The world according to Monsanto : pollution, corruption, and

the bovine growth hormone affair, part two 127Senate committee heard testimony from Michael Hansen, the expert fromthe Consumer Policy Institute, who was familiar with the ins and outs of theUN organizations since he had participated in several meetings as a representativeof consumer organizations. He revealed that the first panel of scientistsassembled by the JECFA in 1992 to evaluate the transgenic growthhormone included six representatives from the FDA, among them MargaretMiller—the former Monsanto employee—and Drs. Greg Guyer and JudithJuskevich, the authors of the controversial Science article. The rapporteur ofthe second panel, in 1998, was none other than Margaret Miller. Underthese circumstances, it is not hard to see why the JECFA issued a favorabledecision on rBGH, as Ray Mowling, Monsanto vice president for governmentand public affairs, was eager to point out: “The UN report reaffirmedthat treating cows with BST to increase milk production is safe . . . there areno food safety or heath concerns related to BST residues in products suchas meat and milk from treated animals.”A Testing Ground for GMOsThat same afternoon, December 7, 1998, the senators heard testimony fromDavid Kowalczyk, Monsanto’s director of regulatory affairs, who was caughtlying openly. “In the memos, you are suggesting to Health Canada who shouldbe on the JECFA panel,” declared Senator Spivak, looking him in the eye.“Do you think that suggesting who Canada’s representative on the JECFApanel should be might be overstepping the boundaries in your relationshipwith Health Canada?”“This is the first time I have heard that. I have never made any recommendationon who should be on JECFA.”“There are memos and minutes of meetings that report conversations thatyou have had with Mr. [Ian] Alexander, who controlled the data provided byyour company. He denied it as well.”After hearing from Health Canada’s three whistle-blowers, Senator Whelanconcluded: “I still maintain we should be doing more research. Now, forinstance, Monsanto is paying $600,000 to Agriculture Canada to find awheat that is immune to Roundup. I wrote to ten universities. One of themtold me to mind my business when I wanted to find out what strings are at-