State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food

Posted by: MissingArty

State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/31/14 12:03 AM

You and your family are eating it. Do you know what it does to your body and brain and that of a growing baby/child?


http://responsibletechnology.org/docs/145.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbACx-Dq...feature=mh_lolz
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/31/14 01:17 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKm2Ch3-Myg
Posted by: VM Smith

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/31/14 05:45 PM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
You and your family are eating it. Do you know what it does to your body and brain and that of a growing baby/child?


http://responsibletechnology.org/docs/145.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbACx-Dq...feature=mh_lolz


LOL...after someone has eaten enough junk food, such as GM food, I'm not sure she's capable of knowing much of anything.
Posted by: Festus

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/23/14 02:56 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/07/14 11:47 PM

Hopefully, this crook will have a...well, I can't say because the NSA is...well, you know.
Posted by: VM Smith

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/08/14 09:18 PM

China protects its massive Army from GMOs

by Jon Rappoport

June 4, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Worldwide sentiment is shifting against Monsanto and GMO food crops. And China is making major moves.

At sustainablepulse.com, we have this May 14, 2014, article: “Chinese Army Bans All GMO Grains and Oil from Supply Stations”:

“The Chinese army has ordered all military supply stations to only allow the purchase of non-GMO grain and food oil due to health safety concerns over GMOs.

“This move by the Chinese army is being seen as yet another step towards the Chinese government’s expected ban on the import of all GMO grains and oilseeds within the next 2 years, due to growing public concern over GMOs. The expected ban would be a huge blow to the Biotech industry worldwide.

“The Hubei Province Xiangyang City Grain Bureau’s website announced on May 6, 2014:

“’During recent years, as China’s grain and oil market has continuously developed, certain GMO grain and GMO food oil products have entered the market. In view that the safety concerns about GMO grain and oil products in China at present has not yet been determined, in order to overall assure the health of military members residing in our city and safety of their drinks and food, in accordance to the request from the Guangzhou Military Command Joint Logistics Department and the Provincial Military Grain & Food Oil Supply Center, from this date all military supply stations are allowed to only purchase non-GMO grain and food oil products from the designated processing enterprises. It is forbidden to supply GMO grain and food oil products to military units within their administration areas.

“’Chen I-wan, an Advisor to the Committee of Disaster History to the China Disaster Prevention Association has stated: “The army has established [an] excellent model for people of the whole nation: No GMO staple food and GMO food oil should enter the army food supply.”

China—protecting its Army from GMOs. And soon, perhaps the entire population of the country.

Apparently, Chinese GMO science differs from American GMO science, where a mere nod and a wink between the FDA and Monsanto, 20 years ago, launched a big Ag revolution that continues to contaminate US lands.

China, by the way, is home to 20% of the world’s population. “GMO-free China” has an interesting ring. Which domino will fall next? India, where 17% of the Earth’s people live, where farmers who have been duped and bankrupted by Monsanto, have been committing suicide in large numbers?

Then there is Russia. Putin recently declared, in reference to a possible ban on GMOs: “We need to properly construct our work so that it is not contrary to our obligations under the WTO. But even with this in mind, we nevertheless have legitimate methods and instruments to protect our own market, and above all citizens.”

Likewise, groups in Africa are pushing back against the US/Monsanto/Bill Gates plan to flood the continent with GMO crops.

In all these cases, world leaders outside the US are seeing the GMO sell-job as an attempt to extend American hegemony, through what amounts to an act of war.

Well, what else would you call artificial gene-contamination and poisoning by herbicides?

Jon Rappoport
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/09/14 06:13 AM

Whew, thank god there wont be any DNA transferred in China. laugh
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/16/14 06:47 AM

Top 10 Myths About Crop Biotechnology And GMOs? Here's The Real Story
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 08/02/14 09:33 AM

With 2000+ global studies affirming safety, GM foods among most analyzed subjects in science
JoAnna Wendel | October 8, 2013 | Genetic Literacy Project
10.9K
383
25
131
via Real Clear Science, Shutterstockvia Real Clear Science, Shutterstock
“The science just hasn’t been done.”

- Charles Benbrook, organic researcher, Washington State University.

“There is no credible evidence that GMO foods are safe to eat.”

- David Schubert, Salk Institute of Biological Studies

“[The] research [on GMOs] is scant…. Whether they’re killing us slowly— contributing to long-term, chronic maladies—remains anyone’s guess.”

- Tom Philpott, Mother Jones

“Genetically modified (GM) foods should be a concern for those who suffer from food allergies because they are not tested….”

- Organic Consumers Association

A popular weapon used by those critical of agricultural biotechnology is to claim that there has been little to no evaluation of the safety of GM crops and there is no scientific consensus on this issue.

Those claims are simply not true. Every major international science body in the world has reviewed multiple independent studies—in some cases numbering in the hundreds—in coming to the consensus conclusion that GMO crops are as safe or safer than conventional or organic foods, but the magnitude of the research has never been evaluated or documented.

Still the claim that GMOs are ‘understudied’—the meme represented in the quotes highlighted at the beginning of this article—has become a staple of anti-GMO critics, especially activist journalists. In response to what they believed was an information gap, a team of Italian scientists cataloged and analyzed 1783 studies about the safety and environmental impacts of GMO foods—a staggering number.

The researchers couldn’t find a single credible example demonstrating that GM foods pose any harm to humans or animals. “The scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazards directly connected with the use of genetically engineered crops,” the scientists concluded.

The research review, published in Critical Reviews in Biotechnology in September, spanned only the last decade—from 2002 to 2012—which represents only about a third of the lifetime of GM technology.

“Our goal was to create a single document where interested people of all levels of expertise can get an overview on what has been done by scientists regarding GE crop safety,” lead researcher Alessandro Nicolia, applied biologist at the University of Perugia, told Real Clear Science. “We tried to give a balanced view informing about what has been debated, the conclusions reached so far, and emerging issues.”

The conclusions are also striking because European governments, Italy in particular, have not been as embracing of genetically modified crops as has North and South America, although the consensus of European scientists has been generally positive.

The Italian review not only compiled independent research on GMOs over the last ten years but also summarizes findings in the different categories of GM research: general literature, environmental impact, safety of consumption and traceability.

The “general literature” category of studies largely reveals the differences between the US, EU and other countries when it comes to regulating GM crops. Due to lack of uniform regulatory practices and the rise of non-scientific rhetoric, Nicolia and his colleagues report, concern about GMOs has been greatly exaggerated.

Environmental impact studies are predominant in the body of GM research, making up 68% of the 1,783 studies. These studies investigated environmental impact on the crop-level, farm-level and landscape-level. Nicolia and his team found “little to no evidence” that GM crops have a negative environmental impact on their surroundings.

One of the fastest growing areas of research is in gene flow, the potential for genes from GM crops to be found—“contaminate” in the parlance of activists—in non-GM crops in neighboring fields. Nicolia and his colleagues report that this has been observed, and scientists have been studying ways to reduce this risk with different strategies such as isolation distances and post-harvest practices. The review notes that gene flow is not unique to GM technology and is commonly seen in wild plants and non-GM crops. While gene flow could certainly benefit from more research, Nicolia and his colleagues suggest, the public’s aversion to field trials discourages many scientists, especially in the EU.

In the food and feeding category, the team found no evidence that approved GMOs introduce any unique allergens or toxins into the food supply. All GM crops are tested against a database of all known allergens before commercialization and any crop found containing new allergens is not approved or marketed.

The researchers also address the safety of transcribed RNA from transgenic DNA. Are scientists fiddling with the ‘natural order’ of life? In fact, humans consume between 0.1 and 1 gram of DNA per day, from both GM and non-GM ingredients. This DNA is generally degraded by food processing, and any surviving DNA is then subsequently degraded in the digestive system. No evidence was found that DNA absorbed through the GI tract could be integrated into human cells—a popular anti-GMO criticism.

These 1783 studies are expected to be merged into the public database known as GENERA (Genetic Engineering Risk Atlas) being built by Biofortified, an independent non-profit website. Officially launched in 2012, GENERA includes peer-reviewed journal articles from different aspects of GM research, including basic genetics, feeding studies, environmental impact and nutritional impact. GENERA has more than 650 studies listed so far, many of which also show up in the new database. When merged, there should be well over 2000 GMO related studies, a sizable percentage—as many as 1000—that have been independently executed by independent scientists.

In short, genetically modified foods are among the most extensively studied scientific subjects in history. This year celebrates the 30th anniversary of GM technology, and the paper’s conclusion is unequivocal: there is no credible evidence that GMOs pose any unique threat to the environment or the public’s health. The reason for the public’s distrust of GMOs lies in psychology, politics and false debates.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 09/17/14 09:19 PM

"There’s something strange about a farm that intentionally creates a biological desert to produce food for one species: us. It’s efficient, yes. But it’s so efficient that the ants are missing, the bees are missing, and even the birds stay away. Something’s not right here. Our cornfields are too quiet.”

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/How_Roundup_Poisoned_My_Nature_Reserve.php#.VBm0hbSIMIM.facebook
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 09/18/14 12:22 PM

More of the story. http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals...nd-1-thing-that
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 09/18/14 12:24 PM

Core Truths: 10 Common GMO Claims Debunked
Genetically modified organisms have become the world’s most controversial food. But the science is more clear-cut.

http://www.popsci.com/article/science/core-truths-10-common-gmo-claims-debunked
Posted by: Timbo

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/06/14 05:19 AM


The devil's hands have been busy.

Both of your links are replete with false arguments, sketchy analogy, half-truths, apologetics, suggestion by convenient omission of critical data.

I just love how they use qualifiers without even touching on the rest of the story, and best of all... no citations.

Brilliant. crazy
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/08/14 09:09 PM

Timbo, you have to take a look at who did the study. If you take a look at "Genetic Roulette," you'll get the history behind gmo.

Politicians, George Sr.'s administration, gave the go ahead for gmo to be approved without the usually required testing by the FDA. Biotech was allowed to submit their own science. No other reviews were done.

Also, see Thom Hartmann's "Science for Sale." A corporation with unlimited cash can buy anything they want, even science, from the Weinburg Group. (Start at 2:00, it's about 10 minutes.)

http://www.hulu.com/watch/688124#play-queued-show-by-original_premiere_date-asc

If gmo food is safe then:

1. why are they (chemical and food companies) spending millions of dollars to fight your right to know gmo's are in your food;

2. why will they not let their seed be studied by independent scientists;

3. why do animals die after eating gmo cotton? Remember, this is the cotton you place on yourself and your children everyday. This is the cotton clothing you buy at Wal-Mart and Carters. This cotton is gmo'd, meaning they frankensteined the seed so that the pesticide grows right with the plant. You can't wash it out. Bet you never thought that the simple task of putting a t shirt on could harm you and your baby.

If there gmo seed/food is so safe, what do they have to hide?

Do you people care so little about your families that you won't even take the time to check it out yourself? Look at the shape your country and county is in. You trust these people will make sure no harm comes to your family?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNwnjsY2hn0&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBOuHdpOXbc

Gmos and Gluten:

http://eatlocalgrown.com/article/12462-n...cans.html?c=tca

Why am I so convinced that these foods are bad? I did my own experiment. I stopped eating gmo food. I haven't seen Dr. Lorenzetti in almost two years. I don't need gerd drugs for acid reflux anymore because I don't have acid reflux anymore.

Why am I hell bend on educating you? I care about my family and I'm mad as hell that this has been done to our children. You people have no idea what this is doing to your children.

There is another documentary coming out on October 10th, "Bought." Maybe that will open some eyes.

http://ykr.be/7o2aiv553
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/08/14 09:19 PM

What does Vietnam and Agent Orange have to do with gmo food: Monsanto. Who created gmo food: Monsanto. Who is growing your food: Monsanto.

(Yes, shills, I know it's not just Monsanto. Fyi, when I refer to Monsanto in my posts, I am referring to all the chemical companies involved in poisoning us, Monsanto, Dow, DuPont, Syngenta, Bayer...)

From a Vietnam Veteran's daughter:

"I have been sitting on this information for several weeks now. Un-sure of how to present it to thousands of people, I have spent many hours becoming familiar with the project. It is an amazing piece of work that I have been navigating like a video game of sorts. I am offering this to all of you now so that everyone has an idea of what is going on in our World, Nation, States, Cities, and Towns behind closed doors. I have started everyone with Monsanto’s Map. Each line draws a connection to another company. Each chair is yet another connection. Everything is “clickable” as well as allowing you to move the screen…Yes that’s correct, tap your mouse of the screen and drag it left right down up, and you will see the map expand.

After you become familiar with the idea of what you are navigating, Take your attention to the left hand side of the page. There you will find a world of links that you can learn to use individually. As an example, If you click on “companies” Box A and Box B will appear. You can then scroll on a list of companies to choose to see if they are connected to each other.
Please be patient when the program loads, after you watch the introduction, you will without a doubt know what you are seeing in front of your own eyes."

http://covvha.net/monsanto-exposed-the-biggest-secrets-of-one-of-the-worlds-most-hated-corporations/
Posted by: Timbo

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/09/14 10:56 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Timbo, you have to take a look at who did the study. If you take a look at "Genetic Roulette," you'll get the history behind gmo.

Politicians, George Sr.'s administration, gave the go ahead for gmo to be approved without the usually required testing by the FDA. Biotech was allowed to submit their own science. No other reviews were done.

Also, see Thom Hartmann's "Science for Sale." A corporation with unlimited cash can buy anything they want, even science, from the Weinburg Group. (Start at 2:00, it's about 10 minutes.)

http://www.hulu.com/watch/688124#play-queued-show-by-original_premiere_date-asc

If gmo food is safe then:

1. why are they (chemical and food companies) spending millions of dollars to fight your right to know gmo's are in your food;

2. why will they not let their seed be studied by independent scientists;

3. why do animals die after eating gmo cotton? Remember, this is the cotton you place on yourself and your children everyday. This is the cotton clothing you buy at Wal-Mart and Carters. This cotton is gmo'd, meaning they frankensteined the seed so that the pesticide grows right with the plant. You can't wash it out. Bet you never thought that the simple task of putting a t shirt on could harm you and your baby.

If there gmo seed/food is so safe, what do they have to hide?

Do you people care so little about your families that you won't even take the time to check it out yourself? Look at the shape your country and county is in. You trust these people will make sure no harm comes to your family?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNwnjsY2hn0&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBOuHdpOXbc

Gmos and Gluten:

http://eatlocalgrown.com/article/12462-n...cans.html?c=tca

Why am I so convinced that these foods are bad? I did my own experiment. I stopped eating gmo food. I haven't seen Dr. Lorenzetti in almost two years. I don't need gerd drugs for acid reflux anymore because I don't have acid reflux anymore.

Why am I hell bend on educating you? I care about my family and I'm mad as hell that this has been done to our children. You people have no idea what this is doing to your children.

There is another documentary coming out on October 10th, "Bought." Maybe that will open some eyes.

http://ykr.be/7o2aiv553

You seem to be under the false impression that I'm taking sides either way, I'm not.

I'm taking issue with someone who habitually posits accusations while offering no facts, citations or evidence to back up OBVIOUS allegations. I don't care which side of that argument it falls on. His post is completely void of veracity. Especially in light of the extensive use of false arguments. A tool regularly used by those coming from a weak position. At the very least, it's just glaringly lazy editorialization. At it's worst, it's knowingly deceptive propaganda.

There are facts, and there are opinions. Neither should be passed off as the other. Period.

Furthermore, as someone with a strong science foundation, you would be well-served to bear in mind, that I know a thing or two about GMOs, genetics and the resultant effect on our health by way of their presence in the environment.

FYI: Your statement claiming that "No other reviews were done", is simply not accurate. While personally, I'm no fan of the US government's regulations concerning food-based GMOs, I AM a fan of the facts (whatever they turn out to be).

Just sayin'.

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/10/14 10:54 PM

Alright, could you link me to those reviews. It's my understanding that the fda did no testing because gmo food is "substantially equivalent" to real food.

Yes, I know Monsanto submitted their own studies that they conducted on rats, not humans, for a period of 90 days.

Where are the independent studies that show gmo's had been tested on humans and they are safe? Who did the study? Who paid for it?

The science that is most important to me is the science experiment I did on myself. The symptoms I had went away after I stopped eating gmo food. When I ate gmo food, I got the symptoms again. When I tasted my granddaughter's gmo baby formula, I got stomach pains.

At Moms Across America there are videos from parents whose babies and children were cured of their symptoms after eliminating gmo food.

My message to parents is don't leave the health of your child in the hands of anyone else but yourself. Do your homework.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/13/14 06:12 AM



http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Nicolia-20131.pdf

Link to a spreadsheet of all the studies
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Ge-crops-safety-pub-list-1.xls
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/22/14 01:01 AM

Zen Honeycutt explains gmo's to parents in six minutes.

You have the right to read, research and decide for yourself and your children.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXJE2OkRH0s
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/22/14 06:33 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Zen Honeycutt explains gmo's to parents in six minutes.

You have the right to read, research and decide for yourself and your children.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXJE2OkRH0s


Just make sure you read and research all sides and listen to people that know what they are talking about. This lady can't even get the definition right.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/22/14 09:13 PM

Finally, some good news, that is if the study is done by independent scientists with no connection to biotech. 25 million is pennies to biotech.

Note this is not being launched in the USA or Canada, where citizens are being poisoned daily without their knowledge or consent. Remember that when voting. What have your heard Schummer, Gillibrand or Cuomo say about gmo food? Nothing. Vote out the incumbants.


World’s Largest Ever GMO Safety Study Set for London Launch

"On Wednesday Sustainable Pulse received a media advisory regarding the launch of a $ 25 Million international study on GMO and pesticide safety at The Farmers Club in London, UK on November 11.

http://sustainablepulse.com/2014/10/22/w...h/#.VEhgwI10z3g
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/24/14 10:58 PM

Infant formula:

STATESMANJOURNAL

Most food labeled 'natural' contains GMOs, tests show

"I think most moms purchasing infant formula have no idea they are feeding their baby a product that has been genetically engineered to survive exposure to high levels of chemical pesticides," said Aurora Paulsen, with the Center's Portland office.

The news comes on the heels of a recent Consumer Reports Study that found genetically engineered ingredients in many processed foods labeled "natural."

http://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/te...-gmos/17780357/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/24/14 11:07 PM

Need films to watch this weekend?

Learn what the US Government has done to you, your children and the affects this will have on future generations.


"Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives"

http://ykr.be/6h2e09vhk

"Bought"

http://ykr.be/7o2aiv553

"GMO OMG"

http://ykr.be/49x7jkwlu

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/24/14 11:21 PM

The Case Against GMOs

An Environmental Investor’s View of the Threat to our Global Food Systems

Conclusion, in part:

"The arguments made in favor of the current generation of GM products simply fail to hold up to extended time periods or independent testing. Instead, GM corporations manipulate regulators, research institutions, and media outlets. These companies have been exposed for these practices time and time again, but still insist that they have the customer’s best interests at heart. Monsanto’s recent refusal to release data regarding the effects of their pesticides and GM crops on bee populations is indicative of their myopia and disinterest in any well-being beyond their sales revenues."

"All things considered, the risks associated with GM agriculture outweigh the benefits. While genetic modification as a tool is neither inherently negative nor positive, the history of its use indicates that the GM product is largely deployed to increase short-term profits for agricultural biotech corporations at the expense of consumers, small farmers, and the environment. Industrialized agriculture is enough of a sustainability challenge on its own, and examples from across the globe illustrate the extra level of distress that comes with adding genetically modified organisms into this system."

http://portfolio21.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2014/10/Portfolio-21-The-Case-Against-GMOs.pdf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/26/14 12:43 PM

Free to watch through 10/31.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...ary_facebookdoc
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 10/31/14 11:58 PM

Gmo explained by a Mom in six minutes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXJE2OkRH0s#t=197

One minute:

http://expandedconsciousness.com/2014/10/16/what-is-a-gmo-explained-in-1-minute/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 11/01/14 05:29 PM

Article by Dr. Mercola

New Documentary “Bought” Exposes the Hidden Story Behind Vaccines, Pharma, and Food

"The new documentary Bought dives deeply into the inner workings of the industries at the core of our food and healthcare system, exploring the truth about how vaccines and drugs are developed and rushed to market and the ongoing secrecy behind the genetic engineering of our food supply."

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...t_rid=712387751

Bought

http://ykr.be/7o2aiv553
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/06/14 10:15 AM

Why Did Vitamins Disappear From Non-GMO Breakfast Cereal?
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/08/14 09:38 AM

Although improved over the first draft, the FDA’s proposed food safety rules are still onerous enough that they could jeopardize the existence of many of our safest, local organic farms.

Tell the FDA that small farms are not food processing “facilities” necessitating expensive oversight and testing. (It could cost a family farm over $12,000 a year to comply!) Irrigation water should not have to meet the same safety standards as a community swimming pool. And it should be clear that older farmers, without Internet access, or the Amish, can submit reports on paper rather than the web.

At a minimum, please join farmers and their urban-allies by signing on to the letter below. Additionally, we especially encourage fresh market vegetable farmers to also, very carefully, read the full action alert and submit your individual comments, based on your own farming experience, to the FDA. Your livelihoods are at stake.

http://www.cornucopia.org/food-safety/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/08/14 09:50 AM

History of the company growing your food.

http://bestmeal.info/monsanto/company-history.shtml
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/08/14 09:54 AM

Erin Brockovich

20 mins · Edited ·
.
In case you missed it, here is some science from the United States Geological Survey. Monsanto's Roundup herbicide a daily fact of our existence, and according to the latest study its probably in the air you are breathing.

http://www.cornucopia.org/2014/03/roundup-weedkiller-found-75-air-rain-samples-gov-study-finds
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/08/14 10:19 AM



I just found out about this. I would never consumer any cereals from these companies. I don't trust them.

They could get non gmo vitamins but it would cost more.

I get my non gmo vitamins here, verified by the Non Gmo Verified Project. The brand is "Nutrigold." Look for the logo with the butterfly.

http://www.herbalprovider.com/Nutrigold
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/10/14 03:40 PM

Farm Bureau Member Asks House Subcommittee to Pass Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act

WASHINGTON, D.C., December 10, 2014 – Farm Bureau member Stacey Forshee today called on Congress to help consumers understand the difference between real food safety concerns and marketing ploys by passing H.R. 4432, the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act. Forshee, who is also a Kansas Farm Bureau board member, testified before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health.

“As a hard-working American family who lives off the land and the products it provides, we would never allow a product we grew or raised to enter the food supply unless we knew it was safe,” Forshee said. A farmer and cattle rancher with her husband in north central Kansas, Forshee has seen firsthand the marked benefits of biotechnology crops, including higher yields over fewer tillable acres, reduced pesticide use and improved soil conservation.

The Forshees are not alone in seeing these benefits. Since 1996, more than 17 million farmers have added in excess of 110 million tons of soybeans and 195 million tons of corn to the world’s food supply. Farmers also avoided using 1.2 billion pounds of pesticide by choosing to grow genetically enhanced crops over conventional corn and soybeans.

Forshee praised the Food and Drug Administration’s science-based approach to labeling food products for safety, health and nutrition information. Labeling foods with biotechnology traits “will mislead consumers into believing such food products are materially different, create undue risk and should be avoided – all of which are scientifically false,” she said. Veering from FDA’s safe and proven approach would undermine the livelihoods of farmers and ranchers across the country, while doing nothing to further food safety, Forshee said.

http://www.fb.org/index.php?action=newsroom.news_article&id=198
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/13/14 11:02 PM

I watched this. It's worth watching so that people can see how politicians work on behalf of their corporate contributors. These people are really good actors/lyers.

Biotech is big. Look on Craig's List, there's jobs everywhere for biotech.

You know that old saying that you can fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the time?

Parents are waking up and wondering why their kids have all these allergies, ailments, reactions, etc.

Biotech is going down via "dollar voting." You can buy off my government but you can't tell me where to spend my dollar.

Don't believe me? Just ask my farmer.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/13/14 11:04 PM

There are a few honest politicians.

From GMO Free NY: "Great op-ed by Massachusetts State Rep Marjorie Decker in which she frames GMO labeling as an economic justice issue. I've made this same argument to many members of the NY legislature, but it's great to see a legislator making this argument to the public."

12/10/14

http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20141210/NEWS/141219595
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/16/14 12:00 AM

"Your physician reads these journals, treatment decisions are changed, care is affected, drugs are prescribed – all based on Big Pharma-funded medical ghostwriter-prepared journal articles from physicians who fraudulently claim to be the study authors. Then you walk out of your doctor’s office with a prescription for a drug that may or may not kill you, based on treatment protocols written by doctors like Biederman who are on the take from Big Pharma."
http://ethicalnag.org/2009/11/09/nejm-editor/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/18/14 01:41 PM

PBS interview from 1997:

DH: The general impression out there, by most people, is that there is quite a bit of testing that goes on before any product gets out on the market.

TC: There have been safety nets. But unfortunately the safety net that we used as our model was this 70 kilogram adult male. And we did not look at what happens during embryonic development in the womb or in the egg. And from the minute the sperm enters the egg, and this individual begins to develop, this whole process is driven by chemicals called hormones: first hormones that came with the egg from the mother and then gradually, as the cells split and split and divide and begin to form an organism, they begin producing some of their own hormones, but not much.

These chemicals are working at a concentration of 1/10th of a trillionth of a gram. That is all it takes of a hormone to make a change in how an individual develops in the womb.

Now, we are talking about chemicals that are getting in the human body at parts per million, parts per billion, parts per trillion. That is a lot higher than what the system operates within. And we didn't understand this. So testing chemicals on a fully grown individual who has developed and isn't developing any more, it would take a much larger dose of something to change the way that individual functions. Now we have to go back and think about what happens with humans those first 266 days from conception to birth.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/nature/interviews/colborn.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/19/14 12:30 AM

17 minute video: Theo Colborn reads her letter to the Obamas. She passed away yesterday. Another scientist trying to warn us, wake us up.

http://www.cornucopia.org/2014/12/remembrance-theo-colborn-1927-2014
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/19/14 10:49 PM


Letter sent to Dr.Landa regarding the HR 4432 Hearing:


To Dr. Landa,

Moms Across America, a national coalition of Unstoppable Moms, with over 310 leaders in 44 states, were shocked by your statements at the HR4432 Dark Act Hearing. We ask you to clarify and retract your statements regarding there being no material diifference and no evidence of harm from GMOs.

We are positive, as an intelligent and informed man, with a team of scientists, that you have been privy to the many scientific studies which document harm from GMOs and related chemicals.

What the Energy and Commerce committee, you and the EWG representative failed to address was the fact that GMOs, albeit a foreign protein with plenty of studies showing harm alone, are inantely tied to Roundup ( glyphsoate) and discussion of GMOs cannot be intelligently had without including Glyphosate and Roundup. There are over 1700 studies and reports on GMOFREEUSA.com of harm from GMOs and glyphosate. We have attached several to this email.

Your statement in the HR 4432 was false, we are sure, as a protector of the American people, someone who works with the EPA, (whom we gave at least 30 studies showing harm from glyphosate) You must know that a there have been studies from Russia and France on rats, out for years, showing significant harm to rats consuming GMO feed. You cannot claim you do not know unless you are willfully not doing your job and not reading the scientific studies that exist regarding the most widely used herbicide in the world of which 80% of GMOs are genertically engineered to withstand.

So you are either not doing your job or you are lying.

Either way we request you retract your statement and find the courage to do your job and protect the American people. Our children need leaders of integrity.

1 out of 2 of our children have a chronic illness in America. We have a health crisis on our hands that will bankrupt America in 13 years if it continues. However, we moms see our children GET BETTER when they avoid GMOs and related pesticides and eat organic. We see autism allergies, asthma, auto immune, fibromyalgia, colitis and more, vastly improve or dissapear altogether when they do not eat GMOs and related pesticides. Pesticides/Herbicides have increased up to 26%per year since the use of GMOs. They deliver toxic chemicals to humas via food. Glyphosate is an antibiotic and destroys the gut bacteria, where 70% of our immune system lies, hence the skyrocketing illnesses.

You must admit that there are health concerns related to GMOs and related pesticides. You must take the precautionary principle and protect our children. Autism has been linked to glyphosate for two reason, glyphosate destroys gut bacteria and there is a gut brain connection, and glyphosate breask down the blood brain barrier, allowing toxins from the environment and vaccines into the brain. It is a mathematical fact that in 20 years from now 1 out of 2 children will have autism if we continue at the current rate of diagnosis. Is this the legacy you want to leave?

Or will you say, I stood up to the oligarcy. I stood up and made a difference for the future of America? Will you Be The One to protect the future of America?

We understand you will not say that GMOs cause harm, because then you could not legally allow them in food whatsoever and suddenly 80-90% of our food crops would be barred from our food system and our economy would collapse. So don't do that... yet...just change your determination that there is a material difference between GMOs and conventional food and require them to be labeled. Close that loop hole. When GMO food is labeled the food manufacturers will switch over to non GMO. It will take time, but our economy will shift and not collapse.

And while you are at it, do not allow Roundup and toxic chemicals to be present in our food, especially baby formula. If anyone has to wear a Hazmat suit or cannot touch our food for days after spraying with chemicals that are recognized endoccrine disruptors, that food is not fit to eat. These chemicals do not dry off, they do not wash off, they do not cook off. We eat them and they are showing up in our tap water, urine and breastmilk.

This practice is not conducive to a strong future for America. It is your duty to protect our future above anything else. Please do so now.

Thank you

Moms Across America
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/19/14 10:59 PM

Tell the FDA: We Need a Mandatory Ban on Sub-Therapeutic Doses of Antibiotics for Livestock—not Weak, Voluntary Guidance


http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50865/p/di...h.2HxUg5CM.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/21/14 02:30 PM

Playing God in the Garden

by Jon Rappoport

Monsanto: science and fraud are the same thing

Especially when the media agree and offer their seal of approval

Imagine this. A killer is put on trial, and the jury, in a surprise verdict, finds him not guilty. Afterwards, reporters interview this killer. He says, “The jury freed me. It’s up to them. They decide. That’s what justice is all about.”

Then the press moves along to members of the jury, who say: Well, we had to take the defendant’s word. He said he was innocent, so that’s what we ruled.

That’s an exact description of the FDA and Monsanto partnership.

When you cut through the verbiage that surrounded the introduction of GMO food into America, you arrive at two key statements. One from Monsanto and one from the FDA, the agency responsible for overseeing, licensing, and certifying new food varieties as safe.

Quoted in the New York Times Magazine (October 25, 1998, “Playing God in the Garden”), Philip Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications, famously stated: “Monsanto shouldn’t have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”

From the Federal Register, Volume 57, No.104, “Statement of [FDA] Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties,” here is what the FDA had to say on this matter: “Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety.”

The direct and irreconcilable clash of these two statements is no accident. It’s not a sign of incompetence or sloppy work or a mistake or a miscommunication. It’s a clear signal that the fix was in.

No real science. No deep investigation. No convincing evidence of safety. Passing the buck back and forth was the chilling and arrogant strategy through which Pandora’s Box was pried opened and GMO food was let into the US food supply.

In order for this titanic scam to work, the media had to cooperate. Reporters had to be a) idiots and b) sell-outs.

Reporters and their editors let the story die. No sane principled journalist would have cut bait, but who said mainstream reporters are sane or principled?

Underneath the Monsanto-FDA buck-passing act, there was a conscious deal to give a free pass to GMO crops. This had nothing to do with science or health or “feeding the world.” It was about profits. It was also about establishing a new monopoly on food.

Not only would big agribusiness dominate the planet’s food supply as never before, it would strengthen its stranglehold through patents on novel types of seeds which were engineered.

It’s very much like saying, “A cob of corn is not a plant, it’s a machine, and we own the rights to every one of those yellow machines.”

How was Monsanto able to gather so much clout?

There was one reason and one reason only. Putting the world’s food supply into fewer hands was, and is, a major item on the Globalist agenda. If it weren’t, the FDA-Monsanto approval scam would have been exposed in a matter of weeks.

Major newspapers and television networks would have attacked the obvious con job like packs of wild dogs and torn it to pieces.

But once the scam had been given a free pass, the primary corporate-government tactic was to accomplish a fait accompli, a series of events that was irreversible.

In this case, it was about gene drift. From the beginning, it was well known that GMO plants release genes that blow in the wind and spread from plant to plant, crop to crop, and field to field. There is no stopping it.

Along with convincing enough farmers to lock themselves into GMO-seed contracts, Monsanto bought up food-seed companies in order to engineer the seeds…and the gene-drift factor was the ace in the hole.

Sell enough GMO seeds, plant enough GMO crops, and you flood the world’s food crops with Monsanto genes.

Back in the 1990s, the prince of darkness, Michael Taylor, who had moved through the revolving door between the FDA and Monsanto several times, and is now the czar of food safety at the FDA—Taylor said, with great conviction, that the GMO revolution was unstoppable; within a decade or two, an overwhelming percentage of food grown on planet Earth would be GMO.

Taylor and others knew. They knew about gene drift, and they also knew that ownership of the world’s food, by a few companies, was a prime focus for Globalist kings.

Control food and water, and you hold the world in your hand.

Here is evidence that, even in earlier days, Monsanto knew about and pushed for the Globalist agenda. Quoted by J. Flint, in his 1998 “Agricultural Giants Moving Towards Genetic Monopolism,” Robert Fraley, head of Monsanto’s agri-division, stated: “What you are seeing is not just a consolidation of [Monsanto-purchased] seed companies. It’s really a consolidation of the entire food chain.”

And as for the power of the propaganda in that time period, I can think of no better statement than the one made on January 25th, 2001, by the outgoing US Secretary of Agriculture, Dan Glickman. As reported by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Glickman said:

“What I saw generically on the pro-biotech [GMO] side was the attitude that the technology was good and that it was almost immoral to say that it wasn’t good, because it was going to solve the problems of the human race and feed the hungry and clothe the naked. And there was a lot of money that had been invested in this, and if you’re against it, you’re Luddites, you’re stupid. There was rhetoric like that even here in this department [USDA]. You felt like you were almost an alien, disloyal, by trying to present an open-minded view on some of these issues being raised. So I pretty much spouted the rhetoric that everybody else around here spouted; it was written into my speeches.”

Glickman reveals several things in these remarks: he was spineless; people at the Dept. of Agriculture were madly buying into the Monsanto cover story about feeding the world; and there had to be a significant degree of infiltration at his Agency.

The last point is key. This wasn’t left to chance. You don’t get a vocal majority of Dept. of Agriculture personnel spouting Monsanto propaganda merely because the fairy tale about feeding the world sounds so good. No, there are people working on the inside to promote the “social cause” and make pariahs out of dissenters.

You need special background and training to pull that off. It isn’t an automatic walk in the park. This is professional psyop and intelligence work.

It isn’t rinky-dink stuff. To tune up bureaucrats and scientists, you have to have a background in manipulation. You have to know what you’re doing. You have to be able to build and sustain support, without giving your game away.

Psyop specialists are hired to help make overarching and planet-wide agendas come true, as populations are brought under sophisticated and pathological elites who care, for example, about feeding the world as much as a collector cares about paralyzing and pinning butterflies on a panel in a glass case.

Here is David Rockefeller, writing in his 2003 Memoirs:

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

The Globalists play for keeps.

Owning the food of the world is part of their strike-force action plan, and Monsanto is a technocratic arm of that plan.

thematrix12

Meanwhile, the controlled press treats the whole sordid Monsanto/FDA story with its time-honored policy of “he said-he said.” This policy dictates that stories merely present both sides of a conflict without drawing conclusions.

Monsanto’s lies and crimes and cover-ups are everywhere. You could wear sunglasses and find them in the dark.

The NY Times and the Washington Post could sell millions more papers on the back of Monsanto stories. It would be a bonanza for them. But no. They don’t care. They’d rather keep declining and losing readers. They’d rather die.

Normally, a business doesn’t commit suicide, especially when it sees exactly how to resuscitate itself. But here we are dealing with an agenda which can’t be disturbed. Globalism, and its agri-techno partner, Monsanto, are creating a planetary future. Major media are part and parcel of that op. They are selling it.

Again, we aren’t talking about sloppy reporting or accidental omissions of fact or boggling incompetence or ignorance about science. We are talking about conscious intent to deceive.

Yes, now and then the controlled media will release a troubling piece about Monsanto. But placement and frequency are everything. How often do these stories run? Do they run as the lead or do we find them on page 3? Are reporters assigned to keep pounding on a basic story and reveal more and more crimes? Does the basic story gather steam over the course of weeks and months?

These are the decisions that make or break a story. In the case of Monsanto and the FDA, the decisions were made a long time ago.

Part of every reporter’s training in how the real world works, if he has any ideals at all, is marching into his editor’s office with his hair on fire demanding to be given an assignment to expose a crime. The editor, knowing the true agenda of his newspaper or television network, tells the reporter:

“We’ve already covered that.”

“It’s old news.”

“People aren’t interested in it.”

“It’s too complicated.”

“The evidence you’re showing me is thin.”

“You’ll never get to the bottom of it.”

“The people involved won’t talk to you.”

