GMO: Ticking Time Bomb (video)

GMO: Ticking Time Bomb
A Gary Null Production
Gary Null, PhD.

Part 1. [tv.globalresearch.ca]

Part 2. [www.youtube.com]

Part 3. [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/11/2012 11:27AM by Erling.

To maintain rationality on this subject we should look at the other side of the story from time to time; perhaps like this article from last week's Wall Street Journal:

Gordon

[online.wsj.com]

Thank you Gordon. This website seems determined to implant irrational fear. Afib is bad enough, but now (if you read recent posts here) we also need be very afraid of flu shots, electro-pollution, and wheat. I guess if we all lived in a lead-lined, underground room, eating pemmican, our flu risk would be low.

Cowering in fear,

EB

Tinkering with plants has been going on for many, many years---early tomatoes were very small, not too tasty as they are today. GMO plants are more hardy, produce more and less chemicals need to be used, which is a plus for 3rd. world countries.

Posters use what appeals to them from their sources---Gary Null touts a vegatarian diet, he believes that meat causes a lot of diseases, a lot of posters here believe in a paleo like diet. which is lots of meat. So, if Null is wrong on his diet choice, can he also be wrong on his GMO beliefs?

Liz

Hi Liz,

I think you are exactly right- In psychology it is called "projection" to place your malady on other people. Several regular posters on this website have turned it into an art.

As a result we have people worried about taking a flu shot. Good grief.

EB

Excellent, Erling - Thankfully, we have the Internet as a means to spread the word about the scientific facts without media censoring or editing. Gary Null should be congratulated for a professional presentation of a very important topic.

Following is a video link that's not nearly as polished, but points out the intentional obfuscation by the media and their controlling powers who want to make sure the public is not informed of the truth...whether it's food, or fluoride, or pesticides, or EMFs and so on. So many people fail to understand that when the body takes in these GM foreign proteins, it doesn’t recognize them or know how to process them and as pointed out, the science says this is not a good thing and many health consequences are the result.

Whether or not we choose to accept these harmful influences is a personal choice, but I prefer to be as aware as possible so I can make as many healthy choices as possible rather than be the victim of something that was totally forseeable and preventable. Otherwise-intelligent individuals seemingly deny the consequences because of some thought that "they wouldn't let that happen." Well, "they" most definitely do.

I believe in truth in labeling and that consumers should have the right to choose.

Play this video which is a classic for how the media covers up and manipulates what they want the public to know. This goes back to the contamination of milk with bovine growth hormones but that's not the only topic by far.

Fox News Kills Monsanto Milk Story - MUST SEE!

Here you have proof that FDA ignored the bovine growth hormone issue in spite of Canada’s ruling against it due to the potential of increased cancer. What is so frightening is that Fox news, owned by Rupert Murdoch, states openly: we decide what is in the news. They fire employees who have the story well documented that Americans needed to know and when the employees sue Fox news, of course, Fox wins.

This is how Monsanto seemed destined to control the world, yet consumers got the message and refused to buy their contaminated milk and Monsanto sold off the bovine growth hormone division.
[www.youtube.com]

Also, here's a clip out of Dr. Mercola's many detailed rants on the dangers of GM foods.

GMO: Politics as Usual: On Mercola.com, Dr. Mercola borrows the following phrase from Bill Maher: “Here’s a New Rule: anytime a GMO advocate gushes about the benefits and safety of genetically engineered products, someone must recite the following statistics from Food & Water Watchi:

*Since 1999, the 50 largest agricultural and food patent-holding companies and two of the largest biotechnology and agrochemical trade associations have spent more than $572 million in campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures.

*Lobbying expenditures for food and agricultural biotechnology more than doubled between 1999 and 2009, rising 102.8 percent from $35 million in 1999 to $71 million in 2009.

*Food and agricultural biotechnology PACs made more than $22 million in campaign contributions since 1999.

*Food and agriculture biotechnology firms employ more than 300 former congressional and White House staff members as lobbyists.

In addition to in-house lobbyists, the food and agricultural biotechnology firms employed more than 100 lobbying firms in 2010.”

Jackie

Jackie,

You may be interested in the article Milk and the Cancer Connection [www.yourhealthbase.com] which I wrote in 1998 when Monsanto first started pushing their bovine growth hormone.

Hans



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/13/2012 01:51PM by Hans Larsen.

EB,

In my opinion having a flu shot is a waste of time and, in the US at least, probably a waste of money as well. You may be interested in these two well-researched abstracts written by Professor William Ware (the editor of International Health News).

SEASONAL FLU SHOT. IS IT EVIDENCE BASED?
By the time this issue goes online, the flu vaccination campaign will be in full swing and millions of doses administered. Thus it is of interest to examine the evidence regarding efficacy. One of the most respected organizations doing meta-analyses and systemic reviews is the Cochrane Collaboration. Their most recent review of the above question appeared June 2, 2010. This study reviewed 50 reports of randomized controlled trials of influenza vaccines involving 70,000 individuals. Comparison was with a placebo or no intervention in naturally occurring influenza in healthy individuals 16 to 65 years of age. They found that in the relatively uncommon circumstance of the vaccine matching the circulating strain and high circulation of the strain, 4% of unvaccinated people vs 1% of vaccinated people developed flu symptoms. For the usual situation where there was a partial match between the vaccine and the seasonal strains of virus, the corresponding figure were 2% and 1%. Thus, for what they term the normal situation, i.e. a partial match, one needs to vaccinate 100 individuals to prevent on case of the flu. If by some accident, there is a very good match, then 33 individuals need to be vaccinated to prevent one case.

The Cochrane investigators warn that 15 of the trials included in the analysis were industry funded. Thus the actual efficacy may be somewhat less, given the well known problems with industry sponsorship and the fact that studies funded from public sources are significantly less likely to report conclusions favourable to vaccines.

Additional observations from the researchers:

• Vaccine use did not affect the number of people hospitalized.
• There is no evidence that vaccination for the flu affects the rate of complications such as pneumonia or transmission.
• One case of Guillian-Barré syndrome (a very serious neurological condition leading to paralysis) occurred for every million vaccinations.
• The “harms” evidence base was limited and did not allow significant conclusions.

Most readers probably realize that the make-up of the vaccine used each year involves merely an “educated guess” which due to the logistics of the operation must be done months before the wild strains in action are identified. But it seems that the merits of the vaccination are oversold with a widespread belief that getting the shot will prevent the flu. Even if the number needed to treat of 100 to prevent one case is not corrupted by industry sponsored trial data, to view the vaccine as working is stretching things quite a bit. The near absence of data on side effects means that to get this one-in-a-hundred benefit one is gambling on not having a serious side effect that is ignored or missed in studies. The alternative to the flu shot is Vitamin D, as has been discussed in previous Newsletters and as well in the studies described below.


VITAMIN D VS. INFLUENZA. THE LATEST STUDIES
The reader will also no doubt recall reports in this Newsletter concerning vitamin D and influenza, and in particular the experiment in a nursing home where vitamin D status was assessed and every resident brought up to sufficiency with supplementation prior to the flu season. The flu rate in this susceptible group was very low compared to that among the staff which had the not been supplemented with vitamin D (Dec 09-Jan 10 issue). Two more sophisticated studies related to this issue have appeared recently, one a randomized trial, the other a blinded cohort follow-up study.

The cohort study looked at the association between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and the incidence of acute viral respiratory tract infections in healthy adults.17 Participants were blinded as to what was being assayed in their blood samples, and the incidence of infections was monitored by physicians blinded to the vitamin D status. Serial monthly 25(OH)D determinations were made over the fall and winter of 2009-2010 in 198 healthy adults. It was found that those with concentrations above 38 ng/ml (95 nmol/L) experienced a two-fold reduction in the risk of developing acute respiratory tract infections and a marked reduction in the percentages of days ill. As the season progressed through the Fall and into the Winter, the number of subjects having levels ≥ 38 ng/mL decreased and those below the cut-off increased. Another way of stating the results is that of the 18 who had levels above 38 ng/mL throughout the study, 3 (16.7%) became ill, whereas for the 180 below this cut-off, 81 (45%) became ill.

The second study of school children involved a randomized intervention trial employing 1200 IU/day of vitamin D3 or a placebo. The primary outcome was the incidence of influenza A, diagnosed with antigen testing. Influenza A occurred in 10.8% of the children in the intervention group vs. 18.6% in the placebo group (relative risk 0.58). The reduction was more marked in treated and untreated children who had not been taking other vitamin D supplements and was 0.36, i.e. a 64% risk reduction. Asthma attacks were reduced with 2 occurring in children in the intervention group and 12 occurring in the placebo group. It seems likely that more dramatic results might have been achieved if a somewhat higher dose of vitamin D had been employed. No 25(OH)D levels were reported.

