Transcript GMO Speaker Training Webinar

GMO Speaker Training Webinar
With Jeffrey Smith
4 parts, 2 hours each
June 14,
NOW Skipping June 21st!
June 28
Skipping July 5th
July 12
July 19
8 pm EST
(Please have pen and paper available)
Welcome to the GMO Speaker Training
Webinar
Goals:
• To speak confidently, accurately, and with
compelling facts about the risks of
genetically modified foods, particularly in
the area of human health, using short,
medium and long formats, and to inspire
the audience to take effective action.
Participants will also
• Learn about tools and tips to publicize
your lectures
• Learn to build a local Non-GMO Action
Group
• Be invited to join and support a national
movement
National structure
• Local groups, with a variety of targets
• National Working Groups, focused on
single targets
– Healthcare practitioners, patient advocacy
and support groups, parents, schools,
campuses, youth, health-conscious
consumers and natural products industry,
media and messaging, chefs and food
service, green groups, spiritual and religious
Volunteer Opportunities
• Speaker
– Local and Traveling
– General and specialized audiences
• Volunteer advocate
– Local or National Working Groups
– Member or Leader Team
• IRT volunteer
– Staff or Project basis
Questions?
Workshop concept
•
•
•
A fully scripted PowerPoint is available to
you online (3 versions)
You don’t “require” anything else
The workshop will provide;
–
–
–
–
–
–
Depth
Confidence
Practice
additional information
strategies, and
Q & A.
General Points for Speakers
• Homework and practice is recommended
– Find practice buddies
• This is not a certification. You will not be
authorized to speak on behalf of the
Institute for Responsible Technology
(IRT)
• IRT provides a support community and
referrals
4 Topics
Session 1: Components of a presentation;
how to structure a brief talk: Undermining
the credibility of GMO proponents;
Session 2: Health risks of GMOs
Session 3: Large scope of problem; action
steps
Session 4: How to facilitate an “activist
circle” and mobilize your audience
Lesson 1:
Components of a GMO talk
•
Identifying the key components
– Why they’re important
– What other information can be used
•
How to give a short (2-3 minute
presentation)
Exercise
•
•
Write down the main points you believe
are important in a short 2 minute talk on
GMOs. (Just short notes) 90 seconds
If you are with someone else, you can
instead each give a 45 second
presentation on GMOs
Minimalist Presentation
1. FDA scientists warned that GMOs might
create allergies, toxins, new diseases
and nutritional problems. But the person
in charge of policy at the FDA,
Monsanto’s former attorney and later
their VP, ignored the scientists and
allowed GMOs onto the market without
a single required safety study.
Minimalist Presentation
2. Now years later, the FDA scientists
have been vindicated. The American
Academy of Environmental Medicine
says that animal studies show that GM
food is linked to infertility, immune
problems, accelerated aging, organ
damage, and gastrointestinal problems.
They urge all doctors to prescribe nonGMO diets to everyone.
Minimalist Presentation
3. GMOs are genetically modified organisms,
where genes are taken from one species,
like bacteria or viruses, and forced into the
DNA of other species, like soybeans and
corn plants. Irrespective of what particular
gene you insert, the very process of
creating a GMO results in massive
collateral damage in the plant, which can
increase toxins, allergens, carcinogens, and
anti-nutrients.
Minimalist Presentation
4. Option to insert more health material,
e.g. Furthermore, the only human
feeding study shows that GM genes
can remain inside us, in our intestinal
bacteria and continue to function, long
after we stop eating GMOs.