And if none of those lies work, the editor might say, “If you keep pushing this, it would be bad for your career. You’ll lose access to other stories. You’ll be thought of as weird…”

This is how the game works at ground level. But make no mistake about it, the hidden agenda is about protecting an elite’s op from exposure.

If NBC, for example, gave its golden boy, Brian Williams, the green light, he would become an expert on Monsanto in three days. He’d become a tiger. He’d affect a whole set of morally outraged poses and send Monsanto down into Hell.

Don’t misunderstand. Brian hasn’t been waiting to move in for the kill. But wind him up and point to a target and he’ll go there.

However, no one at NBC in the executive offices will point him at Monsanto or the FDA.

All the major reporters at news outlets and all the elite television anchors are really psyop specialists. It’s just that most of them don’t know it.

One outraged major reporter who woke up and got out of the business put it to me this way: “When I was in the game, I looked at the news as a big public restroom. My one guiding principle was: don’t piss on your shoes. That meant covering a story that was considered out of bounds. If I talked to the boss about one of those stories, he’d look me up and down and say, ‘Hey, you pissed on your shoes. Get out of here.’”

Jon Rappoport

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

More information and links pertaining to this article below:

“Playing God in the Garden”

“Statement of [FDA] Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties,”

“Agricultural Giants Moving Towards Genetic Monopolism,”

the one made on January 25th, 2001, by the outgoing US Secretary of Agriculture, Dan Glickman

Here is David Rockefeller, writing in his 2003 Memoirs:
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/21/14 04:15 PM

Institute for Responsible Technology - The Tipping Point Network

2 hrs · Edited ·
.

Meet Tyrone Hayes, a scientist with the University of California. He made an incredible discovery – that a commonly used herbicide can have profoundly harmful effects on the human endocrine system. He tried to publish his work, but the chemical’s manufacturer started a smear campaign to discredit him and his research.

Read more at http://higherperspective.com/2014/12/paid-shut-up.html…
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/22/14 08:47 PM


The GMO Deception: What You Need to Know about the Food, Corporations, and Government Agencies Putting Our Families and Our Environment at Risk Hardcover – June 3, 2014

by Sheldon Krimsky (Editor), Jeremy Gruber (Editor)

http://www.amazon.com/The-GMO-Deception-..._pr_product_top

Verified Purchase
Excellent! Should become mandatory reading and basis for discussion in 4H, FFA and every Land Grant College as well as for young farmer groups of Farm Bureau, Farmers Union and NFO.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/22/14 09:15 PM

Watch an excerpt of a very powerful speech from Vandana Shiva. She explains the insanity behind the idea of corporations as people and what that notion is doing to our society.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153401590807977&fref=nf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/22/14 09:35 PM

What You Need to Know About GMOs and the GMA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC-q_UJbffY
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/22/14 09:39 PM

Monsanto Cancer Milk: FOX NEWS Kills Story and Fires Reporters!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3hCR_yCvkk
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/22/14 10:14 PM

David Suzuki speaks out against genetically modified food

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mBF1OOPdTo&app=desktop
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/22/14 10:25 PM

At 74, and coming the end of his scientific and broadcasting career, David Suzuki mused on the notion: "If I had one last lecture to give, what would I say?" The result is a very special talk full of humour, warmth, insight and passion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2b7SpLpN5A
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/26/14 11:06 PM

A Walk for GMO Labeling

Plan to Walk across America to Include Dialogue on Genetically Modified Organisms

On January 5, Santa Barbara resident Taylor Lancaster, 31, will go on a walk — a very long one. Beginning at Santa Monica beach, the Los Angeles–born Lancaster, who currently works at Yoga Soup as a desk yogi, intends to continue walking eastward, through the major cities of the desert, upward through the plains, and finally ending in Manhattan, in a transcontinental walk intended to cultivate discussions on genetically modified organisms (GMO).

http://www.independent.com/news/2014/dec/25/walk-gmo-labeling/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/26/14 11:07 PM

"This may be the most important work I have ever done. I hope you agree. We only have one planet. Let's take care of it." -David Suzuki

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/...ild-a-movement/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/26/14 11:11 PM

David Suzuki: An elder's vision for our sustainable future

At 74, and coming the end of his scientific and broadcasting career, David Suzuki mused on the notion: "If I had one last lecture to give, what would I say?" The result is a very special talk full of humour, warmth, insight and passion.

At a packed house at the Perth Convention Centre, Suzuki voiced his long-time frustration at the obsession for economic growth at the sacrifice of nature, while urging us all to strive for a sustainable future.

The event was hosted by the Perth International Arts Festival and UWA Extension. He is introduced by Josh Byrne, who is a host on ABC Television's "Gardening Australia".

David Suzuki was born in Vancouver, Canada in 1936. He has had a long and prolific career as a scientist, environmentalist, broadcaster and author. His scientific field is genetics, but he is best known for his television and radio programs that examine and explain the natural sciences, including "The Secret of Life" and "A Planet for the Taking."

He is the co-founder and chair of the David Suzuki Foundation, which was established in 1989 to advocate and educate people about environmental conservation, sustainable ecology and climate change.

Suzuki has won many awards for his work including the 2009 Honorary "Right Livelihood Award." He has written over 48 books, his latest being "The Legacy: An Elder's Vision for Our Sustainable Future", on which the lecture he is delivering is based.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2b7SpLpN5A&list=LLpPMl2FQ6QaT9iWdjossy6Q&index=12
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/27/14 01:50 PM

laugh A Zooologist laugh
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/27/14 08:36 PM

Institute for Responsible Technology

Yesterday at 2:12pm ·
.
Fascinating culmination of researched articles on GMOs....I like reading the research, if you do too, this link is for you!

http://www.enveurope.com/series/GMO_cultivation
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/27/14 08:43 PM

Originally Posted By: cwjga
laugh A Zooologist laugh




Biotech bully. They will say anything to try to bully the person trying to get the information out.

Classic example: Tyrone Hayes. This is how biotech tries to shut people up.

http://www.the-open-mind.com/they-paid-h...vvv2yoAyqLIw.01
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/28/14 09:04 AM

Journal of Organic Systems, 9(2), 2014 ORIGINAL PAPER
Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the
deterioration of health in the United States of America
Nancy L. Swanson1, Andre Leu2*, Jon Abrahamson3 and Bradley Wallet4
1 Abacus Enterprises, Lummi Island, WA, USA
2 International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements, Bonn, Germany
3 Abacus Enterprises, Lummi Island, WA, USA
4 Crustal Imaging Facility, Conoco Phillips School of Geology and Geophysics, University of
Oklahoma, USA
* Corresponding author: andreleu.al@gmail.com
Abstract

A huge increase in the incidence and prevalence of chronic diseases has been reported in the United
States (US) over the last 20 years. Similar increases have been seen globally. The herbicide
glyphosate was introduced in 1974 and its use is accelerating with the advent of herbicide-tolerant
genetically engineered (GE) crops. Evidence is mounting that glyphosate interferes with many
metabolic processes in plants and animals and glyphosate residues have been detected in both.
Glyphosate disrupts the endocrine system and the balance of gut bacteria, it damages DNA and is a
driver of mutations that lead to cancer.

In the present study, US government databases were searched for GE crop data, glyphosate
application data and disease epidemiological data. Correlation analyses were then performed on a
total of 22 diseases in these time-series data sets. The Pearson correlation coefficients are highly
significant (< 10-5) between glyphosate applications and hypertension (R = 0.923), stroke (R = 0.925),
diabetes prevalence (R = 0.971), diabetes incidence (R = 0.935), obesity (R = 0.962), lipoprotein
metabolism disorder (R = 0.973), Alzheimer’s (R = 0.917), senile dementia (R = 0.994), Parkinson's (R
= 0.875), multiple sclerosis (R = 0.828), autism (R = 0.989), inflammatory bowel disease (R = 0.938),
intestinal infections (R = 0.974), end stage renal disease (R = 0.975), acute kidney failure (R = 0.978),
cancers of the thyroid (R = 0.988), liver (R = 0.960), bladder (R = 0.981), pancreas (R = 0.918), kidney
(R = 0.973) and myeloid leukaemia (R = 0.878).

The Pearson correlation coefficients are highly significant (< 10-4) between the percentage of GE corn
and soy planted in the US and hypertension (R = 0.961), stroke (R = 0.983), diabetes prevalence (R =
0.983), diabetes incidence (R = 0.955), obesity (R = 0.962), lipoprotein metabolism disorder (R =
0.955), Alzheimer’s (R = 0.937), Parkinson's (R = 0.952), multiple sclerosis (R = 0.876), hepatitis C (R
= 0.946), end stage renal disease (R = 0.958), acute kidney failure (R = 0.967), cancers of the thyroid
(R = 0.938), liver (R = 0.911), bladder (R = 0.945), pancreas (R = 0.841), kidney (R = 0.940) and
myeloid leukaemia (R = 0.889).
The significance and strength of the correlations show that the effects
of glyphosate and GE crops on human health should be further investigated.
http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/92/JOS_Volume-9_Number-2_Nov_2014-Swanson-et-al.pdf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/29/14 09:27 AM

Biotech Companies Are Peddling Dangerous Propaganda About the Risks of GM Potatoes

One man had the courage to speak out in 1998 about the risks associated with genetically modified foods.

"Twelve years ago, a 150-second TV broadcast changed our world; everyone everywhere owes a debt of gratitude to the man whose life it turned upside down—in his effort to protect ours. On August 10, 1998, eminent scientist Dr. Arpad Pusztai (pronounced Poos-tie) dared to speak the truth.

He had been an enthusiastic supporter of genetic engineering, working on cutting edge safety research with genetically modified (GM) foods. But to his surprise, his experiments showed that GM foods were inherently dangerous. When he relayed his concerns during a short television interview in the UK, things got ugly. With support from the highest levels of government, biotech defenders quickly mobilized a coordinated attack campaign trying to distort and cover up the evidence."

http://www.alternet.org/food/biotech-com...page=1#bookmark
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/29/14 02:53 PM

Why must you keep posting crap


http://academicsreview.org/reviewed-content/genetic-roulette/section-1/1-1-pusztais-flawed-claims/


Analysis of Peer-Reviewed Research:

A panel of experts, the Royal Society and food-safety scientists in regulatory agencies around the world, all have concluded that the study does not demonstrate that the GM potatoes were unsafe in any way
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/29/14 08:13 PM

Glyphosate Toxic to Mouth Cells & Damages DNA, Roundup Much Worse

Further evidence of genotoxic and cytotoxic effects – a prelude to cancer, birth defects and reproductive problems Dr Eva Sirinathsinghji

A fully referenced version of this articles is posted on ISIS members website and is otherwise available for download here

Please circulate widely and repost, but you must give the URL of the original and preserve all the links back to articles on our website

New research finds that glyphosate causes cell and DNA damage to epithelial cells derived from the inside of the mouth and throat [1]. It raises concerns over the safety of inhaling glyphosate, one of the most common ways in which people are exposed to the herbicide
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Glyphosate_Toxic_to_Mouth_Cells.php
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/29/14 09:32 PM


Cancer doc admits giving patients unneeded chemo

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/natio...chemo/15754535/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/29/14 09:36 PM


Current Microbiology
November 2014
Date: 19 Nov 2014

The Influence of Glyphosate on the Microbiota and Production of Botulinum Neurotoxin During Ruminal Fermentation

Get Access



Abstract


The aim of the present study is to investigate the impact of glyphosate on the microbiota and on the botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) expression during in vitro ruminal fermentation. This study was conducted using two DAISYII-incubators with four ventilated incubation vessels filled with rumen fluid of a 4-year-old non-lactating Holstein–Friesian cow. Two hundred milliliter rumen fluid and 800 ml buffer solution were used with six filter bags containing 500 mg concentrated feed or crude fiber-enriched diet. Final concentrations of 0, 1, 10, and 100 µg/ml of glyphosate in the diluted rumen fluids were added and incubated under CO2-aerated conditions for 48 h. The protozoal population was analyzed microscopically and the ruminal flora was characterized using the fluorescence in situ hybridization technique. Clostridium botulinum and BoNT were quantified using most probable number and ELISA, respectively. Results showed that glyphosate had an inhibitory effect on select groups of the ruminal microbiota, but increased the population of pathogenic species. The BoNT was produced during incubation when inoculum was treated with high doses of glyphosate. In conclusion, glyphosate causes dysbiosis which favors the production of BoNT in the rumen. The global regulations restrictions for the use of glyphosate should be re-evaluated.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/29/14 09:40 PM

Mother Shocked to Find GMO Propaganda in Children’s Science Book By Nick Meyer On December 3, 2014

The Biotech and GMO food industries have long spent big bucks on lobbying to influence public opinion, but it’s not just the hearts and minds of our Congresspeople that Monsanto and others are after: they also have a long history of going after children as well.

- See more at: http://althealthworks.com/4596/no-bugs-m...h.YUOeAHTX.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/29/14 09:45 PM

http://www.gmofreebeer.com/gmo-beer-listing.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/29/14 09:55 PM

Today I made homemade eggnog and am enjoying it with Wild Turkey 101. Awesome.


Wild Turkey Master Distiller Jimmy Russell is a little more cautious. During a tour of the Lawrenceburg, Ky., distillery, he told photographer/blogger Michael Kellstrand why Wild Turkey doesn’t use GMO grains:

The whiskey distilled today will not become a bottled product for another four to 15 years. If a GMO grain is discovered to have an issue five years from now, or if the government decides any GMO products must be labeled as such, then the distillery would be in quite a bind with all that aging product now affected. The premium they pay for non-GMO grain is considered insurance against any possible issues later.

Colin O’Neil, regulatory policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety, says he hasn’t seen any science pointing to genetic material passing through the distillation process. But, as he sees it, that’s not the only cause for concern.

“To assume that the only real risk is contamination of genetic material ignores the fact that these crops by and large either produce an insecticide (which has been shown not to break down in the human gut) or they are engineered to withstand exposure to herbicide.” And farmers are spraying an increasing amount of Roundup and other weed killers as a result of herbicide-resistant “superweeds,” he points out.

“I don’t know what types of pesticide residues are on the corn that goes through the distillation process,” O’Neil adds, “but residue in any form presents an increased exposure to consumers.”

http://grist.org/corn/2012-01-06-bourbon-of-proof-will-kentuckys-heritage-be-compromised-gmo-corn/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/29/14 11:05 PM

House Republicans Just Passed a Bill Forbidding Scientists From Advising the EPA On Their Own Research

November 19, 2014

The "reform" measure makes room for industry-funded experts on the EPA's advisory board.

http://www.salon.com/2014/11/19/house_re...r_own_research/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/30/14 12:39 AM

May the Farm be with you. (Star Wars themed.)

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10152526815338202&fref=nf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/30/14 01:13 AM

Institute for Responsible Technology

Jeffrey updates us for 2015

http://youtu.be/1TpmEgSPKKs
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 12/30/14 01:47 AM

A Journalist Asked a Former Monsanto VP (and Current FDA Food Safety Czar) About a Conflict of Interest..His Answer Shows What Kind of People We’re Dealing With By Nick Meyer On July 22, 2014

- See more at: http://althealthworks.com/3195/a-journal...h.GPMAWyBx.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/01/15 12:03 AM

The World According to Monsanto || High Quality || Part 5 of 10

10 minutes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBSxRA4qjo4&feature=share
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/01/15 12:15 AM

Jeffrey Smith: GMOs & Their Impact on Health
What You’ll Hear
0:10 – Cool Fact of the Day!
0:58 – Welcome Jeffrey Smith
2:05 – The basics of genetic modification
7:55 – The unknown effects of genetic engineering
11:00 – The generational impact of our existing GMO efforts
13:06 – A journey of death, disease, destruction, and despair
16:35 – Is BT toxin safe for humans?
25:19 – GMO drugs and microbes
29:21 – The science behind Roundup (Glyphosate)
36:53 – How to avoid GMOs
40:10 – What it will take to eliminate the GMO problem

https://www.bulletproofexec.com/jeffrey-smith-gmos-their-impact-on-health-178/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/01/15 07:30 AM

http://genera.biofortified.org/viewall.php
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/01/15 07:33 AM

http://gmoanswers.com/sites/default/files/GMO_Safety_Table_V12.pdf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/02/15 09:02 PM

Kathleen Hallal, one of the founding members of Moms Across America, interviews Dr Don Huber, a whistle blower in the food world. It's in four parts and if you can't take the time to watch all four, at least watch Part 3 and 4.

Dr. Huber is Professor Emeritus of Plant Pathology at Purdue University, a land grant institution, and has been studying plants for 55 years. He has received various awards for his scientific accomplishments and contributions to government. He was Cereal Pathologist at the University of Idaho for 8 years before joining the Department of Botany & Plant Pathology at Purdue University in 1971. His agricultural research the past 50 years has focused on the epidemiology and control of soil borne plant pathogens with emphasis on microbial ecology, cultural and biological controls, and physiology of host parasite relationships. He’s in his 80s, and he is also a father, a grandfather and has had a 41-year military career as a retired Colonel.

Part 1
Time Code List
1:50 Thank you for meeting with me
3:05 Dr. Huber's background
4:45 What are GMOs?
5:49 Is it true that GMOs are created using viruses and bacteria?
8:10 Are any of those viruses or bacteria still active when we eat the food?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlztFOWxdqo

Part 2
Question: How many ways are glyphosate containing herbicides used on crops that end up in our food supply?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7U2rEYHbFA

Part 3
Time Code List
0:01 Which crops exactly would be sprayed with glyphosate that mothers would have to look out for in the super market?
2:14 I was completely unaware that GMOs were grown in home gardens. I thought it was strictly for industrial agricultural production. Don't they sell BT corn at Walmart?
2:46 Please tell us what you are being told about the health of farm workers exposed to glyphosate. Has the application rate of glyphosate changed since 1996?
4:10 Why did the EPA raise the residue limits? Endocrine disruption (EDCs)?
5:26 Have GMOs been proven safe by the FDA?
7:03 What do scientists say about GMOs in the world community consensus?
8:35 Recap - FDA and safety, FDA scientists studies.

(Note that Dr. Huber said animals won't eat gmo corn but, remember, the meat you are buying in your grocery store is from animals that are forced to eat this gmo corn. I am greatful for Autumn's Harvest Farm, right here in Seneca County for going organic, non gmo.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFO_TvWTNy8

Part 4
Super bugs and super weeds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWQodcnkYD0&list=PLWlbMkC0m_Fa8vSUIsHJV-BrYf9xrNYpj&index=29
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/02/15 10:31 PM

GMO Roundup Ready grass will result in a further increase in the use of Roundup, which will contaminate our groundwater and drinking water. Imagine your children & pets frolicking around in a sea of herbicidal poison. Because of inevitable contamination, the grass is likely to be eaten by grass grazing animals. There has been no toxicity testing and the potential harm to animals eating this GMO grass is unknown. Will we be saying good-bye to pasture raised meat? Lastly, it is a scientific fact that weeds will evolve to develop resistance to Roundup, leading to ever increasing amounts being applied.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/354/661/966/stop-scotts-gmo-grass-in-its-tracks-now/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/02/15 10:38 PM

Comedian Bill Maher Comments On Maui’s Monsanto Predicament

December 29th, 2014

MN: Similarly, you may have heard that Maui had its own “power of the people” moment with respect to passing a bill calling for the suspension on the growth, testing and cultivation of GMO crops here in Maui County?

BM: All I can say to the folks on Maui who were a part of this is “You go, girl!” That’s fantastic. I’m jealous. We tried to do something like that in California a couple years ago.

In that case, we weren’t asking Monsanto to change anything. We were just asking that they let us know: Give us the information, label the products, so we can decide for ourselves.

Well, of course, a company like Monsanto, which owns all the great lobbyists in the world, went to work and they convinced people that it would cost them more money at the grocery store.

It was a disingenuous and dishonest thing to say, but it worked and people voted it down.

But we’ll be back again.

These things always take more than one time – medical marijuana, legal marijuana, gay marriage – it takes a while before people get used to an idea. They’ll get used to this, and we’ll have success.

MN: On this end, the bill is moving to federal court. The giant is awake, as it were. From your own firsthand experience ruffling political feathers, do you have any advice you can share?

BM: Get a good lawyer!

You have got to fight these people on their own turf with their own tools. You can’t fight them singing Kumbaya.

Monsanto is – from my point of view – the most evil company in the world and that’s saying something in a world that also includes ExxonMobil, pharmaceutical companies, defense department companies and all sorts of merchants of death.

Monsanto has the potential to REALLY f#@k with all of us.

And they’re ruthless. They’re the Scientologists of the corporate world. I worry a lot about Monsanto, honestly, and I suppose my advice would be don’t bring a knife to a gun fight.

http://mauinow.com/2014/12/29/comedian-bill-maher-comments-on-mauis-monsanto-predicament/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/02/15 11:02 PM

Listen to what these Indiana farmers have to say about Monsanto and gmo seed. 14 minutes.


http://althealthworks.com/4125/knock-kno...t-evil-company/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/02/15 11:15 PM

Monica Andreassenab*, Elena Roccaa, Thomas Bøhnac, Odd-Gunnar Wikmarka, Johnnie van den Bergd, Martinus Løvike, Terje Traavikac & Unni Cecilie Nygaardb

Publishing models and article dates explained

Received: 15 Oct 2014
Accepted: 2 Nov 2014
Published online: 11 Dec 2014

NEW STUDY: A Bt toxin protein in GMO corn may be a respiratory allergen when exposure occurs through inhalation. The findings are in agreement with previous studies that have found immunogenic responses after administration through other routes of exposure. One limitation of the study is that the sporadic exposures did not reflect real-world situations, in which humans, domestic and wild animals are exposed 24/7 for extended periods of time, with simultaneous exposure to a varying number of other foreign substances. So this protein may actually be MORE allergenic and immunotoxic than this study suggests. Can you say Bt TOXIN? READ:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09540105.2014.988128?journalCode=cfai20&#.VKd5740tGAI
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/03/15 07:29 AM

GMOs Are Nothing to Fear
Genetic modification is a safe and effective way to make America’s crops resilient.


By Pamela Bailey Nov. 4, 2013 | 4:30 p.m. EST + More

Italian scientists recently read and summarized 1,783 scientific studies to conclude that there is, in fact, scientific consensus around the safety of genetically modified organisms. "The scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazards directly connected with the use of genetically modified crops," they concluded, agreeing with the World Health Organization, the Food and Drug Administration and the American Medical Association.

In fact, there has never been a single credible scientific study showing GMOs to have harmful effects on humans, animals or our environment. But scientific consensus hasn't stopped activists from demanding mandatory labeling on all genetically modified foods. Yet there already exists an effective and uniform way for consumers around the country to identify non-GMO products: the presence of a USDA-certified organic label.

Genetic modification is a safe and effective way to make America's crops resistant to drought and pestilence, and it helps ensure the country produces enough food to feed our families and the world, especially developing nations. Simply put, GM technology means that scientists take the naturally-occurring, desirable traits of one plant and add them to another. No chemicals are involved.


Farmers have been using GMOs for nearly 20 years, and between 70 percent and 80 percent of the food you consume contains GM ingredients. The use of this technology ensures farmers can grow more food, fend off infestations and recover from drought faster. GM technology also helps to keep food prices lower. Without it, the cost of key agricultural commodities would go up 15 percent to 30 percent. GM technology is more environmentally friendly as well. From 1996 to 2011, biotech crops have collectively reduced global pesticide applications by 1.04 billion pounds.

Earlier this year, The New York Times profiled the use of GM technology to save Florida's oranges from deadly bacteria that would otherwise wipe out the entire crop. Similarly, scientists could save millions of children from malnutrition by infusing Asia's rice paddies with vitamin A, creating so-called "Golden Rice."

Currently, the FDA does not require foods to be labeled as having been produced with GM technology because it has found that there is no health risk associated with these foods or any material difference between GM and non-GM foods. Nonetheless, recently some groups have put forward state ballot initiatives and legislation to require special labels for products containing these ingredients.


These initiatives – which could mislead consumers into thinking GM foods pose a health risk or are materially different from conventionally produced products – would create an unnecessary patchwork of conflicting state labeling requirements, which would snarl interstate commerce, create confusion and increase costs for consumers.

There is a better way to be open with consumers about the food they eat. The FDA should maintain its role as America's foremost food safety authority and, when food ingredients are proven to impact consumer health, they should use their federal authority to label foods with those ingredients in all 50 states.

The FDA has determined, along with those 1,700-plus other studies, that GM foods pose no risk to America's families and, as such, do not warrant a label. We should follow the science and stop the fear-mongering. We don't need a series of regulations and labels to tell us what we already know: Genetically modified foods are safe.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/03/15 04:55 PM

Scientists Under Attack Watch Documentary (60 mins)
http://www.scientistsunderattack.com/

This is a documentary thriller about how Agro-Chemical multinational corporations victimize international scientists to prevent them from publishing their scary findings.

Appearances by:

Ignacio Chapella
Arpad Pusztai
Jeffrey Smith
Antonio Andrioli
Andrew Kimbrell

Review:
Scientists Under Attack goes on to show how the GM industry has blocked the evolution of scientific knowledge. When Russian scientist Irina Ermakova's study found high mortality rates and low body weight in rats fed GM soy, and when Austrian government research found that decreased fertility in mice fed GM maize, the industry carried out its usual campaign of vilification. If the industry were interested in scientific truth, it would push for studies to be repeated with the alleged "flaws" corrected. But this never happens. Instead, GM companies use their patent-based ownership of GM crops to deny scientists access to research materials the GM crop and the non-GM parent line control. So the original research showing problems with GM crops is buried under a deluge of smears and follow up studies are not done. For the public, the difficulty and expense involved in accessing full research papers makes it hard to find where the truth lies.
http://www.gmwatch.eu/…/12567-scientists-under-attack-film-…

Watch:
http://www.dailymotion.com/…/x248kai_scientists-under-attac…
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/03/15 07:05 PM

The speaker in this video is actually an actress named Kate Miles, but the facts about produce and its marketing are 100% real. The audience is also real, and thus the looks of disgust are totally real too.

She opens with: "I'm going to give you some of the secrets about how we make you buy what we want you to buy. So, as a marketer, when I'm first given a project, what's my job? Well, my job is to make you want it, to crave it, to need it, to think that it is the best innovation in food since sliced bread."

It starts getting creepy from there. The reality behind food marketing is pretty damn eye-opening.

http://www.upworthy.com/no-one-applauds-...ds-together?g=2
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/03/15 07:31 PM

Is there gmo yeast in Finger Lakes wines?

September 25, 2014

Napa Valley Register
by Erica Martenson

Genetic Engineering

Despite the Wine Institute’s recent statement that no genetically modified organisms (GMOs) should be used in winemaking, the Sacramento Bee recently reported that, according to American Tartaric Products, the first wines made with a genetically modified wine yeast, ML01, will be released this year.

A few wineries’ decision to use this yeast could affect the entire North American market. Since these wines are unlabeled, the only way people can avoid them is to avoid all wines from North America, except those labeled organic, and few wines are labeled organic, due to the addition of sulfites during the winemaking process. Consumers in Europe and Asia are very informed regarding GMOs and have resoundingly rejected them. American consumers are becoming more aware, and polls show that a majority of Americans would prefer to avoid them.


A few wineries’ choice to use ML01 could also be a nuisance to other wineries, because this GM wine yeast could contaminate native and traditional wine yeasts through the air, surface waste and water runoff.

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/dangers-genetically-modified-yeast-wine
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/04/15 01:20 PM

The positive side of GMOs
Former Chicoan stands up for genetically modified organisms

By Dylan Burge


This article was published on 09.05.13.


The author grew up in Chico, and is now a researcher in botany at the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco. For more about Burge’s thoughts on GMOs, visit his website, www.edaphics.blogspot.ca.


Summer is a time of agricultural bounty in California, a state renowned for its produce. Summer is also when my career—plant science—seems most relevant. This leads me to ponder the presence of agriculture in society, the role of science in agriculture, and my participation in science—often over a basket of Bing cherries.

I frequently think about transgenic organisms, because I work with them and feel that they may solve some of the world’s problems. Transgenic—or genetically modified—organisms (GMOs) are plants and animals that have had their genomes modified by scientists. Transgenic techniques are used to add new traits, such as disease resistance, to organisms. GM crops have already allowed farmers to reduce reliance on pesticides and the land. And this is just the beginning.

Scientists are developing new kinds of GMOs, including, for instance, disease-resistant pigs and drought-resistant corn. The benefits are limited only by creativity. New GMOs could, for example, save natural forests by providing faster-growing timber trees, or halt global warming by fixing carbon dioxide.

Unfortunately, GMOs have received a lot of negative press, due to a variety of public concerns. Fortunately, a lot of this has resulted from misunderstandings, and a lack of positive public relations by scientists. These misunderstandings come in four flavors. Here, I would like to explain these, and highlight how they might be overcome:

1. They are not natural. Many worry about scientists tinkering with evolution. But evolution tinkers, too. In fact, genes often move among distantly related organisms on their own. Wild plants, for instance, contain DNA from dozens of plant families, as well as bacterial DNA spliced into their genomes by microbes.

2. They threaten our health. GMOs are all vetted for safety before they become food. Scientists are also creating GMOs that address some health concerns, such as new “gene-tailored” organisms that avoid the use of controversial bacterial DNA.

3. They threaten the environment. Scientists have been unable to identify significant environmental threats by GMOs. In fact, GMOs benefit the environment by reducing reliance on chemicals, fuel and land.

4. They are not intellectual property. Many are concerned that corporations are gaining control over food through intellectual-property law. However, new strains of crops and livestock are always protected by such laws. This allows developers to profit from their efforts, and thereby continue to create better crops and livestock for us all.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/04/15 03:15 PM

Computer Bots against Vaccines
March 28, 2014 at 8:13am
From Jeff Hays, the producer of BOUGHT, the movie:

"She said he went on, “So we created a social media bot that searches conversation strings in all social media for these conversations...the bot then posts the fact that they are false and links them to the “real” data showing that vaccines are safe and don’t cause autism. So this is just one example of how we can use Big Data and bots to affect social change for good.”"

"The battle lines have been drawn. Our goal is to sidestep the battle, and force a discussion on 3 key issues of our day:

&#9726;Big Pharma, its reach and effect on our health,

&#9726;The truth about vaccine "safety and efficacy", and

&#9726;The effect of GMOs on our health and our world."

https://www.facebook.com/notes/dr-tenpen...151953988518344
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/04/15 03:48 PM

Childhood vaccines are safe. Seriously.
By Jen Christensen and Nadia Kounang, CNN
Updated 3:18 PM ET, Tue July 1, 2014


Should I get my child vaccinated? 01:14
Story highlights
Review of more than 20,000 scientific titles and 67 papers finds no evidence linking vaccines, autism
Vaccines may be greatest public health achievement of the 20th century, doctors say
Physicians should educate parents about the importance of vaccines
Children should get vaccinated against preventable and potentially deadly diseases. Period.

That's what a project that screened more than 20,000 scientific titles and 67 papers on vaccine safety concludes this week. The review appears in the latest edition of the medical journal Pediatrics.

The evidence strongly suggests that side effects from vaccines are incredibly rare, the study authors said. They found no ties between vaccines and the rising number of children with autism, as a small but vocal group of anti-vaccine activists, including actors Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carey, have said.


Review: Childhood vaccines are safe 02:26
PLAY VIDEO

Dr. Gupta on vaccines and new measles cases 03:33
PLAY VIDEO

Police: Anti-vaccine mom, tot on the run 03:01
PLAY VIDEO
Retracted autism study an 'elaborate fraud'

The review also found no link between vaccines and childhood leukemia, something that was suggested in earlier studies.

The researchers found that some vaccines did cause a few adverse effects but it was only for a tiny fraction of the population.

There was evidence that the meningococcal vaccine can lead to anaphylaxis -- a severe, whole-body allergic reaction -- in children allergic to ingredients in the vaccine. Other studies found the MMR vaccine was linked to seizures.

"Vaccines, like any other medication, aren't 100% risk free," said Dr. Ari Brown an Austin, Texas-based pediatrician and author of the popular book "Baby 411," who was not involved with the study.

"You have a sore arm, redness at the injection site. Those are the things we see commonly. Fortunately the serious adverse effects is extremely rare."

Brown said parents ask her how safe vaccines are all the time. Some patients also ask if they should delay or stagger the vaccinations. She counsels against that practice. She said the younger the child, the more danger these diseases present.

"By delaying the vaccines you're putting your child at risk," Brown said.

Study: Don't delay measles vaccine

The positive effects of vaccines dramatically outweigh the bad, experts said.

An editorial accompanying the study calls vaccines "one of the most successful public health achievements of the 20th century."

Because of vaccines, many diseases that plagued children for centuries have all but been eliminated.

"There were good reasons that these diseases were targeted for vaccine development since they are so life-threatening," said Dr. Carrie Byington, vice-chair for research in the University of Utah's pediatrics department, and the new chair for the American Academy of Pediatrics committee on infectious diseases.

Millions of Americans live longer on average because of the protection vaccines provide. Life expectancy has gone up in the United States by more than 30 years. Infant mortality decreased from 100 deaths per 1000 to 7 between the 1900s and 2000.

A vaccine for smallpox led the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to declare the disease eradicated in 1978. Prior to a vaccination for diphtheria, it was one of the most common causes of illness and death among children. Now it is rarely reported in the United States.


Dr. Gupta: Kids need to be vaccinated 02:51
PLAY VIDEO
Yet research shows there is still doubt among some medical residents about the effectiveness of vaccinations.


What vaccines do children need? 01:05
PLAY VIDEO

Experts: vaccines are necessary 01:17
PLAY VIDEO
"That is particularly concerning for me," Byington said. "Young residents may be in the same position as young parents who have trained at a time, or lived at a time, when these diseases were extremely rare, and they may not have ever seen how serious a vaccine-preventable infection can be."

An increasing number of parents over the years have opted out of getting their children vaccinated. And that may be having a negative impact on the community's health.

A study found that large clusters of children who had not been vaccinated were close to the large clusters of whooping cough cases in the 2010 California epidemic. While California typically has higher vaccination rates than the rest of the country, that state is dealing with yet another whooping cough epidemic.

This spring also saw an 18-year high number of measles cases in the United States. The largest outbreak was in Ohio where the virus spread quickly among the Amish, who are mostly unvaccinated. This outbreak was a real surprise to health officials who thought that the infectious disease was thought to have been eliminated from the United States in 2000.

The editorial accompanying this latest study suggests doctors, who parents typically trust to tell the truth about medical information, need to use this study to speak with confidence about the importance of vaccinating children.

"Looking at all these mounds of data -- there is still no data that show an association that shows vaccine and autism," said Brown. "I would love it to close this chapter and move on. I don't think it will. But the more research, the more we learns about autism, the more we can reassure parents that there are no links here."
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/05/15 01:14 AM

Scientist: Genetic engineering has become a religion
By Ken Roseboro
Published: October 31, 2013 Category:
GMO Environmental Risks

Ignacio Chapela says people must challenge the false “stories” of genetic engineering

See more at: http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/october2013/genetic-engineering-has-become-religion.php#.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/05/15 01:20 AM

Russian President Putin Signs GMO Labeling Liability Law

Posted on Jan 3 2015 - 2:17pm by Sustainable Pulse

Putin signed the new bill on the last day of 2014 TASS news agency reported.

The bill which was submitted by the Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Protection and Welfare (Rospotrebnadzor) imposes fines for vague or unclear labeling on food products containing genetically modified ingredients.

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/01/03/r...aw/#.VKlcVUDCt8
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/05/15 03:09 AM

Monsanto Timeline Of Crime 1901-2014

Posted By COVVHA - AO2GEN Children Of Vietnam Veterans Health Alliance On April 14, 2014

http://covvha.net/monsanto-1901-2014-timeline/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/05/15 05:59 AM

Agriculture
How GMO Crops Can Be Good for the Environment
By Drake Bennett November 18, 2014


Among the winners in this month’s elections, along with the Republican candidate in just about every competitive race, were foods containing genetically modified organisms. Ballot initiatives that would have mandated the labeling of GMOs on store shelves lost in both in Colorado (overwhelmingly) and Oregon (narrowly). Nobody knows exactly how the passage of those measures would have affected the sales of GMO products over the long run; consumers have shown a tendency to ignore the calorie counts on food labels.

Still, it’s possible that over the short term labeling laws would make foods containing GMOs less popular and therefore decrease the amount of farmland, in the U.S. and abroad, given over to modified crops. That was the goal of many labeling proponents, and a new study suggests it would have been a bad result.

The study doesn’t look at the health effects of GMOs. Thousands of independent studies have already done so and found that GMOs are perfectly safe to eat. The new research instead looks at the costs and benefits for agriculture and the environment, a question on which there is less consensus. Plenty of research, including this large study from the National Academy of Sciences, has found that GMOs have significantly increased farm yields while decreasing pesticide use and soil erosion. The idea is that because GM crops are engineered to produce insecticides in their tissues or to be immune to particular herbicides, they reduce the man-hours, fuel, and chemical inputs in farming, even while reducing losses to pests and weather. (Anti-GMO groups have looked at the same data and argued that the yield gains are minimal (PDF) and limited to special circumstances.)


The new study, in the journal PLOS One, comes down strongly on the pro-GMO side. It’s a meta-analysis that aggregates and examines the results of 147 existing research studies looking at GM soybeans, maize and cotton, the world’s biggest GM commodity crops. The authors, a pair of agricultural economists at Germany’s University of Göttingen, found that GM technology increased crop yields by 22 percent, reduced pesticide use by 37 percent, and increased farmer profits by 68 percent.

A few details jump out from the study. For one, the benefits were greater in those GM crops that produced their own pesticides rather than those engineered for herbicide resistance—the latter trait has been hugely convenient for farmers, but has also shown a greater rebound effect as weed species evolved resistance to the chosen herbicides.

The yield and profit gains were also greater in developing countries than in developed countries. Finally, the studies in the meta-analyses that were published in peer-reviewed journals showed more dramatic effects, both in yield and profit gains, than those published elsewhere. Put another way, the more rigorously vetted a study, the more likely it has been to find benefits for GMOs.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/06/15 12:08 AM

Published on Jan 13, 2014

GMO's and our Children's Health

Presentation by Michelle Perro, MD, DHom.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J47K7634MD0&list=PLhBPgar3aNfPTMMhvMNKf8k7JBi5ECe1o&index=9
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/06/15 12:40 AM

Glyphosate Found in Feeding Tube Liquid

Posted by Zen Honeycutt · January 05, 2015 11:15 AM

Further comments on the findings:

This report is absolutely ground breaking for parents everywhere. We need to keep our children safe from these toxic chemicals. Our regulatory agencies have failed us and have let Roundup be carelessly used for too long. The worse part? The American public doesn't have the right to know which food doesn't have it. This must stop and is reason enough to avoid the use of any GMO technology that is tied to this chemical.- Vani Hari Food Babe

"As a mother I am very disturbed by these results. Working as a pediatric Physical Therapist I met children with feeding issues who depend on tube feedings for their entire lives. Children who experience trauma and are recovering from car accidents, shootings, cancers, surgeries and other illnesses may require these tube feedings for days, weeks, or years. I have long questioned the nutritionally poor and inflammatory ingredients in these feedings but am devastated to find out that they are contaminated with poison. Our most vulnerable children, and our children healing from overwhelming trauma, deserve better." Sarah Cusack, MPT, CHHC

"Eeh gads Glyphosate in Pedisure is frightening. As a cardiologist concerned about herbicides, we now know that RoundUp effects heart tissue and facilitates serious heart rhythm problems(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25448876). To think we are exposing infants to this same toxin cannot be tolerated". -Joel Kahn MD

"The high levels found of course, don't address the issue of bioaccumulation in children. If Pediasure is given to sick children, we have no idea of their rates of clearance, liver function, etc. Tests done on children prior to the administration of these compounds. In addition, the issue of bioaccumulation in children has not been addressed. Their ability to clear these toxins has not been evaluated, particularly when they are ill and may have altered renal function." - Dr. Michelle Perro, Pediatrician

The question of bioaccumulation has been addressed and written about by Michael Antoniou:Antoniou M, Habib MEM, Howard CV, et al. Teratogenic effects of glyphosate-based herbicides: Divergence of regulatory decisions from scientific evidence. J Env Anal Toxicol. 2012;S4:006. doi:10.4172/2161-0525.S4-006.

"I find it astonishing that babies and children with cancer are being provided with nutrients through a feeding tube that are contaminated with glyphosate. It ought to be obvious to medical professionals that it is essential to assure that as few toxic chemicals as possible are present in enteral nutrition provided to seriously ill children. This is a direct delivery system for glyphosate to the blood and to the tissues. It should be undeniable that certified organic sources are the only viable option in such a situation."- Stephanie Seneff MIT scientist and co author of the Glyphosate Papers

The data produced regarding the levels of glyphosate in our food, water and medicines the better. Even though this testing is not validated it does give a strong clue as to how ubiquitous glyphosate is in the U.S. food supply system. The question the EPA and USDA should be asking themselves is are they willing to risk public health by relying on short-term industry sponsored safety studies on glyphosate and all other pesticides. It is time for the regulators to support long-term independent science to deterime just how damaging glyphosate pesticides are for this and future generations. While these studies are being completed all glyphosate-based herbicides should be removed from the shelves." - Henry Rowlands, Sustainable Pulse



"I have reviewed the lab report dated January 2, 2015 from Microbe Inotech Lab for Moms Across America and can tell you that your results for Pediasure Enteral Nutritional drink are consistent with our lab results of April 18, 2004 for soy based Enfamil ProSobee liquid infant baby formulas.

The Moms Infotech Lab report for ELISA glyphosate analysis showed 6 out of 20 positive IDs for Glyphosate residue in the product. This represents 30% of the samples which tested positive. The highest concentration found was in sample #5 which contained 111 ppb (parts per billion). The lowest detectable reading for milk-like products with this method of analysis is 76 ppb and the lowest amount positively detected in the Mom's lab report was found in sample #7 and contained 80 ppb.

These results, DO NOT necessarily mean that the other 14 samples were free of glyphosate, they may also have glyphosate, only at undetectable levels. These results only show those samples, that could be positively identified by the ELISA method of analysis. Had another method been chosen, such as HPLC-MS with a lower detection limit, possibly more samples would have shown glyphosate residue contamination. We know HPLC-MS testing is 3 times more expensive, but the ELISA results are quick and now show follow up testing is necessary, especially by government agencies who are supposed to protect public health and interests.

Your results and our results, both show measurable amounts of Glyphosate contained in infant formula products and this is most concerning. We found 170 ppb of glyphosate in Enfamil ProSobee liquid infant baby formula, so it will be interesting to compare this result when you receive the report for your infant formula samples.

Make no mistake about it, the levels of glyphosate found in these tests, are levels that do cause harm and damage to the microbiome which comprises 70% of the immune system. This will affect both present and future health. Glyphosate is an insidious, hazardous chemical which should have never been brought to market nor allowed to contaminate the food supply of the USA and that of the developing world.

The levels found in these lab tests, can cause irreparable damage to a developing child, as well as harm to an adult. After all, it is the bacteria of our microbiome and even greater, that of the biosphere which controls the destiny of all living organisms, from birth to the grave." -Anthony Samsel Independant scientist and co author of the Glyphosate Papers



What to do?

Studies show gut bacteria improvements and symptoms of autism are reduced with probiotics. The best form of probiotics are whole food such as raw organic saurkraut, vegetables, organic yogurt, organic miso, and organic keifer. The reason for this is that the probiotics ( good bacteria) have been shown to restore the gut flora and therefore rebuild the gut brain connection and the immune system.


Unlike any other time in history, American moms, caregivers and all citizens around the world must be concerned with their gut flora, which harbors 70% of the immune system. We moms have seen that when we take preventative measures to avoid GMOs and related pesticides, and ad fermented vegetables and/or probiotics, our children's and our own health improves.

We hope this information is brought to the attention of hospital directors and that they switch to organic feeding tube liquid options (see solutions page for possible option) as soon as possible. Also parents with children on feeding tubes, please look into alternatives such as bone broth, organic smoothies, probiotic and fermeted vegetables and saurkraut juice. Although we are not doctors, and we recommend you seek appropriate care, our mothers have seen improvements with the foods and diets mentioned on our "Solutions" page.

Thank you to all our dedicated supporters and sponsors who donated to get these tests done.


Zen Honeycutt

http://www.momsacrossamerica.com/blog


Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/06/15 01:32 AM

Top 10 Legal Victories for the Food Movement in 2014

http://www.eatdrinkpolitics.com/2015/01/...vement-in-2014/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/06/15 05:54 PM

The Alarming Truths About Genetically Modified Foods

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FkY8tKS1uo
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/06/15 06:34 PM

Beth Hoffman, 8/26/13

So the question is why? Why am I part of a huge, and growing, group not willing to believe the “facts” (according to its proponents) about the benefits of genetic modification?

The basic answer is simple: trust.

Science has a credibility problem. It has for too long been used to distort food and twist the natural into long lasting Twinkies and nutritionally void Lunchables. Tobacco was good for us, we were told, and DDT was fine to spray on our fields. Food dyes are all still considered safe for our kids to eat, and “natural” foods, we are made to believe, are made of naturally occurring ingredients.

In all cases we have been misled, and today it is not “false fears” that has bred skeptical consumers, it is experience.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bethhoffman/2013/08/26/why-genetically-modifying-food-is-a-bad-idea/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/07/15 06:47 AM

The Benefits of Genetically Modified Food Crops
While genetically modified crops have come under much skepticism, GMOs have the potential to benefit food production, world health, the environment, and the economy.
by Andy Luttrell


GM Crops Benefit Global Health and EnvironmentGenetically modified (GM) crops have made a tremendous positive impact on the world. A 2004 article titled “GM crops: The global economic and environmental impact—the first nine years 1996-2004,” published in the Journal of Agrobiotechnology Management & Economics by Graham Brookes and Peter Barfoot reports that GM technology has had considerable economic and environmental effects between 1996 and 2004, bringing $27 billion directly to farms, reducing pesticide use by 172 million kg (resulting in a 14% reduction in pesticide-associated environmental footprint), and reducing greenhouse gas emissions by over 10 billion kg (as much as removing five million cars from the earth for a year).
This data was only based on the first nine years of widespread GM crop growth; the technology shows even greater promise as more research is conducted and implemented. “GM crops can contribute substantial progress in improving agriculture, in parallel to the (usually slow) changes at the sociopolitical level,” says a 2003 Nuffield Council on Bioethics report titled “The use of genetically modified crops in developing countries: A follow-up discussion paper.” “There is an ethical obligation to explore these potential benefits responsibly, in order to contribute to the reduction of poverty, and to improve food security and profitable agriculture in developing countries.”

How Genetically Modified Crops Benefit Crop Growth
As demonstrated by GMO-pioneer Norman Borlaug ("Norman Borlaug," The Nobel Foundation, Nobelprize.org), crops can be modified to facilitate their growth in less-than-ideal circumstances. A particular concern among small-scale farmers in developing countries, but also among large-scale farmers, is the loss of crops to insect pests. One way to combat this problem is to drench fields with pesticides, but this behavior can have negative health effects on farmers, the environment, and the health of consumers.

Instead, biotechnology can be used to increase yields via pest-resistant crops, according to Matin Qaim and David Zilberman’s 2003 paper “Yield effects of genetically modified crops in developing countries” in the journal Science. For example, in Africa (and Kenya, particularly), the sweet potato serves as an important subsistence crop, but viruses and weevils can dramatically decrease output by up to 80%. The Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, however, has developed a genetically modified sweet potato that can increase crop yields by 18-25%.

Biotechnology can also generate crops with genes that resist damage due to unexpected frost and long periods of drought. These GM crops will allow more food to be produced per plot of land, and in regions that suffer from a lack of arable land, these crops will provide food where there once was not.

Economic Benefits of Genetically Modified Crops
Use of genetically altered foods can have a positive effect on the economy, especially in less developed countries. Already, implementation of GM crops has led to economic gains in South Africa, according to the 2006 Journal of Development Studies article “The economic impact of genetically modified cotton on South African smallholders” by Richard Bennett, Stephen Morse, and Yousouf Ismael.

The GM sweet potatoes mentioned earlier have been predicted to increase farmer income by up to 30% for virus-resistant potatoes and up to 40% for weevil-resistant potatoes. Because GM crops require fewer pesticides, farmers can save money on both the costs of pesticides and on the labor necessary to administer the treatments. This, combined with higher output, allow the farmer to profit more from his or her product.

How Genetically Modified Plants Benefit the Environment
While GM crops’ reduced reliance on pesticides has shown both agricultural and economic benefits, it also has environmental benefits. The United States Department of Agriculture reports in the 2000 document “Genetically engineered crops: Has adoption reduced pesticide use?” that from 1997 to 1998, farmers used 8.2 million fewer pounds of active pesticide ingredients on corn, cotton, and soybeans. This reduction corresponded with an increasing adoption of GM crops, marking the potential for this technology to reduce pest-control chemicals released into the environment. In fact, while not necessarily related to food-related biotechnology, some GM plants have been developed to take care of heavy metal pollution in contaminated soil.

The Effect of Genetically Modified Food on Global Nutrition
Given the prevalence of malnutrition throughout the world, the ability to increase the nutritional content of available foods would have dramatic implications. An important example is vitamin A deficiency (VAD). Vitamin A is vital to reproduction, immune system functioning, and vision, but Dr. Nilva Egana, in the 2003 Journal of Nutrition & Environmental Medicine article “Vitamin A Deficiency and Golden Rice” notes that every year, “approximately a quarter of a million children in Southeast Asia go blind because of VAD and many more become susceptible to infectious diseases such as measles.”

In response to this problem, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Institute for Plant Sciences developed “golden rice,” a strain of rice with a higher amount of vitamin A that could be given to countries suffering from malnutrition. While some critics note that the distribution of golden rice will not solve global malnutrition by itself, the potential for GM crops to promote better nutrition in poor countries warrants further research.

How Genetic Engineering Benefits World Health
Finally, biotechnology can allow people to receive crucial medicines and vaccines that are difficult to distribute. By putting vaccines into food products, organizations can more easily transport and administer them to people in need. For example, a June 4, 2001 Scientific American piece by Kate Wong, titled “Souped-up Spuds Show Promise for Edible Vaccines,” describes the work of researchers who have developed a transgenic potato that has immunized rats against both rotavirus and E. coli, two potentially deadly stomach diseases. This research demonstrates the potential for GM food to carry vaccines against infections by both bacteria and viruses.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/07/15 06:39 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 02:34 AM

This article was posted TODAY by the Institute of Science in Society. The study finds that gmos are harmful to health.

They advise to take immediate action to BAN GMOs from homes and local communities.

"To conclude

GMOs are once again found to be deleterious for health in a feeding trial that last no longer than 90 days. And within that time, the most widespread piece of transgenic DNA found in the GM diet, the CaMV 35S promoter, was found transferred horizontally into the animals’ tissues at high frequencies. The CaMV 35S promoter is not the only hazardous piece of transgenic DNA, there are similar aggressive promoters designed to make genes express out of context, as well as genes coding for antibiotics and other dangerous functions, together with numerous recombination hotspots that enhance horizontal gene transfer; all of which contribute to making all GMOs unsafe. That is indeed the conclusion from research carried out by scientists independent of the industry up to now, which fully corroborates what farmers have been witnessing in their livestock and doctors in their patients for years [14]. People need to take immediate action to ban GMOs from their own home and local communities. Governments should recall all GMOs from the market. And companies and regulators should face prosecution for causing damages to health and criminal negligence."

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/CaMV_35S_Promoter_in_GM_Feed_that_Sickened_Rats.php#.VK2TuoN2rtY.facebook
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 02:50 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAMlir8oprw

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 04:21 AM

Russian President Putin Signs GMO Labeling Liability Law

Posted on Jan 3 2015 - 2:17pm by Sustainable Pulse

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/01/03/r...w/#.VK5ZtI0tH3i
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 05:38 AM

2000+ Reasons Why GMOs Are Safe To Eat And Environmentally Sustainable
Comment Now Follow Comments

A popular weapon used by those critical of agricultural biotechnology is to claim that there has been little to no evaluation of the safety of GM crops and there is no scientific consensus on this issue. Those claims are simply not true.

NOTE: This piece was co-written with a writer at the Genetic Literacy Project, JoAnna Wendel.

**********

“The science just hasn’t been done.”

- Charles Benbrook, organic researcher, Washington State University.

“There is no credible evidence that GMO foods are safe to eat.”

- David Schubert, Salk Institute of Biological Studies

“[The] research [on GMOs] is scant…. Whether they’re killing us slowly— contributing to long-term, chronic maladies—remains anyone’s guess.”

- Tom Philpott, Mother Jones

“Genetically modified (GM) foods should be a concern for those who suffer from food allergies because they are not tested….”

- Organic Consumers Association

The claim that genetically engineered crops are ‘understudied’—the meme represented in the quotes highlighted above—has become a staple of opponents of crop biotechnology, especially activist journalists. Anti-GMO campaigners, including many organic supporters, assert time and again that genetically modified crops have not been safety tested or that the research done to date on the health or environmental impact of GMOs has “all” been done by the companies that produce the seeds. Therefore, they claim, consumers are taking a ‘leap of faith’ in concluding that they face no harm from consuming foods made with genetically modified ingredients.

That is false.

Every major international science body in the world has reviewed multiple independent studies—in some cases numbering in the hundreds—in coming to the consensus conclusion that GMO crops are as safe or safer than conventional or organic foods. But until now, the magnitude of the research on crop biotechnology has never been cataloged. In response to what they believed was an information gap, a team of Italian scientists summarized 1783 studies about the safety and environmental impacts of GMO foods—a staggering number.


The researchers couldn’t find a single credible example demonstrating that GM foods pose any harm to humans or animals. “The scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazards directly connected with the use of genetically engineered crops,” the scientists concluded.

The research review, published in Critical Reviews in Biotechnology in September, spanned only the last decade—from 2002 to 2012—which represents only about a third of the lifetime of GM technology.

“Our goal was to create a single document where interested people of all levels of expertise can get an overview on what has been done by scientists regarding GE crop safety,” lead researcher Alessandro Nicolia, applied biologist at the University of Perugia, told Real Clear Science. “We tried to give a balanced view informing about what has been debated, the conclusions reached so far, and emerging issues.”

The conclusions are also striking because European governments, Italy in particular, have not been as embracing of genetically modified crops as has North and South America, although the consensus of European scientists has been generally positive.

The Italian review not only compiled independent research on GMOs over the last ten years but also summarizes findings in the different categories of GM research: general literature, environmental impact, safety of consumption and traceability.

The “general literature” category of studies largely reveals the differences between the US, EU and other countries when it comes to regulating GM crops. Due to lack of uniform regulatory practices and the rise of non-scientific rhetoric, Nicolia and his colleagues report, concern about GMOs has been greatly exaggerated.

Environmental impact studies are predominant in the body of GM research, making up 68% of the 1,783 studies. These studies investigated environmental impact on the crop-level, farm-level and landscape-level. Nicolia and his team found “little to no evidence” that GM crops have a negative environmental impact on their surroundings.

One of the fastest growing areas of research is in gene flow, the potential for genes from GM crops to be found—“contaminate” in the parlance of activists—in non-GM crops in neighboring fields. Nicolia and his colleagues report that this has been observed, and scientists have been studying ways to reduce this risk with different strategies such as isolation distances and post-harvest practices. The review notes that gene flow is not unique to GM technology and is commonly seen in wild plants and non-GM crops. While gene flow could certainly benefit from more research, Nicolia and his colleagues suggest, the public’s aversion to field trials discourages many scientists, especially in the EU.


In the food and feeding category, the team found no evidence that approved GMOs introduce any unique allergens or toxins into the food supply. All GM crops are tested against a database of all known allergens before commercialization and any crop found containing new allergens is not approved or marketed.

The researchers also address the safety of transcribed RNA from transgenic DNA. Are scientists fiddling with the ‘natural order’ of life? In fact, humans consume between 0.1 and 1 gram of DNA per day, from both GM and non-GM ingredients. This DNA is generally degraded by food processing, and any surviving DNA is then subsequently degraded in the digestive system. No evidence was found that DNA absorbed through the GI tract could be integrated into human cells—a popular anti-GMO criticism.

These 1783 studies are expected to be merged into the public database known as GENERA (Genetic Engineering Risk Atlas) being built by Biofortified, an independent non-profit website. Officially launched in 2012, GENERA includes peer-reviewed journal articles from different aspects of GM research, including basic genetics, feeding studies, environmental impact and nutritional impact. GENERA has more than 650 studies listed so far, many of which also show up in the new database. When merged, there should be well over 2000 GMO related studies, a sizable percentage—as many as 1000—that have been independently executed by independent scientists.

In short, genetically modified foods are among the most extensively studied scientific subjects in history. This year celebrates the 30th anniversary of GM technology, and the paper’s conclusion is unequivocal: there is no credible evidence that GMOs pose any unique threat to the environment or the public’s health. The reason for the public’s distrust of GMOs lies in psychology, politics and false debates.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 05:38 AM

http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Nicolia-20131.pdf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 05:20 PM

US GOV'T & MONSANTO BEHIND EXPONTENTIAL RISE IN AUTISM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9fr3f5pFEQ
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 05:56 PM

Thurston County, Washington Bans Neonics from County-Managed Lands

Beyond Pesticides, January 8, 2015

At the close of 2014, Thurston County in Washington State became the first county government to ban the use of neonicotinoid insecticides on county-owned and managed lands. The ban comes in the form of an amended pest and vegetation policy and was passed by County Commissioners by a 3-0 vote in favor of the amendment. According to The Olympian, the ban will impact 77 acres of county facilities, 2,646 acres of parks, 47.1 miles of trails, and one mile of right-of-way landscape.

Commissioners instituted the ban because of concerns over the pesticides effects on pollinators. Neonicotinoids (“neonics”) are a relatively new class of insecticides that share a common mode of thurston countyaction that affect the central nervous system of insects, resulting in paralysis and death. They include imidacloprid, acetamiprid, clothianidin, dinotefuran, nithiazine, thiacloprid and thiamethoxam. Recent scientific research has uncovered many uncertainties and new information on neonic-induced adverse impacts with regard to the environmental fate and sublethal exposure on foraging behavior of pollinators.

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=14778
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 06:01 PM

GMO-Free Food Sales Explode Amid Public Awareness

January 5, 2015

This ought to give Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta, and the huge food corporations a run for their suicide-seed money: A staggering 80% of consumers sought out non-GMO products in their survey. The non-GMO issue has emerged as a consumer hot-button.

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/gmo-free-food-sales-explode-amid-public-awareness/#ixzz3OHHO13J5
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 06:04 PM

Anti-GMO Petition Receives 59,742,753 Signatures

January 6, 2015

It isn’t a small minority anymore asking our regulators to limit biotech’s far-reaching arm. There is now an open letter endorsed by more than 59 million people asking both US and UK officials to be more prudent in questioning the hazards of genetically modified crops.

The open letter is signed by celebrities, scientists, farmers, academics in various fields, business tycoons, and every day people like you and me. It’s called the letter from America, but it is getting global attention. No longer can Americans be called sheeple. We are clearly voicing or disdain for GM crops in ever growing numbers, and our eyes are wide open.

One high-profile signatory, actress Susan Sarandon says:

“We’ve had GMOs in the US for nearly 20 years. Instead of bringing certainty and security they have raised more and more worrying questions about their effectiveness, their necessity, and even their safety. Polls show that the majority of US citizens – and in fact citizens everywhere – either want them labelled or taken out of the food system altogether. It’s important to keep pressing our elected representatives to act in accordance with this strong public mandate.”


Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/anti-gmo-petition-receives-59742753-signatures/#ixzz3OHHuxOIf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/08/15 06:13 PM

Thom Hartmann

Jan. 8, 2015

Why Half Of All Children Could Be Autistic by 2025

http://www.thomhartmann.com/bigpicture/why-half-all-children-could-be-autistic-2025
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/09/15 06:09 AM

Arguments in Favour of Genetically-Modified Crops

Harvard Website
Ben Miflin

Genetic modification (GM) of crops, like any other new technology, should be viewed in the light of what has gone before. Mankind has been manipulating the genetics of crops for around 10,000 years. Wheat, the world's major crop, is a hybrid of different species. It probably arose from a rare natural occurrence but has subsequently been maintained artificially.

The modern (non-GM) wheat is unable to exist in the wild because it cannot disperse its seed. Furthermore, plant breeders have spliced in pieces of chromosomes from several other species. The crop has been spread from a small fertile crescent in the middle east to nearly every country in the world. Much experience has been gained in this evolution that is relevant to GM crops. The new GM technology allows genes to be added more precisely than before and their effects to be studied more carefully. However, because it also allows almost any source of genes to be used it is an extremely powerful technology that has to be treated with care and respect.

GM technology is the only technology to be regulated from its inception, before any mishaps had occurred. Researchers who developed the technology set up a series of voluntary regulations in 1974 which have generally become officially incorporated by governments throughout the world. GM crops have been extensively tested in hundreds of thousands of field tests. Foods from these crops have to pass much more rigorous regulations than from conventionally bred crops.

Over the last 12 years between 50-100 million euros have been spent by the EU on bio-safety research. GM technology is used widely in the production of foods (e.g. the majority of cheese in the UK and US is made with an enzyme that is the product of GM technology) and medicines (e.g. the production of human growth hormone by GM methods removed the major cause of CJD). GM crops have been grown on many millions of acres since 1966 in North and South America and Asia. There are no proven examples of GM products adding risks. In contrast, there are many examples of the technology reducing risks. GM technology is not safe - nothing is - but it has a very effective record.

Critics claim that GMOs may increase use of chemical pesticides and increase the profits of agribusiness. Pigs might fly. It is a matter of fact that GM crops have drastically cut the use of such pesticides. GM cotton, containing a built in insecticide, uses 50% less chemical insecticides. In 1998 around 1000 tonnes less insecticide was used in the US cotton belt than before the introduction of GM cotton. That insecticide was mainly sprayed from planes. Only a small percentage reached its target. The rest drifted into the wider environment killing susceptible insects, whether pests or not. GM cotton only kills those insects that feed on the crop.

Independent studies on commercially grown herbicide-tolerant GM crops in North America have shown up to 50% reduction in herbicide use by farmers. Economic analyses suggest these commercial crops have led to a transfer of value from the agrochemical industry around half of which has gone to the farmer. The overall value (chemicals plus seeds) retained in the multinational agricultural supply industry has therefore gone down.

With this record of proven environmental benefit in practice, I find it hard to explain why there is such fierce opposition to the technology. Why are Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace trying to block technology that is decreasing pesticide use? I appreciate that some people have an intrinsic dislike of such powerful manipulation of genetics.

I also think the introduction of the GM soya products into Europe will go down in the marketing text books as a classic example of how not to launch a product. This was a shame after Zeneca's excellent launch of the GM tomato paste. But GM technology is not the real target but rather the weapon to use against multinationals and global corporations. It is effective because it can be used to stir emotions - 'Frankenstein Foods' might be nonsense but it is an eye-catching, gut-wrenching headline.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/09/15 06:39 AM

More hogwash. You just love falling for that corporate marketing, don't you.

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Thom Hartmann

Jan. 8, 2015

Why Half Of All Children Could Be Autistic by 2025

http://www.thomhartmann.com/bigpicture/why-half-all-children-could-be-autistic-2025


http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/20...cientists-view/

Will my child be born autistic if I eat GMOs? A scientist’s view
Layla Katiraee | January 5, 2015 | Genetic Literacy Project
218616
autism
Cyberspace has been awash with claims over the past two weeks that glyphosate, an herbicide used with some genetically modified crops, causes autism. “Half of All Children Will Be Autistic by 2025, Warns Senior Research Scientist at MIT,” blared a headlined article on a natural products website that was shared by more than 100,000 people. Other sites had similarly headlined articles.

Similar near hysterical claims appear like clockwork every few months on the Internet, promoted by natural products and supplement sites working in concert with anti-GMO activists. The alleged link between autism and GM foods is heavily promoted by notorious alternative medicine and natural products advocates, such as Dr. Joseph Mercola, as well as by Jeffrey Smith, the controversial founder of the anti-GMO one-man Institute for Responsible Technology. Mercola even promotes a Smith video headlined: “Monsanto’s Roundup Herbicide May Be Most Important Factor in Development of Autism and Other Chronic Disease”.

[Editors’ suggested reading: Mother’s science-based view: Organics and Whole Foods are ‘scam of the decade’]

Is there any truth to the claims of a GMO-glyphosate-autism link?

The autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is characterized by “difficulties in social interaction, verbal and nonverbal communication and repetitive behaviors”. There is a broad range in the severity of these symptoms, which is why the term “spectrum” is used in the definition of the disorder. It is hypothesized that there are multiple causes for ASD, including genetic, epigenetic and environmental factors. The heritability of autism has been studied in twins and historical data suggest 80-90 percent values, while more recent data using different ascertainment criteria suggest roughly 50 percent heritability.

A study in 2011 found that the recurrence risk of autism is ~19 percent in infants if an older sibling is autistic, with a roughly three-fold increase in risk if the infant is male and a two-fold increase in risk if there is more than one older sibling with autism. A recent review highlighted that a genetic cause can be elucidated in 10-30 percent of cases of ASD depending on the technology used and cohort examined, and that exome and whole genome sequencing of ASD patients has led to the discovery that there are “hundreds of genes” involved in the disorder.

However, genetics does not account for all cases of autism and many studies have focused on identifying non-genetic causes of ASD. Environmental risk factors that have been associated with ASD include parental age, pre- and perinatal complications (particularly respiratory distress), air pollution, maternal use of valproate and maternal exposure to pesticides, among others. It is this last factor that is being exploited by Mercola and Smith to fuel their campaign against genetically modified foods.

I do not use the word “exploit” lightly, but can find no better term. The link between autism and GMOs is most often restricted to the criticism of glyphosate-use. Glyphosate, which is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s RoundUp, is used on genetically modified crops that are made to resist this herbicide. However, whether you are searching for a link between autism and GMOs or autism and glyphosate, your findings can be summarized in one brief sentence: “there is no data that I could find”.

Throughout the course of doing research for this piece, I contacted several research scientists including my former lab, which is now one of Canada’s leading autism research laboratories and part of a project that is sequencing the genomes of 10,000 ASD patients (note that I am not an ASD research scientist). My request for an opinion on the topic was passed from one research scientist to the next and across the board, I got the same message: “there is no evidence-based data we are aware of.” That is not to say that a link does not exist or may not be identified in the future, but as I write this article, there is no credible research linking GMOs to autism.

However, the memes and websites preying on the fears of parents and the vulnerabilities of those with autistic children abound, which is why I consider this to be exploitation of the worst sort. The recent spate of articles and Mercola’s website feature interviews or talks by Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a Massachusetts of Technology computer scientist and electrical engineer who has written about autism and glyphosate. Seneff, whose previous work include a thoroughly lambasted paper in a low tier journal claiming a “link” between autism and vaccines, also wrote a paper in 2013 in a similar marginal journal outlining a hypothetical link between glyphosate and multiple disorders, including “gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimer’s disease.”

Neither paper included any novel research. But her work was legitimized by Carey Gillam, a reporter for Reuters, whose news story was headlined “Roundup linked to health dangers”.

Seneff’s latest claim, eagerly promoted by anti-GMO alternative medicine sites, is that half of the US childhood population will be born autistic within 10 years as a result of GMO use:

At a conference last Thursday, in a special panel discussion about GMOs, she took the audience by surprise when she declared, “At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.” She noted that the side effects of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity, and presented data showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the use of Roundup on crops (and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds) with rising rates of autism. Children with autism have biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder.

A fellow panelist reported that after Seneff’s presentation, “All of the 70 or so people in attendance were squirming, likely because they now had serious misgivings about serving their kids, or themselves, anything with corn or soy, which are nearly all genetically modified and thus tainted with Roundup and its glyphosate.”

Multiple reviewers, including most recently David Gorski, a surgical oncologist and well known science blogger, have noted the incoherent nature of Seneff’s claims and papers and the pay-for-play nature of the publishing journal. Seneff hypothesized that glyphosate causes nutritional deficiencies and systemic toxicity, primarily by impacting the bacteria in the gut, yet fails to provide any evidence supporting her hypothesis.

There have been very few studies that have specifically examined glyphosate and ASD. In 2007, one study examined maternal exposure to pesticides during gestation and ASD among children in the California Central Valley. The pesticides selected for analysis were based on the toxicological and physical properties of the compound, as well as substances that were of community concern. The final list of pesticides included in the analysis lists glyphosate, yet fails to find association between maternal exposure to the chemical and ASD.

Pesticide use is recorded in the United States and there are multiple databases that house this information, ranging from the amount of pesticide used to the exposure that handlers have experienced. As such, it stands to reason that if glyphosate were associated with autism, there would be more instances of ASD in regions of the U.S. where glyphosate use is high. Geographic clusters of ASD cases do exist in the U.S. (see here and here for example studies), but the analysis of these clusters has not identified glyphosate exposure as a possible cause, despite the availability of data.

The onus is on the researcher to disprove the null hypothesis, i.e. to prove that something exists or that there is a link. Until that point in time, there is no link. Seneff points to glyphosate as the cause of autism based on her observation that glyphosate use has increased while the rate of autism has increased in the same time period. Seneff states, “I’ve watched the rate of autism skyrocket in the last five years. It’s extremely scary. One in 150, one in 100, one in 88, and the most recent numbers from March 2013, one in 50… You do the math… 20 years from now every other boy in this country will be diagnosed on the autism spectrum.”

Yet the Center for Disease Control and Prevention has stated that “the recent prevalence increase [of ASD] is likely attributable to extrinsic factors such as improved awareness and recognition and changes in diagnostic practice or service availability”. This is supported by the fact that recent statistics have noted an increase in the incidence of autism in specific populations and racial backgrounds, suggesting increasing awareness in such groups. But for the sake of argument, let’s acknowledge that there has been an increase in the occurrence of autism. The link is a classic case of association with no causation.

There’s a plethora of items whose prevalence or use has increased during the past 20 years: the number of electronics we own, the number of pedicures women get, the amount of coffee we drink, etc, and each would make an equally convincing graph if their rate was compared to the incidence of ASD over time. This is not to say that glyphosate should not be studied; yet until a link is identified, its association with ASD is equivalent to that of eating organic food, whose salves have also risen in tandem with the increase in incidences of autism.

ScreenHunter_04 Jan. 07 23.11

GMOInside.org, an organization that promotes the labeling of GM ingredients, also has an article promoting the autism-GMO link on its site. The article shares anecdotal stories about the commonality of gastrointestinal symptoms between autistic patients and GMO-fed animals. Gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with ASD are well documented and recent funding grants will infuse hundreds of thousands of dollars to better understand this relationship. But as it stands today, “there is no data”.

I’ve searched publication databases to find a scientific article providing evidence for gastrointestinal symptoms associated with GMOs and was unable to find even one. Additionally, glyphosate is not used exclusively on GMOs: it is used for a wide-range of different applications including “weed control in vineyards, olive groves, fruit orchards, grass pastures, forestry, parks, gardens and underwater usage in rivers and lakes”. In fact, it could not be avoided through a GMO labeling law or ban.

There are those who will read this article and will conclude that research has not been done examining the link between autism and GMOs because corporate interests have silenced researchers, that corporations paid off scientists or that universities threatened to cut off funding. However, I think that there are very few scientists who wouldn’t give their life savings and the naming rights for their first born for the opportunity to identify an environmental cause for autism. Monsanto, Dow Agro, and Syngenta combined aren’t big enough to silence that. The reason it hasn’t been examined is far simpler: there is no likely connection based on the known comparatively benign toxic profile of glyphosate and most researchers do not want to waste their time and effort and preciously limited support dollars on a project that would most likely find no association with ASD.

Although the world of science has tried to study the emotional toll that ASD takes on families, I think that there’s nothing that could fully describe the full range of emotions that parents experience when their child is diagnosed with ASD. I know I’m lucky to be the parent of a healthy and rambunctious toddler, and I feel arrogant even imagining myself in the shoes of families with ASD. But there is one thing that I know that I share with all parents: we are equally concerned about the health and well-being of our children.

I wrote this article more harshly than I generally would and condemned scientists for poor research more strongly than I generally would because they have made conclusions where none are to be made and would have us believe facts where none exist by exploiting the concern we have for our children. So rather than listening to the advice of Mercola, Seneff or Smith, consult your pediatrician or GP and have them address any concerns that you may have about your family’s diet.

Note: This piece, in large measure, was originally posted on May 9, 2014
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/09/15 05:06 PM

The #1 Reason You Must Read Ingredient Lists: The FDA Admits They Can’t Do Their Job

The FDA is asleep at the wheel and the Food Industry is in charge.

By Food Babe

While there are some food additives that the FDA has approved before they hit the shelves, this has proven to be a burdensome process. The FDA claims that so as not to waste government resources, they will just let the manufacturer decide whether an ingredient is safe to eat or not.

That’s right – all an ingredient manufacturer has to do is hire their own experts to claim under “reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful under the intended conditions of use” and the manufacturer may deem it as “GRAS”, which stands for “Generally Recognized as Safe”. This is the green light to start adding it to food products.

http://foodbabe.com/2015/01/06/read-ingredient-lists/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/09/15 06:47 PM

Mom Receives Glyphosate Task Force Studies on Glyphosate Submitted to the EPA

Posted by Zen Honeycutt 1630.20GS on December 02, 2014

Six months ago today, June 1, a few days after our meeting with the EPA, I requested per my right as a US citizen, by way of the Freedom of Information Act, to receive copies of all of the documents submitted to the EPA regarding glyphosate. Never in my life did I imagine I would be asking for potentially thousands of pages of scientific studies about a toxic chemical. I loved science when I was in sixth grade, even imagined being one someday. But I did not think I was good at math, all the rote learning without understanding was more condescending than the looks my math teacher gave me, so I dismissed the possibility of being a scientist and headed down a more artistic path as a designer.

I have a creative background, but I could not make up what I am about to share with you.

It is incredible that any scientist or non scientist could look at this information think glyphosate safe.

I received 9 files, ranging from 67-293 pages. Most were the actual studies, two were assesments of other studies. I do not believe I received all of the studies submitted to the EPA, and will be asking for the full set of documents. What I did receive however, in my opinion, is reason enough not to re register glyphosate.

http://www.momsacrossamerica.com/glyphosate_task_force_studies_on_glyphosate_submitted_to_the_epa
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/09/15 11:05 PM

Food Industry Poisoning Consumers with Trillions of Nanoparticles

January 1, 2015

Would you like a side of toxic nanoparticles with that?


http://massreport.com/food-industry-pois...h.5PmPGD4R.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/09/15 11:10 PM

Seedy Big Agriculture, Big Government Team Up Against Gardeners

December 30, 2014

What’s so threatening about “seed libraries”?

Gardeners and other traditional traders in the “locally grown” food market are sharing seeds. Not exactly formidable competition to larger corporations like Monsanto, this voluntary exchange is an alternative. That seems to be enough to make “seed libraries” illegal in some states. Big government strikes again!

http://www.voicesofliberty.com/article/s...inst-gardeners/


Will there be a standoff? Will anyone be arrested, fined, or feel the force of the state over saving and trading seeds?

http://theantimedia.org/department-agric...agro-terrorism/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/15/15 04:02 AM

Are the drug companies buying your doctor?


http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/15/15 07:03 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Are the drug companies buying your doctor?


http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/


A simple solution, get rid of the government price cap on drugs.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/15/15 10:48 PM

The life and work of biologist Dr. Tyrone B. Hayes, PhD, reads like the script of a Hollywood blockbuster: Scientist whistleblower takes on global agribusiness responsible for environmental havoc; a web of lies, corporate shenanigans, and mystery ensues. So it’s somehow fitting that Oscar-winning director Jonathan Demme took on Hayes’ story for a segment in the Amazon Original TV series pilot, "The New Yorker Presents."

Tyrone Hayes on the misfortune of frogs, crooked science and why we should shun GMOs

January 15, 2015

http://www.treehugger.com/sustainable-ag...-shun-gmos.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/15/15 11:06 PM

From 2011 but still going on today.

This Company Spends Over $5M a Year to Lobby U.S. Government to Make You Sick

July 07, 2011

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA)—Monsanto’s Evil Twin—is pulling out all the stops to keep you in the dark about what’s in your food. For nearly two decades, Monsanto and corporate agribusiness have exercised near-dictatorial control over American agriculture.

Finally public opinion around the biotech industry's contamination of our food supply and destruction of our environment has reached the tipping point. We're fighting back.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...e-you-sick.aspx
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/15/15 11:11 PM

Ukraine agreed to a Monsanto "Land Grab" to Get a 17B Loan From the IMF

January 11, 2015

"Make no mistake that what is happening in the Ukraine now is deeply tied to the interests of Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, and other big players in the poison food game."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-agr...und-imf/5424058
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/15/15 11:15 PM

Here we go, another doctor speaking out...

Streamed live on Jan 12, 2015

Dr. Buckley will review exactly how the destruction of our gut bacteria from glyphosate can lead to inflammation in the brain and body, leading to the sky rocketing illnesses we are seeing in America today. Glyphosate is sprayed in GMO food and on non orgnaic food as a drying agent before harvest. It does not dry, wash or cook off and it has been found in water, air, rain, urine, breast milk and pediatric feeding tube liquid.

36 minutes, be patient. Brought to you by Moms Across America

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEKj_UxBq8g&noredirect=1
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/15/15 11:18 PM

Dangerous Loophole in Law Permits Food Companies to Market Novel Chemicals Without Safety Disclosures

December 17, 2014

Dr. Mercola


The fact that processed foods contain added ingredients that aren't necessarily food isn't secret knowledge. A simple read-through of just about any processed food label will tip you off to this fact with its listing of impossible-to-pronounce chemicals.

Many of these additives have questionable safety profiles, or none at all, since only a small percentage has ever been properly tested. This situation has become the norm courtesy of a regulatory system that favors industry profitability over public health and safety. This too is a well-known fact by many.

What may come as a complete shock, however, is that companies are allowed to add chemicals to their food without disclosing what they are to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or having to prove their safety before putting them into use.

All they have to do is have their expert evaluate it on their terms. There is no independent third party objective evaluation. This is reprehensibly irresponsible on the part of governmental agencies that are assigned the task of looking out for our health. According to EcoWatch

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...ure_facebookdoc
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/15/15 11:20 PM

Dr. Don Huber: GMOs and Glyphosate and Their Threat to Humanity

April 8, 2014

“We’ve pretty much sacrificed an entire generation of children. The longer we go, the more damage that is going to accumulate.”

http://foodintegritynow.org/2014/04/08/dr-don-huber-gmos-glyphosate-threat-humanity/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/15/15 11:23 PM

3 Companies Using GMOs in Baby Formula

Similac
Enfamil
Gerber Good Start

http://www.healthy-holistic-living.com/3-companies-using-gmos-in-baby-formula.html?t=ONGR#
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/16/15 09:41 PM

USDA Gives Monsanto the Green Light

By Sara Jennings in Blog Posts, Spilling the Beans Newsletter

January 16, 2015

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/posts/usda-gives-monsanto-the-green-light/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/16/15 09:59 PM

Communities enact bans on GMO crops


Written by Lisa Neff, Staff writer
Thursday, 15 January 2015 19:07

Two Oregon farmers are defending a local ordinance in federal court in a campaign to protect their harvests and create a zone free of genetically engineered crops.

http://www.wisconsingazette.com/trending-news/communities-enact-bans-on-gmo-crops.html
Posted by: DR. D

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/24/15 08:08 AM

More than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research,and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not more risky than conventional plant breeding technologies.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 12:41 AM

Bernie Sanders Goes After Monsanto-"People want to know what´s in the food they are eating!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay7LyzXkGG8
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 12:47 AM

Dr. Ray Seidler, Former Senior Scientists, EPA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw0bkRq8_aM&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 01:01 AM

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955666/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 01:03 AM

Monsanto’s RoundUp-Ready GMO Grass About to Be Approved and Fed to Cattle

By Christina Sarich

Global Research, September 19, 2014

The Scotts ‘Miracle-Gro’ Company which created genetically modified RoundUp-Ready Kentucky Bluegrass has announced that it will conduct field trials at the homes of Scotts’ employees. What’s more, they can do so without any government oversight because there are no laws that prohibit or limit the planting of GMO grass.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/monsantos-r...-cattle/5403031
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 01:10 AM

Poison Spring: The Secret History of Pollution and The EPA

August 20, 2014 by Carol Grieve

“When you allow chemical companies to do its own testing you are in trouble. But it is well thought out by the industry. They said, how can we take chemicals that are related to chemical warfare and allow them in our agriculture? We have to create an agency that allows the appearance of safety.”

http://foodintegritynow.org/2014/08/20/poison-spring-secret-history-pollution-epa/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 01:14 AM

Scientists find multiple problems with GMOs

By Ramon J. Seidler Posted Apr. 13, 2014

As a lifelong scientist, I am deeply troubled to report that promises of patent enforcement by American agrichemical seed companies have prevented U.S. scientists from researching what some exclaim are "problems" associated with GMO crops. We will not know the facts as long as the seeds and plants that we, our children, pets and livestock consume are not made available for conducting long-term, controlled experiments.

Norwegian scientists recently detected Roundup in 10 of 10 farms using genetically engineered soybeans. We had to also learn from these Norwegian (not American) scientists that the nutritional composition of soybeans grown on 31 Ohio farms differed depending upon the type of farm management system employed. Soybeans harvested from organic farms had higher concentrations of protein and essential amino acids, and higher concentrations of two minerals, and no Roundup residues (Food Chem. 2014).

Now we know from the scientific literature that the same concentrations of Roundup residues in soybeans is sufficient in laboratory assays to: induce hormone disruptions during frog development (mixed-sex frogs); kill young trout and tadpoles; stop the growth of earthworms in soil; inhibit activities of beneficial soil and human gut bacteria; and stimulate the growth of human breast-cancer cells assayed under laboratory conditions.

http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20140413%2FOPINION%2F404130320%2F-1%2FNEWSMAP
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 01:15 AM

The Alarming Truths About Genetically Modified Foods

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FkY8tKS1uo
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 01:21 AM

Widespread Glyphosate Contamination in USA

08/10/14

The most comprehensive research to date on environmental glyphosate levels exposes the widespread contamination of soil and water in the US, as well as its water treatment system. Looking at a wide range of geographical locations, researchers from the US Geological Survey (USGS) analysed 3 732 water and sediment samples and 1 081 quality assurance samples collected between 2001 and 2010 from 38 states in the US and the district of Colombia. They found glyphosate in 39.4 % of samples (1 470 out of 3 732) and its metabolite AMPA (aminomethylphosphonic acid) in 55 % of samples [1]. Water samples included streams, groundwater, ditches and drains, large rivers, soil water, lakes, ponds and wetlands, precipitation, soil and sediment, and waste water treatment plants.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Widespread_Glyphosate_Contamination_in_US.php#.VDhWE9Mvwtg.facebook
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 01:32 AM

Scientifically Speaking: Expert Panel Discuss HR 4432, GMO Dicamba Crops and more

"secret studies"
"I'm not allowed to release the studies but I can comment on them"
"Monsanto knew in 1978 that glyphosate damages the kidney and they threw the data out"

Panelists:
Kathleen Hallal, moderator and mother of three boys
Dr. Don Huber, Professor Emeritus, Purdue University
Anthony Samsel, Research Scientist / Consultant
Howard Vlieger, Iowa Farmer and GMO Crop Expert
Dr. Stephanie Seneff, Senior Research Scientist
MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
Jack Olmsted, Producer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jB_Bwls6DM
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 02:32 AM

Genetically Modified (GM) Ingredients in Pet Foods: Dogs & Cats at Risk

By Dr. Michael W. Fox*

Dogs and cats, like the proverbial canaries down the mine shafts, have become our sentinels. They alert us to health hazards in the home-environments we share and in the products and by-products of the same agribusiness food industry that feeds most of us and them. In the mid 1990s I began to suspect diet may play a role in a “cluster” of health problems not seen nearly as often as when dogs and cats were being fed conventional corn and soy. Since that time I have formed the professional opinion that there is sufficient proof from evidence based medicine that dietary ingredients derived from GM crops are not safe for companion animals, and by extension, for human consumers either.

http://responsibletechnology.org/gmosinpetfood
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 01/27/15 02:42 AM

Jan 14 Jon B. Abrahamson

Letter to Monsanto’s Hugh Grant from former US Marine

I’ve read too many to count peer reviewed and published papers by Drs. Seralini, Huber, Kruger, Samsel, Seneff, Mason, Shiva, Ho, Carmen, Antoniou, and others. I also know what your new man at Elsevier did to Dr. Seralini’s 2 year study of NK-603 maize. I know all about your FDA rubber stamped studies and why they’re are only 3 months long. I’ve yet to see any Independent, long term, peer reviewed papers proving GMOs are safe, despite the fact there are close to 2000 peer reviewed and published papers saying they’re not.

http://farmwars.info/?p=13771
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 04:53 PM

Hello all.

I want to thank those of you who sent me a thank you message. I really appreciate it. It gives me the will to keep educating myself and you. I haven't posted in awhile because I haven't felt well. Read on. I have lots to share with you. I hope you will take the time to scan/read what is important/of interest to you.

On January 18th, I went to get some groceries at Cdga. Wegmans and I was hungry. I found an organic sandwich and organic chili on the snack bar, so I purchased it and ate it. By 8 p.m. I knew I had eaten something gmo or pesticide/herbicide sprayed.

Keep in mind that I have been off gmo food since January, 2013, with the exception of two restaurant meals (Applebees) in 2013 and two gmo baby formula tastes in 2013, two Trader Joe's products in 2014 (American flour (I've posted about this being contaminated) and pumpkin bread mix) in which I had pin and needle pains in my stomach and didn't feel good for almost a week.

The bloating and needle and pin pains started in my stomach and I immediately got out my natural medicines, lemon juice, Bragg's apple cider vinegar, cayenne pepper, green tea, coconut oil and started drinking.

By the middle of the night I was having pain in my intestines that at first felt like someone was stabbing me, then later on cutting me. The next day the headache started. The stomach and intestinal pain was on and off but the headache was constant and I spent most of the time in bed.

I won't bore you with the rest of the details, except to say that my natural meds (real food) worked.

The reason I wanted to tell you about this is because I want you to think for a minute. What happens when a new born baby starts life out with this stuff in their baby formula or from the mother's breast milk?


Glyphosate Testing Full Report: Findings in American Mothers’ Breast Milk, Urine and Water.

http://www.momsacrossamerica.com/glyphosate_testing_results
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 04:59 PM

Free Healthy Gut Summit

One of my heroes, Jeffrey Smith, will be speaking at this. He is the producer of Genetic Roulette and the head of the Institute for Responsible Technology.

Learn what your doctor won't tell you because if you are not sick, he or she's not making a boat load of money.


Jeffrey Smith speaks on February 11th in an in-depth interview on “GMOs: Their Impact on the Microbiome in Your Gut” as part of the Healthy Gut Summit. Jeffrey’s talk will include:

-GMOs: history, origin and why it all went wrong

-9 essential key crops to avoid

-2 main toxins lurking in GMOs that impact health and digestion

Discover how your digestive health is intimately linked to your immune, endocrine, circulatory and central nervous systems.

Watch one-on-one interviews with Jeffrey Smith and a host of over 32 other respected thought leaders and physicians as they each share fascinating new insights and research on how gut health impacts our most basic physiological processes–including how we think and behave.

You can learn all about the different ways your digestive tract works to establish a foundation for physical, mental and emotional wellbeing at the Healthy Gut Summit, free and online from February 9-16, 2015.

Use this link to register:

https://im177.isrefer.com/go/healthygutreg/JeffreySmithIRT/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 05:28 PM

Excerpts from the film, Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives

There are several excerpts. There is a short pause in between.

http://expandedconsciousness.com/2014/10/16/what-is-a-gmo-explained-in-1-minute/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 05:30 PM

Fyi.

http://www.drugwatch.com/recalls/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 05:45 PM

The Next Phase of Genetic Engineering: A Flood of New Crops Evading Environmental Regulation

By Doug Gurian-Sherman on January 27, 2015

You may have heard of the new genetically engineered Simplot potato. It was made with a new GE technology called RNAi (RNA interference), a technology for which many important gaps remain in our understanding.

http://civileats.com/2015/01/27/the-next...tal-regulation/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 05:55 PM

A must watch. Four parts.

Published on Nov 15, 2014

GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS, GLYPHOSATE AND THE DETERIORATION OF HEALTH IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Nancy L. Swanson 1, Andre Leu 2*, Jon Abrahamson 3 and Bradley Wallet 4

Panel Discussion Playlist: Watch complete 2+ hour online session
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=...

Panel:
Kathleen Hallal, Moderator
Dr. Stephanie Seneff, MIT Senior Research Scientist
Dr. Nancy Swanson, Retired United States Navy staff scientist, author
Anthony Samsel, Retired Science Consultant
Dr. Don M. Huber, Professor Emeritus, Purdue University
Jack Olmsted, Producer
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 05:58 PM

How To Use Apple Cider Vinegar As Medicine

One tablespoon of this stops a headache.

http://higherperspective.com/2014/10/acv.html?utm_source=RF

Bragg's website

http://www.bragg.com/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:03 PM

Mamavation

Wow. Just look at what french students get to eat in school.

It's amazing...compared to here.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10152612332728202&fref=nf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:05 PM

'Natural' on food labels is misleading

Consumer Reports is pushing to have the 'natural' claim banned

Published: August 2014

What is natural, and what does it mean on a food label? Right now it’s essentially meaningless. But it ends up misleading a great many consumers, according to a recent national survey of more than 1,000 Americans by the Consumer Reports National Research Center.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/08/natural-on-food-labels-is-misleading/index.htm
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:07 PM

Outrage over US secret approval of GM trees

January 30, 2015

There is widespread condemnation today of the US government’s decision to allow the first genetically engineered tree to be commercialised.

The GM loblolly pine has been legalised with no government or public oversight, with no assessment of its risks to the public or the environment, and without regard to overwhelming public opposition to GM trees.

http://beyond-gm.org/outrage-over-us-secret-approval-of-gm-trees/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:10 PM

Articles like this are good news. More and more people are buying organic. Vote with your dollar. Drive the "tipping point."

DuPont seed sales dip as pest gains resistance to GM corn

January 27, 2015

http://www.agrimoney.com/news/dupont-seed-sales-dip-as-pest-gains-resistance-to-gm-corn--7909.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:13 PM

Monsanto Patent revoked on Tomatoes

December 23, 2014

The European Patent Office revoked Monsanto’s patent on tomatoes this month because Monsanto only obtained the patent in the first place “based on a combination of fraud, abuse of patent law and biopiracy,”

http://www.dmlawfirm.com/monsanto-patent-revoked-tomatoes#.VMqSE326Iww.facebook
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:21 PM

Title 40: Protection of Environment

PART 180—TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES IN FOOD

Subpart C—Specific Tolerances

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID...64&rgn=div8
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:23 PM

FDA Admits That It Doesn’t Know What’s In Your Food

September 15, 2014

And in hundreds of cases, the FDA doesn’t even know of the existence of new additives, which can include chemical preservatives, flavorings and thickening agents, records and interviews show.

“We simply do not have the information to vouch for the safety of many of these chemicals,” said Michael Taylor, the FDA’s deputy commissioner for food.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/f...dfd1_story.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:28 PM

Hmm? 2012. So the docs are concerned. Why are they not advising us to NOT consume it? Answer: $$$$$$$

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

By Monica Eng Tribune reporter

June 19, 2012, 4:12 PM

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA's meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainm...0619-story.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:37 PM

GMOs, Monsanto’s RoundUp Found in Kellogg’s Froot Loops

All through independent lab testing

by Mike Barrett
Posted on January 30, 2015

Independent DNA lab testing has verified that 100% of the corn in Kellogg’s Froot Loops is genetically modified corn, containing DNA sequences known to be present in insecticide producing Bt and Roundup Ready corn. The soy also contained DNA sequences known to be present in Roundup Ready GMO soy. What’s more, tests documented the presence of glyphosate at 0.12 mg/kg, the main chemical ingredient of Monsanto’s best-selling Roundup weed killer.

http://naturalsociety.com/gmos-monsantos-roundup-found-kelloggs-froot-loops/#ixzz3R0zPspfQ
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:44 PM

Good read. My leader takes on Monsanto for me, you and America's children.

Full Account of Monsanto Shareholder Meeting Jan 30, 2015

Posted by Zen Honeycutt

February 01, 2015

The following account and conversations are conveyed to my best recollection without having listened to the recording. I will do so asap. Those who have listened to it and read my blog say my account is "very accurate".

Scientific studies can be found at www.momsacrossamerica.com/data

The sounds of the boisterous rally crowd faded behind me in the distance as I walked toward building A of Monsanto Headquarters in St. Louis Missouri for the shareholder meeting. The security stationed on the perimeter of the property, without a word between us, relayed my pending arrival to the headquarters, “Ms. Honeycutt approaching building A”. The staff inside also knew me by name and greeted me cordially. After a thorough security check and receiving my “Shareowner” sticker, I was escorted to a conference room where Lisa from SumofUs was also sitting. Why I was being sequestered in a room instead of being brought to the conference room? As if reading my mind, the security person explained that the conference room wasn’t ready yet. Still I thought it odd that I was not able to be in a hallway or near other shareholders.

Several minutes later, a woman walked in and said “I am Zen’s host”, looking right at me. I soon learned that “handler” would have been a better term for her. The staff were prepared. Around 12:50, we were joined by a few other shareholders, (apparently the room really was not ready). There was another “host” for Lisa who made sure to steer the conversation cheerily to where people are from.

Read the rest...

http://www.momsacrossamerica.com/full_ac..._source=yesmaam
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 06:59 PM

Recording of Monsanto shareholder meeting. It's about three hours.

http://edge.media-server.com/m/p/mojmtw5m

Donations needed.

Often, MAM needs transcription done and I'd like to be able to do this for them.

I'm in need of:

- digital transcription kit that includes the software, and

- a current word processing program.

Thanks.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 07:01 PM

Geneticist David Suzuki Says Humans “Are Part Of A Massive Experiment”

September 28, 2014

Another prominent public figure, Geneticist David Suzuki has been a long time advocate against GMOs, and has been speaking out about how they can be hazardous to human health as well as the environment. Below, I’ve provided a video example of Suzuki explaining why he feels the way he does about GMOs.

http://earthweareone.com/geneticist-david-suzuki-says-humans-are-part-of-a-massive-experiment/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 07:02 PM

What does Dr. Oz think of GMO’s?

http://www.gmofreebaby.com/2015/01/31/what-does-dr-oz-think-of-gmos/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 11:14 PM

GMO Free USA

GM foods neither safe nor needed, say genetic engineers. The second edition of GMO Myths and Truths, co-authored by genetic engineers Dr. John Fagan and Dr. Michael Antoniou and researcher Claire Robinson, is available as a free online download by the sustainability and science policy platform Earth Open Source (EOS).

“The GMO debate is far from being over, as some GMO proponents claim. Instead the evidence of risk and actual harm from GM foods and crops to health and the environment has grown in the two years since we brought out the first edition. The good news is that GMOs are not needed to feed the world. The report shows that there are far better ways of ensuring a safe and sustainable food supply.”
- Dr. John Fagan

http://earthopensource.org/index.php/reports/gmo-myths-and-truths
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 11:24 PM

January 21, 2015

Monsanto just gained approval of its new GE soybean and cotton varieties resistant to Monsanto's dicamba pesticide. This could mean a significant increase in pesticide use, unless the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) puts a strict limit in place.

Please tell the EPA: We’ve had enough! No more pesticides!

http://orgcns.org/1848NcD
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/06/15 11:35 PM

Soy Lecithin

Genetically Modified

One of the biggest problems associated with soy lecithin comes from the origin of the soy itself. The majority of soy sources in the world are now genetically modified (GM). Researchers have clearly identified GM foods as a threat to the environment, pollution of soils and a long-term threat to human health with links to of the world with unnatural genetic material that may have unknown long-term consequences with links to decreased fertility, immunological alterations in the gut and the exacerbation and creation of allergies.

Genetically engineered soy contains high concentrations of plant toxicants. The presence of high levels of toxicants in the GM soy represent thousands of plant biochemicals many of which have been shown to have toxic effects on animals.

http://preventdisease.com/news/09/073009_soy_lecithin.shtml
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 10:53 AM

The African Centre for Biosafety

MONSANTO FORCED TO WITHDRAW UNSUBSTANTIATED ADVERTISING CLAIMS ON BENEFITS OF GM CROPS-ADVERTISING STANDARDS AUTHORITY OF SOUTH AFRICA

Monday, 17 March 2014

Monsanto was given an opportunity by ASA to respond to the ACB’s complaint but was according to the ASA, only able to provide the ASA with links to documents on its website but was unable to provide, as it is required to in terms of South African law governing advertising, inputs from an independent and credible expert confirming the various studies that Monsanto relied upon showing the ostensible benefits of GM crops.

http://www.acbio.org.za/index.php/media/...of-south-africa

There are links at the bottom of the page to more articles that may be of interest to you
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 11:19 AM

Banned in 160 Nations, Why is This Growth Hormone in U.S. Meat?

by Barbara Minton Posted on January 11, 2015

The fabulous taste of bacon is more popular than ever. But if you are eating conventionally-produced bacon or other pork products, chances are great that you are consuming ractopamine, a livestock growth altering drug so dangerous that 160 countries around the world have banned its use.

Not the U.S. though, where this chemical additive has been given the green light by the FDA, in spite of the fact that it endangers livestock and farm workers as well as consumers.

http://naturalsociety.com/beware-growth-hormone-ractopamine-drug-meat-pork-banned/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 11:50 AM

American wheat is sprayed twice with pesticides/herbicides. Buy organic.

Monsanto at Work on GMO Wheat – Again

By Sara Jennings January 27, 2015

Monsanto’s first stab at introducing Roundup Ready wheat ended in 2004 when the company decided not to seek approval because the market wasn’t ready for it, but in 2013 rogue GMO wheat was found in Oregon, news of which immediately rippled to overseas buyers and caused importing countries including Japan and South Korea to suspend purchases over fears of contamination. The USDA investigation called the Oregon case an isolated incident, however the subsequent discovery of a genetically modified strain in the field of a Montana wheat farmer more or less put the lie to that story. In November of 2014, Monsanto settled the lawsuit brought by farmers in the Pacific Northwest for $2.4 million to cover damages due to the loss of export markets.

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/posts/monsanto-at-work-on-gmo-wheat-again/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 11:53 AM

Published on Feb 3, 2015

Nature's One the creator of the first organic formula in the United States explains why being GMO free is so vital to the company's mission.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu4dlDFOxHE

Baby food and infant formula verified by the Non Gmo Project.

http://www.nongmoproject.org/find-non-gmo/search-participating-products/?catID=23
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 12:01 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 12:39 PM

US farmers are switching to non-GMO crops and feed

on 19 January 2015.

Improved animal health and simple economics are pushing farmers towards non-GMO

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/ar...-crops-and-feed
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 03:14 PM

GMO Foods: Science, PR, and Public Backlash

Published on Oct 29, 2012

15 Minutes

In the face of yet more scientific evidence of the adverse health effects of genetically modified foods, country after country is working to ban, limit or restrict the cultivation and testing of GM crops. But as the biotech giants gear up the PR war against their opponents, the question of what people can do to avoid GMO foods is becoming more important than ever. Find out more about this topic in this week's GRTV Backgrounder on Global Research TV.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5epdNz4T_x0&feature=share
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 03:18 PM

Evidence of GMO Harm in Pig Study

Pictures, papers, etc.

http://gmojudycarman.org/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 03:22 PM

Former GMO Biotech Scientist Admits GMOs Aren’t Safe

By COVVHA - Children Of Vietnam Veterans Health Alliance

November 4, 2014

Vrain explains:

“I started paying attention to the flow of published studies coming from Europe, some from prestigious labs and published in prestigious scientific journals, that questioned the impact and safety of engineered food.”

Vrain was so much a supporter of GMOs (as well as a former biotech scientist for Agriculture Canada) that he used to conduct tours and tell large groups of people all about the greatness of genetically altered crops – but not anymore. Here is what he thinks about his former industry now:


http://covvha.net/former-pro-gmo-biotech-scientist-admits-gmos-arent-safe/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 03:26 PM

11 November 2014

'Don't be drawn into Frankenstein food experiments': Hollywood stars, academics and activists sign open letter to British public warning against GM foods

Coalition of 57 million people have signed open letter to British consumers

Signatories include Susan Sarandon, Daryl Hannah and Jeremy Irons

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...l#ixzz3R63up5Rj
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 03:31 PM

Opinions, The Washington Post

By Mark Bittman, Michael Pollan, Ricardo Salvador and Olivier De Schutter November 7, 2014

How a national food policy could save millions of American lives

How we produce and consume food has a bigger impact on Americans’ well-being than any other human activity. The food industry is the largest sector of our economy; food touches everything from our health to the environment, climate change, economic inequality and the federal budget. Yet we have no food policy — no plan or agreed-upon principles — for managing American agriculture or the food system as a whole.

That must change.

The food system and the diet it’s created have caused incalculable damage to the health of our people and our land, water and air. If a foreign power were to do such harm, we’d regard it as a threat to national security, if not an act of war, and the government would formulate a comprehensive plan and marshal resources to combat it. (The administration even named an Ebola czar to respond to a disease that threatens few Americans.) So when hundreds of thousands of annual deaths are preventable — as the deaths from the chronic diseases linked to the modern American way of eating surely are — preventing those needless deaths is a national priority.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/h...eb67_story.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 03:38 PM

How Monsanto Keeps Halting GMO Labeling Despite Over 96% Approval - Monsanto's dirty tricks explained

By Anthony Gucciardi November 5, 2014

Checkout the details of who exactly is pumping cash into efforts to defeat your ability to know what you’re eating:

Monsanto – $7,100,500
DuPont – $4,900,000
Pepsi – $2,145,400
Bayer – $2,000,000
Dow – $2,000,000
BASF – $2,000,000
Syngenta – $2,000,000
Kraft Foods – $1,950,000
Coca-Cola – $1,455,500
Nestle – $1,315,600
General Mills – $1,135,000
ConAgra – $1,077,000
Kellogg’s – $790,000
Smithfield – $684,000

http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-gmo-labeling-96-approval/#ixzz3R66KsqZs
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 03:48 PM

Monsanto Timeline Of Crime 1901-2014

Posted By COVVHA - AO2GEN Children Of Vietnam Veterans Health Alliance On April 14, 2014

http://covvha.net/monsanto-1901-2014-timeline/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 05:50 PM

February 7, 2015

USDA Approves Toxic Herbicide Amidst Great Public Outcry

Our regulatory agencies no longer serve to protect the health of American citizens, but primarily exist to further corporate profits.

http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/usda-approves-toxic-herbicide-amidst-great-public-outcry/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 06:05 PM

Dramatic Correlation Shown Between GMOs and 22 Diseases

19 November 2014 By Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers

The research highlighted below, “Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America,” was published in The Journal of Organic Systems this September and links GMOs to 22 diseases with very high correlation. We reprinted many of the graphs from the study that show an incredible correlation between the rise of GMO crops that use the herbicide glyphosate and a wide range of diseases.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/27544-dramatic-correlation-shown-between-gmos-and-22-diseases#
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/07/15 06:09 PM

Republication of the Séralini study: Science speaks for itself

http://www.gmoseralini.org/republication-seralini-study-science-speaks/
Posted by: DR. D

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/08/15 04:05 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/08/15 09:23 PM

Stephanie Seneff - Autism and Glyphosate

http://mauicauses.org/stephanie-seneff/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/09/15 09:28 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Stephanie Seneff - Autism and Glyphosate

http://mauicauses.org/stephanie-seneff/


Another quack. see the post one the other thread. You sure have enough of the to spread your crap.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/09/15 01:27 PM

The makers of Glyphosate, a/k/a Round Up, which Stephanie Seneff has warned us about. Who you going to trust, Stephanie or Monsanto?

7 January 2015

Monsanto fined $1.5m for bribery

US dollar bills
Bribes were falsely entered in the books as "consultancy fees"

The US agrochemical giant Monsanto has agreed to pay a $1.5m (£799,000) fine for bribing an Indonesian official.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world/africa/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/09/15 01:36 PM

The real roots of the American Medical System: Rockefeller Medicine, 44 minutes

Really good video. I hope you can find time to watch it. Naturalist were dubbed quacks by the rich so that they could make more money on medical equipment, hospitals, etc. Obamacare written by former corporate health care executive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6J_7PvWoMw
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/09/15 02:24 PM

GeneWatch UK PR: Superbugs warning for genetically modified insect factories

4th February 2015

"Mass production of GM insects in factories, using antibiotics as an additive in their feed, could lead to drug resistance in bacteria, leading to the spread of superbugs as billions of insects are released into the environment in future" warned Dr Helen Wallace, GeneWatch UK's Director, "This important risk to human health has been ignored by regulators, despite bans on the use of antibiotics in animal feed in many countries".

http://www.genewatch.org/article.shtml?als%5Bcid%5D=575436&als%5Bitemid%5D=575437
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/09/15 02:34 PM

Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Stephanie Seneff - Autism and Glyphosate

http://mauicauses.org/stephanie-seneff/


Another quack. see the post one the other thread. You sure have enough of the to spread your crap.


If she said the sky was red you would believe her laugh
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/09/15 02:40 PM

Reminder...

Institute for Responsible Technology

Are you, or is someone you know, one of 70 million people suffering from digestive diseases in the United States? Check out this incredibly important free online health resource, The Healthy Gut Summit, February 9-16.

Make sure to catch the in-depth interview with Jeffrey Smith on Feb 11 as he covers the connection to GMOs. More than 32 experts and physicians will participate in the summit which will explain how your digestive health is intimately linked to your immune, endocrine, circulatory and central nervous systems.

Use this link to register:

https://im177.isrefer.com/go/healthygutreg/JeffreySmithIRT/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/09/15 09:32 PM

Petition to the President.

Shaking up the White House hive

Feb 4, 2015 by Paul Towers

As I spoke to a packed room at the EcoFarm Conference late last month, it was clear that many of us eagerly await the unveiling of the White House's new plan to protect bees. But if recent events are any indication, officials aren’t getting the message that pesticides are a key part of the problem. Just one day before my talk, EPA approved another bee-harming pesticide.

http://www.panna.org/blog/shaking-white-house-hive
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/09/15 09:34 PM

These videos are only available to watch for a short period of time.

Today's speaker's videos have one day, ten hours left, so don't put it off.

https://healthygutsummit.com/schedule/?i...78f113eb96882d8
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/09/15 10:49 PM

Video: The Case for Labeling &#8234;#&#8206;GMO&#8236; Foods - Jeffrey Smith presents a Legislative Briefing in Sacramento, CA

Jeffrey summarizes why the safety assessments conducted by the FDA and regulators worldwide teeter on a foundation of outdated science and false assumptions, and why genetically engineered foods must urgently become our nation's top food safety priority.

1hr 48+ mins)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqniJB0DMRY&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/10/15 12:20 AM

EPA Approval of Dow’s Enlist Duo Herbicide Violates Endangered Species Act

Lawsuit filed to protect endangered whooping crane and Indiana bat from toxic herbicide to be used on genetically engineered crops

February 9, 2015

San Francisco, CA — A coalition of farmers and environmental groups filed a motion Friday to stay the EPA’s October 2014 decision to approve a powerful new herbicide called “Enlist Duo” for use on genetically engineered (GE) crops in six Midwestern states. The groups maintain that EPA violated...

http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2015/...red-species-act
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/10/15 12:30 AM

Modern Farmer

The Post-GMO Economy

One mainstream farmer is returning to conventional seed — and he’s not alone

By Elizabeth Royte on December 6, 2013

Still, winning converts to conventional corn can be an uphill slog. Post-harvest, farmers face a barrage of TV and print ads touting the latest seed technology. There’s a subtler psychology at work, too. Farmers have close relationships with their seed dealers, who often live nearby and keep them company at local baseball games, PTA meetings or church. “You can’t break up with them,” Bloom says, noting that seed dealers work on commission. DuPont Pioneer, for example, offers him a non-GMO corn for $180 a bag, while Wyffels Hybrids sold the same for $115 a bag last year.

Why does Pioneer charge so much? Because it doesn’t want lower-priced conventional seed to lure customers away from GMOs. Bloom says a company dealer confessed: “We don’t want our farmers to buy it.”

http://modernfarmer.com/2013/12/post-gmo-economy/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/10/15 08:39 PM

Institute for Responsible Technology

“If these GE loblolly pines are released on a large scale in the US, there will be no way to stop them from cross contaminating native loblolly pines,” said biologist Dr. Rachel Smolker of Biofuelwatch. “This is deliberate, irreversible and completely irresponsible contamination of the environment with unknown and possibly devastating consequences. Forest ecosystems are barely understood, and the introduction of trees with genes for modified wood characteristics could have all manner of negative impacts on soils, fungi, insects, wildlife, songbirds, and public health. And all this for short term commercial profit.”

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/02/01/global-outrage-grows-unregulated-gm-trees/#.VNq_wI0tGAI
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/10/15 08:41 PM

The World According to Monsanto

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FGGlSvt0U4&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/10/15 08:45 PM

Erin Brockovich

Before the sides line up to shoot at each other (and me), pay very close attention to what my question is.

What is wrong with a consumer's Right to Know?

If you want patent protection... and you want to sell your products to me, don't I have a Right to Know that is has been genetically altered. What is the problem with notification? What is there to hide? If it is safe... great; tell me and let me make my decision informed.

The Deny Americans the Right to Know – or DARK – Act is expected to be reintroduced in Congress any day now. This reprehensible anti-labeling bill would both rule out any federal labeling requirement for genetically engineered foods and deny states the right to enact their own labeling legislation. In other words, if the DARK Act passes, the fight for genetic engineering (GE) labeling is over.

In order to stop the DARK Act in its tracks, we need to make sure that every single supporter of GE labeling is heard loud and clear. That’s why this week I am joining forces with activists around the country in a National Week of Action to call on Congress to oppose the DARK Act and support mandatory GE labeling.

Monsanto, the Grocery Manufacturers Association (an industry front group) and others have already spent over $100 million to keep consumers in the dark in Washington, California, Oregon and Colorado alone. And with millions more at their disposal, you can bet that Big Food will be pulling out all the stops to get this reprehensible bill passed this year.

Let’s prove that the American people are louder than Big Food lobbyists.

https://takeaction.takepart.com/actions/oppose-the-dark-act
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/10/15 10:23 PM

February 9, 2015

GMO Free NY

The NY Assembly is finally back in business and it just passed its first bill of the year. And guess what?!? It's a good one! It protects farmers from being sued for patent infringement if their crops are unintentionally and unknowingly cross-contaminated with patented GMO crops! Woohoo! Now we just need the Senate to pass it, too. We can't take any credit for this awesomeness but we sure as heck can celebrate it!!

"If a farmer is sued for infringing on a patent related to genetically modified organisms, they would be able to avoid paying damages if they can prove that they “did not knowingly and intentionally introduce the genetically engineered or genetically modified organisms into his or her plants or seeds or onto his or her property and he or she did not knowingly gain from the distinctive traits due to genetic modification or genetic engineering.”

http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2015/02/09/on-feb-9-assembly-passes-first-bill-of-2015/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/12/15 12:52 AM

10 Banned Foods Americans Should Stop Eating Infographic

http://www.mercola.com/infographics/10-b...ods_facebookdoc
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/13/15 09:09 PM

Astroturf and manipulation of media messages

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bYAQ-ZZtEU#t=157
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/13/15 09:22 PM

NY Times

Gene-Altered Apples Get U.S. Approval

By ANDREW POLLACK FEB. 13, 2015

The government on Friday approved the commercial planting of genetically engineered apples that are resistant to turning brown when sliced or bruised.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/14/business/gmo-apples-are-approved-for-growing-in-us.html?_r=1
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/13/15 09:26 PM

BREAKING:

Connecticut becomes the first state to introduce legislation to BAN Scotts' Roundup Ready GMO grass.

http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/CGABillStatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=HB6041
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/13/15 09:47 PM

February 13th, 2015

Congress: Don’t Mess With Meat Labels

By Katherine Cirullo

This week brought progress for consumers, ranchers and food safety advocates who want to know where their food is produced. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has dropped an anti-consumer lawsuit filed by meatpackers and industry groups against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), that would have denied U.S. shoppers the right to know where the meat they purchase was born, raised and slaughtered.

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/blogs/congress-dont-mess-with-meat-labels/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/13/15 11:36 PM

National GMO Labeling Bill Reintroduced as U.S. Reps, Citizens Demand the Right to Know

By Nick Meyer On February 12, 2015

A new bipartisan bill that would give Americans more information about what’s in their food was reintroduced on Thursday, Feb. 12 in both the U.S. Senate and House, as announced on the Center for Food Safety’s website.

The bill, introduced by Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, would require that food manufacturers label foods that contain genetically modified ingredients.

“We cannot continue to keep Americans in the dark about the food they eat,” said Rep. Peter DeFazio.

“More than sixty other countries make it easy for consumers to choose. Why should the U.S. be any different? If food manufacturers stand by their product and the technology they use to make it, they should have no problem disclosing that information to consumers.”

http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/ge...-right-to-know/

Sign the Petition

https://www.facebook.com/notes/actions-f...889710961069591
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/13/15 11:56 PM

Happy Valentine's Day to our local organic farmers:

Autumn's Harvest Farm in Romulus and Felenz Family Farm in Phelps

https://www.facebook.com/MomsAcrossAmeri...5540584/?type=1
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/14/15 04:34 PM

2/12/15

Syngenta's Phillipson admits Atrazine banned in home country

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZcm7728CZg
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/14/15 04:38 PM

"In Hendersonville, NC this was once drinking water. Now it is a dead zone. Nothing can live when oxygen is gone. What caused this? Glyphosate and atrazine which came from an apple tree farm on top of a mountain above this drinking water. The entire 150 acres shows a buffer of fast growing moss. People who drank this water have gotten numerous illnesses and cancer. The trees in the area are growing a fungus.

You see... The poisoning of OUR earth has to be stopped. It goes much deeper than our foods and a GMO label. These poisons are DESTROYING our home which was once abundant with life. People, animals, trees, & bees are dying!!! All for profit...GREED!!

Can we please just WAKE UP??!! For Mother Earth and our children and grandchildren... Speak up ... raise hell... ENOUGH IS ENOUGH ALREADY!!!"

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10202709519418690&set=gm.837927479587065&type=1
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/14/15 05:40 PM

Okanagan orchardists upset over genetically modified apples
February 13, 2015

While the U.S. government has deregulated the Arctic apple, the product is not approved in Canada at this time.

“If consumers want to be perfectly assured that they are not eating a GMO apple, then avoid purchase of U.S. Granny Smith and golden delicious apples,” said Steele.

http://www.vernonmorningstar.com/news/291896321.html?mobile=true
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/14/15 05:49 PM

Are Your Medications Safe?

The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My students and I dug it up.

By Charles Seife

If you manage to get your hands on these documents, you’ll see that, most of the time, key portions are redacted: information that describes what drug the researcher was studying, the name of the study, and precisely how the misconduct affected the quality of the data are all blacked out. These redactions make it all but impossible to figure out which study is tainted. My students and I looked at FDA documents relating to roughly 600 clinical trials in which one of the researchers running the trial failed an FDA inspection. In only roughly 100 cases were we able to figure out which study, which drug, and which pharmaceutical company were involved. (We cracked a bunch of the redactions by cross-referencing the documents with clinical trials data, checking various other databases, and using carefully crafted Google searches.) For the other 500, the FDA was successfully able to shield the drugmaker (and the study sponsor) from public exposure.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and...idden_from.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/14/15 06:19 PM

True Food Shoppers Guide to Avoiding GE Food

January 01, 2014

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/fact-sheets/1974/true-food-shoppers-guide-to-avoiding-gmos#
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/14/15 07:21 PM

Tell Food Companies to Reject the GE apple!

http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/1881/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=15648
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/17/15 10:39 PM

We at Moms Across America recently decided that we could not ignore discussing the gmo food (Glyphosate a/k/a Round Up)connection with vaccines. I will not post vax info here unless the item I'm posting is discussing a vax connection to glyphosate.

Please watch as Stephanie Seneff explains:

"...but with the Glyphosate (a/k/a Round Up) you get an increased delivery of the aluminum to the Pineal glad, which ends up messing it up..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3P6wVUH0pc
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/18/15 10:18 AM

CORPORATE INFLUENCE OVER UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH

Private-sector funding not only corrupts the public
research mission of land-grant universities, but also
distorts the science that is supposed to help farmers
improve their practices and livelihoods.

See charts:

* Examples of Corporate Representatives on University Boards
* Examples of Schools, Buildings and Departments Funded by Corporations
* Examples of Academic Departments Funded by Private Sector
* Snapshot of Selected Professors at Iowa State University

University of Illinois Crop Sciences 2006–10 $18.7 million 44 percent Monsanto, Syngenta, Smith Bucklin & Associates

http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/PublicResearchPrivateGain.pdf


Posted by: DR. D

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/18/15 10:31 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Hopefully, this crook will have a...well, I can't say because the NSA is...well, you know.


And folks here you have the reason Arty doesn't reply, because the Gov't man is watching her and is gonna get her.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/18/15 10:37 AM

Jonathan Emord talks about corruption within the FDA

2 minutes

(Jonathan W. Emord is an American attorney who practices constitutional and administrative law.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tgf-nBeI1g8
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 12:50 AM

A must watch film.

David vs. Monsanto

Canadian canola farmer, Percy Schmeiser, was sued by Monsanto for patent infringement in 1998, after his fields were found to contain Monsanto’s patented GM canola. But rather than accepting Monsanto’s bullying ways, he decided to fight back—and won. Its a fascinating case.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLzELDt3d2I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVgwqpvI1bg
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 12:52 AM

January 5, 2015

DuPont Pioneer unleashes new genetically modified soybean cooking oil

It is called Plenish and it is a cooking oil that has been approved by the USDA as safe to eat. It is made solely of genetically modified (GM, GMO) soy beans and they say it may very well change the way the world sees GMOs. Problem is, it is a GMO product, it does not matter how healthy they say it is, it is still untested GMO food and from previous un official science experiments, GMO foods are very dangerous long term. We've all seen the lab rats that were fed Monsanto's GMO corn for 3 years straight! The problem is, and will remain, GMOs are harmful to the planet, it's environment and the people and animals that live here.

http://www.examiner.com/article/dupont-p...ean-cooking-oil
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 12:58 AM

January 24, 2015

Dr. Jayasumana: Glyphosate Leads to 5-Fold Increase in Deadly Kidney Disease Risk

By Henry Rowlands

This new study from Sri Lanka showed that drinking water from abandoned wells, where the concentrations of glyphosate and metals are higher, as well as spraying glyphosate, increased the risk of the deadly chronic kidney disease (CKDu) by up to 5-fold.

http://www.gmoevidence.com/dr-jayasumana...y-disease-risk/

Full Paper: http://www.ehjournal.net/content/pdf/1476-069X-14-6.pdf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 01:00 AM

GMO Free USA

ALASKA has introduced a Bill to require the mandatory labeling of GMOs. Sponsored by State Representatives Tarr and Kawasaki, HB 92 requires GMOs to be labeled and prohibits the use of the word "Natural" to describe food produced with genetic engineering. If you are a resident of Alaska, contact your state Reps and ask them to support HB 92! Tell them WE NEED TO KNOW IF IT'S GMO. Help us get the word out.

Don't know who your Representative is? Search here: http://house.legis.state.ak.us/

READ: http://www.legis.state.ak.us/PDF/29/Bills/HB0092A.PDF
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 01:02 AM

Petition

Nestlé/Gerber: Stop using genetically modified ingredients in baby food in No. America & Worldwide

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/243/227/6...-and-worldwide/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 01:04 AM

“Extreme levels” of Herbicide Roundup Found in Food

By Emily Cassidy, Research Analyst

Friday, April 18, 2014

The study, coming out in June’s issue of Food Chemistry and available online, looked at 31 different soybean plants on Iowa farms and compared the accumulation of pesticides and herbicides on plants in three categories 1) genetically engineered “Roundup Ready” soy, 2) conventionally produced (not GE) soy, and 3) soy cultivated using organic practices. They found high levels of Roundup on 70 percent of genetically engineered soy plants.

http://www.ewg.org/agmag/2014/04/extreme-levels-herbicide-roundup-found-food
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 01:15 AM

Published on May 10, 2013

It was "supposed" to be harmless to humans and animals—the perfect weed killer. Now a groundbreaking article just published in the journal Entropy points to Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, and more specifically its active ingredient glyphosate, as devastating—possibly "the most important factor in the development of multiple chronic diseases and conditions that have become prevalent in Westernized societies."

That's right. The herbicide sprayed on most of the world's genetically engineered crops—and which gets soaked into the food portion—is now linked to "autism ... gastrointestinal issues such as inflammatory bowel disease, chronic diarrhea, colitis and Crohn's disease, obesity, cardiovascular disease, depression, cancer, cachexia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, and ALS, among others."

Enjoy this videotaped guided tour of Jeffrey Smith interviewing co-author Stephanie Seneff, PhD, a Senior Research Scientist at MIT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_AHLDXF5aw
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 01:20 AM

This Common Practice Will Be a 'Disaster in Time'!

Published on Jan 8, 2015

Dr. Stephanie Seneff has researched a number of chemicals used in many of today's modern farming practices. She discusses what she thinks is a potential looming disaster with the continued use of these chemicals. Find out what chemicals she's talking about and what kind of conditions we're already faced with because of them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6qW8E2bGmo
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 01:27 AM

By ‘Editing’ Plant Genes, Companies Avoid Regulation

By ANDREW POLLACK JAN. 1, 2015 New York Times

“They are using a technical loophole so that what are clearly genetically engineered crops and organisms are escaping regulation,” said Michael Hansen, a senior scientist at Consumers Union. He said the grass “can have all sorts of ecological impact and no one is required to look at it.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/02/busine...crops.html?_r=2
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 01:32 AM

Puberty Before Age 10: A New ‘Normal’?

April 16, 2012

Environmental Chemicals a Likely Factor

No one knows what happens when a developing fetus or young child is exposed to hundreds of chemicals, many of which mimic your body's natural hormones and can trigger major changes in your body even as an adult, let along during the most rapid and vulnerable periods of development (in utero and as a young child).

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...rty_facebookdoc
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 01:48 AM

Food Additives Make Children Behave Badly

Irritability, temper outbursts, oppositional defiance, restlessness and difficulty falling asleep are the main behavioral effects of additives. But parents rarely realize that food chemicals can be associated with many other effects including arguing with siblings, making silly noises, speech delay, anxiety, depression or difficulty concentrating. Additive-free children are generally calmer, happier and more cooperative.

http://healthybody.buzz/food-additives-make-children-behave-badly/#sthash.6tZz23h6.i7x8ckWa.dpbs

Our kids get better when they get off GMO's!

Just some of over 300 Testimonials from Moms Across America about the health of their children and families in relation to GMOs and Glyphosate: See one of our Mom's video, Jennifer Lawerenson, survey responses and Facebook posts below.

http://www.momsacrossamerica.com/zenhoneycutt/mom_s_testimonials
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 01:50 AM

Former Pro-GMO Scientist Speaks Out On The Real Dangers of Genetically Engineered Food

By Thierry Vrain January 13, 2015

I retired 10 years ago after a long career as a research scientist for Agriculture Canada. When I was on the payroll, I was the designated scientist of my institute to address public groups and reassure them that genetically engineered crops and foods were safe. There is, however, a growing body of scientific research – done mostly in Europe, Russia, and other countries – showing that diets containing engineered corn or soya cause serious health problems in laboratory mice and rats.

I don’t know if I was passionate about it but I was knowledgeable. I defended the side of technological advance, of science and progress.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/former-pro-...ed-food/5424010
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 11:32 AM

October 18th 2012

Written By: Heidi Stevenson

GM Wheat May Damage Human Genetics Permanently

The Australian government, in the form of its science research arm, is joining Agribusiness profiteering by designing a GM wheat that could kill people who eat it & be inherited by their children.

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/gm-wheat-may-damage-human-genetics-permanently
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 11:47 AM

Via GMO-Free Rochester https://gmofreerochester.wordpress.com/2015/02/15/gmo-article-in-abundance-co-ops-newsletter/
-------
Newsletter of Abundance Cooperative Market, 62 Marshall St., Rochester Volume 15, Issue 1 January/February 2015

By Elizabeth Henderson

Time to Label GMOs in New York State!

This is why we care so strongly. First of all, food made from GMO ingredients is not labeled. You do not have a choice about whether you want to participate in this massive experiment in novel kinds of food proteins some of which seem to cause allergies. 70-80% of the conventionally grown processed foods sold in grocery stores today have at least some GMO ingredient. GMO varieties are not tested independently for safety. The FDA policy not to require testing before approval for commercial sale was set against the advice of its own scientists. There are memos dating to 1991 in which FDA scientists warn of potential health risks. The FDA official who made the decision not to test each new genetically engineered variety was a former employee of Monsanto. The safety testing done by the companies that sell the seeds.

https://abundancecoop.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/rutabaga-rap-jan-feb-2015-final-color-for-web.pdf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/19/15 12:00 PM

Monsanto Is Making Us Sick: A Protest at Monsanto's Headquarters

09 February 2015 By Alexis Baden-Mayer, Organic Consumers Association

On January 30, the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) joined Moms Across America (MAA), SumofUs, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, Harrington Investments and GMO Free Midwest in a protest and confrontation at Monsanto’s annual shareholder meeting.

The meeting was held at Monsanto corporate headquarters outside St. Louis, Mo., in a town called Creve Coeur—which in French means Broken Heart.

It’s a fitting name for the location of a company that has caused so much heartache with its toxic chemicals.

OCA’s mission on January 30 was to let Monsanto know, in no uncertain terms, that its so-called science—bought and paid for with dirty corporate money—is no match for the research being conducted by honest, independent scientists. And that research is clear: Monsanto is making us sick.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/29004-a-lively-day-at-monsanto-headquarters#
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/20/15 05:06 AM

Polish farmers block motorways for land rights, no GMOs

Oliver Tickell

9th February 2015

Key demands: land rights, no GMOs, legalize farm food sales

http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_ro...ts_no_gmos.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/22/15 05:13 AM

"Freedom from Choice"

The producers of this film are allowing a FREE viewing through 2/27.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...ary_facebookdoc

To learn more about the film, watch the feature length version, or to purchase a DVD, please click here.

http://www.freedomfromchoicefilm.com/

"Bought" is free to watch now for a limited time only.

http://www.freedomfromchoicefilm.com/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/22/15 06:08 AM

Fields of Gold: GMO-Free Crops Prove Lucrative for Farmers

Non-Biotech Corn, Soybeans Fetch a Premium as Processors Respond to Rising Demand

Jacob Bunge Feb. 2, 2015

http://www.wsj.com/articles/fields-of-gold-gmo-free-crops-prove-lucrative-for-farmers-1422909700
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/22/15 06:20 AM

Monsanto’s Roundup. Enough to Make You Sick.

By Alexis Baden-Mayer Feb 17, 2015

Eager to sell more of its flagship herbicide, Monsanto also encouraged farmers to use Roundup as a dessicant, to dry out all of their crops so they could harvest them faster. So Roundup is now routinely sprayed directly on a host of non-GMO crops, including wheat, barley, oats, canola, flax, peas, lentils, soybeans, dry beans and sugar cane.

http://foodrevolution.org/blog/monsantos-roundup-enough-make-sick/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/22/15 06:26 AM

Seedy Business: What Big Food Is Hiding with Its Slick PR Campaign on GMOs

February 10, 2015 Mercola

The purpose of this campaign is to deceive the public, to deflect efforts to win the right to know what is in our food via labeling that is already required in 64 countries, and ultimately, to extend their profit stream for as long as possible.

This campaign has greatly influenced how U.S. media covers GMOs. The industry’s PR firm, Ketchum, even boasted that “positive media coverage has doubled” on GMOs. The report outlines fifteen things that Big Food is hiding with its artful PR campaign on GMOs.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...ess_facebookdoc
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/22/15 06:44 AM

Dr. Don M. Huber

"Genetic Engineering is a very powerful potential technology. Our understanding of what we're doing is very limited at this time. That's why every genetically engineered product has to be evaluated separately. Without that safety testing, we're playing Russian Roulette. We've pretty much sacrificed an entire generation of children."

Excerpt from bio:

His agricultural research the past 50 years has focused on the epidemiology and control of soilborne plant pathogens with emphasis on microbial ecology, cultural and biological controls, and physiology of hostparasite relationships. Research also includes nitrogen metabolism, micronutrient physiology, inhibition of nitrification, and nutrient-disease interactions.

http://farmandranchfreedom.org/bio-dr-don-m-huber/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/22/15 06:50 AM

Target doubling initiative on organics, naturals

Posted: 02/20/2015

The nation’s second-largest discount retailer is nearly doubling the number of brands and products in the organic and sustainable arena

http://chicago.suntimes.com/business/7/71/382810/target-organics-sustainable-made-matter
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 09:14 AM

Glyphosate & Honeybees, interview with Don Huber 2014

Published on Feb 2, 2015

Jeffrey Smith talks to Don Huber about the effects of glyphosate and the dwindling bee population.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HFDeno_5vU&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 12:31 PM

Keep posting crap. Great way to inform people about reality.

Just a few rebuttals of your nonsense.

http://www.biofortified.org/2014/01/deconstructing-don-huber-a-tale-of-two-talks/

http://geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/1...ealed-as-fraud/

http://thefarmerslife.com/biotechnology/alarming-or-alarmist/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 06:03 PM

Americans still have the right to decide what they eat.

Americans have a right to know that their food has been changed.

Americans have a right to know that corporations can rig their in-house science and the fda will accept it, no questions asked.

Americans have a right to know that the education they received may have been influenced by corporations to their benefit.

Americans have a right to know their politicians are crooks and their federal agencies, in charge of protecting them and the environment, are crooks in the pockets of corporations. See link below.

Americans have a right to know that their news sources have been corrupted and the news is edited to protect corporate and political interests.

If you want to continue to eat poison, that is your right. Aren't you glad you have that right to choose?

Here is some background on the crap you like to eat. You can thank Bush and Quale for "substantially equivalent" food.

*************

20 Years of GMO Policy That Keeps Americans in the Dark About Their Food - 05/30/2012

Twenty years ago this week, then-Vice President Dan Quayle announced the FDA's policy on genetically engineered food as part of his "regulatory relief initiative." The policy, Quayle explained, was based on the idea that genetic engineering is no different than traditional plant breeding, and therefore required no new regulations.

Five years earlier, then-Vice President George H.W. Bush visited a Monsanto lab for a photo op with the developers of Roundup Ready crops. According to a video report of the meeting, when Monsanto executives worried about the approval process for their new crops, Bush laughed and told them, "Call me. We're in the dereg businesses. Maybe we can help."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-murphy/dan-quayle-and-michael-ta_b_1551732.html

VP Bush
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGLfPAyItmE&list=PLKpK7w40NKS6YC6S-7j5Sdh1zRs-wT3gz&index=10
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 06:05 PM

5/30/2012

Dave Murphy, Founder, Food Democracy Now!

20 Years of GMO Policy That Keeps Americans in the Dark About Their Food

Twenty years ago this week, then-Vice President Dan Quayle announced the FDA's policy on genetically engineered food as part of his "regulatory relief initiative." The policy, Quayle explained, was based on the idea that genetic engineering is no different than traditional plant breeding, and therefore required no new regulations.

Five years earlier, then-Vice President George H.W. Bush visited a Monsanto lab for a photo op with the developers of Roundup Ready crops. According to a video report of the meeting, when Monsanto executives worried about the approval process for their new crops, Bush laughed and told them, "Call me. We're in the dereg businesses. Maybe we can help."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-murphy/dan-quayle-and-michael-ta_b_1551732.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 06:08 PM

February 23, 2015

Stacy Malkan

How National Geographic Got it Wrong on GMO Science

Judging a book, or in this case a magazine article, by it’s cover, I was prepared to dislike Joel Achenbach’s “War on Science” story in National Geographic. Turns out it’s an insightful, beautifully written piece about the psychology that influences scientific belief.

Too bad Achenbach got it wrong on the science of genetic engineering, and allowed his piece to be used as PR fodder for the agrichemical industry. I’m guessing that the higher ups at Monsanto and their PR firms have already ordered up poster-sized copies of the cover image, which conflates concerns about GMOs with climate change denial – a talking point the PR gurus have been pushing hard.

http://usrtk.org/gmo/how-national-geographic-got-it-wrong-on-gmo-science/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 06:46 PM

Erin Brockovich

“What is wrong with a consumer's Right to Know?

If you want patent protection... and you want to sell your products to me, don't I have a Right to Know that it has been genetically altered.

What is the problem with notification? What is there to hide?

If it is safe... great; tell me and let me make my decision informed.

Monsanto, the Grocery Manufacturers Association (an industry front group) and others have already spent over $100 million to keep consumers in the dark in Washington, California, Oregon and Colorado alone. And with millions more at their disposal, you can bet that Big Food will be pulling out all the stops to get [the DARK Act] passed this year. Let’s prove that the American people are louder than Big Food lobbyists.”

CALL & EMAIL your Representatives and tell them NOT TO SUPPORT Pompeo's "The Safe & Accurate Food Labeling Act." Tell them to support the "Genetically Engineered Food Right-To-Know Act” instead. We need to know if it’s GMO!

Find your Reps here: http://www.opencongress.org/people/zipcodelookup

Feb 12, 2015

Boxer, Blumenthal, DeFazio Introduce Bill to Require Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
http://defazio.house.gov/media-center/pr...ire-labeling-of
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 07:15 PM

“CONFIDENTIAL: Read and Destroy”

Fifteen things Big Food is hiding with its slick PR campaign on GMOs

#1: The agrichemical companies have a history of concealing health risks from the public

If there were something wrong with genetically engineered food, would Monsanto or the other agrichemical companies tell us? If there were health risks, would the companies disclose them? Their history suggests that the answer is: probably not.

The big agrichemical companies have a well-documented record of hiding the truth about the health risks of their products and operations. Let’s review some key moments in that history.

#2: The FDA does not test whether GMOs are safe

In recent testimony before Congress, the FDA stated that it is “confident that the GE foods in the U.S. marketplace today are as safe as their conventional counterparts.

However, FDA does not itself test whether genetically engineered foods are safe. The FDA has repeatedly made this clear. As Jason Dietz, a policy analyst at FDA explains about genetically engineered food: “It’s the manufacturer’s responsibility to insure that the product is safe.” Or, as FDA spokesperson Theresa Eisenman said, “it is the manufacturer’s responsibility to ensure that the [GMO] food products it offers for sale are safe…”

Nor does the FDA require independent pre-market safety testing for genetically engineered food. As a matter of practice, the agrichemical companies submit their own studies to the FDA as part of a voluntary “consultation.” Moreover, the FDA does not require the companies to submit full and complete information about these studies. Rather, as the FDA has testified, “After the studies are completed, a summary of the data and information on the safety and nutritional assessment are provided to the FDA for review.

See, page 11.

http://usrtk.org/seedybusiness.pdf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 07:30 PM

They will be coming to our state soon to confuse the consumer, try to convince you that gmo food is the same as real food, that they have over 400 safety studies (their own), that it's needed to feed the world, that the cost of food will skyrocket because of the addition of two words to an ingredient label.

Take a look at the chart to see who is spending millions so that those two words are not added to a label.

Page 61 to 63.

http://usrtk.org/seedybusiness.pdf
Posted by: genevaparent

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 09:09 PM

GMO foods are way too risky. I would much rather use pesticides. They have been around longer and have better known side effects. DDT got a bad wrap. These environmentalist types are WAY too concerned with preserving the world.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 10:50 PM

Gmo plants produce their own pesticide. Please watch:

Free version for a limited time
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/...effrey_M_Smith/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAMlir8oprw
http://geneticroulettemovie.com/

Crops such as Bt cotton produce pesticides inside the plant. This kills or deters insects, saving the farmer from having to spray pesticides. The plants themselves are toxic, and not just to insects. Farmers in India, who let their sheep graze on Bt cotton plants after the harvest, saw thousands of sheep die!

Herbicide tolerance lets the farmer spray weed-killer directly on the crop without killing it. Comparative studies on the toxic residues in foods from such crops have not yet been done.

Pollen from GM crops can contaminate nearby crops of the same type, except for soy, which does not cross-pollinate. In fact, virtually all heritage varieties of corn in Mexico (the origin of all corn) have been found to have some contamination. Canola and cotton also cross-pollinate.

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/gmo-education

But resisting pests is a euphemism for contains its own pesticide. When bugs take a bite of the GM plant, the toxin from the plant splits open their stomach and kills them.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articl...corn-chips.aspx

The Dangers of GMOs: 'Eye-Opening' Facts You MUST Know Part1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glqK1x000Hs&list=PLKpK7w40NKS4BlItHSP8q2dD3T4rudA84

The Dangers of GMOs: 'Eye-Opening' Facts You MUST Know Part2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltenDz-Hq78&list=PLKpK7w40NKS4BlItHSP8q2dD3T4rudA84&index=2

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 10:54 PM

February 24, 2015

Willie Soon’s Failure to Disclose Industry Funding for Contrarian Climate Research is Another Reason to Support Transparency

Aaron Huertas, science communication officer

Article relating to climate change but another example of scientists for sale? Lack of Disclosure.

http://blog.ucsusa.org/willie-soon-clima...utm_campaign=fb
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/24/15 11:00 PM

I found a free version of Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives.

I do not know how long it will be free. Please watch.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/...effrey_M_Smith/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/25/15 12:16 PM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
I found a free version of Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives.

I do not know how long it will be free. Please watch.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/...effrey_M_Smith/


shocked Jeffery Smith "Hack" is making money off of fear. Really shocked

NOT
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/26/15 04:05 PM

http://findourcommonground.com/food-facts/food-safety/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/26/15 05:54 PM

I found a free version of Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives.

I do not know how long it will be free. Please watch.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/...effrey_M_Smith/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/28/15 01:56 AM

http://www.trackingvaccinations.com/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 02/28/15 02:46 PM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
I found a free version of Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives.

I do not know how long it will be free. Please watch.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/...effrey_M_Smith/


shocked Jeffery Smith "Hack" is making money off of fear. Really shocked

NOT
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/01/15 04:05 PM

Retired USDA microbiologist. Every farmer should listen to this.

Our Guest - Robert Kremer, Ph.D. is a Professor of Soil Microbiology at the University of Missouri and recently retired after a 32-year career as a research microbiologist with the USDA Agricultural Research Service.

http://www.naturalhealth365.com/talkhourshow.html#sthash.oHonShyV.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/01/15 04:10 PM

I found a free version of Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives.

I do not know how long it will be free. Please watch.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/...effrey_M_Smith/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/02/15 05:48 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
I found a free version of Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives.

I do not know how long it will be free. Please watch.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/...effrey_M_Smith/


shocked Jeffery Smith "Hack" is making money off of fear. Really shocked

NOT
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/03/15 04:31 PM

Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: MissingArty
I found a free version of Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives.

I do not know how long it will be free. Please watch.

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/...effrey_M_Smith/


shocked Jeffery Smith "Hack" is making money off of fear. Really shocked

NOT


This is how it's done - bullying - name calling - because they don't have anything legitimate to back up what they are saying. They don't want you to read what I am posting, they don't want you to see these films.

Free to watch until March 6.

Bought

http://ykr.be/7o2aiv553

Genetic Roulette (about $4.00 to rent)

http://geneticroulettemovie.com/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/03/15 05:17 PM

Is the sugar you are consuming "chemically ripened?"

Chemical ripeners

In 2013, the following glyphosate formulations are available as chemical ripeners: Touchdown Total, Roundup WeatherMAX and Roundup PowerMAX. Note: these products are labeled for use in stubble sugarcane crops only and not in plant cane. When used according to the label and the following recommendations, these products should increase recoverable sugar per ton of cane while minimizing decreases in tons of cane per acre...

Glyphosate can cause serious damage when drifted onto non-target sites (newly planted cane, other crops or residential landscapes). Drift-control agents may be added to reduce drifting potential. However, ripener should only be applied when wind speeds are between 3 and 10 mph and should not be applied when there is a surface temperature inversion. A surface inversion occurs when temperature at the surface is cooler than air above the surface; usually in the evening or early morning. Surface inversions restrict vertical air mixing and cause spray droplets to remain suspended where they can move laterally, reducing effectiveness of application and potentially causing damage to non-target sites. Also, wind direction should be taken into account when applying glyphosate ripener to avoid drifting onto sensitive non-target sites.

http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops_live...-Glyphosate.htm
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/03/15 05:43 PM

American lawyer launches new book exposing systematic fraud by the GMO lobby

03 March 2015

Steven Druker is an American public interest attorney who initiated a lawsuit against the US Food and Drug Administration that forced it to divulge its files on genetically engineered foods. This revealed that the agency had covered up the extensive warnings of its own scientists about the unusual risks, lied about the facts, and then ushered these products onto the market in violation of explicit mandates of federal food safety law.

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/ar...y-the-gmo-lobby

**********

He explains the lawsuit in the film "Genetic Roulette."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAMlir8oprw

http://geneticroulettemovie.com/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/03/15 06:04 PM

DO YOU WANT an all-powerful Monsanto? A provision of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) “trade” deal called Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) would allow Monsanto to sue any nation bound by the TPP contract (Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam) for potential lost profits as a result of GMO or pesticide regulations. Have GMO labeling or cultivation bans within your borders? Get ready to go to court. Monsanto’s court, that is. With ISDS, Monsanto can take its case before an international corporate court where corporate lawyers are the judges. And the ruling can’t be challenged in the defending nation’s courts. HELLO, GMO & PESTICIDE TAKEOVER. GOODBYE, NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY.

Fast Track (formally known as Trade Promotion Authority) is a power given to the President by Congress and would allow the President to push the TPP deal through without any Congressional debate or public review.

LEARN the basics in this short video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnC1mqyAXmw&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/03/15 06:21 PM

Finally! The FDA Admits That Nearly Over 70% of U.S. Chickens Contain Cancer-Causing Arsenic

Lauren DeCuir - 2015-01-15

So a few days ago when I turned on the tube and saw the news headlines stating that the FDA has finally confirmed that chicken meat sold in the USA contains arsenic, my head, and stomach, nearly hit the roof. This cancer-causing toxic chemical, that in high doses could kill you, is actually being added to chicken feed on purpose, giving store-bought chicken the illusion of healthy coloring and plump appearance...

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/foodanddrink/fo...enic/ar-AA8cWca

FDA source:

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/ProductSafetyInformation/ucm257540.htm
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/03/15 06:27 PM

The Campaign to Stop GE Trees

http://stopgetrees.org/take-action-reject-unregulated-genetically-engineered-loblolly-pines/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/03/15 06:38 PM

Finally! — A Healthy Fast Food Restaurant is Almost Here Thanks to this Organic Frozen Food Brand

By Nick Meyer On March 3, 2015

Amy’s to Open its First Drive Thru on West Coast

http://althealthworks.com/5323/frozen-or...staurant/?c=ngr
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/05/15 11:36 AM

Breaking News

March 5, 2015

New York Moves Forward with GMO Labeling Bills

Bill A.617 just successfully voted out of Assembly Consumer Affairs & Protection Committee in a 9 to 6 vote, and now it needs to make it through a Codes Committee. Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal of Manhattan sponsored A00617, and State Senator Ken LaValle of Suffolk sponsored S00485 for mandatory GMO labeling in New York. Make sure you thank them.

The room was filled with Big Ag and Biotech special interests and the NY Farm Bureau, all lobbyists who would like to keep GMOs from being labeled.

If your representative is already a co-sponsor, let them know that you support this important stand they are taking against companies like Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, and Syngenta.

To check to see if your Assembly member has co-sponsored Bill A00617, check this link. http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?term=2015&bn=A00617

http://www.infowars.com/breaking-news-new-york-moves-forward-with-gmo-labeling-bills/

Stacie Orell runs the grassroots organization GMO Free NY.
http://www.gofundme.com/9ft0zo

Linda Rosenthal
https://www.facebook.com/LindaBRosenthal.UWS?fref=ts

Ken Lavalle
https://www.facebook.com/kenlavalle
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/06/15 09:59 AM

Published on Oct 2, 2012

Abby Martin takes a closer look at the incestuous relationship between the White House and Monsanto, by calling out Romney and Obama's longstanding ties with the company.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbhtUhebzic
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/11/15 02:54 PM

http://www.biofortified.org/2014/04/real...campaign=buffer

The 10 minor realizations that flipped my thinking about GMOs
by marcbrazeau on 8 April 2014
A recent story about GMO testing kicked off a conversation with a friend. The researchers tested the biochemicals from crops to suss out variations in food quality and composition due to genetic engineering. The new process allowed researchers to extract 1,000 or so biochemicals from the fruit of tomatoes. *

When the scientists compared the biochemicals of the GM tomato and a wide assortment other non-GM tomatoes, including modern and heirloom varieties, they found no significant differences overall. Thus, although the GM tomato was distinct from its parent, its metabolic profile still fell within the “normal” range of biochemical diversity exhibited by the larger group of varieties.

My friend was unimpressed. He said:

Can you explain how this is any different from the problematic way the USDA and certain diet plans defines nutrition. As long as foods have a similar nutrient and vitamin profiles they are interchangeable. Food isn’t just a collection of interchangeable pieces there is something that this type of researches misses about the value of whole foods taken whole and not taken apart and reconstituted into food like substances. By this logic it has been claimed that Rice Crispies are heart healthy and margarine is healthier then butter. I understand your desire to find equivalences between GM and heirloom varieties but I have my doubts that anyone who is interested in whole food nutrition would say that this is the proof you are searching for.

Adapted from an image by Amanda via Flickr.
Adapted from an image by Amanda via Flickr.

I understood where he was coming from. It’s very similar to the way I thought about the issue a few years ago when I first became aware of GMOs. I was learning about nutrition at the time and coming to similar conclusions as Michael Pollan did in his book In Defense of Food: nutrition is a science very much in its infancy and we don’t understand how its constituent parts interact very well. While waiting for credible and durable advice on sugar, sodium, and saturated fat, etc; successful traditional diets based on whole and minimally processed foods currently provide more credible and durable guidance for making choices about what to eat.

When I first started learning about GMOs, my model was trans fats and vitamin supplements. We thought that we could engineer a food that was healthier than saturated animal fats and it blew up in our face. We thought that if eating vitamin rich foods conferred health benefits, then supplementation would be even better. Except in cases of malnutrition, that hasn’t proven to be the case. I wasn’t ideologically opposed to genetic engineering, I just figured that given our current understanding of nutrition and ecology, the technology wasn’t really ready for prime time. I figured if we couldn’t figure out margarine, then we weren’t ready to start tinkering with plants at a genetic level. Common sense, right?