When these studies are compared with the Cochrane study, one can not help notice the huge discrepancy between the incidence rates they found for either the vaccinated, placebo or untreated groups and those in the two studies just discussed. It would appear that vaccine studies either recruit participants much less susceptible to influenza or the bar is set much higher for identifying cases.

Hans

Hans,

In the US the CDC recommends a flu shot and we could debate ad nausem whether the one in a million chance of getting GBS is a worse risk than being one of the 27,000 dying from a flu-related illness. The question is, why is this debate even here?

IMHO, making people worry about flu shots or wheat is just alarmist; and it dillutes the website's more important role (educating people about afib). Your readers are not here to learn about electro-pollution, they have afib to worry about.

As I said earlier, it is not psychologically unusual to "project' our own maladies on others and you have some professional "projectors" posting every day.

If you are a fan of irony, consider that on this website, you have posts promoting nutritional supplements that have no clinical trial data, claiming to cure pulmonary fibrosis among other things, yet you advise against a flu shot?


EB

EB,

The General Health Forum is for discussing subjects unrelated to atrial fibrillation. I am not advising against a flu shot, I am just saying that in my opinion it is a waste of time and personally, I would not have one and never had one.

Hans

Most big conglomerates have lobbyists, I would suppose that organic farmers have lobbyists, nothing new about that As far as Fox News they are probably the only news scource that does print more balanced news than most of the other prime time news stations. I would imagine that certain stories could cause them problems, they are in business and can be hurt if they run them. Fox had to pull a show and host because the White House put pressure on them, sometimes in order to stay on air they have have to pull their story, I am not saying this is good, just the way it is.

One way to turn off a reader is to quote Bill Maher---

It seems strange that taking DNA from one plant and inserting that DNA into another, which I understand is what they do, should cause all of the problems that GMO foods are supposed to be guilty of. GMO foods are supposed to cause cancer, cancer has been around for decades, centuries, what caused cancer then, John Adams, our second president, daughter died of breast cancer. We have people that are against drilling for oil, they are against fracking, all kinds of causes abound, since the beginning of time progress was decried as being bad and would cause all kinds of maladies, if those alarmists were listened to we would still be back in huts.

Liz

Thanks, Jackie, for filling potholes in the road to facts. Perhaps they didn't study the videos? The science presented succinctly by cell biologist Bruce Lipton PhD makes the case for GMOs alterating our DNA (which by the way implicates GMOs in AF causation, another piece of the “disease of civilization” puzzle):

“What we understand from epigenetics -- the new science of how environmental signals control our genes -- we’re introduced to where do the signals come from that select the genes and modify our genetic activity? Well, we used to say that everything is due to the genes, but now we find that a class of molecules called “micro RNA” – they’re very small RNA molecules and they’re found in all the cells -- and these micro-RNA molecules are molecules that adjust the reading of our genes and change the readout of the genes. Well, a new understanding about the micro-RNA molecules says this:

When we eat food, the micro-RNA from the food is picked up by the digestive system and not broken down. The micro-RNA is taken into our own body intact, and now what they’ve found is that the micro-RNA from food ends up in our own cells - like in our liver and other cells in our body - and these micro-RNAs still have the same function: they change our genetics and they change the readout of our genome. And the significance is profound: it says when we eat genetically modified food we’re eating a new class of micro-RNAs that have never been in the world before, and yet these micro-RNAs are picked up by our biology and adjust our own genetics, so in a sense the old story “we are what we eat” actually now has a biochemical foundation. And now all of a sudden you can say if that’s true, why would you risk your life eating a genetically modified food containing micro-RNAs that can totally destroy our own biology and cause great problems in our lives?"

Potholes:

“This website seems determined to implant irrational fear.”

“GMO plants are more hardy, produce more and less chemicals need to be used, which is a plus for 3rd. world countries.”

“Posters use what appeals to them from their sources.”

“In psychology it is called "projection" to place your malady on other people. Several regular posters on this website have turned it into an art. As a result we have people worried about taking a flu shot.”

“The question is, why is this debate even here?”

”IMHO, making people worry about flu shots or wheat is just alarmist… and it dilutes the website's more important role (educating people about afib).”

“Your readers are not here to learn about electro-pollution, they have afib to worry about.”

”As I said earlier, it is not psychologically unusual to "project' our own maladies on others and you have some professional "projectors" posting every day.”

”… you have posts promoting nutritional supplements that have no clinical trial data, claiming to cure pulmonary fibrosis among other things…”

“One way to turn off a reader is to quote Bill Maher---“

“It seems strange that taking DNA from one plant and inserting that DNA into another, which I understand is what they do, should cause all of the problems that GMO foods are supposed to be guilty of."

“. …if those alarmists were listened to we would still be back in huts.”



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/14/2012 11:25PM by Erling.

Erling:

And your point is?

Liz

What's the point? Sometimes I wonder. . .

The point in highlighting the distracting comments - like potholes - was to hopefully have readers attention on the GMO topic and become knowledgeable.about its seriousness. Had you listened to the information in the videos you wouldn't have wondered, "It seems strange that taking DNA from one plant and inserting that DNA into another, which I understand is what they do, should cause all of the problems that GMO foods are supposed to be guilty of." See for example biologist Bruce Lipton's description of how foreign micro-RNA molecules can alter one's DNA. Dr. Lipton is certainly not an "alarmist" and neither am I..

Erling.

Erling,

People don't come to this website to read about wheat.

But your message is very clear- the sky is falling.

EB

I came across the study below done in 2000 regarding the positives and negatives of GMO. It's quite long and detailed but at least the conclusion is well worth reading. It seems to present both sides of the issue well.

It struck me that very little has changed on this subject in the 12 years since the study was done. We're still pounding the same drums on both sides, it's still a lightening rod and will continue to be ad naseum.

By continuing intense discussion of this subject, are we really going to change any minds at this point in time?

[www.csa.com]

Gordon

Dr. Rima Laibow, who speaks in one of the videos that Erling posted for us to watch, is in my opinion suspect. Dr. Rima also has ties to Swann, who is a UFO culist, includes remote seeing of UFOs. Dr. Rima has co-authored a UFO abduction book. Dr. Rima is big with Alex Jones, he and his followers of his website believe in conspriritory theories. Dr. Rima believes that the Illuminati (Banks, big business etc.) want to get rid of 90% of the worlds population by using vaccines---wonder what she thinks of the Salk vaccine, saved much of the population--. Google Dr. Rima Laibow to learn about her, don't just accept a posted video.

Liz

EB,

The board you are posting on is the General Health Forum. It is legitimate to post something about wheat if a health concern, whether real or imagined, is involved. Subjects involving lone atrial fibrillation should be discussed on LAF Forum IX. Postings relating to religion or politics will be deleted as will postings which I deem are irrelevant to the subject discussed such as those questioning the character, motives, or intellectual ability of fellow posters.

Hans

Gordon,

Thanks for the rational 2000 science article by Deborah B. Whitman Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful? [www.csa.com].

There have been major developments in genetics sciences since 2000, notably in 'epigenetics', so your comment that "very little has changed on this subject in the 12 years since the study was done. We're still pounding the same drums on both sides, it's still a lightening rod and will continue to be ad naseum" is simply not true. These developments were the reason for posting the videos in the first place, especially Part 3 which deals with the now well-understood way that "foreign" molecules in GM foods will damage / alter our human genetics.

The above quote from biologist Bruce Lipton is verbatim from the Part 3 video, likely produced very recently because it presents science not mentioned in the 2011 edition of his The Biology of Belief.

Peace!

Erling.

Liz,

With credentials like that, Dr. Rima is well-qualified to mislead people on this website. I bet she doesn't like flu shots either...

Hans,

I totally understand the purpose of the General Health Forum. I don't think many people read it, because your website is called afibbers.org, not wheat.org or Ihateflushots.com. Questioning the validity and veracity of some the posts doesn't imply anything negative about the poster.

And, as I have previously stated, getting people worried about something inconsequential (i.e. wheat) doesn't help their afib in the least.

EB



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/15/2012 04:30PM by FiveBox.

Thank you, Hans, for the link to your insightful report back then which is still important information today as the US has cut down on the bovine hormone but apparently not banned it completely.

You probably recall probably recall Fran reporting her observations with the farm-raised salmon in her area of Scotland -- what they were fed and how they fish had developed hideous physical abnormalities. Farm-raised fish are typically fed grain pellets- not their normal diet- and if the grains are GM, then it's a science experiment on a very large scale...not only for the fish but the consumers of those fish.

My research time lately is focused on Anti-aging and Restorative Medicine especially as it pertains to brain health, but obviously overall health and of course, I'm always on the lookout for heart-related info.

Awareness and open mindedness is important to every health-conscious individual. For those wishing to enhance their health so that they live healthier and longer, tips about flu shots, BPA, GM foods, food sensitivities and the resultant effects for those who are susceptible and who are fortunate enough to have a related “tip off” symptom, being mindful of environmental influences is critical. There are many people who have symptoms but they are not traced back to the origins so they often are given drugs to mask the symptoms rather than seek out the source or cause which then continues to smolder silently and manifest significantly when it's much too late for reversal.

There are countless numbers of grateful afibbers who have significantly benefited from the tips offered here. Many have avoided ablation procedures as a result of making significant changes in lifestyle which are very often revolve around nutrition.

My experience is that frequently, people want to know how to avoid environmental factors that may influence afib and are open-minded enough to examine many potential risk factors and so very much appreciate the tips offered here over the years. Since we are all unique in susceptibility or vulnerability as well as exposure response, there are a myriad of methods to sleuth out typical offenders. Ultimately, it’s a personal choice about modifying the dogma and exploring the new potentials.

One of my recent excursions into the importance of protecting the integrity of the Blood Brain Barrier turned up an interesting report out of Scotland on the dangers of GM foods. In part, the following quotes stand out as relevant to this thread.

Jackie



GM affects the brain
April 2011

GM crops could cause a pandemic of psychiatric disorders. How far-fetched is that?

The scientific wisdom of yesteryear held that a “blood-brain barrier” exists which protects the brain from substances and cells in the blood which would otherwise upset brain function.

There is, indeed a physical blood-brain barrier. But it can be breached. Stress and inflammation can make different areas of the barrier leaky. This allows harmful materials to pass through and disturb the function of associated areas of the brain.

Immune-system responses in turn trigger inflammation which makes the blood-brain barrier leaky, and potentially exposes the brain cells to all those same immune-system factors. The resulting brain disturbances indicated by the experiments so far include: impaired learning and memory, obsessive-compulsive disorder, depression, anxiety and suspicion, impulsiveness, and development of nervous tics.

In a nutshell, things which make you physically ill can also make you mentally ill.

Where does GM food fit into all of this?

First, GM soya and GM maize form feedstock for the junk food industry. They are a major fuel of the modern obesity epidemic.

Second, GM foods have an increased potential to generate allergens and novel toxins which may cause inflammation. Besides this, all GM crops so far commercialised have inherent systemic pesticides (Bt insecticide and/or glyphosate weedkiller). They may soon include inherent industrial, pharmaceutical and waste chemicals too.

Third, GM material plus novel DNA in the diet has the potential to alter the microbial mix in the gastro-intestinal tract, and to impair its health-promoting qualities, such as protection from inflammation (see GM time-bomb, Microbes in our guts ... a little something to worry about).

The fourth potentially adverse link between GM food and brain-function is the dreaded HGT (horizontal gene transfer) which, to many regulators and scientists, seems to be a taboo subject.

It's now well-known that genes move around in the natural world, and that HGT is a main route for the generation of pathogenic bacteria and viruses. However, natural HGT is an occasional and very restricted event. GM techniques applied to crops are nothing less than a greatly facilitated horizontal gene transfer on a vast scale. As the Institute of Science in Society has described it, genetic transformation “has created highways for gene trafficking in place of narrow by-ways and occasional footpaths that previously existed”.

As if man's gung-ho activity in spreading self-replicating novel DNA throughout his food crops isn't bad enough, we've actually gone one better.

Genetic engineers have been using a common soil bacterium, Agrobacterium tumefaciens, to insert their engineered DNA for them. This bug is used because it's an ideal vector for HGT. Unfortunately it's also persistent. Also unfortunately, its gene transfer activities aren't likely to stop where the biotech engineers want them to. unquote

Continue for the complete report: [gmfreescotland.blogspot.com]

The Institute of Science in Society is calling for a global ban to be imposed on further environmental releases of GMOs, and for all those responsible for releasing them to be brought to book.

More interesting links about GM food problems
65 Health Risks of GM Foods
[responsibletechnology.org]

Children born to parents who eat GM wheat may DIE before age five, warn scientists
By admin on Sep 22, 2012 with Comments

Ethan A. Huff
Natural News

Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) has developed a novel variety of genetically-modified (GM) wheat that contains an altered protein and enzyme-suppressing mechanism that some scientists are now saying could cause serious problems for the human liver. A recent report compiled by several acclaimed experts in the field of genetics says that children born to parents who consume this GM wheat variety could actually end up dying before they reach the age of five.

This shocking revelation comes at the same time as CSIRO has announced that Australia’s Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) has granted the group approval for two field trials of both wheat and barley that have been modified in this untested way. Since the technology directly inhibits an enzyme in wheat that is very closely linked to glycogen, a polysaccharide produced in the liver, consuming wheat or barley that contains these genetic alterations will very likely lead to liver failure, and eventually death.

“If this (technology) silences the same sort of gene in us — as it silences in the wheat — then, well, children who are born with this enzyme not working tend to die by the age of about five,” says Professor Judy Carman, a biochemist and director of the IHER, Flinders University, who helped compile the report. “And adults with this problem, just kind of get more and more sick, and more and more tired, until they get very, very ill indeed.”

Australian regulatory authorities approved field trials of deadly GM wheat without any evidence of safety
Carman worked with both Michael Antoniou, a molecular genetics expert from Kings College in London, and Prof. Jack Heinemann, a Lecturer in Genetics at the University of Canterbury, to compile and present these very serious concerns about the safety of CSIRO’s GM wheat for public and expert review. According to Heinemann, there is no evidence that CSIRO even considered the fact that its GM wheat could obstruct glycogen production, and OGTR was apparently unconcerned about this very serious possibility when it freely granted the group approval for field trials.

“What we found is that the molecules created in this wheat, intended to silence wheat genes, can match human genes,” said Heinemann during a recent press conference hosted by the Safe Food Foundation. “And through ingestion, these molecules can enter human beings and potentially silence our genes.”

You can watch that press conference here:
[youtu.be]

Currently, CSIRO’s GM wheat has not been approved for commercial use, which means it is not being used in the food supply at this time. But since Australian authorities so easily approved field trials for the “Frankenwheat” without demanding so much as a shred of evidence that it is safe for human consumption illustrates just how easily this genetic poison will also likely be foisted on the public without such evidence in the very near future.

“If CSIRO cannot provide immediate and adequate responses to these issues, we call on them to cease all field trials currently underway, stop all plans for human feeding trials, and agree to undertake the recommended safety testing,” says Scott Kinnear, Director of the Safe Food Foundation.

Sources for this article include:

[au.news.yahoo.com]

[gmwatch.org]

[www.naturalnews.com]

Monsanto Apologists Attempt to Spin Shocking GMO Study
Establishment trots out “experts” in desperate bid to debunk fact that genetically-engineered food is a threat to humanity

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
September 21, 2012

A shocking new study conducted by French scientists which shows that rats fed on Monsanto’s genetically modified corn suffered cancer and premature death has been met with a furious response from GMO apologists, who are desperately trying to cast doubt on the the study in an effort to discredit its findings.

50 percent of male and 70 percent of female rats fed on a diet containing NK603 – a genetically modified corn produced by Monsanto – or those exposed to Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller – suffered tumors and multiple organ damage, causing them to die prematurely, the study found.

The study was conducted by French scientists at the University of Caen and published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology.

Almost immediately after the findings were made public at a press conference in London, numerous other scientists rushed to Monsanto’s defense and claimed that the study was inaccurate.

“This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumors particularly when food intake is not restricted,” said Tom Sanders, head of the nutritional sciences research division at King’s College London. “The statistical methods are unconventional … and it would appear the authors have gone on a statistical fishing trip.”

However, the statistical methods are perfectly straightforward. Only 30 percent of males and 20 percent of females in the control group of rats that were not exposed to Monsanto’s products died prematurely – meaning males were 30 per cent more likely to die prematurely after eating Monsanto corn and females a whopping 50 per cent more likely to die.

Sanders’ point about that particular breed of rat being prone to tumors treats the study as if it was conducted without using a control group of rats as a comparison, which is completely untrue.

David Spiegelhalter of the University of Cambridge also tried to cast doubt on the accuracy of the study by highlighting that “The study’s untreated control arm comprised only 10 rats of each sex, most of which also got tumors.”

That statement again completely ignores the fact that the rats, whether they developed tumors or not, were statistically far more likely to die prematurely if they were exposed to Monsanto products. The figures don’t lie.

Monsanto continually points to studies they claim confirm the safety of GMO food, and did so again in the aftermath of the latest French study. However, all of those studies did not go beyond the 90 day reporting period unlike the Caen study which tracked the health of the rats throughout their life span. It was only after four months that the tumors and organ damage suffered by the rats became evident.

Monsanto is already very much on the ropes in Europe and faces being kicked out of the European marketplace altogether if its reputation continues to be denigrated – that’s presumably why a gaggle of “experts” have been trotted out by the establishment Universities – a lot of which routinely receive huge grants from Monsanto itself – in order to desperately try and debunk the study.

Meanwhile over in the United States, Monsanto and other GMO corporations have spent a combined sum of over $19 million dollars in an attempt to shoot down Proposition 37, the California bill that merely seeks to require genetically-modified foods and food ingredients to be labeled at the retail level.

If Monsanto and other GMO producers like DuPont, Bayer, Dow, BASF, and Syngenta are so confident that their genetically-engineered products are safe – why have they spent so much money attempting to prevent the public from knowing that they are in the food supply?

As Mike Adams points out, no matter how many apologists the establishment wheels out to cover-up for the fact that GMO represents an unparalleled environmental threat to humankind – the cat is already out of the bag.

“The era of GMO deception is history. A food revolution is upon us. And if governments will not halt the mass poisoning of our world by evil corporations, I have no doubt that the People will, by themselves, eventually invoke other necessary methods of halting this great evil,” he writes.

GM crops must be immediately outlawed; Monsanto halted from threatening humanity
The GMO debate is over

Mike Adams
Natural News
September 21, 2012

The GMO debate is over. There is no longer any legitimate, scientific defense of growing GM crops for human consumption. The only people still clinging to the outmoded myth that “GMOs are safe” are scientific mercenaries with financial ties to Monsanto and the biotech industry.

GMOs are an anti-human technology. They threaten the continuation of life on our planet. They are a far worse threat than terrorism, or even the threat of nuclear war.

As a shocking new study has graphically shown, GMOs are the new thalidomide. When rats eat GM corn, they develop horrifying tumors. Seventy percent of females die prematurely, and virtually all of them suffer severe organ damage from consuming GMO. These are the scientific conclusions of the first truly “long-term” study ever conducted on GMO consumption in animals, and the findings are absolutely horrifying. (See pictures of rats with tumors, below.)

What this reveals is that genetic engineering turns FOOD into POISON.

Remember thalidomide? Babies being born with no arms and other heart-breaking deformities? Thalidomide was pushed as “scientific” and “FDA approved.” The same lies are now being told about GMO: they’re safe. They’re nutritious. They will feed the world!

But the real science now coming out tells a different picture: GMOs may be creating an entire generation of cancer victims who have a frighteningly heightened risk of growing massive mammary gland tumors caused by the consumption of GM foods. We are witnessing what may turn out to be the worst and most costly blunder in the history of western science: the mass poisoning of billions of people with a toxic food crop that was never properly tested in the first place.

Remember: GMOs are an anti-human technology. And those who promote them are, by definition, enemies of humankind.

GMOs are unfit for human consumption

The evidence keeps emerging, day after day, that GMOs are absolutely and without question unfit for human consumption. France has already launched an investigation that may result in the nation banning GM corn imports. It’s already illegal to grow genetically modified crops in France, but the nation still allows GMO imports, meaning France still allows its citizens to be poisoned by imported GM corn grown in America.

The GMO industry, not surprisingly, doesn’t want any independent research conducted on GMOs. They don’t want long-term feeding trials, and they most certainly do not want studies conducted by scientists they can’t control with financial ties.

What they want is to hide GMOs in products by making sure they’re not listed on the labels. Hence the biotech industry’s opposition to Proposition 37 (www.CArighttoknow.org).

The tactics of the biotech industry are:

• HIDE genetically modified ingredients in foods
• FALSIFY the research to claim GMOs are safe
• MANIPULATE the scientific debate by bribing scientists
• DENY DENY DENY just like Big Tobacco, DDT, thalidomide, Agent Orange and everything else that’s been killing us over the last century

Monsanto is now the No. 1 most hated corporation in America. The company’s nickname is MonSatan. It is the destructive force behind the lobbying of the USDA, FDA, scientists and politicians that have all betrayed the American people and given in to genetically modified seeds.

These seeds, some of which grow their own toxic pesticides right inside the grain, are a form of chemical brutality against children and adults. This is “child abuse” at its worst. It’s an abuse of all humans. It is the most serious crime ever committed against nature and all of humankind.

Science for sale

That’s what you get with payola science… science “for sale” to wealthy corporations. Nearly all the studies that somehow conclude GMO are safe were paid for by the biotech industry. Every one of those studies is unreliable and most likely fraudulent. Every scientist that conducts “research” for Monsanto is almost certainly a sellout at minimum… and more likely a jackal operative working for an industry of death.

Corporate science is fraudulent science. When enough money is at stake, scientists can be bought off to even declare smoking cigarettes to be safe. And they did, throughout the 1950′s, 60′s and 70′s. Some of those very same scientists are now working for the Monsantos of the world, peddling their scientific fraud to the highest bidder (which always happens to be a wealthy corporation).

There is no poison these scientists won’t promote as safe — even “good for you!” There is no limit to their evil. There are no ethics that guide their actions.

GMO-promoting scientists are the most despicable humanoid creatures to have ever walked the surface of this planet. To call them “human” is an insult to humanity. They are ANTI-human. They are demonic. They are forces of evil that walk among the rest of us, parading as authorities when in their hearts and souls they are actually corporate cowards and traitors to humankind. To pad their own pockets, they would put at risk the very future of sustainable life on our planet… and they do it consciously, insidiously. They feed on death, destruction, suffering and pain. They align with the biotech industry precisely because they know that no other industry is as steeped in pure evil as the biotech industry. GMO pushers will lie, cheat, steal, falsify and even mass-murder as many people as it takes to further their agenda of total global domination over the entire food supply… at ANY cost.

This is war at the genetic level. And this kind of war makes bullets, bombs and nukes look downright tame by comparison. Because the GMO war is based on self-replicating genetic pollution which has already been released into the environment; into the food supply; and into your body.

The hundreds of millions of consumers who eat GMO are being murdered right now, with every meal they consume… and they don’t even know it. GMO-pimping scientists are laughing at all the death they’re causing. They enjoy tricking people and watching them die because it makes their sick minds feel more powerful. These were the geeks in school who were bullied by the jocks. But now, with the power of genetic manipulation at their fingertips, they can invoke their hatred against all humankind and “bully” the entire world with hidden poisons in the food. That makes them smile. It’s the ultimate revenge against a world that mistreated them in their youth. Death to everyone!

Society must respond in defense of life on Earth

The sheer brutality of what the GMO industry has committed against us humanity screams out for a decisive response. It is impossible to overreact to this. No collective response goes too far when dealing with an industry that quite literally threatens the very basis of life on our planet.

To march government SWAT teams into the corporate headquarters of all GMO seed companies and shut down all operations at gunpoint would be a mild reaction — and fully justified. To indict all biotech CEOs, scientists, employees and P.R. flacks and charge them with conspiring to commit crimes against humanity would be a small but important step in protecting our collective futures. To disband all these corporations by government order have their assets seized and sold off to help fund reparations to the people they have harmed is but a tiny step needed in the defense of life.

The truth is that humanity will never be safe until GMO seed pushers and manufacturers are behind bars, locked away from society and denied the ability to ever threaten humanity again.

What the Nuremberg trials did to IG Farben and other Nazi war crimes corporations, our own government must now do to Monsanto and the biotech industry.

It is time for decisive intervention. Monsanto must be stopped by the will of the People. The mass poisoning of our families and children by an evil, destructive corporation that seeks to dominate the world food supply must be halted.

The GMO debate is over. The horrors are now being revealed. The truth can no longer be hidden, and the reaction from the public cannot be stopped.

Prediction: Activist attacks on GM seeds and the criminals who promote them

The era of GMO deception is history. A food revolution is upon us. And if governments will not halt the mass poisoning of our world by evil corporations, I have no doubt that the People will, by themselves, eventually invoke other necessary methods of halting this great evil.

I predict a future where — and for the record I DO NOT encourage this — shipments of GM seeds to farmers are raided and destroyed by activists. I predict Monsanto employees being publicly named and shamed on websites. I predict — but DO NOT CONDONE — scientists who conduct research for Monsanto being threatened, intimidated and even physically attacked. Again, for the record, I DO NOT IN ANY WAY condone such behavior, but I predict it will emerge as an inevitable reaction to the unfathomable evil being committed by the GMO industry and all its co-conspirators. The “Army of the 12 monkeys” may become reality. (See the sci-fi movie “12 monkeys” starring Brad Pitt and Bruce Willis.)

What we are fighting for here is the protection of our species. We are fighting for the sanctity of life on our planet. Those who threaten that life must be stopped from continuing to harm us. This evil must be put back in its box and prevented from ever threatening us again.