Minimalist Presentation
5. There are very few safety studies, mostly funded
by the biotech companies and widely criticized as
rigged to avoid finding problems. When
independent studies do discover problems with
GMOs, the scientists are typically silenced,
threatened, and fired, and no follow-up studies are
done. Thus, we don’t have enough data to say
that a particular disease is caused by a particular
GM food. But many experts believe that they GM
foods are a significant contributor to many of the
serious health problems that have been on the
rise since GMOs were introduced in 1996.
Minimalist Presentation
6. Somehow, animals are clued into the
problems. Eyewitness reports from around
the world show that when given a choice,
many species of livestock and wild animals
avoid GMOs. For us humans, we need help.
Go to www.NonGMOShoppingGuide.com to
learn how to avoid the 8 GMO food crops and
their derivatives.
Minimalist Presentation
7. Since GMOs offer no consumer benefit, if
even a small percentage of shoppers avoid
GMO brands, we can create a tipping point
of consumer rejection, to force them out of
the market. This happened very quickly in
Europe, and we believe it is going to
happen soon here too. In fact, there is a
campaign to achieve this in the near future.
8. Go to www.HealthierEating.org to find out
more.
Analyzing and Refining the Presentation
1. What is your overall reaction to the
presentation?
2. What points were important to you?
3. Convincing? Not convincing?
Problematic?
4. What questions did it raise?
5. Are there any main points that are
missing? Check your own lists.
5 main components
1. Undermine the credibility of those
who promote GMOs
2. Describe the risks (health risks)
3. Cite third party support
4. Convey the large scope of the
problem
5. Call to action
Undermine the credibility of those who
promote GMOs
Creates receptivity and handles the objection: “But if it’s so bad, why…”
Tip: Try to bring out health risks with each example, so it does double duty
Examples of undermining credibility:
1.
FDA corrupted
Show quotes from FDA
2.
Independent scientists are thwarted/attacked
Refer to first chapter of Seeds of Deception for Arpad Pusztai story
Refer to Urban Garden magazine, November 2009: Carasco, Pusztai, Ermakova,
Traavik, Seralini
http://www.seedsofdeception.com/utility/showArticle/?objectID=4302
3.
Industry research is rigged
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
rbGH
Soil protein
Rigged control group
Ignoring gender differences
Short term studies
Refer to Genetic Roulette part 3
Undermine the credibility of those who
promote GMOs
1. FDA scientists warned that GMOs might
create allergies, toxins, new diseases
and nutritional problems. But the person
in charge of policy at the FDA,
Monsanto’s former attorney and later
their VP, ignored the scientists and
allowed GMOs onto the market without
a single required safety study.
Third party endorsements; The risks
•
Gives us credibility, and the audience
“permission” to reject GMOs
–
AAEM (Doctors prescribe non-GMO diets)
•
Read their statement
http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html
–
–
–
–
Excellent quotes: Not a casual relationship
lists specific disorders
Read my write up of their position
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle
/?objectID=2989
Third party endorsements; The risks
2. Now years later, the concerned FDA
scientists have been vindicated. The
American Academy of Environmental
Medicine says that animal studies show
that GM food is linked to infertility,
immune problems, accelerated aging,
organ damage, and gastrointestinal
problems. They urge all doctors to
prescribe non-GMO diets to everyone.
Health Risks (Process itself)
–
Process is unsafe, causing massive
unpredictable side effects
•
•