It took a while to realize that was an incorrect model for thinking about GE breeding. There are a number of realizations that I went through before leaving that behind. Here are ten of them:

It’s a single gene (sometimes two or three) that is being transferred out of 10’s of thousands.
The cartoon of a tomato crossed with a fish is wildly misleading. It’s one gene from a fish into the DNA of a tomato that contains 31,760 genes. *
A geneticist would say, “It doesn’t matter where the gene comes from it matters what it does.”
I share half my DNA with a banana. Half the genes in me are also in a banana.
That doesn’t mean that taking the same gene from me or a banana would produce the same results if you inserted it into a plantain, for example. But it’s worth keeping in mind in regards to our squeamishness about boundaries that nature doesn’t recognize. (See also: 1. “a tomato crossed with a fish”)
Once again, a geneticist would say, “It doesn’t matter where the gene comes from, it matters what it does.” Or, “We’re all wearing the same genes.”
The genes/proteins/traits for GE crops are very well thought out and chosen carefully.
None of them seem particularly risky if you understand them.
Round Up works on deactivating a plant enzyme called EPSPS. In RR crops they express a different version of EPSPS that is not deactivated by glyphosate. It has allowed farmers to use a relatively non-toxic herbicide and practice no-till farming.
The Arctic Apple simply silences the gene that produce an enzyme that causes browning.
Rainbow Papaya has a bit of the ringspot virus encoded into the DNA as a built in vaccine. Humans are not susceptible to ringspot virus. In fact if you have eaten organic papaya with a some green spots, you’ve eaten ringspot virus.
Bt crops express the protein from the organic pesticide Bt that is toxic to corn borers and other pests but harmless to humans. Lots of edible plants produce their own pesticides.
Lots of plants produce their own pesticides. You can read more about this here and here.
Introducing a food from another part of the world introduces more risk of unintended consequences than introducing a single gene into a soybean.
Cultivating kiwis for human consumption began just 100 years ago and only recently imported to the US market. There was no testing for allergenicity. Some people turned out to be allergic. Yet, no one thinks things like this should require new regulations or complicated testing.
My Irish and French (Canadian) ancestors did not co-evolve in any meaningful way with kiwis or mangos or chocolate or any of a number for foods I eat to great benefit and pleasure.
Radiation and chemical mutagenesis breeding have been safely practiced for half a century.
Does anyone look at a bag of Calrose rice or a Rio Star grapefruit and think those are unwholesome foods?
Those forms of breeding are more likely to cause unintended consequences than GE breeding. You blast seeds with radiation or chemicals, get random mutations, choose the best ones and selectively breed to finish. That’s also roughly how nature works.
This is not to suggest that radiation and chemical mutagenesis breeding is dangerous, just that it’s all a question of relative risks.
Traditional selective breeding has had negative unintended consequences. In the real world. Not just theoretically.
The Lenape potato is the most well known, but in trying to make a breed of celery that was more pest resistant, the breeders dialed up the amount of psoralens a variety of celery expressed. (see also: 4. Lots of plants produce their own pesticides.) That resulted in farm and grocery workers getting serious rashes and the product had to be pulled. That celery was released without allergen testing or compositional analysis. If you want to talk about being a human guinea pig, talk to those farm and grocery workers. Since those cases, breeders are more careful about voluntarily testing for potential unintended effects.
This is not to suggest that traditional selective breeding is dangerous, just that it’s all a question of relative risks.
Contemporary selective breeding is incredibly … selective.
Today’s breeders know exactly what traits they want to achieve and they will achieve them.
Whether it’s drought tolerance or herbicide resistance or yield or heat tolerance or flavor or pest resistance, why does it matter to me what breeding technique is used to get there?
Why isn’t the novelty of breeding with wild relatives an issue?
“…if a plant breeder chose to cross breed a wild relative with a plant in order to confer a desired trait of hardiness; drought, heat, flood, pest resistance – take your pick; nobody raises an eyeball. Keep in mind that we have no experience eating the wild relative, no mandated testing of toxins (which of course would be the desired trait in breeding pest resistance) or allergens. We have no experience with large scale cultivation of the wild relative, so it’s hard to extrapolate the environmental impact. “
Or a novel new mutation from nature? And what if that novel plant is then selectively breed using genetic analysis to isolate which genes the breeder wants to move and whether they have indeed been moved?
Scientific American recently told the story of a breeder who had been sent seeds of a habanero pepper that didn’t produce capsaicin, the compound that provides the heat. They then went on to detail the way the breeder had identified the genes associated with the traits he desired and ran the genome of each new cross instead of waiting for the plant to express the traits, saving massive amounts of time and guesswork.
It took awhile to sink in, but I’ve come to understand that a GMO tomato is a tomato. The reason why testing shows that it is biochemically substantially equivalent to a GM tomato is because it is a tomato.

Instead, my question has become, “Why aren’t concerns about tinkering with our food any less applicable to the Dutch in the 17th century, breeding nearly all carrots to be orange, in homage to William of Orange?

Or a contemporary potato breeder like Walter DeJong?

De Jong has been working with farmers long enough to know that our food supply is never more than a step ahead of devastating insect infestations and disease. Selective breeders like De Jong work hard to develop resistant crops, but farmers still have to turn to chemical pesticides, some of which are toxic to human health and the environment. De Jong enjoys dabbing pollen from plant-to-plant the old-fashioned way, but he knows that selective breeding can only do so much.

Like I said, today’s breeders know what they want to achieve and they will achieve it, regardless of breeding technique. I’ve learned that I can live with that. In fact, it’s quite exciting.

Sources:

A new approach to detecting changes in GM foods American Society of Agronomy | Phys.org | 3 April 2014
When Edible Plants Turn Their Defenses On Us Rae Ellen Bichell |The Salt | NPR | 23 October 2013
Natural Toxins in Fruits and Vegetables Food Safety Network | University of Guelph
Genetically engineered food: Allergic to regulations? Nathanael Johnson | Grist | 30 July 2013
The case of the poison potato Maggie Koerth-Baker | Boing Boing | 25 March 2013
Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods: Approaches to Assessing Unintended Health Effects National Academies Press | 2004
Contemporary Selective Breeding. Plant Edition. Marc Brazeau | REALFOOD.ORG | 28 January 2014
What About Wild Relatives? Marc Brazeau | REALFOOD.ORG | 13 February 2014
Creating Tastier and Healthier Fruits and Veggies with a Modern Alternative to GMOs Ferris Jabr | Scientific American | 23 January 2014
Are carrots orange for political reasons? Suzy Khimm | Wonkblog | Washington Post | 10 September 2011
GMOs May Feed the World Using Fewer Pesticides Amy Maxmen | NovaNext | PBS | 24 July 2013* There is currently no GMO tomato on the market. The tomato in that was tested in the article was a tomato in development. The Flavr Savr tomato developed by Calgene in the 90’s to ripen without softening, was withdrawn from the market, due to poor sales. The so-called ‘Fish Tomato’ developed in the early nineties with a gene from a flounder to tolerate frosts was never commercialized.
Share:
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/12/15 09:51 PM

Glyphosate & Honeybees, interview with Don Huber 2014

5 minutes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HFDeno_5vU#t=55
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/12/15 09:57 PM

Chemical Landscape and Nursery Industry Says Bee Friendly Habitat “Not Viable”

(Beyond Pesticides, March 11, 2015)

Plants can be grown without neonicotinoids and other systemic pesticides

It is a common myth perpetuated by the pesticide, agricultural, and horticultural industry that growing plants without pesticides cannot be done. But while these two national industry groups charge that creating pollinator habitat without toxic inputs cannot be done to protect pollinators, several smaller nurseries and retail outlets have already pledged to not use systemic neonicotinoids to grow their plants and protect pollinators.

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15150
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/13/15 08:01 AM

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/nature/fewer-pesticides-farming-with-gmos/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/13/15 11:23 AM

A lawyers take on gmo food and his lawsuit against the FDA. Mercola interviews Attorney Druker.

"...it blindsided me..."

"Well, this struck me as being not only unscientific, but irresponsible and unethical. At the time I also had a hunch that it was illegal."

"...it forced the FDA, through the discovery process, to hand over more than 44,000 pages of it's internal files relevant to the policy it had made on genetically engineered foods."

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rBL0MK9Y-o





Dr. Joseph Mercola interview with Dr. Steven Druker about his new book, "Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public"

Book, Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/…/0985616…/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl…

3:38 Can you give us some of your background that lead you to embark on this historic venture?
4:02 About 1994-5, I became aware of genetic engineering, it was being used to reconfigure the genetic core of almost every edible fruit and vegetable and grain, that is the grand vision
5:36 I had this feeling that I had to learn more, I might need to do something about it. I didn't know why. Big gap between industry claims and facts
6:25 One of the things that concerned me greatly is that the FDA was not enforcing their regulations on GMOs
7:19 At the time, I was concerned the FDA, in 1992, that GMOs were "generally recognized as safe" (GRAS)
http://www.fda.gov/Food/IngredientsPackagingLabeling/GRAS/

7:53 FDA Claim: There is an overwhelmingly scientific consensus GMOs are safe...so safe they do not have to be tested, no labeling
8:22 Hunch it was illegal, out of line with science
8:43 You would know....you are an attorney
8:58 It became clear the FDA had violated the law
9:44 I can contacting public interest groups with the hope of inspiring them to do the lawsuit
10:00 It became clear if I didn't do the lawsuit it was not going to happen
10:13 I founded a non-profit - Alliance for Bio-Integrity http://www.biointegrity.org/
10:40 I was contacted by International Center for Technology Assessment http://www.icta.org/
11:15 The lawsuit was filed in May 1998
11:25 The lawsuit forced the FDA to hand over 44,000 pages of internal files
http://3dd.816.myftpupload.com/24-fda-documents

12:00 The memos from the FDA scientists during risk assessments - usual risks to GMO food
13:13 The surprising thing was the FDA scientists were warning their superiors
13:40 FDA decided it was more important to promote US biotech rather than tell the truth and scientists warnings
13:58 They covered up those warnings
14:34 What the world heard from the FDA was the agency is not aware of any information showing that GMO foods differ from other foods.
15:25 An astounding fraud, biggest US government fraud ever &#65279;
16:30 Document #8 - Letter from Dr. James Maryanski, Biotechnology Coordinator, to Dr. Bill
Murray, Chairman of the Food Directorate, Canada. Subject: the safety assessment of foods and food ingredients developed through new biotechnology.October 23, 1991. (2 pages)
http://3dd.816.myftpupload.com/wp-cont…/uploads/…/10/08.pdf&#65279;

17:05 Not a scientific consensus about the safety of GMO foods - in FDA files
17:25 FDA influenced world health leaders, paved the way for other countries
18:30 Companies worldwide can dump GMO crops in US market - no safety studies
19:02 The law states companies must demonstrate the GMO foods safe
19:40 Give a brief summary of the scientific discussion that occurred a decade or two earlier that lead up to the 1992 decision

20:36 There is a lot of back story - I wanted to do a book that made a major contribution
21:39 Back in the early days, before GMOs became a reality in the 1970s, biggest break in nature in human history
22:28 Scientist warned about the dangers of this new technology
22:46 The public got afraid, so they began to change their story
23:10 A progressive misrepresentation campaign to convince the public and government that GE is not different and there should be no worries
23:53 Summer 1976-77, major lobbing campaign that universities were participating
25:18 There were several bills to regulate GE technology
24:41 Who was behind the lobbing efforts?
26:00 The ends justifies the means mentality. A cure for many, many things.
26:40 The burden of proof was placed on the developer.It got shifted on the critics with concerns. &#65279;
27:22 How did this group shift the burden of proof? There were some in both camps.&#65279;
28:06 The one that were pitching the promise of this technology had the most support from the major research universities.
28:05 James Watson - started claiming very strongly that Genetic Engineering was safe. The molecular biologists.
28:44 National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
29:08 Their agenda was so strongly influenced.
29:29 Dr. Phillip Regal - University of Minnesota
29:44 Conference with Ecologists and Molecular Biologists could talk.
30:18 Dr. Phillip Regal. He was the point man, attempting to get the genetic engineering venture more in line with sound science.
31:27 Dr Phillip Regal is a great hero. He has performed such a great service to Science and to the cause of food safety. A great personal sacrifice.
32:20 High risk projects got stopped because of the two conferences.
33:16 Chapter 7: Huge erosion of Environmental protection in this country.
33:39 Food safety: bigger risks.
34:23 President Dwight Eisenhower warned about the danger of Scientific Technologic elite. Molecular Biology establishment and Biotech establishment were able to play the media.
35:02 The media had a very imbalanced way of presenting this.
35:50 Scientists who spoke out, if they didn't have tenure, they didn't get it.
36:11 A tremendous subversion of Science that has gone on, ironically in the name of Science. Distorted and subverted.
36:35 The prevailing of the elite. Power, ability to manipulate the press.
36:44 They were successful in propagating the impression that there no real problems with genetic engineering, that there was an overwhelming Scientific consensus that this was so; there never has been a Scientific consensus about that.
37:11 They kept regulation at a bare minimum.
37:30 If that fraudulent groundwork hadn't been laid, the FDA could not have done what it did.
37:55 Monsanto and Biotech industry
38:08 1970's Molecular Biologists: spindoctoring
38:35 Phillip Regal: Within the Scientific community, gossip became as good as truth, as good as fact. People just parroted what they heard other people saying.
38:53 Combination of a conflict of interest with the tendency of human nature to think they know better.
39:19 A combination of arrogance and avorance.
39:59 The first major Genetically Engineering catastrophe: L Triptophan
41:09 The only Triptophan supplement that was ever a problem, was the one created by Genetically Engineered bacteria.
42:40 The history is in the book, so the narrative they are spinning cannot survive.
43:02 It's very important to get the truth out there, so dramatic changes can be made.
43:26 Genetically Engineered L. Triptophan supplement history story
47:16 This epidemic was only determined because the symptoms were unique. The name of the epidemic was EMS.
49:00 Damage control: FDA showed they were quite willing to suppress evidence and to dispense misinformation in order to protect the image of Genetic Engineering. 1991
49:36 So, powerful and persistent and successful of clearing GMO contamination.
Chapter: Disappearing of a Disaster.
51:33 I called one of the scientists who was a professor of the Mayo clinic
52:38 Their research shows a strong likely-hood that Genetic Engineering caused the epidemic
53:40 With all this evidence, the case against Genetic Engineering become very strong indeed.
54:11 For the official story -
54:56 The FDA knew before 1992 that GE could not be ruled out as a cause of the MS epidemic
56:08 FDA official statements state the GE was not involved at all
56:34 The FDA knew enough in May of 1992 that doubt had been cast on the safety of GE because of that incident
54:56 The FDA knew before 1992 that GE could not be ruled out as a cause of the MS epidemic
56:08 FDA official statements state the GE was not involved at all
56:34 The FDA knew enough in May of 1992 that doubt had been cast on the safety of GE because of that incident
57:18 When we started the GMO labeling campaigns on the west coast, the general public did not know what a GMO was
58:30 And it is so gross that you will hear from governments around the world who are promoting this and scientists that there is not human health problem associated with GMOs....not a sneeze and a sniffle
59:10 History is so important as it relates to GMOs
59:42 1991, Michael Taylor
1:01:19 The transition from government to corporate funding
1:01:50 It took almost 9 years from the creation of the first GE bacterium to the creation of the first Genetic Engineered plant
1:04:45 I believe that Michael Taylor was brought in at that critical juncture to get thing moving in the direction of the Bush White House and the head people of the FDA wanted. Tracking the memos....you can see where the clout was coming from
Watch (1 hour 18+ mins)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rBL0MK9Y-o


Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/13/15 01:29 PM

https://www.agronomy.org/news/media-inquiries/releases/2014/0403/623/

American Society of Agronomy
5585 Guilford Road • Madison, WI 53711-5801 • 608-273-8080 • Fax 608-273-2021
www.agronomy.org
Twitter | Facebook | RSS News Release Feed
NEWS RELEASE
Contact: Susan V. Fisk, Public Relations Manager, 608-273-8091, sfisk@sciencesocieties.org

A new approach to detecting changes in GM foods
Comparing biochemicals in the GM foods to their non-GM counterparts is enlightening


April 3, 2014--Does genetic manipulation causes unintended changes in food quality and composition? Are genetically modified (GM) foods less nutritious than their non-GM counterparts, or different in unknown ways?

Despite extensive cultivation and testing of GM foods, those questions still linger in the minds of many consumers. A new study in the March issue of The Plant Genome demonstrates a potentially more powerful approach to answering them.

In research led by Owen Hoekenga, a Cornell University adjunct assistant professor, scientists extracted roughly 1,000 biochemicals, or “metabolites,” from the fruit of tomatoes. These tomatoes had been genetically engineered to delay fruit ripening—a common technique to help keep fruits fresher longer. The researchers then compared this “metabolic profile” from the GM fruit to the profile of its non-GM variety.

Extracting and analyzing hundreds metabolites at once gives researchers a snapshot of the fruit’s physiology, which can be compared against others.

When the scientists compared the biochemicals of the GM tomato and a wide assortment other non-GM tomatoes, including modern and heirloom varieties, they found no significant differences overall. Thus, although the GM tomato was distinct from its parent, its metabolic profile still fell within the “normal” range of biochemical diversity exhibited by the larger group of varieties. However, the biochemicals related to fruit ripening did show a significant difference—no surprise because that was the intent of the genetic modification.

The finding suggests little or no accidental biochemical change due to genetic modification in this case, as well as a “useful way to address consumer concerns about unintended effects” in general, Hoekenga says.

He explains that the FDA already requires developers of GM crops to compare a handful of key nutritional compounds in GM varieties relative to their non-GM parents. The process is designed to catch instances where genetic manipulation may have affected nutritional quality, for example.

Moreover, comparing a GM variety to diverse cultivars can help scientists and consumers put into context any biochemical changes that are observed. “We accept that there isn’t just one kind of tomato at the farmer’s market. We look for diverse food experiences,” Hoekenga says. “So we think that establishing the range of acceptable metabolic variability [in food] can be useful for examining GM varieties.”

The process was expensive, and the chemistry methods can’t yet be used in official safety assessments, Hoekenga acknowledges. Making statistical comparisons of metabolic “fingerprints” is no easy task. In their study, Hoekenga’s group adapted a style of statistics used in other research.

But the techniques don’t apply only to tomato. “The method can be applied to any plant or crop,” Hoekenga says. “We’ve made something fundamentally useful that anyone can use and improve on.”

When crossing parent plants, for example, breeders often like to track the genes underlying their trait of interest, such as resistance to a pathogen. That’s because pinpointing offspring that carry the right genes is often faster and easier than examining plants for the trait itself.

But sometimes, so many genes contribute to a single trait that figuring out which genes are involved in the first place becomes onerous. This is where Hoekenga thinks his style of research and analysis might one day help. “We’re trying to describe at the biochemical level what might be responsible for a trait. And from that, you could extract genetic information to use in breeding.”

# # #

A copy of the full article can be found at https://www.crops.org/story/2014/apr/thu/a-new-approach-to-detecting-unintended-changes-in-gm-foods

A peer-reviewed international journal of agriculture and natural resource sciences, Agronomy Journal is published six times a year by the American Society of Agronomy, with articles relating to original research in soil science, crop science, agroclimatology and agronomic modeling, production agriculture, and software. For more information visit: www.agronomy.org/publications/aj
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/13/15 06:45 PM

Do You Value Your DNA and Genetic Health? Stay Away from Monsanto Chemicals, Study Says

Nick Meyer On March 13, 2015

While the powers-that-be insist these chemicals are safe, the study casts a dark shadow on their safety especially in light of the importance of genetic health, both now and among future generations, to human health in general.

http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/do...als-study-says/


Study: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138357181300003X
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/13/15 08:16 PM

Campbell Soup CEO says distrust of 'Big Food' a growing problem

by Phil Wahba February 18, 2015

The company, whose portfolio of products ranges from V8 juice to Pepperidge Farm cake to its namesake soups, has found itself grappling with big changes in consumer behavior, in particular growing interest in fresh food and consumers much more keen to know what impact what they’re eating is having on their health and where it’s from.

http://fortune.com/2015/02/18/campbell-soup/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/15/15 08:50 AM

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/10/01/228221063/when-edible-plants-turn-their-defenses-on-us
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/15/15 04:45 PM

The citizens of Argentina are trying to worn us. Please listen to this important speech from Dr. Jeff Ritterman about what has happened to this country's health. Kids dying and born with deformities, high rates of cancer. He also talks about Dr. Andres Carrasco, an Argentine neuroscientist, who proved these deformities/cancer were caused by Glyphosate, a/k/a Round Up weed killer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lqz2O5h7Poc#t=18

Info on Dr. Carrasco:

Dr. Andres Carrasco, 67, neuroscientist fought Monsanto over Roundup

05/14/2014 By MICHAEL WARREN Associated Press

His team’s study, published in the peer-reviewed Chemical Research in Toxicology journal, found that injecting very low doses of glyphosate into embryos can change levels of retinoic acid, causing the same sort of spinal defects that doctors are increasingly registering in communities where farm chemicals are ubiquitous. Retinoic acid, a form of vitamin A, is fundamental for keeping cancers in check and triggering genetic expression, the process by which embryonic cells develop into organs and limbs.

http://chicago.suntimes.com/uncategorize...o-over-roundup/

Info on Dr. Ritterman:

Jeff Ritterman, MD, retired as chief of cardiology at Kaiser Richmond in 2010, where he had worked since 1981. Dr. Ritterman currently serves as Vice President of the Board of Directors of the San Francisco Bay Area chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility.

http://www.psr.org/environment-and-healt...tterman-md.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-ritterman/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/15/15 05:00 PM

Ghana Court Orders Temporary Halt on Commercialization of GM Crops

Posted on Mar 4 2015 - 3:02am by Sustainable Pulse

Food Sovereignty Ghana is a grass-roots movement of Ghanaians, home and abroad, dedicated to the promotion of food sovereignty in Ghana. FSG still maintains that the National Biosfety Committee has unlawfully been operating in the place of a National Biosafety Authority and is in clear breach of the provisions of the Biosafety Act 2011 Act (831), as regards the need for public awareness and participation in decisions affecting the release of genetically modified organisms into the environment.

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/03/04/g...s/#.VQXxdo0tH3g

Ghana Temporarily Bans GMO Commercialization

If so, Ghana would join countries as diverse as Thailand, Venezuela, Brazil, Russia, Switzerland, and Australia that have also banned GMOs, among many others. Could it be looking to Kyrgyzstan,which decided to become one of the first countries in the world to ban all GMO crops as well as the sale and importation of genetically modified organisms? Perhaps allowing citizens to enjoy better reproductive, cellular, and digestive health while the environment evades millions more pounds of pesticides is a leading factor for the ban.

Joining the trend of other Asian countries to ban GMOs, with China’s recent refusal of 8 different shipments of GMO corn and the nation of Bhutan also going 100% organic, the tide seems to be turning for Monsanto and biotech monopolies who would push herbicide-‘resistant’ seed on the world.

http://naturalsociety.com/ghana-temporarily-bans-gmo-commercialization/?utm_source=Natural+Society&utm_campaign=239129c304-Email+692%3A+3%2F10%2F2015+-+Cooking+Oil+Aging&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f20e6f9c84-239129c304-324071473
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/16/15 12:41 AM

Find Your Representative:
http://www.house.gov/

https://www.facebook.com/KirstenGillibrand…
http://www.gillibrand.senate.gov/contact/

https://www.facebook.com/chuckschumer
http://www.schumer.senate.gov/contact/email-chuck
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/16/15 01:29 AM

We Are The Many - Makana

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq3BYw4xjxE&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/16/15 02:10 AM

Senior academic condemns ‘deluded’ supporters of GM food as being ‘anti-science’ and ignoring evidence of dangers

Dr Jane Goodall argues supporters of GM food ignored evidence of harm

4 March 15

‘They then set to work to convince the public and government officials, through the dissemination of false information, that there was an overwhelming expert consensus, based on solid evidence, that the new foods were safe. Yet this, as Druker points out, was clearly not true.’

Importantly, she claims, the companies have spread disinformation to try and win public support.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...l#ixzz3UWgDDIFn
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/16/15 02:36 AM

Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public

Book review excerpt:

"Before reading this text, I knew something about the corruption and scientific manipulation which are shameful components of the GMO assessment and approval process, but Druker reveals the full scale of the connivance and complacency at the heart of the US administration. He is a meticulous researcher and narrator, and what he reveals is truly chilling. Personally, I was surprised by the revelations that in the early days of the GM enterprise the push for the acceptance of what was then a very novel technology came not from the politicians and the biotech industry, but from university researchers who saw a new academic (and commercial) avenue opening up before them. It was salutary to learn that even at that stage there was no serious attempt to establish the safety of GMO crops and foods; hype and aggressive marketing took the place of careful science, with dissenting voices silenced and inconvenient research results either ignored or labelled as biased or incompetent. Once Monsanto and the other biotech corporations and the politicians became involved, the stakes became so high that doubt was banished and dissenters were simply vilified and victimised. The rolling bandwaggon simply crushed anybody who happened to get in the way. One of the early martyrs was Arpad Pusztai, whose research project was destroyed in 1999 and who was thrown to the lions because he had the temerity to demonstrate, in his results, that the animals consuming GMO materials appeared to be harmed in some way."

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Altered-Genes-Twisted-Truth-Systematically/dp/0985616903
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/16/15 08:04 AM

http://grist.org/food/the-genetically-modified-food-debate-where-do-we-begin/

The genetically modified food debate: Where do we begin?

By Nathanael Johnson on 8 Jul 2013 508 comments
ShareTweet
gmo-debateShutterstock
I’ve lingered at the fringes of the debate over genetically modified foods since the ’90s, hoping that some solid fact would filter out and show me clearly who was in the right. But that hasn’t happened. Every shred of information, it seems, is contested, and all this turbulence keeps the water muddy.

Now the debate is coming to a head again. Britain is reconsidering its restrictive position. Here in the U.S., bills to require the labeling of GM foods were introduced to the legislatures in 28 states this year. Now that I’m writing on food for Grist, I can’t keep waiting on the sidelines for someone else to clear this up. I’m going to have to figure it out for myself.

A project like this requires humility. Many people — including, I’m sure, many of you — may have greater expertise in this area than I do. If so, let me know where you think I should be pointing the searchlight. Or, if you’re like me, and just want to get reliable information from someone who’s not bent on convincing you one way or the other, well, come along for the ride.

My goal here is to get past the rhetoric, fully understand the science, and take the high ground in this debate — in the same way that greens have taken the high ground in talking about climate. It’s hard to make the case that we should trust science and act to stem global warming, while at the same time we are scoffing at the statements [PDF] of *snort* scientists on genetic modification.

Now that doesn’t mean we have to stop thinking, and simply accept everything that the voice of authority lays in front of us. I’m going to look at the science critically, and take into account the efforts of agricultural corporations to cant the evidence. When Mark Lynas made his speech saying that he’d changed his mind about genetic engineering, I was unconvinced, because he didn’t dig into the evidence (he provides a little more of this, though not much, in his book). Lynas did, however, make one important point: There are parallels between opposition to GM crops and other embarrassingly unscientific conspiracy theories. If there are grounds to oppose genetic engineering, they will have to be carefully considered grounds, supported by science.

Of course people who are concerned about genetic engineering don’t have a monopoly on error and overstatement. As the journal Nature put it in a special issue in on transgenic crops:

People are positively swimming in information about GM technologies. Much of it is wrong — on both sides of the debate. But a lot of this incorrect information is sophisticated, backed by legitimate-sounding research and written with certitude. (With GM crops, a good gauge of a statement’s fallacy is the conviction with which it is delivered.)

Over the next few weeks, I’ll be writing a series of pieces, attempting to highlight legitimate concerns and identify the arguments that should be taken out back and … retired. In the courtroom, a judge will often work with both sides to determine a set of facts that all can agree upon, before moving on to argue about how the law should apply to those facts. I’d like to do something similar here: sort out established facts, and gain a sense for what the bulk of the science indicates.

I’m going to start with the most politicized issue: Is there any evidence that genetically modified food is directly harmful to people who eat it? There’s a one-word answer to this: no.

If you aren’t prepared to take my word for it (especially that particular word), things get a bit more complicated. The most persuasive evidence is that millions of people have been eating genetically modified foods for the past 20 years without any obvious ill effects. If anyone exhibited acute symptoms after eating GM food, we would have seen it.

At the same time, the absence of evidence of harm does not prove safety. If the effects were subtle and chronic, and showed up in only a small subset of the population, it’s possible that we could have missed something. And we don’t know what to look for.

That’s the point Margaret Mellon made when I called her at the Union of Concerned Scientists, in Washington, D.C. Mellon has been critical of U.S. policies on genetically engineered crops.

“People need to understand how hard it is to use the scientific method to address the issue of, ‘Is genetic engineering safe?’” she said.

The problem: It’s not a yes-or-no question.

“It does not appear,” Mellon said, “that there’s any risk that applies across the board to all genetically engineered food and to all people. Each plant is different, each gene insertion is different, each person’s response is different.”

In other words, every GM food could be wonderfully healthy until one particular gene insertion causes things to go awry in just such a way that it messes with the immune system of one particular person. How do you deal with this?

“You need to make a list of all the things that might be potential problems and analyze each of these risks in a wide variety of genetically engineered products,” Mellon said.

Dozens of scientific advisory panels have done this sort of brainstorming. The World Health Organization [PDF], for example, reached the fairly common conclusion that the problems in genetically engineered foods are fundamentally the same as the dangers that arise naturally in plant breeding. Each relies on mutations randomly mixing up the genome. Each sometimes provides unexpected outcomes — try to make corn disease-resistant, end up with too many toxins in the kernels. In both GM and conventional breeding, scientists rely on screening to weed out the bad cobs.

However, researchers generally acknowledge that there’s something a little different about genetic engineering. The United Kingdom’s 2003 Genetic Modification Science Review [PDF], led by David King, puts it this way: “By virtue of the different processes involved, there will be some sources of uncertainty and potential gaps in knowledge that are more salient with respect to GM food production techniques.”

If you have no idea what that means, that’s because it’s incredibly vague. Sure, King is saying, there’s something unusual about transferring a firefly gene into a tomato — that kind of thing doesn’t happen very often in nature. (Although it does happen, amazingly — scientists have found examples of genes moving between different species.) But we don’t know what that difference implies. The report goes on to say that the science so far suggests that those implications have amounted to nothing so far. All the same, this unique technique does create “uncertainty and potential gaps in knowledge.”

The quest for greater certainty on genetic engineering leaves you chasing shadows: When you’re dealing with gaps in knowledge, rather than hard data, it’s hard to tell what’s an outlandish hypothetical, and what’s the legitimate danger. Anything, of course, is possible, but we shouldn’t be paralyzed by unknown risks, or we’ll end up huddled in our basements wearing tinfoil hats. Exhibit A:


There’s no way to completely eliminate risk. The real question is, have we thought through the realistic potential for problems, and put regulatory safety nets out to protect ourselves?

Trying to answer that opens another can of worms. Critics like Mellon say that, right now, the producers of GM crops aren’t required to do any testing at all. GM boosters say that regulations are so onerous they stifle innovation. Clearly, someone is wrong here. I’ll take that up in my next post.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/19/15 01:13 AM

Monsanto mounts an aggressive GMO PR campaign

By Wenonah Hauter, Food Tank March 18, 2015

Excerpts:

Companies like Monsanto hope that casting doubt on the GMO labeling debate will cause us to get caught up in the proverbial weeds of the issue. So let’s get something straight: the debate over GMOs isn’t just about GMOs. It’s about the current and future state of our food system—who grows and sells our food, how it’s marketed, and what technologies were used to produce it. By selling seeds to farmers, peddling pesticides, forming corporate monopolies, and funding academic research on GMOs, agribusiness giants like Monsanto have one goal in mind: controlling the food system.

Since 1999, the fifty largest agricultural and food patent-holding companies and two of the largest biotech and agrochemical trade associations have spent more than US$572 million in campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures, much of it to create a favorable political context to allow GMOs to proliferate.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/The-Bite/2015/0318/Monsanto-mounts-an-aggressive-GMO-PR-campaign
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/19/15 11:12 AM

Merchants of Doubt: Robert Kenner Exclusive Interview

"They have been very successful in tricking the American public and the American press..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMSf21QWLFc
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/19/15 11:28 AM

http://grist.org/food/genetic-engineering-vs-natural-breeding-whats-the-difference/

Genetic engineering vs. natural breeding: What’s the difference?

By Nathanael Johnson on 16 Jul 2013 589 comments
ShareTweet
If you are new to this series, I’ve been trying to break down the competing claims about genetic engineering. I’m not an expert: When I told a friend I was writing about GMOs he asked, “So are you for them, or against?” My answer: “I’m trying to figure that out.”

The next step in trying to figure that out is to really understand how genetic engineering works. Is this process simply a minor extension of plant-breeding techniques? Or is there a way in which genetic engineering represents a fundamental discontinuity with the age-old practice of farmers selecting seeds?

That’s what I asked Pamela Ronald, a scientist at U.C. Davis who uses genetic engineering to study rice. I approached Ronald because she’s not one of those scientists who is so used to looking through the microscope that she loses sight of the big ecological picture. Her husband, Raoul Adamchack, teaches organic agriculture at Davis, and together they wrote the book Tomorrow’s Table, which makes the case for incorporating genetic engineering into organic practices. Nor is Ronald among the progress-addled optimists who rush to embrace every new technology. She gave birth to her third child in her outdoor hot tub, because the science suggests that — for a normal pregnancy, with one kid already out, and a hospital nearby — it’s actually safer.

Raoul and PamPico van Houtryve
When I started to ask questions, Ronald asked if we could back up a bit. “I end up asking people, ‘What is it that bothers you about genetic engineering?’” she said. “Is it the idea of moving genes from one species to another? Well, what we do here is rice — we put rice genes into rice plants. Is it that you don’t like corporations? Well, I’m at a university here, and we’re funded by the government. Is it that you don’t like profits? Well, we have no private funding, and the rice we are developing is all for developing countries. We don’t make money off our discoveries.”

What bothers me about genetically engineered crops, I told her, is that the technology seems to disrupt the co-evolutionary relationship between farmer and plant. I like the idea of farmers saving seeds and coaxing plants toward a greater harmony with their environment (the seasons, the pests, the culture), rather than buying their seeds each year from Monsanto. Plus, in that slow process of selection, it might be easier to weed out any unintended effects that cause problems.

“So,” she said, “in the developed world almost everyone buys their seeds, but the people using our rice can’t afford that. They need to self their seeds” (i.e., they self-pollinate their seeds each year to provide for the next).

In the U.S. farmers buy hybrid seeds, which don’t work as well if you try to save the next generation. But the farmers in Bangladesh, who use rice Ronald pioneered, save seeds every year. The seeds are genetically engineered, yes are breed to contain genes discovered with GE* — but then they continue that process of co-evolutionary selection. As for the risk of unintended problems, Ronald said, “Any time you introduce a new seed there’s some risk, but the risks are small and the benefits are huge. I just think we need to work with whatever technology works best to achieve the goals of sustainable agriculture.”

As with birth, it’s a question of appropriate technology. I wanted to see for myself what it meant to create new seed, and how we might parse the risks of the various methods for doing it. The next day I drove up to Davis. Ronald was traveling, so she left me in the care of Randy Ruan, her lab tech.

IMG_3015

Ruan told me to meet him outside the greenhouse. He’d leaned a red bicycle (with an Obama button pined to a pannier) against the glass. He seemed a little bemused by my interest.

“Take as many pictures of rice as you like,” he said.

He had a point. Everything pretty much looked like rice. But the story behind each plant was slightly different.

Marker assisted breedingRice derived via marker-assisted breeding.
When doing marker-assisted breeding, scientists cross their plants through pollination, hoping to get an exciting new combination of traits. As new plants emerge, they can take a tiny piece of tissue and see if it contains the genes they were hoping for. If not, they can discard the plants. It’s conventional breeding, assisted by a keyhole through which to peek at the DNA.

The problem with conventional breeding, marker-assisted or otherwise, is that it’s messy, said Margaret Smith, a plant breeder at Cornell. (I followed up with her to fill in the nitty gritty of how things worked.) You’re mixing two whole strands of DNA and swapping lots of genes at once, Smith explained. Researchers crossbreed generation after generation with a plant that displays an interesting mutation, creating thousands of plants, most of which they will destroy. It’s not exactly the slow dance with the land that I’d imagined.

Mutation breed riceThis rice was exposed to radioactivity to induce mutations. FN stands for “fast neutron.”
Another way to tweak crops is to induce mutations by dousing seeds in mutagenic chemicals or zapping them with radiation. This causes bits of DNA to copy incorrectly, which causes more changes than you generally see with genetic engineering. “You’re just rolling the dice and hoping to get something interesting,” Smith said.

It works. As it turns out, the 20-pound bag of organic brown rice on top of my refrigerator was a strain (Calrose 76) that mutated after exposure to 25 kR of Cobalt-60 gamma radiation.

Genetically engineered riceGenetically engineered rice.
The most common mode of experimentation in Ronald’s lab, of course, is genetic engineering. Ruan gamely pointed out a few examples. Ronald had mentioned that there were two main projects for which her lab is known: the discovery of the gene XA21, which confers resistance to bacterial disease — good for farmers in the developing world who can’t afford antibacterial pesticides; and a gene that allows rice to tolerate submergence better — good for those same farmers, who now have an herbicide-free way of drowning weeds without drowning the rice.

There are two main ways of genetically engineering plants: shooting them with a gene gun, or using the microbe Agrobacterium tumefaciens. A gene gun literally shoots pellets coated with DNA through plant tissue. As a result of this pure mechanical force, a few genes end up in the nucleus and are incorporated into it. Ronald’s lab, however, uses Agrobacterium. With a little arm twisting, I got Ruan to take me to the lab and walk me through the process.