Even Congress is starting to state the obvious on how evil Monsanto really is. Just yesterday, Congressman Dennis Kucinich demanded GMO labeling in a powerful speech. Watch that at: [www.youtube.com]

Also, watch this video of the French scientists discussing how GMOs and Roundup caused grotesque cancer tumors to grow in mice:


Say No To GMO Foods In Florida
Chris Coffman

Federal Jack

Genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, are created when a gene from one species is transferred to another, creating something that would not be found in nature.

A large percentage of domestic crops (up to 85% of soybean yields) have DNA that was tweaked in a lab, yet it is nearly impossible to know which food items contain these genetically engineered ingredients. Thankfully new mobile phone apps are making it a bit easier for the consumer to know what she is eating, but this is not enough.

GMOs are bad for your body, bad for the community, bad for farmers and bad for the environment. This is why:
1.The health consequences of eating genetically modified organisms are largely unknown. Genetically engineered foods have not been shown to be safe to eat and may have unpredictable consequences. When trans-fats were first introduced, corporations battled to get them onto your grocery shelves – and it is only decades later that this once novel food has been proven to be extremely unhealthful. Many scientists are worried that the genetically altered foods, once consumed, may pass on their mutant genes to bacterium in the digestive system, just like the canola plants on the roadsides of North Dakota. How these new strains of bacteria may affect our body systems’ balance is anybody’s guess.
2.Food items that contain GMOs are unlabeled in America. Why so sneaky? The European Union has banned GMOs, as have Australia, Japan, the UK and two dozen other countries that recognize that a lack of long term studies and testing may be hiding disastrous health defects.
3.Genetic engineering reduces genetic diversity. When genes are more diverse, they are more robust; this is why a pure bred dog tends to have greater health problems than the dear old mutt. Plants with reduced genetic diversity cannot handle drought, fungus invasions or insects nearly as well as natural plants, which could have dire consequences for farmers and communities dependent on GMO crops for survival.
4.Once the mutant genes are out of the bag, there is no going back. Genetically modified organisms contaminate existing seeds with their altered material, passing on modified traits to non-target species. This creates a new strain of plant that was never intended in the laboratory. In North Dakota, recent studies show that 80% of wild canola plants tested contained at least one transgene. In Japan, a modified bacteria created a new amino acid not found in nature; it was used in protein drinks and before it was recalled it cause severe mental and metabolic damage to hundreds as well as several deaths. Japan banned GMOs after this horrific experience. Monarch butterflies have also died after their favorite food, milkweed, was cross-pollinated from Bt corn which rendered it toxic to the endangered species.
5.GMOs are not the answer for global food security. Genetically engineered crops have shown no increase in yield and no decrease in pesticide use. In many cases other farm technology has proven much more successful, and even Monsanto agrees that its genetically engineered crops yield less than conventional farming.
6.Genetically engineered foods have not been proven to be safe, but the few studies conducted don’t look so hot. The organs of rats who ate genetically modified potatoes showed signs of chronic wasting, and female rates fed a diet of herbicide-resistant soybeans gave birth to stunted and sterile pups.
7.Big biotech firms have very sketchy track records, but then again what would you expect from organizations who want to patent the world’s food supply? These massive biotech companies have a history of toxic contamination, deceiving the public and suing small farmers when their patented seeds blew across the fence. Biotech firms sell sterile seeds to African farmers- meaning the seeds are only good for one season, because the plants that grow up will not be able to reproduce. Farmers must buy new seeds every year instead of growing from the previous year’s yield. GMOs are not the farmers’ friend.
8.GMOs require massive amounts of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides. These things are poisons, and should not be eaten or allowed to run off into our water supply. But they are, every day, by companies who care far more about the bottom line than they do about your health, your environment or your children’s future.

The bottom line is that genetically modified organisms have not been proven in any way to be safe, and most of the studies are actually leaning the other direction, which is why many of the world’s countries have banned these items whose DNA has been genetically engineered. In America, they aren’t even labeled, much less banned, so the majority of the populace has no idea that they are eating lab-created DNA on a daily basis.

SIGN THE PETITION HERE

Monsanto, pesticide companies have now spent more than $19 million to kill Prop. 37
Ethan A. Huff
Natural News

(NaturalNews) The latest campaign finance disclosure records released by California’s Secretary of State reveal that the most evil corporation in the world, Monsanto, has forked over another $2.89 million to kill Proposition 37, the historic bill that, if passed, will require genetically-modified (GM) foods and food ingredients to be labeled at the retail level in California.

Combined with its other recent contributions of more than $4.2 million (http://www.naturalnews.com), Monsanto has now officially shelled out a total of more than $7.1 million to prevent consumers from knowing the truth about what is really contained in the foods they buy.

Along with Monsanto’s latest contributions were similar contributions by the other five of the “Big Six” pesticide firms — DuPont, Bayer, Dow, BASF, and Syngenta — which together gave more than $2.6 million to the No on 37 campaign as part of their most recent contributions. To date, the “Big Six” have collectively contributed nearly $20 million to keep Californians in the dark about GMOs.

“Monsanto wants to buy this election so they can keep hiding what’s really in our food,” said Gary Ruskin, campaign manager for Yes on Prop. 37, about Monsanto’s efforts to stamp out the potential for mandating food transparency. “(But) they are on the losing side of history. Californians want the right to know what’s in our food, and we will win it.”

Most of the funding for ‘No on 37′ is coming from GMO companies not even located in California

Interestingly, none of the “Big Six” pesticide companies are even located in California, which just goes to show how far-reaching the scope of Prop. 37 will be once it is passed. Only one of the top ten antagonists in the fight for honesty in food labeling, Nestle USA, is based out of California, and even this company has its roots overseas in Switzerland.

Below is a list of the top ten contributors to the No on 37 campaign, which is trying to stop GMO labeling in California:

1) Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO, $7,100,500
2) E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co., Washington, DC, $4,900,000
3) BASF Plant Science, Research Triangle Park, NC, $2,000,000
4) Bayer CropScience, Research Triangle Park, NC, $2,000,000
5) Dow Agrosciences LLC, Indianapolis, IN, $2,000,000
6) PepsiCo, Inc., Purchase, NY, $1,716,300
7) Nestle USA, Inc., Glendale, CA, $1,169,400
8) Coca-Cola North America, Atlanta, GA, $1,164,400
9) ConAgra Foods, Omaha, NE, $1,076,700
10) Syngenta Corporation, Washington, DC, $1,000,000

As you will notice, every single one of these companies has a critical stake in making sure that you do not know what is in the food you eat, because every single one of these companies either produces GMOs or uses GMOs in their product formulations.

If GMO labeling is mandated in California, the “Big Six” will lose significant market share as many large food companies like Coca-Cola and Pepsi will have to either reformulate their products to exclude GMOs, or risk losing much of their customer base by labeling GMOs, which Monsanto admitted many years ago is akin to putting “a skull and crossbones” on the food label. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035578_Monsanto_petition_biotechnology.html)

And since large food conglomerates distribute their offerings nationwide, mandatory labeling in California, the world’s eighth largest economy, will cause sweeping changes across the country as well. This is why it is crucial for Californians get out to the polls on November 6 and vote YES on Prop. 37.

You can learn more about the Yes on Prop. 37 campaign by visiting:
[www.carighttoknow.org]

Kucinich Calls Out Monsanto: Americans Demand GMO Labeling

GMO rice illegally tested on Chinese children as part of US-backed research project?
Friday, September 21, 2012 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
(NaturalNews) Chinese authorities are currently investigating allegations that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) worked with Chinese researchers back in 2008 to illegally test genetically-modified (GM) “Golden Rice” on rural Chinese children. Reuters reports that 24 Chinese children between the ages of six and eight may have served as human guinea pigs for the project, which had never even been approved to take place by the Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The so-called “Golden Rice Project” is a massive endeavor birthed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (http://www.naturalnews.com/032834_humanitarian_aid_GMOs.html) more than a decade ago to develop and introduce into the market rice that has been bio-engineered to artificially produce its own beta carotene (vitamin A). The ultimate goal, according to the project, is to help nourish the millions of poor children around the world that are vitamin A deficient by forcibly replacing their natural varieties of rice with GM golden rice.

Up until this point, Chinese authorities have been hesitant to introduce GM rice commercially, and have even reportedly prohibited Chinese institutions from participating in research intended to test GM rice on human subjects. But according to allegations made by environmental group Greenpeace, Chinese researchers have been testing Golden Rice on young children in violation of their country’s laws, and with covert assistance from the USDA.

“It was actually back in 2008 that we first heard of this experiment and immediately informed the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture,” wrote Monica Tan from Greenpeace East Asia in a recent blog post announcement. “The Ministry came back and assured us no Golden Rice had been imported and the trial had been stopped — something that unfortunately appears not to be the case.”

In response to the claims, the Chinese Ministry solicited help from Tufts University near Boston, Massachusetts, to help investigate the situation, and to verify whether or not the study, which was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (AJCN) last month, was conducted outside the limits of ethical and legal parameters. The researchers involved in the study, after all, had come from Tufts, and one of them has since been suspended while the investigation continues.

