There was never anything wrong with the L-tryptophane -- it was a contaminated batch which got out to the public.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Liles" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 1:38 AM Subject: Re: CS>Fw: Update on Federal Labeling Legislation > I am a poor sleeper and was pointed to L Tryptofan about 15 years ago and it > was a great sleep aid. Sure missed it when it exited the shelves and > thought it was pulled as it was a threat to the prescription sleep aides. > > So, did it truly have untoward or dangerous implications. > > Isn't it still available for veterinary applications? Used to be marketed > in alfalfa like pellets and sold in feed stores. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ode Coyote <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 10:36 AM > Subject: Re: CS>Fw: Update on Federal Labeling Legislation > > > > > > Last night on the health channel thre was a program about hundreds of > > people who nearly died after using L Tryptofan as a sleep aid. > > A Japanese company had genetically modified the organism used to produce > > it in order to increase production but the modified organism produced an > > unidentified toxin along with the increased production rates that killed 4 > > people and severly crippled hundreds. > > The FDA yanked all tryptofan off the shelves and it is banned to this > day. > > Tryptofan is present in turkey [and us]..a natural harmless protein that > > makes you sleepy. > > > > Genetically modified? You might never wake up. > > > > Ken > > > > > > At 07:43 PM 10/9/02 -0500, you wrote: > > > > > >News Update From The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > >Dear News Update Subscribers, > > > > > >The Natural Products Expo East was held October 3-6 in Washington, DC. > > >The sponsor, New Hope Natural Media, generously provided The Campaign to > > >Label Genetically Engineered Foods a complimentary exhibit space at the > > >event. Thank you New Hope Natural Media! > > > > > >On Friday Morning, October 4, Jeremy Rifkin gave the keynote address > > >titled "Natural Products in the Biotech Century." Jeremy Rifkin has been > > >warning about the potential problems with genetically engineered foods > > >since the 1980's. (Unfortunately Jeremy Rifkin's session was not > > >recorded.) > > > > > >Jeremy emphasized the threat that genetically engineered foods pose to > > >the organic segment of the natural products industry. He stated "This is > > >a life and death issue for your industry." He explained that we probably > > >only have about five years left to stop the open field growing of > > >genetically engineered crops. Otherwise, organic crops in the United > > >States will become permanently contaminated with genetically engineered > > >organisms. > > > > > >I had to leave Jeremy Rifkin's presentation before it was over because > > >it ran overtime and I had a 10:00 AM meeting with Senator Barbara > > >Boxer's Senior Policy Advisor, John Hess. As you may be aware, > > >California Senator Barbara Boxer had been planning to sponsor the > > >"Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act" into the U.S. Senate > > >this year. This is very similar to the legislation that was introduced > > >into the House of Representatives by Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich in > > >May. > > > > > >John Hess explained that at this late date, it did not make sense to > > >introduce the Senate version of the labeling legislation into the 107th > > >Congress. However, he assured me that Senator Boxer is very enthusiastic > > >about moving forward on the "Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know > > >Act" early next year after the 108th Congress begins. John and I > > >discussed other members of the Senate that are likely candidates to > > >co-sponsor the labeling legislation. > > > > > >Remember that this is an important election year. All members of the > > >House of Representatives and one third of the Senators are up for > > >re-election. This is an excellent time to put pressure on members of the > > >U.S. Congress and their opponents to support labeling legislation. > > > > > >Form letters to mail to members of Congress can be found on our web site > > >at: > > >http://www.thecampaign.org/congressletters.htm > > > > > >Form letters can also be found in the back of The Campaign's Take Action > > >Packets. Order extra copies of our Take Action Packets to share with > > >your friends and associates at: > > >http://www.thecampaign.org/tap.htm > > > > > >Senator Boxer's Senior Policy Advisor and I also discussed the effort to > > >pass Measure 27 in Oregon. We agreed that passing Measure 27 in Oregon > > >is likely to have a very positive effect on getting the federal > > >legislation passed into law by the U.S. Congress. > > > > > >The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods launched a new web > > >site last week to combat the misinformation campaign being