This answers the question about golden rice, etc.
It also answers questions about GM oils, and other
products without DNA or proteins
–
•
E.g. The endocrine disruptor changed in GM corn is
expected to remain in corn syrup (see pg 37 Genetic
Roulette)
Use Stomach Lining slide from Pusztai’s potato
study (see PPT slides)
Health Risks, continued
(adding “definition” and “process itelf”)
3. GMOs are genetically modified organisms,
where genes are taken from one species,
like bacteria or viruses, and forced into the
DNA of other species, like soybeans and
corn plants. Irrespective of what particular
gene you insert, the very process of
creating a GMO results in massive
collateral damage in the plant, which can
increase toxins, allergens, carcinogens, and
anti-nutrients.
Health Risks continued
4. Option to insert more health material,
e.g. Furthermore, the only human
feeding study shows that GM genes
can remain inside us, in our intestinal
bacteria and continue to function, long
after we stop eating GMOs.
Large scope of problem
•
Creates sense of urgency and leads to
commitments for action
1. Statistics on rising health issues in the US, e.g.
multiple chronic illness, food allergy, autism,
diabetes
2. Industry plans to replace all food
3. Self-propagating pollution is irreversible
Undermining Credibility; Large scope
5. The very few safety studies are mostly funded by
the biotech companies themselves and widely
criticized as rigged to avoid finding problems.
When independent studies do discover problems
with GMOs, the scientists are typically silenced,
threatened, and fired, and no follow-up studies are
done. Thus, we don’t have enough data to say
that a particular disease is caused by a particular
GM food. But many experts believe that they GM
foods are a significant contributor to many of the
serious health problems that have been on the
rise since GMOs were introduced in 1996.
Third party endorsements
– Animals avoidance is VERY compelling
•
•
Cows, pigs, geese, squirrels, elk, deer,
raccoons, mice, rats, chickens, buffalo, dogs,
and chickens
Reference Seeds of Deception or page in
Genetic Roulette
Action (avoid)
–
Avoid
•
•
•
•
•
–
See www.NonGMOShoppingGuide.com
iPhone App, ShopNoGMO
Pocket Guide
Downloadable pages
4 tips
Non-GMO Project verified
•
•
New standard
New criteria for Guide (enrolled products only)
Third party endorsements; Action (avoid)
6. Somehow, animals are clued into the
problems. Eyewitness reports from
around the world show that when given
a choice, many species of livestock and
wild animals avoid GMOs. For us
humans, we need help. Go to
www.NonGMOShoppingGuide.com to
learn how to avoid the 8 GMO food
crops and their derivatives.
Action (vision and activism)
–
Tipping point
•
–
rbGH & Europe are examples
How to help
•
IRT site
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
learn more
tell parents, show videos
pass on CDs, podcasts
Email and FaceBook network
Other healthcare practitioners
religious organizations
Natural food store
Etc.
Action (vision and activism)
7. Since GMOs offer no consumer benefit, if
even a small percentage of shoppers avoid
GMO brands, we can create a tipping point
of consumer rejection to force them out of
the market. This happened very quickly in
Europe, and we believe it is going to
happen soon here too. In fact, there is a
campaign to achieve this in the near future.
8. Go to www.HealthierEating.org to find out
more.
Exercise
•
•
Draw something that incorporates the
main points of a talk on GMOs. 90
seconds
Picture, diagram, cartoon, mind map,
whatever.
5 main components
1. Undermine the credibility of those
who promote GMOs
2. Describe the risks (health risks)
3. Cite third party support
4. Convey the large scope of the
problem
5. Call to action
Starting the Presentation

Connect immediately
Joke
 Show of hands
 Praise someone in the room
 Envision a warm, appreciative audience

Style points
Model optimism
 No need to emphasize negative
emotions. The facts are potent enough.
 Can be humorous in the face of gloomy
details

Notes are found on PPT
You can use “Notes Page” under View
 Or click and drag the bottom of the slide
up to reveal the notes
 Presenter View

Allows you to view the notes on your
computer while showing the slideshow
version to the audience
 Enable under SLIDE SHOW tab, under
SET UP SLIDE SHOW

The Health Risks of
Genetically Modified Foods
US GM crops
Soy
Corn
Cotton
Canola
93%
86%
93%
85% (Canada)
Hawaiian papaya
virus resistant
Zucchini
crookneck squash
virus resistant
Sugar Beet
Minor Food Crops
How do we avoid GMOs?
 Buy organic
 Buy products that are labeled non-GMO
 Buy products listed on a
Non-GMO Shopping Guide
 Avoid at-risk ingredients
See
www.
NonGMOShoppingGuide.com
for shopping guides and tips
Rate yourself
1-100, How vigilant were you
to avoid GM food when
eating out?
1-100, How vigilant were you
this week to avoid bringing
GM food home?
Rate yourself
1-100, How active you have
been in educating people on
this issue?
cells
nucleus
chromosome
DNA
gene
A
A
C
T
C
G
T
Basepairs: A-T & C-G (nucleotides)
T
T
G
A
G
C
A
How does
Genetic Engineering work?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Isolate a gene with a
desired trait*
Change the gene so it will
work in plants*
Prepare plant cells or tissue
Transform plant cells using a gene gun
or bacteria infection method*
Re-grow cells to plants via tissue culture
(cloning)*
* Steps that contain scientific uncertainties and risk potential
Gene
construct
Promoter: on switch
often CaMV (virus)
Gene sequence
Stop signal
e.g. Bt toxin gene
from soil bacterium
e.g. from pea
Identify cells with
incorporated genes
Test for markers
Add antibiotic
Only transformed
cells survive
Grow transformed GM
cells
via cloning (tissue culture)
Antibiotic Resistant Genes
“IT WOULD BE A SERIOUS HEALTH
HAZARD TO INTRODUCE A GENE
THAT CODES FOR ANTIBIOTIC
RESISTANCE INTO THE NORMAL
FLORA OF THE GENERAL
POPULATION.”
Director, Division of Anti-infective Drug Products
FDA Quotes and Michael
Taylor
Expose the lack of credibility of
GMO proponents
Agency scientists
warned of:
Allergens
Toxins
New diseases
Nutritional problems


GM plants could “contain unexpected
high concentrations of plant
toxicants.”
“The possibility of unexpected,
accidental changes in genetically
engineered plants justifies a limited
traditional toxicological study.”
FDA Toxicology Group
1. “Increased levels of known naturally
occurring toxins”,
2. “Appearance of new, not previously
identified” toxins,
3. Increased tendency to gather “toxic
substances from the environment” such
as “pesticides or heavy metals”, and
4. “Undesirable alterations in the levels of
nutrients.”
They recommended testing every GM food
“before it enters the marketplace.”
Division of Food Chemistry and Technology
“Residues of plant
constituents or toxicants in
meat and milk products may
pose human food safety
concerns.”
Gerald Guest, Director, FDA’s
Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM)
FDA declares GMOs no different
“The agency is not aware of
any information showing that
foods derived by these new
methods differ from other
foods in any meaningful or
uniform way.”
“Statement of Policy”
May 29, 1992
Food and Drug Administration
Secret FDA
documents
confirmed that
the facts
contradicted the
statement
What was said within FDA
“The processes of genetic engineering
and traditional breeding are different,
and according to the technical
experts in the agency, they lead to
different risks.”
Linda Kahl, FDA compliance officer
By “trying to force an ultimate
conclusion that there is no
difference between foods
modified by genetic engineering
and foods modified by traditional
breeding practices,” the agency
was “trying to fit a square peg
into a round hole.”
Linda Kahl, FDA compliance officer
“Animal feeds derived from
genetically modified plants present
unique animal and food safety
concerns.”
“I would urge you to eliminate
statements that suggest that the lack
of information can be used as
evidence for no regulatory concern.”
Gerald Guest, Director, FDA’s
Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM)
“There is a profound difference between the types of
unexpected effects from traditional breeding and genetic
engineering,”
“There is no certainty that [breeders] will be able to pick up
effects that might not be obvious.”
“This is the industry’s pet idea, namely that there are no
unintended effects that will raise the FDA’s level of concern.
But time and time again, there is no data to back up their
contention.”
FDA microbiologist Louis Pribyl
“What has happened to the scientific elements of
this document? Without a sound scientific base to
rest on, this becomes a broad, general, ‘What do I
have to do to avoid trouble’-type document. . . . It
will look like and probably be just a political
document. . . . It reads very pro-industry,
especially in the area of unintended effects.”
FDA microbiologist Louis Pribyl
Who overruled
the scientists?
Michael Taylor
• In charge of FDA policy
• Former Monsanto attorney
• Later Monsanto vice president
• Now US Food Safety Czar
‘Based on the safety and nutritional assessment you have
conducted, it is our understanding that Monsanto has
concluded that corn products derived from this new variety
are not materially different in composition, safety, and
other relevant parameters from corn currently on the
market, and that the genetically modified corn does not
raise issues that would require premarket review or
approval by FDA. . . . as you are aware, it is Monsanto’s
responsibility to ensure that foods marketed by the firm
are safe...’”
FDA Letter to Monsanto, 1996
For a Short Presentation:
Three slides on FDA
FDA declares GMOs no different
“The agency is not aware of any
information showing that foods
derived by these new methods differ
from other foods in any meaningful
or uniform way.”
“Statement of Policy”
May 29, 1992
Food and Drug Administration
In reality, agency scientists
warned of:
Allergens
Toxins
New diseases
Nutritional problems
Person in charge of FDA’s
GMO policy ignored
scientists’ warnings
Michael Taylor
•Former Monsanto attorney
•Later Monsanto vice president
•Now back at FDA as
US Food Safety Czar
Monsanto’s own former employees
Kirk Azevedo
 Scientist relating rbGH story and rigged
research story