GM ‘golden rice’ a complete fraud
Interestingly, Golden Rice has already been shown to be nothing but a scientific fraud. According to humanitarian, author, and environmental advocate Dr. Vandana Shiva, a single serving of Golden Rice would provide only about one percent of the total recommended daily allowance of vitamin A, which means that an individual would have to eat more than five pounds a day of Golden Rice just to meet the bare minimum nutritional requirements.

Not only this, Dr. Shiva says artificially boosting vitamin A levels in rice will actually create more vitamin A deficiency, as vitamin A must be accompanied by a proper amount of fats for proper uptake. And even if enough fats are consumed with Golden Rice, the assumption in all this is that Golden Rice is safe to consume, a theory that has never been proven scientifically. (http://online.sfsu.edu/rone/GEessays/goldenricehoax.html)

“Golden Rice was presented in 2000 as a rice variety that was genetically engineered in a laboratory to produce pro-vitamin A (beta-carotene), [but] the media hype was more robust than the science,” said Greenpeace several years before the 2008 study on Chinese children even took place. “[O]ur analysis revealed that people would need to consume 12 times more rice than normal to satisfy the minimum daily adult requirements of vitamin A. Subsequent studies have questioned the very notion that Golden Rice would be effective in addressing vitamin A deficiency.” (http://www.greenpeace.org)

Sources for this article include:

[www.greenpeace.org]

[www.reuters.com]

New Study Finds GM Corn and Roundup Causes Cancer In Rats
Sayer Ji, Contributor
Activist Post

In an alarming new study published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, researchers from The Committee for Research & Independent Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN) reported on the results of a 2-year feeding study in rats given either NK603 Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize, cultivated with or without Roundup, and Roundup alone, at levels permitted in drinking water and GM crops in the United States.

The authors of the study pointed out that currently no regulatory authority requires mandatory chronic animal feeding studies to be performed for edible GMOs and formulated pesticides, and the only 90-day feeding trials were conducted by the biotech industry.

This study, therefore, was performed in light of this need, and the results were an unprecedented confirmation of the cancer-causing effects of GM food and agrichemicals, reported as follows:

In females, all treated groups died 2–3 times more than controls, and more rapidly. This difference was visible in 3 male groups fed GMOs. All results were hormone and sex dependent, and the pathological profiles were comparable. Females developed large mammary tumors almost always more often than and before controls, the pituitary was the second most disabled organ; the sex hormonal balance was modified by GMO and Roundup treatments. In treated males, liver congestions and necrosis were 2.5–5.5 times higher. This pathology was confirmed by optic and transmission electron microscopy. Marked and severe kidney nephropathies were also generally 1.3–2.3 greater. Males presented 4 times more large palpable tumors than controls which occurred up to 600 days earlier. Biochemistry data confirmed very significant kidney chronic deficiencies; for all treatments and both sexes, 76% of the altered parameters were kidney related. These results can be explained by the non linear endocrine-disrupting effects of Roundup, but also by the overexpression of the transgene in the GMO and its metabolic consequences. [emphasis added]

Below is an image of tumors induced through the experiment. More can be found at the journal website.


The results of this new study are doubly concerning. Not only has the consumption of a genetically modified food crop now been shown to cause tumor growth and accelerated mortality, but so has the primary herbicide these plants have been engineered to withstand exposure to: Roundup.

GMO plants actually incorporate glyphosate directly into themselves, with the herbicide residues and their metabolites persisting there, making dual exposure to transgenes and herbicide inevitable, and the synergistic amplification of their toxicities likely.

It is a shameful fact of history that Roundup herbicide was once marketed by its creator and original patent holder, Monsanto, as being “safe as table salt.” Now, an accumulating body of research shows that glyphosate, Roundup’s active ingredient, is genotoxic and endocrine disrupting — both hallmark characteristic of many carcinogens — at concentrations several orders of magnitude concentration lower than agricultural application. In fact, Monsanto has gone to great lengths to deny the emerging Roundup-Cancer link by pouring money into contract research companies like Exponent, who deny its well established harms.

This newest study provides clear and convincing evidence that GMO agriculture is contributing to cancer in exposed populations. The timing of this new study — two weeks before Breast Cancer Awareness Month (BCAM) — is all the more fitting, considering that “In female animals, the largest tumors were in total 5 times more frequent in males after 2 years, with 93% being mammary tumors.” They also “…observed a strikingly marked induction of mammary tumors by R[oundup] alone…even at the very lowest dose administered.” The annual pinkwashing campaign focuses on equating “prevention” with “early detection” by exposing women’s bodies to breast cancer-causing x-rays, rather than to identify and remove the preventable causes, e.g. chemical exposure, carcinogenic foods, of breast cancer.

The precautionary principle requires that if there is indication in a non-human study that a chemical is toxic to those who are forced to ingest it, inhale it, or otherwise be exposed to it, the burden of proving it safe must be on those manufacturing, marketing it and/or releasing it into the environment.

For too long has America — albeit, unbeknownst to most of the population — been engaged in a mass chemical and feeding experiment, without the protection of informed consent, or even the right to know what it is eating through truthful labeling of GMOs. Please help to spread this information far and wide, and to further garnish support for California’s Proposition 37 (Just Label It), which could turn the tide against GM agriculture’s systemic destruction of the biosphere, and by implication, our health.

This article first appeared at GreenMedInfo. Please visit to access their vast database of articles and the latest information in natural health.

Genetic Roulette – Full Movie – Dangers of GMOs

37 reasons why California’s Prop. 37 MUST pass
Wednesday, September 19, 2012 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

(NaturalNews) In fewer than two months, Californians will have the unique opportunity to vote YES on Proposition 37, a ballot measure that will require retail food items made with or containing genetically-modified (GM) ingredients to be labeled as such. And in the face of concerted opposition to GMO labeling by Monsanto and the corporate food industry, which would rather keep the presence of GMOs in your food a secret, it is important that voters are aware of why passing a law requiring mandatory GMO labeling is crucial to food freedom.

As compiled by Hemi Weingarten over at the blog Fooducate.com, here are 37 reasons why California’s Prop. 37 ballot measure must pass:

1) The alleged environmental superiority of GM crops is questionable at best, and GMO production still requires the heavy use of pesticides and other toxic chemicals.

2) A popular misconception, selective breeding and hybridization are not the same thing as genetic modification. GMOs contain foreign genes for which the harmful side-effects are largely unknown.

3) Contrary to popular belief, there has never been a single long-term safety study conducted on any GMO.

4) Cultivation of GMOs leads to the proliferation of herbicide-resistant “superweeds,” for which there are no known solutions.

5) Monsanto, the largest purveyor of GMOs, is responsible for thrusting Agent Orange on the world — can this chemical company really be trusted?

6) Labeling GMOs will not increase food costs, as GMOs have been labeled throughout Europe for more than a decade without consequence.

7) Animal studies have shown that GMOs cause sterility within three generations — are GMOs really something we should be feeding our children?

8) There have been no long-term studies on the environmental impact of GMO cultivation.

9) GMOs are produced using “terminator” seeds, requiring farmers to buy new seeds every year from biotechnology firms.

10) GM corn, which is used in livestock feed, has been shown to severely harm animals — what must it be doing to humans?

11) GMO labeling has nothing to do with excessive government intervention and regulation, and everything to do with promoting honesty and transparency.

12) More than 90 percent of Americans in numerous surveys have indicated they support mandatory GMO labeling.

13) GM crops have never been shown to produce higher yields than conventional and organic crops, despite industry propaganda.

14) GMOs are extremely expensive to produce, which means the biotech industry is eager to market them whether they are proven safe or not.

15) Passage of Prop. 37 will boost sales for small manufacturers and producers, and increase crop diversity. It will steer agriculture away from the corporations and back into the hands of local communities.

16) Many GMOs contain inbred genes and pesticides that cannot simply be washed off before consumption. Bt corn, for instance, contains its own built-in pesticides.

17) GM crops poison useful insects, which become more prone to deadly infections and disease.

18) GMO cultivation is creating “superbugs” that are quickly evolving to develop resistance to pesticides.

19) GMOs contaminate non-GMOs through cross-pollination, a process that cannot be undone.

20) GMO cultivation eliminates biodiversity and ruins the heritage of farming wherever it is introduced.

21) Once introduced into the environment, GMOs can never be withdrawn.

22) Since GMOs were first introduced, rates of allergies and autoimmune disease have skyrocketed — coincidence?

23) All studies that claim GMOs are safe have been industry-funded. All studies that raise serious concerns about GMO safety have been independently funded.

24) The companies responsible for producing GMOs do not want them labeled — why?

25) The scientific community is divided on whether or not GMOs are safe, so how is it ethical for them to remain unlabeled?

26) GM crops are not the same as their non-GMO counterparts, both nutritionally and compositionally.

27) Consumers have a right to know whether or not they are eating GMOs.

28) Studies showing health consequences of GMO consumption are being blocked from scientific publication.

29) GMOs eliminate biodiversity and deplete soil nutrients.

30) GM traits have been shown to induce allergy transfer. Eating a GM soybean that contains a Brazil nut trait, for instance, can induce Brazil nut allergy.

31) Passage of Prop. 37 will cause major food manufacturers to improve product quality.

32) How can individuals be expected to “eat healthy” if they do not even know what their food contains?

33) Passage of Prop. 37 will cause a “ripple effect” throughout the U.S., benefiting everyone.

34) Passage of Prop. 37 is a bipartisan issue — no matter what your political affiliation, you have a right to know what is in your food!

35) Big Ag and Big Biotech are spending tens of millions of dollars to spread lies about Prop. 37′s “deceptive” nature — who are the ones really doing the deceiving here?

36) Revolving door between government and industry has prevented GMO labeling in the U.S. for almost 20 years — is it not time for the people to have their voices heard?

37) Transparency is the best way to “air out corruption,” for which the biotech industry is fraught.

Sources for this article include:

[blog.fooducate.com]

[www.naturalnews.com]

[www.carighttoknow.org]

What exactly are GMOs and why should they be labeled?
Wednesday, September 19, 2012 by: PF Louis
(NaturalNews) GMOs (genetically modified organisms) were brought into the world by a chemical company, not an agriculture or food group. Monsanto created DDT, PCBs, Agent Orange, marketed aspartame, and created bovine growth hormone (rBGH) to infect milking cows that put pus into commercial milk.GMOs are created within the seeds of chosen parent crops in laboratories by “splicing” genes from completely unrelated species into those seeds. Normal plant hybrids are cultivated in soil over time by cross pollinating closely related plants.

So far, GMOs have invaded soy, corn, beets (for beet sugar), cotton, and alfalfa agriculture. Many GMO edibles are contained surreptitiously in a wide variety of processed foods, while GMO corn and soy are used by unnatural factory farm feed lots.

If you’ve been following NaturalNews for some time, you may recall several articles describing GMOs’ inherent human and animal health hazards as well as crop and environmental dangers. If not, you’ll find most of them here. (http://www.naturalnews.com/GMO.html)

GMOs damage crops, the environment, and the food chain
GMOs are often genetically created artificially to tolerate herbicides, made by Monsanto and others, that kill weeds. The herbicides contain glyphosates. Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer is meant for Roundup Ready GMO crop seeds. It’s an extremely toxic glyphosate agent.

Glyphosates greatly harm grazing animals and pollute the wells and groundwater of farm areas where they’re used. (http://naturalsociety.com)

They create sterility and birth defects among animals and humans. Most of the honey bee die-off, or colony collapse, is attributed to glyphosates. If enough pollinating bees disappear, our food chain is endangered further.

Glophosate’s chelating capabilities remove minerals from the soil where they’re sprayed. So crops get increasingly worse while increasingly abundant Roundup resistant weeds, or super weeds, force farmers to add more toxic materials to Roundup.

It’s a vicious cycle for farmers who, conned by greater production promises, unwittingly signed on to Monsanto Roundup Ready GMO binding seed contracts. Monsanto uses patent laws to litigate against farmers whose non-GMO fields are contaminated by GMO fields, forcing smaller farms out of business.

Most farmers fold because they cannot afford the litigation. American farmers are attempting to organize against mostly Monsanto’s GMOs. European farmers have managed to resist thus far.

Why you should be concerned
Maybe the reasons summarized above are too abstract. So let’s get personal. Contrary to mainstream media’s (MSM) outlook, the jury is not out on GMOs. GMOs do destroy human and animal health while endangering non-GMO crops with contamination. That’s been discovered by several scientists acting independently.

They jeopardize their careers and even their lives by communicating what they find while the MSM ignores them. Anti-GMO activist and author Jeffrey Smith lists the casualties and summarizes Monsanto’s harassment here: (http://www.sott.net)

Agro-ecologist Don Lotter, Ph.D. released an inside scoop when he stated:

The promoter gene used … [the] cauliflower mosaic virus, … [was assumed to be] denatured in our digestive system, but it’s not. It has been shown to promote the transfer of transgenes from GM foods to the bacteria within our digestive system, which are responsible for 80 percent of our immune system function.

Read Lotter’s interview here: (http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_19468.cfm)

This from Wessex Natural Law research papers: The cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV 35S) used for plant genetic engineering is cited as a source of viral recombination as well as a gene silencer and DNA disruptor.

Forget petitioning the government. It’s so corrupted that one of Monsanto’s most ruthless executives, Michael Taylor, now serves in the Obama administration as FDA chief adviser, or “Food Czar.”

That’s why our only chance is to help California succeed with Proposition 37. GMO labeling may spill over from California making it easier to boycott GMOs. (http://www.kcet.org)

Sources for this article include:

[www.youtube.com]

[www.naturalnews.com]

[www.organicconsumers.org]

[rense.com]

[www.gene.ch]

[www.naturalnews.com]

Shock findings in new GMO study: Rats fed lifetime of GM corn grow horrifying tumors, 70% of females die early
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
(NaturalNews) Eating genetically modified corn (GM corn) and consuming trace levels of Monsanto’s Roundup chemical fertilizer caused rats to develop horrifying tumors, widespread organ damage, and premature death. That’s the conclusion of a shocking new study that looked at the long-term effectsof consuming Monsanto’s genetically modified corn.The study has been deemed “the most thorough research ever published into the health effects of GM food crops and the herbicide Roundup on rats.” News of the horrifying findings is spreading like wildfire across the internet, with even the mainstream media seemingly in shock over the photos of rats with multiple grotesque tumors… tumors so large the rats even had difficulty breathing in some cases. GMOs may be the new thalidomide.

“Monsanto Roundup weedkiller and GM maize implicated in ‘shocking’ new cancer study” wrote The Grocery, a popular UK publication. (http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/topics/technology-and-supply-chain/monsant…)

It reported, “Scientists found that rats exposed to even the smallest amounts, developed mammary tumors and severe liver and kidney damage as early as four months in males, and seven months for females.”

The Daily Mail reported, “Fresh row over GM foods as French study claims rats fed the controversial crops suffered tumors.” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2205509/Fresh-fears-GM…)

It goes on to say: “The animals on the GM diet suffered mammary tumors, as well as severe liver and kidney damage. The researchers said 50 percent of males and 70 percent of females died prematurely, compared with only 30 percent and 20 percent in the control group.”



The study, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen, was the first ever study to examine the long-term (lifetime) effects of eating GMOs. You may find yourself thinking it is absolutely astonishing that no such studies were ever conducted before GM corn was approved for widespread use by the USDA and FDA, but such is the power of corporate lobbying and corporate greed.

The study was published in The Food & Chemical Toxicology Journal and was just presented at a news conference in London.


Findings from the study
Here are some of the shocking findings from the study:

• Up to 50% of males and 70% of females suffered premature death.

• Rats that drank trace amounts of Roundup (at levels legally allowed in the water supply) had a 200% to 300% increase in large tumors.

• Rats fed GM corn and traces of Roundup suffered severe organ damage including liver damage and kidney damage.

• The study fed these rats NK603, the Monsanto variety of GM corn that’s grown across North America and widely fed to animals and humans. This is the same corn that’s in your corn-based breakfast cereal, corn tortillas and corn snack chips.

The Daily Mail is reporting on some of the reaction to the findings:

France’s Jose Bove, vice-chairman of the European Parliament’s commission for agriculture and known as a fierce opponent of GM, called for an immediate suspension of all EU cultivation and import authorisations of GM crops. ‘This study finally shows we are right and that it is urgent to quickly review all GMO evaluation processes,’ he said in a statement. ‘National and European food security agencies must carry out new studies financed by public funding to guarantee healthy food for European consumers.’ (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2205509/Fresh-fears-GM…)

Read the study abstract
The study is entitled, “A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health.” Read the abstract here:
[www.biolsci.org]

That abstract include this text. Note: “hepatorenal toxicity” means toxic to the liver (TF Note: as well as the kidneys).

Our analysis clearly reveals for the 3 GMOs new side effects linked with GM maize consumption, which were sex- and often dose-dependent. Effects were mostly associated with the kidney and liver, the dietary detoxifying organs, although different between the 3 GMOs. Other effects were also noticed in the heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system. We conclude that these data highlight signs of hepatorenal toxicity, possibly due to the new pesticides specific to each GM corn. In addition, unintended direct or indirect metabolic consequences of the genetic modification cannot be excluded.

