Changeover to Non-GMO Soya, experiences in Denmark.

1. Changeover to Non-GMO Soya, experiences in Denmark. Pilegaarden, Hvidsten, Denmark. Presentation by Ib Borup Pedersen.

2. Sows – Straw based system (Summer) Transponder feeding and natural ventilation Standard farrowing house

3. Changeover – Economy:Sowsweaning at 7kg 1.8 more pigletsweaned per sow. (29.9 as opposed to 28.1 before) Financial effectssows: Betterproductionresults = £ 33,000 2/3 of medicinesaved in the sow herd = £ 3,550 Higherenergy and protein in feed (£19 per ton Non GMO soya) = £ 1,300 Extraexpenses NON-GMO soya for £90 per Ton. = £ -6,750 In total, a plus of : £31,000 or £ 69 per sow.

4. MedicineUse: Sows and pigletsNon-GMO from April 2011

5. Short summery of health effects going NON-GMO. Higher milk production Sows can look after 1-2 piglets more at the udder Less medicine usage Less abortions and more piglets born per litter No diarrhoea in piglets, and in weaners at feed change to feed containing more soya No bloat, or ulcers in sows Sows live longer, sows drop in production after 8 layer, on GMO soy after 6 layer,

6. Conclusion A change to NON-GMO, Makes your herd easier to manage, Improves the health of your herd, Reducesmedicineusage, Increasesproduction and is PROFITABLE.

7. Deformity – Siamesetwin (body)Sent to a localschool

8. Deformities got too frequent I read a lot of literature on the subject. The article that follows describes very clearly what has been seen in scientific studies on Roundup. The same type of deformities that I see in my pigs!

9. Teratogenic Effects of Glyphosate-Based Herbicides: Divergence of Regulatory Decisions from Scientific Evidence M Antoniou1, MEM Habib2, CV Howard3, RC Jennings4, C Leifert5, RO Nodari6, CJ Robinson7* and J Fagan8* 1Head, Gene Expression and Therapy Group, Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, King’s College London School of Medicine, UK 2Professor of entomology, former director, Institute of Biology, UNICAMP, and former provost of extension and community affairs, UNICAMP, São Paulo, Brazil 3Professor, Centre for Molecular Biosciences, University of Ulster, Northern Ireland 4Affiliated research scholar, Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, UK 5Research development professor for ecological agriculture at the University of Newcastle, UK. Interests: director and trustee of the Stockbridge Technology Centre Ltd (STC), UK 6Professor, Center for Agricultural Sciences (department of plant science), Federal University of Santa Catarina, Brazil 7Research director, Earth Open Source, London, UK. Interests: editor, GM Watch, UK 8Director, Earth Open Source. Interests: employed at a GMO testing and certification company *Corresponding authors: Claire Robinson Research director, Earth Open Source London, UK E-mail: claire.robinson@earthopensource.org John Fagan Director, Earth Open Source E-mail: jfagan64@gmail.com Received June 01, 2012; Accepted June 21, 2012; Published June 23, 2012

10. An investigation (Paganelli et al.) of the toxicity of a commercial Roundup® herbicide formulation and its active ingredient glyphosate found that these substances caused severe malformations in embryos of the South African clawed frog Xenopuslaevis and chickens. In frogs, dilutions of 1/5000 of the formulation (equivalent to 430 μM of glyphosate) were sufficient to induce malformations, including shortening of the anterior−posterior axis, microcephaly, microphthalmia, cyclopia, and craniofacial malformations at tadpole stages. Embryos injected with pure glyphosate showed similar phenotypes, suggesting that glyphosate itself, rather than a surfactant or other adjuvant present in the formulation, was responsible for these developmental abnormalities. Roundup® produced similar effects in chicken embryos, which showed a loss of rhombomere domains, reduction of the optic vesicles, and microcephaly. Through the use of reporter gene assays and phenotypic rescue via administration of an antagonist, the authors confirmed that the mechanism by which glyphosate and Roundup caused the observed teratogenic effects in Xenopus embryos was via disruption of the retinoic acid signalling pathway. This resulted in dysregulation of the shh, slug and otx2 regulatory genes, which are crucial to the development of the central nervous system [1]. The study, while not a classical toxicological study, is relevant to human risk assessment because the retinoic acid signalling pathway is a central signalling pathway in embryonic development that operates in virtually all vertebrates, whether amphibians, birds, or mammals.

11. Other Studies Showing Malformations from Glyphosate and Roundup Exposure Paganelli et al.’s study was one among several to find malformations from glyphosate and Roundup exposure. Jayawardena et al. (2010) found nearly 60% malformations in tadpoles of the tree frog Polypedatescruciger treated with an environmentally relevant concentration of 1 ppm Roundup. Effects included kyphosis, scoliosis, and edema [2]. Relyea (2012) found that environmentally relevant concentrations of Roundup induced relatively deeper tails similar to the adaptive changes caused by the presence of a predator in the tadpoles of the wood frog (Ranasylvatica or Lithobatessylvaticus) and leopard frog (R. pipiens or L. pipiens) [3]. A study on tadpoles of Scinaxnasicus (Lajmanovich et al., 2005) found that exposure to glyphosate herbicide caused craniofacial and mouth deformities, eye abnormalities and bent, curved tails, as well as mortality. Malformations and mortality increased with dose and time of exposure. A 2-day exposure to 3.07 mg/l glyphosate herbicide caused only 10% mortality but caused malformations in 55% of the test animals [4]. Malformations have also been found in mammals treated with glyphosate herbicides. A toxicological study by Dallegrave et al. (2003) found that the offspring of pregnant rats dosed with 500, 750 and 1000mg/kg Roundup on days 6–15 after fertilisation had increased skeletal abnormalities, including at doses that were not maternally toxic. Malformations consisted of the absence of bones or parts of bones, shortened and bent bones, asymmetry, fusions, and clefts. The percentage of altered foetuses increased with dose. The authors concluded that the formulated product was more toxic than the technical glyphosate evaluated by the World Health Organisation [5] and tested in the industry-sponsored teratogenicity studies described in Germany’s 1998 draft assessment report on glyphosate.

12. Types of deformitiesseen 11.Cranial 13. Spinal 13. Tail 3. limbs 7. feet 6. dual Sex 3. misplaced sex organ 6. ears 2. No-Rectum 2. kidneys 1. Eye 1. Tounge 1. Stommack 1. Motoric problems

13. Deformities - Spinal

14. Deformity - Limbs / spinal

15. Deformity – softtissue

16. Deformities - Cranial

17. Deformity – Tail / Spinal

18. All mydeformedpiglets had glyphosate present in their organs!

19. There is a clear connection between Glyphosate in food and number of deformities, The graph shows cranial and spinal deformities per 1000 born in relation to Glyphosatecontent in the food. Counted on farrowings 35 daysafterhigh or lowlevels of glyphosate in feed.

20. Thomas Böhn From Tronheimuni. In Norway helped with this graph, note that the periods are much longer, as he believes accumulated exposiure has an effect. It does also water down the difference in the groups, as the “high” period in feed was only 2 months, and the High” group here is a 6 months period. Average app. 0.2ppm – 1ppm - 0,1ppm

21. Therearesignificantlyless pigs bornafterHigherlevels of Glyphosate in food!

22. In short effects of 5 times the dosage of Glyphosate in feedFrom 0.2 to >1 ppm = gram / ton 5 times the deformities born (cranial and spinal) 5 times more abortions 0,95 piglets less born per litter

23. Glyphosate tests shoving that 2-4% of what you eat is in your urine

24. My summary as a farmer Any farmer, who switches away from GMO’s and Roundup will experience improved health in their herd and crops. What I have seen in my pigs, knowing aboutsientific studies on malformations due to the chemical Roundup, and the factthat 1/80 people in certaintowns in Argentina have the same defects, afterbeenexposed to the chemical, and thafactthatIknow of 11 Danish peoplebornwith deformities of the same type, scaresme. I believethatwealreadytoday in our part of the worldareseeing the effects of genemanipulation and assosiatedexposure to Roundup. The levels of Glyphosate in myownurine show that, by eating ”normal” foodsbought in shops, I have alreadyexposedmyself to 1000 fold higherdosesthan the chemical Roundup, thatmakes cancer, and I am certanly in the level of exposure, wherefertility problems and deformedchildrencouldbe the result. My pigs have same level as I have and producedeformedpiglets, and I believealso have fertility problems! Weneed to shiftfocus in order to keep the public healthy, and able to reproduce. It is nogoodtalkingaboutlevels of glyphosate in ourdrinkingwater, whenwearealreadyexposed to the chemical 1000 fold higher in ourfood. I don’tbelievethere to beanyplace for the chemical Roundup in food or feed-production, the casualties of thischemicalarealready on the table. A farmer’stask is to provide nutrious and healthyfood to consumers, GMO’s and Roundup provide NEITHER!

25. This slide puts intoperspectivehowwecanbe misled by new, intriguingbreakthroughs and ignore the warningsigns. The same goes for GMO’s and Rounduptoday!