Robbins Hall at UC DavisMosaics outside the Ronald lab in Robbins Hall.
I wanted to understand in detail how this worked because, years ago, I had attended a lecture given by Ignacio Chapela, a critic of genetic engineering, and his critique had turned on these details. Genetic engineers often make it sound as if they are cutting and pasting DNA in precise places, he said, but the genes are sprayed into the genome at random. The thing that really bothered Chapela is that scientists bundle the gene they want with several others: They will build a sequence starting with a promoter (or “on switch”), then the gene they want to transfer, then a marker (which displays some visible trait to show them everything is working), and a terminator (the “off switch”).

Throw all this at a genome and it could cause trouble: The terminator sequence could break off, Chapela pointed out, and all of a sudden the plant is expressing not just the trait you want, but also whatever comes right after that in the genome. Plants often have inactive genes for the manufacture of toxins, for instance, and the randomness of genetic engineering could turn them on.

Flasks in Ronald's labFlasks in Ronald’s lab.
All this, it turns out, is absolutely true. But it’s also occurring all the time in the wild and in plant breeding, without the assistance of genetic engineering. The process for building the bundle of genes is, in actuality, incredibly precise. Because researchers are working with a relatively small amount of DNA, they really can cut and paste with precision. To this sequence, they add a bit of DNA called a plasmid — which catches both ends of the sequence, turning it into a circle. Plasmids are strange and fascinating things: They are essentially tools that bacteria use to swap genetic information between species — an instrument for creating transgenics built by evolution.

A tray of plasmids carrying DNA bundles in a freezerA tray of plasmids carrying DNA bundles in a freezer.
Next comes Agrobacterium. This particular microbe specializes in injecting plasmids into plant DNA. In the wild it does this with genes that make the plant form a home in which the Agrobacterium thrive. Scientists simply replace those plasmids with the ones they’ve constructed.

Chapela was correct to say that this part of the process is random; there’s no control over where the Agrobacterium insert their payload, and there is a chance that this bundle of DNA can fracture. But, Smith told me, the same thing happens during normal breeding. The promoter might, certainly, turn on unwanted genes. But the promoter, which almost always comes from the cauliflower mosaic virus, is doing the same thing all the time in the wild.

The difference, Chapela had hypothesized, was that genetic engineering methods would lead genes to fall into more vulnerable and unstable sections of the genome. But that hasn’t happened. Analyses of thousands of genomes show that introduced genes fall randomly amid the DNA strands. The genes introduced by humans have proven to be no more likely to break up or move around the genome. (I’m not getting to Chapela’s main point, that engineered genes were spreading with pollen. More on that later.)

Of course, Chapela’s objection was just one possible scenario — others have and will continue to be raised. The point is, it’s easy to overestimate the risk of the new while underestimating the risks of the status quo. Species appear to be fairly stable, but beneath the surface, we live in a churning ocean of genetic flux.

In 2003, when the United Kingdom’s GM Science Review Panel (chaired by climate hawk Sir David King) looked closely at this issue, it concluded that genetic engineering was no more likely [PDF] to produce unintended consequences than conventional breeding:

Conventional plant breeding can produce gross undirected and unpredictable genetic changes and in that sense has considerable uncertainty. This is well documented and we know much about the types of change at a cellular level.

Comparing forms of genetic modificationClick to embiggen. A handy table comparing forms of genetic modification.Kevin Folta
There is, of course, one potentially important difference:

A special feature of GM breeding is that it allows the transfer into crop plants of one or a few genes from what might be radically different organisms. Conventional breeding cannot, for example, form plants that can assemble complex human immunoglobulins as has been achieved in GM plants. This inevitably raises uncertainty about whether there are any novel genetic interactions and whether these are potentially harmful …

A further special feature of GM breeding is that the products of particular gene constructs may become present in radically different foodstuffs, effectively independently of any biological relationships … this can hold important implications for risk management policy in areas such as the avoidance of exposures to any allergens that might pass through regulatory screening.

Recently engineered rice sproutingRecently engineered rice sprouting.
As a result, genetically engineered foods are screened for potential allergens. It’s frequently pointed out that Pioneer Hi-Bred mistakenly introduced an allergen into soybeans when it added a gene from Brazil nuts. The rest of the story is that we know about this because there was the right testing regime, and the product never went on the market — the company (and the regulators) knew what to look for and successfully weeded the plant out.

So what’s the takeaway of all this? Before I finished up my conversation with Margaret Smith, I asked her if there might be some evolutionary wisdom in the way genetic material gets swapped during normal reproduction that was fundamentally different than techniques of genetic engineering. We don’t know of any, she said. But she added:

I think we need to be thoughtful, and as we learn more we need to continue to think about this carefully. We’re learning more every day — just look at the revolution in epigenetics — and that could change the way we approach this. But my message on this is that we shouldn’t just stop because there are unknowns. Every technology has unknowns. We just have to be as thoughtful as we can.

Those of us who are suspicious of genetically engineered foods need to be thoughtful, too. It makes no sense, for instance, to protest GMOs while accepting that irradiated organic mutants should be exempt from any special regulation. It makes no sense to try to ban all genetically engineered foods if we aren’t concerned about the rice-to-rice transfers that people like Ronald are doing.

I still think that we have an important role to play in making sure the technology isn’t used inappropriately. But it’s not useful to flail blindly against something we don’t understand.

Rice

Update: Pamela Ronald made it clear during our initial conversation that, while she used genetic engineering for gene discovery, it was her collaborators, using marker-assisted selection who actually developed rice for farmers. I omitted this because I thought that a discussion of the distinction between basic and applied science would be tangential to the main point: How is GE different from conventional breeding?

This distinction, however, raises another important question, namely: Is genetic engineering actually a useful tool for sustainable agriculture? I’ll be getting to that.

I did make one real mistake. Ronald’s lab found the submergence tolerance gene Sub1, which is indeed the gene that was released in the Bangladeshi varieties, but it was introduced through marker-assisted selection. I regret the error.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/19/15 12:08 PM

Here is a great explanation on GMO and Bt pesticide. A must watch documentary by David Suzuki. 46 Minutes

A Silent Forest: The Growing Threat Genetically Engineered Trees

"I am narrating this film because I'm concerned about the unseemly haste with which my colleagues and my peer groups seem
to be ready to rush in and begin to apply ideas in this revolutionary area, to apply ideas that I think are far too early to expose people either in our drugs, in our food or, out in open fields."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hjy-CJlzbM
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/19/15 12:15 PM

Final Suit Routing Genetically Engineered Crops and Related Practices from Refuges

(Beyond Pesticides, March 19, 2015)

A federal court ruled Monday against the use of neonicotinoid insecticides linked with destruction of bee colonies and other beneficial insects in national wildlife refuges in the Midwest region. The ruling caps a legal campaign to end the planting of genetically engineered (GE) crops and other industrial agricultural practices on national wildlife refuges across the country.

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15221
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/19/15 12:24 PM

Former Pro-GMO Scientist Speaks Out On The Real Dangers of Genetically Engineered Food

September 24, 2014

When I was on the payroll, I was the designated scientist of my institute to address public groups and reassure them that genetically engineered crops and foods were safe. There is, however, a growing body of scientific research – done mostly in Europe, Russia, and other countries – showing that diets containing engineered corn or soya cause serious health problems in laboratory mice and rats.I don’t know if I was passionate about it but I was knowledgeable. I defended the side of technological advance, of science and progress.

I have in the last 10 years changed my position. I started paying attention to the flow of published studies coming from Europe, some from prestigious labs and published in prestigious scientific journals, that questioned the impact and safety of engineered food.

I refute the claims of the biotechnology companies that their engineered crops yield more, that they require less pesticide applications, that they have no impact on the environment and of course that they are safe to eat.

There are a number of scientific studies that have been done for Monsanto by universities in the U.S., Canada, and abroad. Most of these studies are concerned with the field performance of the engineered crops, and of course they find GMOs safe for the environment and therefore safe to eat.

http://earthweareone.com/former-pro-gmo-...ngineered-food/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/19/15 01:11 PM

http://grist.org/food/genetic-engineering-do-the-differences-make-a-difference/

Genetic engineering: Do the differences make a difference?

By Nathanael Johnson on 24 Jul 2013 418 comments
ShareTweet
girl with grapefruitShutterstock
Last week, I asked how different genetic engineering was from conventional breeding. My answer (to boil some 2,000 words down to three) was: just a little bit.

But there’s more than one way to think about this little bit of difference. I think it’s important to recognize — as we hash this out, as you try to convert your friends, or your local politician, or me — that there really are fundamentally opposed values here, and they influence how we see the same things. Two smart people with different perspectives might look at the same evidence, and come away with radically different conclusions about risk.

And so a couple of people suggested revisiting the conclusions I took home from my visit to Pam Ronald’s lab. One of these people was Jack Heinemann, a New Zealand scientist who works on risk assessment of genetically modified organisms.

One real difference between genetic engineering and good old sexual reproduction, Heinemann suggested, is that genetic engineering frequently creates bits of double-stranded RNA (imagine a free-floating chunklet of DNA). We don’t know if this happens with conventional breeding or not.

RNARNA.UCL Mathematical and Physical Sciences

I’m always tempted to dive into the science, as is my nerdific wont, but you don’t need to fully understand the science to understand the argument — and see why it’s so divisive. In short, this issue of double-stranded RNA is pretty representative: You could substitute any number of potential GM horror stories that people have dreamed up. However, if you do want a peek at the science, let me just offer you this lovely video from the people at Nature.


Basically, Heinemann says, we know that we’re creating double-stranded RNA in genetically modified foods, and you can think up several scenarios in which it could be harmful.

When I asked Anastasia Bodnar of Biofortified (which generally favors genetic engineering) about this, she said that these scenarios didn’t worry her. You can dream up hypotheticals all day, but the world we live in is already full of these kinds of possibly dangerous unknowns. We’ve been living with double-stranded RNA since the beginning of time — the stuff is probably in every bite we fork into our mouths. Normal (non-engineered) rice, for instance, has lots of it; moreover, it has thousands of RNA sequences that match (and therefore might hypothetically interfere with) ones in the human body. So, given the ubiquity of double-stranded RNA, we must just be impervious to it. One of our several lines of defense: Stomach acid utterly destroys RNA, though there’s some preliminary evidence suggesting that some double strands might survive. The point is that we are up to our ears in the RNA of other species, so we must be well equipped to deal with it.

Well, Heinemann says (I’m not quoting him conversationally because he lives on the other side of the world and communicated in late-night emails — but here’s a quote from one of his papers):

Rice, of course, has a long history of safe use in the human diet. If rice produced a small RNA that was toxic, it would have been screened out of our diets thousands of years ago. The important point is that the safe use of a conventional plant with potential [small RNAs] does not extend to its GM counterpart.

This is where I imagine a pro-GE interlocutor starts pulling out his hair and exclaims: Gah! OK, maybe every small RNA in rice is thousands of years old, but maybe it was inserted yesterday! We don’t know. So why do you think that the terrifying black box of nature is any less likely to gin up a horrific scenario?

Anti-GMO: We know we are making double-stranded DNA with GM. We don’t know that it’s happening frequently in nature. So we should be more careful.

Pro-GMO: Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t, and it almost certainly doesn’t matter. We’re almost certainly impervious.

Anti-GMO: But maybe it does — and if so, hoo-boy, we’ll all be sorry!

Pro-GMO: Oh, please — you are taking a bigger risk walking down the stairs.

Anti-GMO: Am not.

Pro-GMO: Are too. [and on forever and ever]

Rise above the details of my imaginary debate for a moment to notice the ground each side has staked out as a presumptive starting place. You have one side that sees humans as fragile and dependent on maintaining the nurturing environment in which they evolved. The other sees humans as tough survivors of a fundamentally chaotic environment. One side sees huge dangers in technologies that alter our surroundings. The other sees technological advance as a defense against nature red in tooth and claw.

I think we can all recognize that both positions make sense. Nature is abundant and nurturing. Also, it often wants to eat us. It’s not useful to argue that one is right and the other is wrong. But it is useful to recognize where we sit on this continuum if we hope to assess the risks and benefits of innovations in a clear-eyed way. (This is where I am, or this for all the dirty details.)

You can see this divide all over the GM food debate. Heinemann took me to task for taking the perspective of the technological optimist, for instance, with regards to the cauliflower mosaic virus promoter. (This is a bit of DNA that we’ve borrowed from a plant virus and slip into genomes along with genes, to boost their power.) I’d noted that we see the virus inserting a promoter out in wild and woolly nature all the time, and reasoned that, if that hasn’t caused any problems, an intentional and tested use of this natural tool was even safer. In other words: Humans are tough, we’re used to this sort of thing. But you could think of it in just the opposite way: We’re using this piece of virus in a whole new way, placing it into thousands of acres of crops every year. If something subtle went wrong in this case, it could cause problems that wouldn’t have showed up in nature.

So, to get back the question at hand, the evidence we have suggests that there is “a little” difference between GE and conventional breeding. But the interpretation of what “a little” means for perception of risk, and for public policy, varies wildly depending on people’s values.

The anti-GE people are angry that additional risk — no matter how distantly hypothetical — is being placed upon them without their permission. The pro-GE people are infuriated by what looks to them to be the defiance of a logical cost-benefit analysis — that is, why worry about this when there are much bigger risks all around? The former wants regulations to protect the sanctity of the environmental status quo from evil corporations. The latter wants the innovations to improve the environment, and fears evil regulations will impede them.

This doesn’t mean that values are the only thing that matters, or that any position can be legitimate. There are probably a lot of claims floating around out there that both Jack Heinemann and Pam Ronald would agree are phony. And there are a lot of us in the middle of this debate, inclined slightly to one side or the other, who want to become more familiar with the evidence for the risks and benefits before we make up our minds.

A true conversation can only occur when both parties come to the table ready to fight for their convictions, but also willing to question them. I find I’m much more persuasive if I’m also willing to be persuaded. Which is why I’m writing this.

A couple reminders: I promise to dig into the the big-picture issues of politics, and money, and ecology. Lots of people in the comments want to know about corporate influence over science and intellectual property. But there’s a couple other things that were brought up from the last few posts that I’d like to flesh out first. Remember, this is an iterative process: When I take up a new topic, that’s the beginning, not the endpoint — so if you have evidence that fills out the picture from my first pass, let me know in the comments below. Every day I’m learning new things from the yeoman’s work some readers have been doing there.

More in this series:
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/19/15 01:20 PM

Monsanto settles 7 lawsuits after 2013 GMO-wheat scare

March 19, 2015

Excerpts

Without any admission of liability the company will pay some $350,000 in donations to agricultural schools.

In November, Monsanto has already agreed to settle about $2.4 million worth of damages in other lawsuits related to the Oregon scandal. The history of settlements seems like a drop in the ocean for a company that made $2.74 billion last year that with sales of $15.86 billion.

http://rt.com/usa/242085-monsanto-gmo-case-settlement/

---------------

Enjoy a refreshing take on the news, the truth. Chanel 93.4.

Abby Martin's "Breaking the Set," Thom Hartman's "The Big Picture," and Erin Aide's "Boom Bust."
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/19/15 01:47 PM

http://grist.org/food/genetically-modified-seed-research-whats-locked-and-what-isnt/

Genetically modified seed research: What’s locked and what isn’t

By Nathanael Johnson on 5 Aug 2013 191 comments
ShareTweet
beaker of moneyShutterstock
In the next few posts, I’m going to look at intellectual property rights in biotechnology and corporate influence over science. There are huge, philosophical issues to grapple with here, to wit: Should we even allow ownership of organisms? When it turns out that there are Monsanto crops growing in an organic farmer’s field (accidentally?), who is at fault? What’s the effect of corporations funding university research and patenting the discoveries of public scientists? As I’ve been doing, I’m going to focus on one sliver at a time, building toward bigger answers post by post.

You may have heard that companies place draconian licensing agreements on their genetically engineered seeds. In the same way that using software presumes you accept a raft of terms and conditions, using GM seeds generally means that you’re bound by a complex contract [PDF]. Scientists have said that these patent restrictions keep them from accurately testing GE seeds. However, the biotech companies claim that they cooperate with independent scientists and support objective research. So where’s the truth here?

In 2009, 26 scientists drafted an anonymous letter to the Enivironmental Protection Agency complaining that the legalese that came with each sack of GM grain was making it impossible for them to do their jobs. “No truly independent research can be legally conducted on many critical questions,” they wrote.

One of the anonymous 26 was Elson Shields, a corn-insect scientist at Cornell University.

“You had to have written permission from the companies for any science involving their seed, even if it was commercially available,” he said. Companies sometimes revoked this permission [PDF] in the middle of an experiment, undoing months of work. “Well, a research group decided to get boisterous about it and wrote that letter to the EPA,” Shields said.

This was not a group of starry-eyed environmentalists. “These were plant entomologists, mostly from Midwestern land-grant universities. We’re all generally pro-GMO,” Shields said. “It’s just that each event [of genetic insertion] needs to be looked at and evaluated on a scientific basis.”

“We readily admit that there were some concerns early on,” said Andy LaVigne when I called to ask him about this. LaVigne is president of the American Seed Trade Association, the organization that represents the crop biotech firms. But LaVigne says that he was caught somewhat off guard when Shields and the other scientists complained. “Well, we said, let’s get everyone around a table.”

That table was in a conference room at Iowa State University. The university scientists were shoulder-to-shoulder with the industry representatives for the first time.

“I think probably the biggest thing that came out of it is that we were sort of two communities talking past each other,” LaVigne said. “There were really a-ha moments on both sides. It evolved over the next six months and then the principles were adopted.”

Those principles made explicit an industry commitment to allow independent scientists to do any sort of research they wanted with commercially available seeds, as long as they weren’t trying to pirate the technology, and as long as they don’t sell or release the seeds into the wild afterward. If you read these principles [PDF], it sounds like the problem’s solved.

So I asked Shields: How’s that working out?

“If you are at a major agricultural school that’s negotiated an agreement with the companies, it’s working fine,” he said.

Any scientist working at those institutions with agreements is now free to experiment. The catch is that the companies require the universities to sign a further legal agreement, showing that they understand they can’t let researchers pirate the seeds or plant them after the experiment is over.

“Each company has to decide how many universities to make those agreements with,” Shields said. “What justification they have and why they pick one over the other, that’s above my pay grade. It may be that they know there’s a scientist whose work they don’t like, so they don’t choose that university.”

I went back to LaVigne and asked, why not just let all universities do this? He explained that it took a lot of time and lawyerly effort to draft agreements with every university, and some of the smaller companies had made the determination that they just didn’t have the lawyers on staff to contact them all.

But why bring in the lawyers in the first place? Why not just lay out the guidelines and go after anyone who violates them? That was just the decision the companies made, LaVigne said.

Want to guess where Monsanto stands in this? Monsanto has a blanket agreement allowing research at all universities in the United States. And actually, when Shields et al. made their complaint, Monsanto claimed it already had many of these agreements in place allowing independent research.

“Was that true?” I asked Shields. “Could you have been doing research on Monsanto grain?”

“Yes,” he said. “We just didn’t know it. I’m a scientist, I don’t speak legalese. Monsanto gets a lot of pain in the public press, but they are the company that interacts the best with public scientists — they have always been on the forefront of pushing public research forward.”

There was one problem still, he said: Scientists can’t work with seeds before they come on the market. That hampers his ability to make recommendations about which seeds work best under different conditions, or to test for unwanted effects. Remember the study [PDF] that showed that Monarch butterflies might die if they ate too much insect-resistant GE corn pollen? That was technically an illegal study, he said.

Ultimately, though, Shields said, everything I was asking about was a bit of a sideshow. Getting permission to do research is all well and good, but it’s meaningless unless you also are able to get money to do research.

“In my 30 years as a public scientist, there’s been a dramatic erosion of public funding. And that makes science more dependent on private funding. If I want to study something, I have to figure out who I can BS into giving me enough money. And these days everyone wants to invest in a sure thing. The preliminary stuff, the interesting stuff, competitive funding will never pay for it.”

Shields had told me when we started talking that he believed agriculture was going to have to make some spectacular innovations to prevent civilization from “the crash, burn, and starve scenario.” Genetic modification, he said, almost certainly will be a part of that. But, he said, you don’t necessarily get spectacular innovation by following the carrot (and the profits) in front of your nose:

“I think you need to try a lot of crazy ideas, you’re going to get a lot of failure, but you also might just get something big. The problem is it’s getting harder and harder to do that kind of work. Federal, state, institutional funding, it’s all drying up. That scenario is really the bigger risk than anything we’ve talked about.”

I’ll look further down this road soon. Next up, though, because I’ll be on vacation, I’m working on a guide to books about GM food.

More in this series:
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/20/15 07:19 AM

Former GMO Engineer Drops Biotech and Goes Organic

Thierry Vrain

"If you are a scientist and discover things that are of concern, then you are accused of doing “pseudoscience” and often viciously attacked by the industry and academics on the payroll."

"Those warnings were ignored."

"It troubles me that money and the bottom line are at the root of the use of the technology."

"Rats and mice are the canary in the mine, and we should be paying attention to what happens to them."

"There are a lot of people on the payroll and a lot of grant money flowing from biotech companies to academia."

"Even if genetic engineering was perfectly safe, I still question it because of genetic pollution. Organic crops and foods are becoming contaminated."

Regarding the gmo apple: "There’s no research or toxicity tests to show that it’s not toxic."

http://organicconnectmag.com/project/for...paign=fbmention
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/20/15 07:25 AM

Ontario County CSA Fair includes movie

Cornell Cooperative Extension of Ontario County is hosting a CSA (community-supported agriculture) Fair and Documentary Film from 1 to 4:30 p.m. March 21 at 480 N. Main St., Canandaigua.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/stor...movie/24510211/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/20/15 07:35 AM

Monsanto and DuPont Lose Initial Appeals over Mexico GM Maize Ban

Mar 20 2015

The legal battles over the existing ban on the planting of GM maize in Mexico continue to unfold with a string of four important court victories by the Acción Colectiva del Maíz.

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/03/20/m...n/#.VQwD440tH3g
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/21/15 12:06 PM

FDA News Release For Immediate Release March 20, 2015

FDA concludes Arctic Apples and Innate Potatoes are safe for consumption

Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration completed its evaluation for two varieties of apples genetically engineered by...

... the FDA encourages them to participate in a voluntary consultation process...

The consultation process includes a review of information provided by a company...

The FDA has no additional food safety questions at this time concerning food from these plant varieties. It is a company’s continuing responsibility to ensure that food it markets is safe and otherwise in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements. In certain circumstances, characteristics of these varieties of apples and potatoes that differ from their conventional counterparts may require disclosure to the consumer.

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm439121.htm
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/21/15 12:18 PM

Jeffrey M. Smith of the Institute for Responsible Technology and author of Seeds of Deception and Genetic Roulette talks with John (Total Health Magazine) about the war on GMOs.

3 minutes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOCjtZhTKho
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/21/15 01:28 PM

GMO Yeast in your wine?

Not if it is Non GMO Project Verified.

Natural Merchants is proud to announce that 29 of their imported organic wines have been Non-GMO Project Verified.

http://www.nongmoproject.org/2014/03/12/...ed-from-europe/

https://www.facebook.com/NaturalMerchants
Posted by: Timbo

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/21/15 02:46 PM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
"If you are a scientist and discover things that are of concern, then you are accused of doing “pseudoscience” and often viciously attacked by the industry and academics on the payroll."

Or, if you're a credible scientist who recognizes more gross examples of the seemingly endless barrage of commonly promoted lousy science theories, you may also choose to appropriately apply the label of “pseudoscience”.

FORMER genetic engineer Thierry Vrain's (Ph.D) "scientific" papers and reports are so full of inaccuracies, inconsistencies, false assumptions, faulty logic and uniformly discredited theories, that you can drive a truck through them.

http://www.langleytimes.com/opinion/letters/233667121.html
http://www.kelownacapnews.com/opinion/letters/233650961.html?mobile=true
http://randomrationality.com/2013/07/05/creationism-anti-gmo/
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/0...ccine-movement/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collid...e/#.VQ27MFwn8qY
http://geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/1...ect-in-science/
http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/neil-degrasse-tyson-annihilates-anti-gmo-argument

All the Gish Gallop (see bluezone*) in the world, doesn't change that fact.

The biggest example of such pseudoscience, is the incessant and universal claim that forced transgenics do not occur naturally. Not only does it do so, it happens almost as often as not. Emotional reactionism and ignorance of the scientific process is at the core of the vast majority of anti-GMO sentiment. Bottom line... peer reviewed science simply does NOT support such arguments.

And before you fly off half-cocked again, mistakenly or intentionally accusing me of being any kind of friend of Monsanto, etc., think again, I'm FAR from it. I believe that food labels should be labelled for GMOs so that people can make whatever informed or un-informed choices that they choose to.

My only allegiance is to the facts and to a process of intensely rigorous peer-reviewed scientific scrutiny.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/22/15 11:51 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Ontario County CSA Fair includes movie

Cornell Cooperative Extension of Ontario County is hosting a CSA (community-supported agriculture) Fair and Documentary Film from 1 to 4:30 p.m. March 21 at 480 N. Main St., Canandaigua.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/stor...movie/24510211/


Good post. http://www.porterfarms.org/ a link to great CSA owned by my close friend.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/23/15 12:07 PM

cwjga, awesome.

http://www.fellenzfamilyfarm.com/

http://www.autumnsharvestfarm.com/



Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/23/15 12:44 PM

The First Gmo Apple Approved by the USDA, Trouble to the Core (page 26)

"But this apple isn't about feeding the world. It's about selling you a cosmetically enhanced product that looks fresh when it might, in fact, be on the verge of rotting."

http://www.sopdigitaledition.com/commonground/#/26/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/23/15 12:47 PM

The Common Ground interview: Jeffrey Smith's Anti-GMO Crusade

http://www.sopdigitaledition.com/commonground/#/50/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/23/15 01:59 PM

It’s Official, McDonald’s and Monsanto Are Both ‘Losing Money Fast’ Public awakens to what's really in their food

by Anthony Gucciardi Posted on February 22, 2015

In a series of headlines that would pass as virtually unbelievable several years ago, mainstream economists are sounding the alarm over the financial decline of both fast food giant McDonald’s and biotech juggernaut Monsanto.

CNN asks, ‘Is McDonald’s doomed?’ Business Insider declares that ‘McDonald’s Is Losing America’

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/official-mcdonalds-monsanto-losing-money-fast/#ixzz3VESSbIWK
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/23/15 02:11 PM

It's gotten so bad, you have to laugh so that you don't cry! Stewart calls out the food industry....again!

http://www.takepart.com/video/2015/03/18...-share-facebook
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/23/15 07:31 PM

Published on Feb 22, 2015

Watch as these kids show what makes organic farming the choice for the future in a surprising twist on a classic children’s song. www.NewMacDonald.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypF15z3euwM
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/23/15 10:06 PM

Press Release just put out by the NY GMO Labeling Coalition. Please share! Links at bottom. Please sign the petition to NY legislators.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 23, 2015

New Study: Probable Cancer-Causing Weed-Killer Used on GMO Crops

On Heels of Groundbreaking Report from the World Health Organization, Environmental & Consumer Rights Experts Urge NYS Legislature to Stand Up to Coca-Cola and Monsanto and Pass GMO Labeling Bill

Local Farmers Question Farm Bureau’s Die-hard Support of a Mode of Agriculture That Puts Farmers and Other Agricultural Workers at Increased Risk of Certain Cancers

Albany- As the New York State legislature considers an important consumer rights bill (A.617 Rosenthal / S.485 LaValle) that would inform New York residents whether food products contain genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, the World Health Organization delivered an important decision classifying the herbicide used on GMO crops as a probable cancer-causing carcinogen. The probable carcinogenic herbicide--glyphosate--is popular specifically because of GMO crops' inbred resistance to it.

“It's appalling to discover that an herbicide that GMO crops are specifically engineered to tolerate is actually a probable carcinogen," said Michael Hansen, PHD Senior Scientist at Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports. "Monsanto and other biotech companies have created crops that use glyphosate at vastly increased levels. New York residents deserve to know whether the food they buy for their families--the food they put in their bodies--has been genetically engineered, given that almost all GE crops are sprayed with this herbicide."

The New York State Assembly's Committee on Consumer Affairs and Protection approved A.617--a bill which would require the labeling of food products containing genetically modified organisms--on March 3rd. The legislation is now before the Assembly's Codes Committee.

Organic farmers used the news today to also urge the New York State Farm Bureau to change course and support GMO labeling.

“The Farm Bureau’s die-hard support for a probable cancer-causing weed killer used on GMO crops is baffling and wrong,” said Elizabeth Henderson, of Peacework Farm in Newark, New York. “It puts the health and safety of farmers and other agricultural workers at risk. The Farm Bureau should stop taking its cues from Monsanto and start supporting local farmers. They can start by signing on to GMO labeling legislation.”

Over 90 percent of consumers want genetically engineered food labeled, according to polls by Consumer Reports and The New York Times. Public support for GMO labeling crosses partisan boundaries; 71 percent of Democrats and 64 percent of Republicans are in favor of labeling, according to a December 2014 Associated Press-GfK poll.

The legislation has broad statewide support as well, including Consumers Union, Food & Water Watch, the Sierra Club, NYPIRG, NRDC, GMO Free NY, and dozens of New York State farmers. A full list of supporters is available here:
http://gmofreeny.net/nygelabelingcampaign.html

The study determining the probable carcinogenic nature of herbicides used on GMOs is available online:

http://www.thelancet.com/…/lanonc/PIIS1470-2045%2815%297013…

http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lanonc/PIIS1470-2045(15)70134-8.pdf
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/24/15 07:01 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Press Release just put out by the NY GMO Labeling Coalition. Please share! Links at bottom. Please sign the petition to NY legislators.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 23, 2015

New Study: Probable Cancer-Causing Weed-Killer Used on GMO Crops

On Heels of Groundbreaking Report from the World Health Organization, Environmental & Consumer Rights Experts Urge NYS Legislature to Stand Up to Coca-Cola and Monsanto and Pass GMO Labeling Bill

Local Farmers Question Farm Bureau’s Die-hard Support of a Mode of Agriculture That Puts Farmers and Other Agricultural Workers at Increased Risk of Certain Cancers

Albany- As the New York State legislature considers an important consumer rights bill (A.617 Rosenthal / S.485 LaValle) that would inform New York residents whether food products contain genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, the World Health Organization delivered an important decision classifying the herbicide used on GMO crops as a probable cancer-causing carcinogen. The probable carcinogenic herbicide--glyphosate--is popular specifically because of GMO crops' inbred resistance to it.

“It's appalling to discover that an herbicide that GMO crops are specifically engineered to tolerate is actually a probable carcinogen," said Michael Hansen, PHD Senior Scientist at Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports. "Monsanto and other biotech companies have created crops that use glyphosate at vastly increased levels. New York residents deserve to know whether the food they buy for their families--the food they put in their bodies--has been genetically engineered, given that almost all GE crops are sprayed with this herbicide."

The New York State Assembly's Committee on Consumer Affairs and Protection approved A.617--a bill which would require the labeling of food products containing genetically modified organisms--on March 3rd. The legislation is now before the Assembly's Codes Committee.

Organic farmers used the news today to also urge the New York State Farm Bureau to change course and support GMO labeling.

“The Farm Bureau’s die-hard support for a probable cancer-causing weed killer used on GMO crops is baffling and wrong,” said Elizabeth Henderson, of Peacework Farm in Newark, New York. “It puts the health and safety of farmers and other agricultural workers at risk. The Farm Bureau should stop taking its cues from Monsanto and start supporting local farmers. They can start by signing on to GMO labeling legislation.”

Over 90 percent of consumers want genetically engineered food labeled, according to polls by Consumer Reports and The New York Times. Public support for GMO labeling crosses partisan boundaries; 71 percent of Democrats and 64 percent of Republicans are in favor of labeling, according to a December 2014 Associated Press-GfK poll.

The legislation has broad statewide support as well, including Consumers Union, Food & Water Watch, the Sierra Club, NYPIRG, NRDC, GMO Free NY, and dozens of New York State farmers. A full list of supporters is available here:
http://gmofreeny.net/nygelabelingcampaign.html

The study determining the probable carcinogenic nature of herbicides used on GMOs is available online:

http://www.thelancet.com/…/lanonc/PIIS1470-2045%2815%297013…

http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lanonc/PIIS1470-2045(15)70134-8.pdf


Can't wait until producers are mandated to label there crops as non-GMO.

Everyone has the right to know.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/24/15 09:58 AM

http://farmprogress.com/story-event-establish-open-dialogue-gmos-consumers-9-125392-spx_0
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/25/15 06:46 AM

http://blog.ted.com/why-genetic-engineer...aks-at-ted2015/


How genetic engineering can fight disease, reduce insecticide use and enhance food security: Pamela Ronald speaks at TED2015

Posted by: Kate Torgovnick May March 18, 2015 at 11:01 am EDT
Pamela Ronald speaks at TED2015 - Truth and Dare, Session 6. Photo: Bret Hartman/TED
Pamela Ronald is a plant scientist, married to an organic farmer. Her talk shows how their goals are the same: to grow good food. Photo: Bret Hartman/TED
Pamela Ronald is here to talk about her work as a plant geneticist, about her work “studying genes that make plants resistant to disease and tolerant of stress.”

But first, she’d like to introduce us to her husband. “This is Raoul. He’s an organic farmer,” she says. “People say, ‘Really? An organic farmer and a plant geneticist? Can you agree on anything?’ Well, we can. Because we both have the same goal: we want to help nourish the growing population without further destroying the environment.”

Genetic improvement of plants isn’t new, she says. Ancient corn had a case so hard that it couldn’t be chewed; the ancient banana was full of large seeds; ancient brussels sprouts weren’t actually individual objects. “To create these crops, breeders used many kinds of genetic techniques,” says Ronald. “Today breeders have even more the options choose from. Some of them are extraordinarily precise.”

She moves on to her own work on rice, “the staple food for more than half the world’s population.” Every year, 40% of the rice harvest is lost to pests and disease. “Farmers rely on varieties that carry genes for resistance.”

When Ronald started her work, no one knew exactly what those genes were. Her lab helped isolated a gene called “XA21&#8243; that makes rice resistant to bacterial infection, and engineered it into plants. After the publication of this work, Ronald was approached by a colleague, Dave Mackill, who was working on how to make rice more resilient in the face of flooding.

“Although rice grows well in standing water, most varieties will die if they’re submerged for more than three days. Flooding increasingly problematic as climate changes,” says Ronald. “[Mackill] said, ’70 million rice farmers are having trouble growing rice because their fields are flooded. They’re living on less than $2 a day.”

The two launched a decade-long quest, with graduate student Kenong Xu, to identify and isolate a gene that might help. Eventually, they succeeded with the discovery of the gene Sub1. In a greenhouse test, rice engineered with Sub1 survived 18 days of flooding, while the standard rice died. Ronald shows a time lapse of what happened when breeders at the International Rice Research Institute developed new varieties carrying this gene using precision breeding. Both the IRRI variety and the conventional variety grow well at first. But after 17 days of submergence, the conventional rice has withered while the Sub1 rice thrives. “And they produce three-fold more grain than the conventional variety,” says Ronald.

Last year, 3.5 million farmers grew Sub1 rice thanks to financial support of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

“A lot of people don’t mind genetic modification when it involves moving rice genes around,” says Ronald, “but when it comes to taking genes from viruses and bacteria and putting them into plants, people say ‘Yuck! Why would scientists do that?'”

Ronald’s answer: “Because sometimes it is the safest, cheapest and most effective technology to advance sustainable agriculture and enhance food security.”

She walks us through a few examples. In the 1950s, the papaya crop on the island of Oahu in Hawaii was threatened by a ringspot virus. “Many people thought the Hawaiian papaya was doomed,” says Ronald.

A local Hawaiian plant pathologist named Dennis Gonsalves had an idea. He spliced a snippet of the DNA of the virus into the papaya genome — and it worked. It made the papaya resistant to the virus. “His pioneering work is credited with rescuing the papaya industry,” says Ronald. “Twenty years later, no other method is as effective.” 80% of all Hawaiian papaya is now engineered in this way.

Next, she brings us to Bangladesh, where a caterpillar pest is ravaging the eggplant crop. “To control this pest, farmers spray insecticides 2 to 3 times a week, sometimes even twice a day,” says Ronald. Of course, this threatens their own health. “It’s estimated that 300,000 people die every year because of exposure and misuse of insecticides.”

Organic farmers like Ronald’s husband use a spray called Bt, which is highly specific to caterpillars while being safe for humans, birds and other animals — it’s less toxic than table salt, says Ronald. But this approach does not work for farmers in Bangladesh because it is expensive and hard to find. “In the genetic approach, scientists cut the gene for Bt out of the bacteria and insert it directly into the eggplant genome,” says Ronald. This was used last season and it helped farmers take insecticide use down to zero.

And one final example has to do with malnutrition. “In less developed countries, Vitamin A deficiency causes nearly 500,000 children to go blind every year. More than half die,” says Ronald.

To try to help, scientists created genetically engineered “golden rice,” that has B-carotene, a precursor of Vitamin A. “Scientists predict that just one cup of golden rice per day will reduce blindness and the deaths of thousands of young children each year,” says Ronald. “But Golden Rice has been virulently opposed by activists who are against genetic modification.”