run by > > >Monsanto and the coalition trying to defeat Measure 27 in Oregon. We > > >modified the appearance of the web site in the past few days and > > >continue to add content. Check out the new appearance at: > > >http://www.voteyeson27.com > > > > > >Posted below is an excellent article that recently ran in PR Week > > >magazine with the headline, "PR Expert Warns Gene Giants on No-Labeling > > >Stance." It discusses the misinformation campaign being waged by the > > >opposition in Oregon. > > > > > >Craig Winters > > >Executive Director > > >The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods > > > > > >The Campaign > > >PO Box 55699 > > >Seattle, WA 98155 > > >Tel: 425-771-4049 > > >Fax: 603-825-5841 > > >E-mail: mailto:[email protected] > > >Web Site: http://www.thecampaign.org > > > > > >Mission Statement: "To create a national grassroots consumer campaign > > >for the purpose of lobbying Congress and the President to pass > > >legislation that will require the labeling of genetically engineered > > >foods in the United States." > > > > > >*************************************************************** > > > > > >PR Expert Warns Gene Giants on No-Labeling Stance > > > > > >PR Week (US) > > >October 7, 2002 > > > > > >THE GM FOOD INDUSTRY'S INSISTENCE ON KEEPING SECRETS FURTHER EXPOSES ITS > > >PR SHORTCOMINGS > > > > > >HIGHLIGHT: > > >By PAUL HOLMES, currently president of The Holmes Group and editor of > > >www.holmesreport.com > > > > > >Let's say your company makes a massive technical advance, one that both > > >improves the quality of the product you sell and has the potential to > > >solve one of the world's most intractable problems. You'd be ready to > > >spend millions to promote it, right? Well, not if you're in the > > >genetically modified (GM) food business. Then you spend dollars 4.5 > > >million on a campaign to keep your new technology secret. Faced with a > > >ballot initiative that calls on food companies to label products that > > >contain genetically modified ingredients, the Coalition Against the > > >Costly Labeling Law is trying to sell Oregonians on the idea that such > > >labeling would cost millions in 'government bureaucracy and red tape.' > > > > > >The campaign's premise is a lie, of course. The industry isn't concerned > > >about red tape - or if it is, it's a secondary issue. What truly worries > > >the industry - the reason it has resisted labeling since GM foods were > > >introduced a decade ago - is that consumers will select unmodified foods > > >if given a choice. So the campaign is about denying them that choice, > > >but calling the group the Coalition Against Informed Consumers probably > > >sounded like a bad idea. > > > > > >Faced with labeling demands, the GM food industry falls back on the fact > > >that the FDA considers labels unnecessary. After I discussed this > > >subject in a recent column, a Monsanto rep pointed out (correctly) that > > >the company does label its products, which it sells to farmers rather > > >than consumers, but the FDA 'has determined that the biotech crops > > >currently grown and subsequent ingredients don't need to be labeled > > >because biotech food is no different than conventional food.' > > > > > >But, the FDA's position notwithstanding, there is clearly a segment of > > >the public that wants to know how its food is made, and it is hard to > > >see any moral basis on which companies would deny that right. > > >Apparently, the increased corporate transparency we've heard about > > >doesn't encompass this kind of information. Instead, the industry is > > >essentially saying, 'Trust us, you don't need to know.' > > > > > >But at the same time, it is also saying, 'We don't trust you. We think > > >you're so stupid that you won't be able to use the labeling information > > >intelligently. You're not smart enough to understand the science or to > > >process our arguments. Instead, you will be influenced by hysterical > > >Luddites who want to ban our product, and you won't buy it.' > > > > > >But 21st-century PR isn't about controlling the flow of information or > > >deciding what information the public has a right to. It's about putting > > >information in context. If the GM food industry doesn't believe its PR > > >people are smart enough to explain its products' benefits, it should > > >either hire new PR people or get a new product. > > > > > >Fighting against an informed public only creates the impression that it > > >has a sinister secret to hide. > > > > > >- Paul Holmes has spent the past 15 years writing about the PR business > > >for publications including PRWeek, Inside PR, and Reputation Management. > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. > > > > > >Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org > > > > > >To post, address your message to: [email protected] > > > > > >Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > > > > >List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > >
