vermont revealed serious health
problems with the rBGH-injected cows that were part of a
Monsanto-financed study at the University of Vermont (UVM).
Among the problems was an alarming rise in the number of
deformed calves and dramatic increases in mastitis,
a painful bacterial infection of the udder which causes
inflammation and swelling.xii To treat mastitis
outbreaks, the dairy industry has relied on antibiotics.
Critics of rBGH point to the subsequent increase in antibiotic
use (which contributes to the growing problem of antibiotic
resistant bacteria) and inadequacies in the federal
government’s testing program for antibiotic residues in
milkxiii as further reasons why the hormone should
never have been approved.
Additionally, cows forced to produce unnaturally high
quantities of milk will often become malnourished because they
lose more nutrients through their milk than they ingest in their
feed, xiv and are therefore more susceptible to
disease.
Milk from rBGH-treated cows contains higher levels of
IGF-1 (Insulin Growth Factor-1), which has been linked to colon
and breast cancer. Even though no direct connection has been
made between elevated IGF-1 levels in milk and cancer in humans,
scientists have expressed concern.xv
Faced with mounting evidence to the contrary, the FDA has
stubbornly continued to assure consumers that rBGH is safe for
cows and humans. In fact, in 1994, the FDA prohibited dairies
from claiming there was any difference between milk from
rBGH-injected cows and milk produced without the artificial
hormone.xvi
What You Can Do
There are many small family farmers who don’t use
artificial hormones on their animals. By purchasing your milk
and meat from local, sustainable farms, you are supporting a
system that ensures the health and welfare of the farm animals,
and protects you and your family from hormone-related health
risks.
- Choose hormone-free beef and
rBGH-free dairy products at the supermarket. Foods that carry
the “USDA-certified organic” label cannot contain
any artificial hormones. When purchasing sustainably raised
foods without the "organic" label, be sure to check
with the farmer to ensure no additional hormones have been
administered.
- Visit the Eat
Well Guide for an online listing of stores, restaurants and
producers that sell hormone-free meat and dairy products.
- Use Sustainable Table and Food and
Water Watch’s rBGH-free dairy list to find a list of
rBGH-free brands available in your state.
Did You Know?
- According to Science News,
80 percent of all U.S. feedlot cattle are injected with
hormones.xvii
- A study of cows treated with
melengestrol acetate (one of the artificial growth hormones
approved for use in the U.S.) revealed that residues of this
hormone were traceable in soil up to 195 days after being
administered to the animals.xviii
- While the average dairy cow produced
almost 5,300 pounds of milk a year in 1950, today, a typical
cow produces more than 18,000 pounds.xix
Resources
Fact Sheets
- A Primer on Beef Hormones
The USDA claims animals fed and injected with hormones are safe
to eat. This primer explains their reasoning. (Food and
Agriculture Service of the USDA)
- Say
No To rBGH! Keep Artificial Hormones out of Dairy
Products
A fact sheet created by Food & Water Watch to educate
people about the routine use of artificial hormones on factory
farms and the subsequent health effects, immunological effects
and cancer risks for consumers. (Food & Water Watch)
Articles
- Hormones: Here's the Beef
A Science News Online article focusing on the
environmental impacts of growth hormones from livestock
production. (Janet Raloff, Science News Online, January 2002)
- EU Scientists Confirm Health Risks of
Growth Hormones in Meat
An Associated Press article reports that a European Union
scientific panel has confirmed eating beef from cattle raised
on growth hormones is a potential health risk. (Associated
Press, April 23, 2002)
Sources
|