Monsanto’s Past

PCBs
Fined $700 million
 Knew that residents were endangered

Agent Orange
 DDT

Rigged Research
rbGH
 Soil protein
 Journal of Nutrition case study

Stifled Scientists
Ecologists can’t access seeds
 Turkish scientist transferred
 Carasco on birth defects
 G.E. Seralini
 Richard Burroughs

Health Risks
Choices for presenting health dangers
1.
2.
3.
4.
Easy summary (AAEM)
5 categories of what can go wrong (See my keynote
presentations)
Focus on the two varieties: soy and Bt corn/cotton,
plus the dangers of the process itself (see medium
length PowerPoint on IRT site).
List problems by disease category (See health risk
brochure).

Allergies, toxins, antibiotic resistant diseases, reproductive
disorders, digestive issues, nutritional problems.
Summary Health Effects

Lab animals fed GM crops showed
damaged organs, higher infant mortality,
smaller babies, organ lesions, signs of
toxicity, potentially precancerous cell
growth, and sterility. Investigations link GM
feed with livestock sickness and death. And
thousands of farm workers that handle a
specific variety of GM plant are reporting
rashes, itching, and allergic reactions.
Softening words of Science
No “proof”
 “Suggests,” “implies,” “indicates”
 Preliminary evidence
 Converging lines of evidence indicate
 Fed, not led

Legal ways to implicate
Allegedly
 Seems to
 Appears to
 My opinion

Relative priority of evidence
Not all the points are of equal import
 Bt is particularly strong
 Anecdotal evidence is important for the
public, but not well received in certain
scientific circles
 Increasing US disease rates don’t imply
causality, so we need to demonstrate we
know that. But it is important to raise the
question.

First GM Crop
FlavrSavr
Tomato
Rats refused
to eat the
tomato
Yuk!
Many animals avoided GM feed
when given a choice
Mice avoided GM corn
After 28 days
•7 of 20 rats developed stomach lesions
•Another 7 of 40 died within 2 weeks
Industry study
Homework (Most Important)

Give a 1-3 minute presentation to a practice
buddy





Have a person ask you the following questions
How can it be so bad if the FDA has approved
GMOs?
I’m sure the companies do lots of studies.
Are you saying that these corporations would allow
dangerous foods onto the market?
Watch and listen to PPT presentation
Homework Exercise

Other homework assignments and
resources are found at

www.responsibletechnology.org/webinarjune2
011
Sign up for Spilling the Beans
www.ResponsibleTechnology.org
 Sign up for GMWatch,
www.GMWatch.org

Homework Exercise

Sign up for Tipping Point Network
www.ResponsibleTechnology.org
End of Part 1