Here are some quotes from the researchers:

“This research shows an extraordinary number of tumors developing earlier and more aggressively – particularly in female animals. I am shocked by the extreme negative health impacts.” – Dr Michael Antoniou, molecular biologist, King’s College London.

“We can expect that the consumption of GM maize and the herbicide Roundup, impacts seriously on human health.” – Dr Antoniou.

“This is the first time that a long-term animal feeding trial has examined the impact of feeding GM corn or the herbicide Roundup, or a combination of both and the results are extremely serious. In the male rats, there was liver and kidney disorders, including tumors and even more worryingly, in the female rats, there were mammary tumors at a level which is extremely concerning; up to 80 percent of the female rats had mammary tumors by the end of the trial.” – Patrick Holden, Director, Sustainable Food Trust.

Spread the word: GMOs are toxic!
Share this story. Tweet it, Facebook it, post it.

See the “What is a GMO” video by Nutiva:
[www.youtube.com]

Watch the new video on GMOs by Jeffrey Smith:
[www.geneticroulettemovie.com]

Watch the Health Ranger’s music video:
[www.naturalnews.com]

Support Proposition 37:
www.CArighttoknow.org

France Launches Major Investigation Into GMOs Following Tumor Study
Anthony Gucciardi
NaturalSociety
September 19, 2012

Following the release of a peer-reviewed piece of research linking the consumption of Monsanto’s Roundup-containing GMO crops to tumors and organ damage, the French government is now calling for a health agency investigation. Seeking to analyze the research and potentially ask European authorities to protect human health and abandon the use of GMO crops, France’s Agriculture Minister and others are now sounding the alarm.

The study was the first to ever examine the true effects of lifelong GMO consumption in rats, and was dubbed ”the most thorough research ever published into the health effects of GM food crops and the herbicide Roundup on rats.” Finding an onset of mass tumors and damage to the kidneys and liver, the study has serious implications as to what large-scale GMO consumption is doing to humans. Since a serious lack of serious information has surfaced on the long-term effects of GMO consumption, human consumption of GMOs itself is really a mad scientist experiment on a global scale.

It appears French officials understand the severity of the findings, with Agriculture Minister Stephane Le Foll and others now asking the National Agency for Health Safety to investigate further. Both Le Foll and Social Affairs Minister Marisol Touraine described the decision in a joint statement:

“Depending on ANSES’ opinion, the government will urge the European authorities to take all necessary measures to protect human and animal health,” they said.

The duo went on to highlight how the decision could go as far as generating an emergency suspension of Monsanto’s modified corn known as NK603 (maize) throughout Europe:

“(The measures) could go as far as invoking emergency suspension of imports of NK603 corn to Europe pending a re-examination of this product on the basis of enhanced assessment methods.”

France just days ago decided to maintain a ban on Monsanto’s GMO MON810 maize despite massive political pressure. The country has been at the forefront in the fight against Monsanto as other nations either fold or directly empower Monsanto’s genetic crusade. Wikileaks cables revealed back in 2007, for example, that Monsanto controls most if not all US diplomats and other key players that are set to increase Monsanto’s grasp on the world’s agricultural industry.

"Fred"

How long has Fred been posting?
The hundreds of millions of consumers who eat GMO are being murdered right now, with every meal they consume… and they don’t even know it. GMO-pimping scientists are laughing at all the death they’re causing. They enjoy tricking people and watching them die because it makes their sick minds feel more powerful. These were the geeks in school who were bullied by the jocks. But now, with the power of genetic manipulation at their fingertips, they can invoke their hatred against all humankind and “bully” the entire world with hidden poisons in the food. That makes them smile. It’s the ultimate revenge against a world that mistreated them in their youth. Death to everyone!

The above was in Freds post---anyone posting such crxx is suspect.

"Fred" also posts the following:

Remember thalidomide? Babies being born with no arms and other heart-breaking deformities? Thalidomide was pushed as “scientific” and “FDA approved.” The same lies are now being told about GMO: they’re safe. They’re nutritious. They will feed the world!

This is inaccurate, the FDA never approved Thaldomide, Thaldomide was approved by European countries, there were numerous birth deformities in England.

Unfortunatly, people lie, both sides.

Liz

I have to qualify my post on Thaldomide----The FDA did not approve the drug back in the 60s, the FDA did approve Thaldomide in 1996 for other purposes but not to be used for pregnent women.

Liz

Liz,

I agree with you- very alarmist. Unfortunately there are a few simple minded people who actually believe this stuff.

EB

Looks like simple-minded Californians outnumber the smart ones by at least 2 to 1:

Los Angeles Times, September 27, 2012, By Marc Lifsher

Poll finds Prop. 37 is likely to pass
In USC Dornsife/ L.A. Times poll, supporters of labeling for genetically engineered food outnumber foes 2 to 1.

[articles.latimes.com]

Erling,

Your buddy Fred sounds like a surfer dude for sure-

Evidently your Prop 37 comment doesn't qualify as politics- if it's on a ballot, seems political to me.

I think you should start your own website- GMOWheat.org. It would be popular with the left coast crowd. You could probably sell some supplements to those guys, as long as the supplements can be smoked.

Luckily, the afib community has other web resources that don't have distracting posts about wheat. If any afibber spent any time reading this thread (which you started) then they are due an apology.

Stay blissful,

EB



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/17/2012 10:51AM by FiveBox.

Fred? Never met the man - but since we're both simple-minded s'pose we could be "buddies', as you have it.

Erling.- simple-minded, blissful in ignorance, wishing the same for you.

The Video Monsanto Does NOT Want You to See!

[curezone.org]

ARMAGEDDON

CSIRO GM Wheat Could Potentially change Human Genome
Luis Miranda
The Real Agenda
September 15th, 2012




The proven threats that GMO organisms pose to the environment is endless, but chemical companies don’t seem to care, and instead continue to work with and put out food products that contain such genetically modified threats.

The most recent example is GMO wheat from CSIRO, which just happens not to be one of the large chemical conglomerates that operate worldwide today. CSIRO is the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, which Australia’s National Science Agency.

According to a recent report from the Safe Food Foundation, CSIRO’s GMO wheat has the potential — if consumed — to change the way humans absorb carbohydrates. The foundation held a press conference on September 11 to request that CSIRO makes available all of its studies regarding how the genes contained in the wheat affect . “We were alerted about a safety issue by a researcher who identified DNA/RNA sequence matches in the GM wheat, and in human beings,” said Scott Kinnear, the director of the Safe Food Foundation.

Mr. Kinnear, who is also a professor at University of Canterbury, was joined by researchers Jack Heinemann Judy Carman to discuss the potential threats of CSIRO’s GMO wheat. “This safety issue was extensively studied by our two experts. What we are asking CSIRO to do, is to release all their safety studies on GM wheat, if they’ve done any at all,” added Kinnear.

He said CSIRO also needed to release the sequences of its science and technology, which according to him would enable the foundation’s experts to do a complete bio-informatic sequence matching. He emphasized that so far, the experts had found a significant amount of sequence matches between the GMO wheat and that of a human being, which made it even more urgent to keep on investigating to discover if the GMO wheat could negatively affect human health.

As explained by Professor Jack Heinemann, who is a molecular biologist at the University of Cantenbury, the way in which the wheat has been modified has never been validated. “The technology is too new,” Heinemmann said and that is why the foundation is requesting the information and materials from CSIRO to conduct extensive studies on whether the wheat is safe for human consumption. “What we found is that the molecules created in this wheat intended to silence wheat genes can match human genes.”

He went further to explain that through ingestion, the GMO molecules can enter human beings and potentially silence human genes the same way they do with those of the wheat. Researchers found 770 pages of potential matches between the two GMO genes in the wheat and the human genome.

“We found over a dozen matches that are extensive and identical,” he added. Heinemann said that his findings are conclusive in demonstrating that the matches do exist, but that the limits they’ve had given the lack of data does not prove that the GMO wheat may cause adverse effects on humans. For that he said, experts like himself need to conduct more research to confirm or discard their theory. “From this information, we know it is plausible that there would be an adverse effect, and that is why we are calling for a battery of experiments to be done before humans eat this wheat.”

“This gene is designed to silence a particular gene in wheat to change the carbohydrate content,” said Judy Carman, a biochemist and Director of the IHERS at Flinders University. She warned that if the GMO gene were to act the same way in humans, it would effectively silence human genes, the ones found to match those of the wheat. “That could have serious complications.”

“It will mean that there will be significant changes in the way we store our carbohydrates and glucose in the body.” She said that the human body needs to make a substance known as glycogen, which is essential in order to perform tasks such as waking up, moving, or having a burst of energy to complete everyday tasks. “Children who are born with this kind of genes silenced, tend to die by the age of five, while adults tend to get more sick and more tired,” added Carman. She also insisted that animal studies are necessary even before human studies are conducted.