She points to a moment last year when activists stormed and destroyed a golden rice field trial. “When I heard about it, I wondered if the activists realized that they had destroyed much more than an important scientific research project — that they had destroyed medicines that children desperately need.”

Genetic engineering has been used commercially for 40 years in wines, cheeses and much more. And in that time, there hasn’t been a case of harm to human health or the environment, she points out. “Look, I’m not asking you to believe me. Science is not a belief system. My opinion does not matter. Let’s look at the evidence. After 20 years of careful study and rigorous peer review by thousands of independent scientists, every major scientific organization in the world has concluded that the process of genetic engineering is as safe or safer as older methods of genetic modification.”

She ends: “What scares me most about the loud arguments and misinformation about plant genetics is that the poorest people, the people who most need the technology, may be denied access because of the fears and prejudices of those who have enough to eat.”
Posted by: Timbo

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/25/15 01:52 PM

Originally Posted By: cwjga
http://blog.ted.com/why-genetic-engineer...aks-at-ted2015/

How genetic engineering can fight disease, reduce insecticide use and enhance food security: Pamela Ronald speaks at TED2015

Posted by: Kate Torgovnick May March 18, 2015 at 11:01 am EDT
Pamela Ronald speaks at TED2015 - Truth and Dare, Session 6. Photo: Bret Hartman/TED
Pamela Ronald is a plant scientist, married to an organic farmer. Her talk shows how their goals are the same: to grow good food. Photo: Bret Hartman/TED
Pamela Ronald is here to talk about her work as a plant geneticist, about her work “studying genes that make plants resistant to disease and tolerant of stress.”

But first, she’d like to introduce us to her husband. “This is Raoul. He’s an organic farmer,” she says. “People say, ‘Really? An organic farmer and a plant geneticist? Can you agree on anything?’ Well, we can. Because we both have the same goal: we want to help nourish the growing population without further destroying the environment.”

Genetic improvement of plants isn’t new, she says. Ancient corn had a case so hard that it couldn’t be chewed; the ancient banana was full of large seeds; ancient brussels sprouts weren’t actually individual objects. “To create these crops, breeders used many kinds of genetic techniques,” says Ronald. “Today breeders have even more the options choose from. Some of them are extraordinarily precise.”

She moves on to her own work on rice, “the staple food for more than half the world’s population.” Every year, 40% of the rice harvest is lost to pests and disease. “Farmers rely on varieties that carry genes for resistance.”

When Ronald started her work, no one knew exactly what those genes were. Her lab helped isolated a gene called “XA21&#8243; that makes rice resistant to bacterial infection, and engineered it into plants. After the publication of this work, Ronald was approached by a colleague, Dave Mackill, who was working on how to make rice more resilient in the face of flooding.

“Although rice grows well in standing water, most varieties will die if they’re submerged for more than three days. Flooding increasingly problematic as climate changes,” says Ronald. “[Mackill] said, ’70 million rice farmers are having trouble growing rice because their fields are flooded. They’re living on less than $2 a day.”

The two launched a decade-long quest, with graduate student Kenong Xu, to identify and isolate a gene that might help. Eventually, they succeeded with the discovery of the gene Sub1. In a greenhouse test, rice engineered with Sub1 survived 18 days of flooding, while the standard rice died. Ronald shows a time lapse of what happened when breeders at the International Rice Research Institute developed new varieties carrying this gene using precision breeding. Both the IRRI variety and the conventional variety grow well at first. But after 17 days of submergence, the conventional rice has withered while the Sub1 rice thrives. “And they produce three-fold more grain than the conventional variety,” says Ronald.

Last year, 3.5 million farmers grew Sub1 rice thanks to financial support of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

“A lot of people don’t mind genetic modification when it involves moving rice genes around,” says Ronald, “but when it comes to taking genes from viruses and bacteria and putting them into plants, people say ‘Yuck! Why would scientists do that?'”

Ronald’s answer: “Because sometimes it is the safest, cheapest and most effective technology to advance sustainable agriculture and enhance food security.”

She walks us through a few examples. In the 1950s, the papaya crop on the island of Oahu in Hawaii was threatened by a ringspot virus. “Many people thought the Hawaiian papaya was doomed,” says Ronald.

A local Hawaiian plant pathologist named Dennis Gonsalves had an idea. He spliced a snippet of the DNA of the virus into the papaya genome — and it worked. It made the papaya resistant to the virus. “His pioneering work is credited with rescuing the papaya industry,” says Ronald. “Twenty years later, no other method is as effective.” 80% of all Hawaiian papaya is now engineered in this way.

Next, she brings us to Bangladesh, where a caterpillar pest is ravaging the eggplant crop. “To control this pest, farmers spray insecticides 2 to 3 times a week, sometimes even twice a day,” says Ronald. Of course, this threatens their own health. “It’s estimated that 300,000 people die every year because of exposure and misuse of insecticides.”

Organic farmers like Ronald’s husband use a spray called Bt, which is highly specific to caterpillars while being safe for humans, birds and other animals — it’s less toxic than table salt, says Ronald. But this approach does not work for farmers in Bangladesh because it is expensive and hard to find. “In the genetic approach, scientists cut the gene for Bt out of the bacteria and insert it directly into the eggplant genome,” says Ronald. This was used last season and it helped farmers take insecticide use down to zero.

And one final example has to do with malnutrition. “In less developed countries, Vitamin A deficiency causes nearly 500,000 children to go blind every year. More than half die,” says Ronald.

To try to help, scientists created genetically engineered “golden rice,” that has B-carotene, a precursor of Vitamin A. “Scientists predict that just one cup of golden rice per day will reduce blindness and the deaths of thousands of young children each year,” says Ronald. “But Golden Rice has been virulently opposed by activists who are against genetic modification.”

She points to a moment last year when activists stormed and destroyed a golden rice field trial. “When I heard about it, I wondered if the activists realized that they had destroyed much more than an important scientific research project — that they had destroyed medicines that children desperately need.”

Genetic engineering has been used commercially for 40 years in wines, cheeses and much more. And in that time, there hasn’t been a case of harm to human health or the environment, she points out. “Look, I’m not asking you to believe me. Science is not a belief system. My opinion does not matter. Let’s look at the evidence. After 20 years of careful study and rigorous peer review by thousands of independent scientists, every major scientific organization in the world has concluded that the process of genetic engineering is as safe or safer as older methods of genetic modification.”

She ends: “What scares me most about the loud arguments and misinformation about plant genetics is that the poorest people, the people who most need the technology, may be denied access because of the fears and prejudices of those who have enough to eat.”

Unfortunately, Ronald, under her own ethical principals, retracted her report due to clear errors in sample control groups and testing. However, that is the consistent difference between the modus operandi of the majority of anti-GMO advocates and that of the science community as a whole. Mistakes happen. By definition, responsible science has the obligation to make such retractions. When the errors were discovered, the retraction was published. I can't recall one single instance of any anti-GMO/vaccination promulgators ever doing the same, and there are plenty of instances in which they have, and continue to publish reports containing gross errors in fact and analysis.


Please read the following for a contextually accurate and comprehensive look at this and other such situations:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/food-matters/2013/10/10/lab-life-the-anatomy-of-a-retraction/

http://retractionwatch.com/2013/10/10/ronald-science/

One Famous Retraction:
http://www.pnas.org/content/18/3/213.full.pdf+html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/25/15 10:10 PM

Jesse Ventura: WTF, Monsanto?

http://www.ora.tv/offthegrid/jesse-ventura-wtf-monsanto-0_4vxrk3lp1a4o
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/25/15 11:24 PM

Tell Congress to Stop Doing Monsanto's Dirtywork: Americans Need to Know if It's GMO

author: GMO Free USA

target: U.S. Congress

Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kansas) has re-introduced a bill that would prohibit mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods (GMOs) at both the state and federal levels. He calls this bill the "Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act", when in fact, the bill would keep Americans in the DARK by mandating voluntary labeling of potentially unsafe GMOs. This bill puts the profits of chemical companies over human and environmental health and is an insult to our freedom and to our intelligence.


http://www.thepetitionsite.com/246/172/8...now-if-its-gmo/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/25/15 11:34 PM

Wednesday, March 25, 2015

How to Make a GMO Lobbyist Squirm

By James Corbett

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/03/how-to-make-gmo-lobbyist-squirm.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/25/15 11:44 PM

What’s Your “Daily Value” of Glyphosate?

Sunday, March 22, 2015

Why should we know how much glyphosate we are ingesting? Well, on March 20, 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) produced a monograph, “Evaluation of five organophosphate insecticides and herbicides,” wherein as a result of IARC’s research, the herbicide glyphosate [the major component in Monsanto’s Roundup®] has been “classified as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group A).” According to IARC’s monograph,

- See more at: http://www.naturalblaze.com/2015/03/whats-your-daily-value-of-glyphosate.html#sthash.cTgYSM3i.dpuf
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/26/15 11:31 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Tell Congress to Stop Doing Monsanto's Dirtywork: Americans Need to Know if It's GMO

author: GMO Free USA

target: U.S. Congress

Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kansas) has re-introduced a bill that would prohibit mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods (GMOs) at both the state and federal levels. He calls this bill the "Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act", when in fact, the bill would keep Americans in the DARK by mandating voluntary labeling of potentially unsafe GMOs. This bill puts the profits of chemical companies over human and environmental health and is an insult to our freedom and to our intelligence.


http://www.thepetitionsite.com/246/172/8...now-if-its-gmo/


can't wait till congress mandates that all non-gmo products be labled as such. General mills set a good example of how it is done with out a law. But I guess all the other non-gmo out there need to be told to do it.

We deserve to know that we aren't eating gmo's.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/26/15 04:03 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/26/15 11:04 PM

The Horrific Truth about Roundup - Mercola - June 2013

A new peer-reviewed report authored by Anthony Samsel, a retired science consultant, and a long time contributor to the Mercola.com Vital Votes Forum, and Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), reveals how glyphosate wrecks human health.

...Jeffrey Smith, author of the bestseller Seeds of Deception, says Monsanto, during some reflective moment, must have asked "What would Darth Vader do?" Because what they've come up with is a way of pretending that they're beneficial and then insinuating themselves into the food and agriculture industry, and now it turns out that what they have is very, very dangerous.

Indeed, according to Dr. Seneff, glyphosate is possibly "the most important factor in the development of multiple chronic diseases and conditions that have become prevalent in Westernized societies," including but not limited to:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/06/09/monsanto-roundup-herbicide.aspx
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/26/15 11:17 PM

Study: GMO Food Is Dangerous

Tuesday, 17 Mar 2015

By Russell Blaylock, M.D.

"This is not the only study to find problems with GMO foods, but it is the most damning.

In my estimation, all GMO foods should be removed from stores and GMO crops should be destroyed. The implications of this disaster is almost beyond belief and GMO crops are being heavily promoted all over the world by the IMF, Council on Foreign Relations, and other international organizations."

http://www.newsmax.com/Health/Dr-Blayloc.../#ixzz3VYHHJTdN

http://foodintegritynow.org/2013/06/19/d...e-and-vaccines/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/26/15 11:21 PM

Congressional Bill to Get Key Antibiotics Out of Livestock Feed

March 26, 2015 by Catherine J. Frompovich

The only microbiologist in the U.S. Congress, Congresswoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY) has introduced a bill, The Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA) to impede the apparent abuse of animal husbandry using certain medically important antibiotics to fatten cattle for market or in animal feed as normal ‘supplementation’.

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/03/congressional-bill-to-get-key.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/27/15 12:27 AM

August 28th, 2014

Is Cornell the Go-To University for Industry Science?

By Tim Schwab

Cornell University announced last week that it is embarking on a multi-million dollar campaign to “depolarize the charged debate” around GMOs. Can you guess who’s behind this effort? The biotech industry and its supporters.

...corporations routinely engage neutral-appearing scientists and impartial-sounding front groups to help advance their political and economic agendas.

Cornell is no stranger to this science-for-sale approach. Earlier this year, Cornell economist William Lesser took money from a biotech front group to produce a questionable analysis showing that GMO labeling will be very costly for consumers. While he noted that the study reflected his personal opinions, not those of Cornell, GMO supporters began publicizing the findings of “the Cornell study” in their campaign to defeat state-labeling initiatives around the country. Independent studies, meanwhile, show that GMO labeling will not increase costs significantly—and perhaps not at all.

... Rather than trying to promote a civil, honest, impartial dialogue about GMOs—as you would expect from a university like Cornell—the school has chosen to partner with some of the biotechnology industry’s most prominent supporters and defenders.

At a time when the United States is clearly ready for a frank conversation about GMOs, evident in the state-level labeling ballot initiatives underway across the country, it is unfortunate that our most prominent philanthropists and universities would partner with industry to distort the public discourse.

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/blogs/is-cornell-the-go-to-university-for-industry-science/


http://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/partners
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/27/15 12:37 AM

Nature's One, the first organic formula in the United States, explains why being organic and Non GMO is so vital important to your family's nutrition

http://www.naturesone.com/organic-formula.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/27/15 10:39 AM

"Trending" on Facebook this morning.

http://time.com/3761053/monsanto-weed-killer-drink-patrick-moore-lobbyist/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/27/15 01:04 PM

https://youtu.be/vMVFe0_6cbY
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/27/15 01:39 PM

A really good film: "Hungry for Change" Free to watch till March 30th (starts at 6:00)

FMTV is available on Roku

"...they don't know the nature of the trap."

"If it's made in a lab, it takes a lab to digest it."

"If you look at the amount of sugar in a child's breakfast cereal, you might as well be rolling up the kid's sleeve and putting in heroin, because it's the same."

"Your starving on a cellular basis."

https://www.fmtv.com/live
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/27/15 01:58 PM

Edible Vaccines From Lettuce, Tomatoes And Other Plants

By Ray Schilling - April 2003

A group of researchers under Dr. Robert Rose from the University of Rochester in New York have been working on a number of vaccines with the help of genetic engineering.

http://www.askdrray.com/edible-vaccines-from-lettuce-tomatoes-and-other-plants/


Transgenic lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) expressing H1N1 influenza surface antigen (neuraminidase)

Lettuce plants were genetically engineered to produce the immunogenic protein NA. &#9658; Mice were immunized subcutaneously, using lettuce for the production of NA immunogen. &#9658; This is the first report on the production of the NA in a foreign host.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304423812001203
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/27/15 05:36 PM

Justice for Farmworkers

video, 7 minutes

Once a bass fisherman’s heaven, Lake Apopka needed millions of government cleanup dollars to undo the decades of pesticide runoff that turned it into a toxic brew of chemicals. Our government spent additional millions studying the health effects of the local wildlife during the cleanup. However, the people who worked those fields were all but ignored, and are suffering the effects forty years later.

http://earthjustice.org/advocacy-campaigns/pesticides#
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/27/15 06:04 PM

Mar. 26, 2015 7:59 PM ET

Monsanto fined for not reporting Idaho chemical releases

By KEITH RIDLER

Monsanto Co. has agreed to pay $600,000 in fines for not reporting hundreds of uncontrolled releases of toxic chemicals at its eastern Idaho phosphate plant.

http://hosted2.ap.org/TXKIH/kdhbusinessn...5fd784b766cb80a
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/28/15 03:52 AM

This article is undated but the events referred to in it are dated the latter part of March 2013. The "rider" prez o signed has expired. (prez o, not capitalized or spelled out purposely.)

March 2013

Monsanto and DuPont's GMO War and biotech Monopoly

Now the four biotech companies including Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta and Dow are linked by Monsanto’s license and have joined to work together to control and dominate the whole market.

Recently, Monsanto joined the chemical company Dow to create a new row of GMO crops called "Agent Orange Corn" that is resistant to both Monsanto's Roundup and active ingredient of Agent Orange called 2,4-D. The active ingredient in Roundup called “glyphosate” has been linked to infertility, liver damage, birth defects, allergies, cancer and nutritional deficiencies. 2,4-D in Agent Orange is also linked to health problems including cancer, liver toxicity, neurotoxicity, immune system disorder, Parkinson's disease and endocrine disruption.

http://www.seattleorganicrestaurants.com...h.9rfMalNU.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/28/15 04:25 AM

I'd like to point out this post particularly to folks working in the health care industry, from doctor's offices to urgent cares and ERs, from secretaries to PAs, etc.

Your patients can hear your comments and read your body language. This is hurtful to your patient and adds more stress to their already stressful life.

Please educate yourself. Our family members are coming to you for help. Please take the time to learn about what is making all these people sick with all these illnesses.


Institute for Responsible Technology - March 27, 2015

Evidence points to genetically engineered foods as a major contributor to rising disease rates in the US population, especially among children. Gastrointestinal disorders, allergies, inflammatory diseases, and infertility are just some of the problems implicated in humans, pets, livestock, and lab animals that eat genetically modified soybeans and corn.

Monsanto’s strong arm tactics, the FDA’s fraudulent policies, and how the USDA ignores a growing health emergency are also laid bare. This sometimes shocking film may change your diet, help you protect your family, and accelerate the consumer tipping point against genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Don’t miss this film!

http://geneticroulettemovie.com/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/28/15 04:53 AM

Chemical Tree Pruning. Is this practice going on in NYS? (Moms Across America quoted in this article)

Monsanto power in Texas may be harming people, wildlife, water and environment

January 13, 2015

Trees alongside the highway not far from the Llano River appeared to be dying with abnormal rotting on some branches

http://www.examiner.com/article/monsanto...cid=db_articles
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/28/15 09:18 PM

Erin Brockovich - March 28, 2015

This Wednesday, Monsanto’s favorite congressman, Mike Pompeo of Kansas, introduced H.R. 1599 a.k.a. the DARK Act, a bill that would outlaw any federal or state law to require labels on genetically engineered food. Even states that have already passed labeling laws would be prohibited from enforcing them.

HERE’S WHAT YOU CAN DO: Grab your phone right now and dial 1-877-796-1949. You’ll hear more information about the DARK Act, and then you’ll be automatically connected to your Representative’s office.

We need phones on Capitol Hill to be ringing off the hook with the message that Americans OPPOSE the DARK Act (H.R. 1599) and SUPPORT the Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act (H.R. 913).

This bill may as well be called the Monsanto Profit Protection Act, because it was written for one reason: To protect the corporate profits of big pesticide and junk food companies at the expense of our right to know what’s in our food.

If H.R. 1599 is passed, it could set the GMO labeling movement back decades. There has never been a more important time to stand up to Monsanto and their allies with a call your representative right now.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Erin-Brockovich/75960805493?fref=nf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/28/15 11:36 PM

Thank you, Chipotle, for providing healthy non gmo fast food.

There are three locations in the Rochester area: Pittsford Plaza (Trader Joe's is in this plaza also), Henrietta and Greece. Both are also in Syracuse areas.

Have you seen Chipotle's "Scarecrow" video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUtnas5ScSE
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/29/15 03:21 PM

WHO Glyphosate Report Ends Thirty Year Cancer Cover Up

Mar 26 2015

The question is who is to blame for this shocking lack of protection for public health? The answer is the U.S. government, who have pushed glyphosate around the World as part of their campaign to support the U.S. biotech industry in their attempt to dominate global agriculture.

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/03/26/w...p/#.VRhdgY0tH3g
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/29/15 03:34 PM

!!! The experts were selected on the basis of their expertise and most importantly, the absence of real or apparent conflicts of interest !!!

Glyphosate 'Probably Carcinogenic to Humans' Latest WHO Assessment

March 20, 2015

The world authority on cancer, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the herbicide glyphosate ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’ in its latest expert assessment [1, 2]. A Working Group of 17 experts from 11 countries met at IARC headquarters 3-10 March 2015 in Lyon, France. The meeting followed almost a year of review and preparation, including a comprehensive review of the latest available scientific evidence. The experts were selected on the basis of their expertise and most importantly, the absence of real or apparent conflicts of interest. The Working Group considered “reports that have been published or accepted for publication in the openly available scientific literature” as well as “data from governmental reports that are publicly available”. They evaluated five organophosphate insecticides and herbicides including glyphosate. The results, announced 20 March were as follows. The herbicide glyphosate and the insecticides malathion and diazinon were classified as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A). The insecticides tetrachlorvinphos and parathion were classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/glyphosate-probably-carcinogenic-humans-latest-who-assessment
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/29/15 03:57 PM

Fyi...

Plan to save monarch butterflies backfires

By Lizzie Wade 13 January 2015

That’s because people have been planting the wrong species of milkweed, thereby increasing the odds of monarchs becoming infected with a crippling parasite.

http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2015/01/plan-save-monarch-butterflies-backfires
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/29/15 08:40 PM

“People are afraid of being blacklisted,” Dr. Shields of Cornell said.

Crop Scientists Say Biotechnology Seed Companies Are Thwarting Research

By ANDREW POLLACK February 19, 2009

The problem, the scientists say, is that farmers and other buyers of genetically engineered seeds have to sign an agreement meant to ensure that growers honor company patent rights and environmental regulations. But the agreements also prohibit growing the crops for research purposes.

So while university scientists can freely buy pesticides or conventional seeds for their research, they cannot do that with genetically engineered seeds. Instead, they must seek permission from the seed companies. And sometimes that permission is denied or the company insists on reviewing any findings before they can be published, they say.

Such agreements have long been a problem, the scientists said, but they are going public now because frustration has been building.

“People are afraid of being blacklisted,” Dr. Shields of Cornell said. “If your sole job is to work on corn insects and you need the latest corn varieties and the companies decide not to give it to you, you can’t do your job.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/business/20crop.html?_r=1

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/29/15 11:10 PM

Rep. Doug LaMalfa

March 27, 2015

I am pleased to support the House passage of two common sense bills to increase transparency and accountability in federal regulatory decision making. HR 1030, the Secret Science Reform Act, requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to use publicly available studies and data when proposing, finalizing, or disseminating regulation. HR 1029, the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2015, restores the independence of the Science Advisory Board, which provides scientific advice to the EPA. The measure requires the Board to independently provide that advice, and increases public participation in the process.

The American people deserve to actually read, access, and analyze the studies and data that the EPA uses to justify the costly regulations it imposes. These scientific conclusions and data should not be kept in secret files behind closed doors. Let’s keep the EPA accountable.

https://www.facebook.com/RepLaMalfa?fref=photo
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/30/15 05:57 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Thank you, Chipotle, for providing healthy non gmo fast food.

There are three locations in the Rochester area: Pittsford Plaza (Trader Joe's is in this plaza also), Henrietta and Greece. Both are also in Syracuse areas.

Have you seen Chipotle's "Scarecrow" video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUtnas5ScSE




A thank you to a company that tells farmers they should not use antibiotics to save sick animals. Sad day that we have come to a place where cruelty to animals is accepted.

The scarecrow video, you mean ad, don't you, and you bought the corporate crap advertising hook line and sinker. laugh


For those that really want to decide, and not listen to the corporate marketing machine.

http://findourcommonground.com/food-facts/antibiotics-in-meat/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/30/15 11:29 PM

Oh, come on, you know antibiotics are used to INCREASE the bottom line: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

"Another concern is “subtherapeutic” doses of antibiotics that are given to the animals to cause weight gain. Although it is not clear why small doses of antibiotics cause animals to gain weight and the practice has been banned in the European Union and Canada, it is legal in the United States.

All of this means that healthy cows are being given antibiotics when they don’t need them, which leads to another health risk.

Excessive antibiotics are a concern because they cause the spread of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria. Because antibiotics will kill off most of the bacteria..."

http://animalrights.about.com/od/animalsusedforfood/f/AntibioticsrGBH.htm


Chipotle becomes first U.S. restaurant chain to try and rid menu of GMO foods

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/chipotle-labels-gmo-meu-items-article-1.1407988
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/30/15 11:34 PM

GARDENERS BEWARE:

Many of the plants you buy at Home Depot and Lowe's may be treated with bee-killing neonictinoids. Because there's no clear labeling, many good-intentioned gardeners end up poisoning the very bees they are trying to help!

Home Depot has indicated it is working on safer alternatives, but Lowe's has not yet responded.

Country Max in Seneca Falls is carrying organic gardening items. Way to go Country Max!


The Perfect Crime: What's Killing All the Bees?

CCD has been attributed to a number of causes including mite infestation and pathogens, but for many beekeepers across the world, a primary suspect is a class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids. These chemicals came onto the market in the late-1990s and were approved in 2000 for application to corn, America’s #1 cash crop. It is now estimated that 90 percent of all corn seeds are coated with German agro-chemical manufacturer Bayer’s neonicotinoid pesticide. With the rise of the chemical’s use, there has been a steep drop off in honey production in the Corn Belt of the United States.

http://earthjustice.org/features/the-perfect-crime#
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 03/31/15 11:19 AM

Being a farmer I know a lot of farmers. Not one uses antibiotics to increase the bottom line. They use antibiotics to save sick animals. I find it disgusting that Corporations like Chipolte tell farmers they can't save sick animals just so they can strengthen their bottom line.

Stop falling for the corporate lies.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 01:14 AM

Mar 31, 2015

EPA will require weed-resistance restrictions on glyphosate herbicide

By Carey Gillam

The EPA's action comes in the wake of a finding by the World Health Organization's cancer research unit this month that glyphosate is "probably carcinogenic to humans," a conclusion the working group said was based on a review of years of scientific research. Testing has found residues of the herbicide in water, food, urine and breast milk.

The EPA’s weed management plan will not address human health concerns, but the agency is also analyzing health data as part of a required reevaluation of the herbicide.

The EPA’s preliminary risk assessment of glyphosate is expected to be released for public comment later this year, and the agency will publish its proposed weed management plan for public comment at the same time.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/31/us-monsanto-herbicide-weeds-idUSKBN0MR2JT20150331
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 01:31 AM

Factory Farms Use 30 Million Pounds of Antibiotics a Year (and You're Eating Some of It)

December 21, 2010

For the first time ever, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) compiled and released the amount of antibiotics used in animals raised for people to eat, and the amount is even higher than previous estimates from environmental advocacy groups.

The FDA concludes that in 2009 alone, farmers used nearly 30 million pounds of antibiotics.

A cocktail of drugs, often the same types people rely on, are routinely used to make animals grow faster and to help keep them alive in filthy, crowded conditions that stress them and compromise their immune systems. The concentration of animals and the speedier growth make meat cheaper at the grocery store, but also produce a health threat.

http://www.rodalenews.com/antibiotics

The Chicken Industry

A 2006 study by Consumer Reports found...they are fed large quantities of powerful antibiotics to keep them alive in conditions that would otherwise kill them.

Chickens are also genetically manipulated and regularly dosed with drugs to make them grow faster and larger.

http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-food/factory-farming/chickens/chicken-industry/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 01:28 PM

Environmental group seeks greater protection for USDA scientists

By Carey Gillam Mar 27, 2015

An environmental activist group has filed a legal petition with the U.S. Department of Agriculture seeking new rules that would enhance job protection for government scientists whose research questions the safety of farm chemicals.

The petition to the USDA presses the agency to adopt policies to prevent "political suppression or alteration of studies and to lay out clear procedures for investigating allegations of scientific misconduct."

According to the petition, some scientists working for the federal government are finding their research restricted or censored when it conflicts with agribusiness industry interests.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/28/us-usda-petition-idUSKBN0MN2RI20150328
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 01:37 PM

Brainwashing 6th graders:

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 03:14 PM

Monsanto seeks retraction for report linking herbicide to cancer

By Carey Gillam Mar 24, 2015

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/24/us-monsanto-herbicide-idUSKBN0MK2GF20150324


Monsanto’s “Discredit Bureau” Really Does Exist

Mar 27, 2015 by occupystephanie

Recently, I attended a talk by Monsanto’s Dr. William “Bill” Moar who presented the latest project in their product pipeline dealing with RNA. Most notably, he also spoke about Monsanto’s efforts to educate citizens about the scientific certainty of the safety of their genetically engineered products. The audience was mostly agricultural students many of whom were perhaps hoping for the only well-paid internships and jobs in their field.

One student asked what Monsanto was doing to counter the “bad science” around their work. Dr. Moar, perhaps forgetting that this was a public event, then revealed that Monsanto indeed had “an entire department” (waving his arm for emphasis) dedicated to “debunking” science which disagreed with theirs. As far as I know this is the first time that a Monsanto functionary has publically admitted that they have such an entity which brings their immense political and financial weight to bear on scientists who dare to publish against them. The Discredit Bureau will not be found on their official website.

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/27/1373484/-Monsanto-s-Discredit-Bureau-Swings-into-Action
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 03:16 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 03:21 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 03:22 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 03:23 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 03:29 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 03:36 PM

Weather Modification and Monsanto

By COVVHA - March 1, 2015

Think twice before you say weather control is just a conspiracy theory. Then ask yourself why Monsanto&#8236; owns patents in Geo-engineering.

Conceivably, with enough lead time and the right conditions, you could get “made-to-order” weather.

Vietnam War Weather Modification – Operation Popeye

http://covvha.net/monsanto-weather-modification-operation-popeye/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 03:38 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 04:26 PM

NY Organic Farmer...

GMO Poison: Margaret Bruegel

Published on Mar 29, 2015 (26 Minutes)

Organic farmer Margaret Bruegel of Forestville NY, describes the correlation between the skyrocketing phenomenon of chronic diseases and the increased use of glyphosate (Monsanto's 'Roundup') in genetically modified foods.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMrMGaOvE0w#t=1467

http://roohavenfarm.com/index.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 05:34 PM

Using the Legal System to Fight Factory Farms

Published on Mar 16, 2015 (14 Minutes)

By Michele Merkel, Attorney and Co-Director of Food & Water Justice

"I also quit my job at the EPA because I couldn't do my job and now I sue them."

"So the game is rigged in all three branches of government. Big agribusiness wields tremendous control and influence."

https://secure3.convio.net/fww/site/Advo..._subsrc=033015a
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/01/15 05:39 PM

http://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/Brian-M-Kolb

Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/02/15 07:45 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty


Right, because people are to stupid to put a GMO free sticker on the apple unless the Government tells them to. crazy

Of course you do know that all those apples have been genetically modified.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/02/15 07:46 AM

https://youtu.be/Oht9AEq1798

a Must watch video
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/06/15 06:43 PM

FDA Release Intentionally Misleads Public on GMO Food Safety—Again

By Sara Jennings April 6, 2015

“it is the companies themselves who are fully responsible to determine that their GMOs are safe.”

“the FDA has not performed a genuine scientific assessment that’s competent to certify safety – and the manufacturers have not done so either. The voluntary consultation process is mere window dressing designed to create the illusion that such assessments are occurring.”

The FDA’s press release gives the false impression that the agency used a competent, scientific protocol for its safety review. According to Smith, “Companies can submit whatever data or summaries they want; there are no standards for testing; no requirements for modern analyses; and no adherence to recommendations made by international bodies or scientific organizations.” He adds, “Since companies never actually provide raw data from feeding studies, the FDA is not in a position to verify the producers’ safety claims.”

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/pos...d-safety-again/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/07/15 10:17 AM

http://www.foodinsight.org/pesticide-residue-food-safety-myth

7 Crazy Ways They're Trying to Scare You About Fruits and Vegetables
By FACTS Network | Apr 01 2015
Last updated Apr 03 2015
Share on Facebook
Tweet on Twitter
Share this
Print

Call it the straw that broke the camel’s very, very overwhelmed back.
The latest crazy headline driving people away from fruits and vegetables was too much for us. The last couple weeks have been a heyday for pesticide residue misquotes, misrepresentations, and misinformation. Here are seven of the worst offenders, along with why they don’t need to push you away from some of the most nutrient-dense foods in your kitchen: your produce.
scary-things-you-read-online
1. I read that pesticide residues can cause male infertility.
This question comes from one recent study. Because the study was "observational," it cannot prove a cause-and-effect relationship. In addition, information on the amount of "pesticides" consumed was based on self-reported intake of fruits and vegetables that tend to have the highest level of pesticide residues.
Researchers also failed to record whether participants washed their produce. The amount of pesticide residue on each fruit or vegetable they actually consumed was essentially unknown. Participants completed just one food-frequency questionnaire to report how much produce they ate over an entire year. Could you recall all the fruits and veggies you ate over the past year?
Studies that make wild, headline-grabbing leaps like this could cause men to further avoid fruits and vegetables (which they already do in great numbers). If that’s the case, the health impacts would be far worse than a highly dubious linkage to sperm count.
2. Will pesticide residues on fruit and vegetables give me cancer?
Human epidemiology does not support the hypothesis that cancer or other human illnesses are related to pesticides as food residues. As Reuters described, “Regulators in the United States and many other countries have long considered glyphosate among the safest herbicides in use. A review of the chemical by the German government for the European Union last year concluded that no link to cancer has been established.”
The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) on March 20, 2015, announced that it was classifying glyphosate [PDF link] as "probably carcinogenic." However, numerous experts have said that IARC's determination is based on flawed and discredited science. Shockingly, the scientist who conducted one of the studies that was key to IARC's findings stated that IARC's conclusion was "totally wrong" (emphasis added).
An article in Western Producer represents virtually the only attention the media has given to this disturbing revelation. The article further states: “National regulatory agencies around the globe have evaluated glyphosate and concluded the weed killer is not a human health risk. As an example, a recent German report concluded that glyphosate is probably not a carcinogen.”
The body of credible science stands in stark contrast to IARC's review, which bafflingly excluded several studies that showed glyphosate not to be carcinogenic.
3. I’ve heard pesticide residues on food cause autism in children.
A recent study attempted to link pesticide use to autism in children, of course spurring media attention and concerns among moms. However, experts called this assertion “inaccurate” and “misleading” to the public. According to Dr. Penny Fenner-Crisp, retired former Senior Science Advisor, Deputy Director, and Director of the Health Effects Division of the Office of Pesticide Programs at the EPA, “The study does not allow one to conclude with any degree of certainty that exposure to individual or classes of pesticides or insecticides results in increased rates of autism and other developmental disabilities in the offspring of potentially-exposed mothers.” It’s fear-mongering at its worst.
fear-mongering-in-food
4. Non-organic farmers just douse their land in pesticide and hurt the environment.
Farmers use pesticides only as necessary and within the strict rules established by the EPA. The precision with which farmers can apply pest control products is better than ever with the help of GPS technology, like that on our cell phones. Farmers pinpoint the exact areas that need pest control and leave other areas alone. Pesticides are expensive, so it would not be fiscally responsible for farmers to waste or overuse them. In addition, if pesticide use harmed the land, farmers wouldn’t use them, as they would be destroying their investment in their family’s future.
5. Isn’t biotechnology (imprecisely referred to as "GMOs") creating crazy pesticides that are worse for us?
Biotechnology has actually reduced pesticide use 37%. In fact, from 1996-2011, biotech crops have collectively reduced global pesticide applications by 1.04 billion pounds of the active ingredient. Biotechnology has played an important role in the reduction and more precise use of pesticides, and allowing for use of more environmentally friendly herbicides.
6. Pesticides can make farm workers sick, right? So isn’t it bad to ingest at any level?
Environmental and occupational exposure to pesticide, particularly in situations where handling instructions aren’t followed, is not remotely akin to trace amounts on food. Dr. Carl Winter, Director of the FoodSafe Program and Extension Food Toxicologist at the University of California, Davis, makes it clear that “dietary exposures to the most commonly detected pesticides pose negligible risks to consumers.” In fact, because farmers can use less insecticide with Bt crops, farmers are more protected from accidental poisoning.
questions-about-produce
7. But I’m really better off eating organic, right?
Nope. Both organic and traditional farmers use pesticide (organic farmers cannot use synthetic pesticides, but may use approved naturally sourced pesticides), and both types of produce are nutritious and safe to eat. As if that weren't bad enough, organic fruits and vegetables are currently being recalled at much higher rates than their traditionally produced counterparts because of foodborne illnesses. But whether you choose organic or traditionally produced fruit and vegetables, the important thing is to get plenty of servings of fruits and vegetables each day and to handle all food safely to prevent foodborne illness.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), as well as the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Cancer Society, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the Institute of Food Technologists, the American Institute of Nutrition, and the American Society for Clinical Nutrition encourage parents to feed their children more, not less, of a variety of fruits and vegetables. Bring more produce into your family, and you’ll be better off.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/07/15 10:33 PM

USDA Under Fire for Rules Permitting Agribusiness Interests like Monsanto to Intimidate Scientists

(Beyond Pesticides, April 7, 2015)

Scientists working with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) don’t have adequate protections from pressure and retaliation when researching issues that threaten the interests of powerful agrichemical corporations like Monsanto,

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15352
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/07/15 11:01 PM

Editorial Reviews

“Without doubt, one of the most important books of the last 50 years. I shall urge everyone I know who cares about life on earth, and the future of their children, and children’s children, to read it. . . . Steven Druker is a hero. He deserves at least a Nobel Prize.”--Jane Goodall, Ph.D. (from the Foreword)

“Altered Genes, Twisted Truth is lucid, illuminating, and alarming. As a former New York City prosecutor, I was shocked to discover how the FDA illegally exempted GE foods from the rigorous testing mandated by federal statute. And as the mother of three young kids, I was outraged to learn how America’s children are being callously exposed to experimental foods that were deemed abnormally risky by the FDA’s own experts.”--Tara-Cook Littman, J.D.

“Steven Druker has written a great book that could well be a milestone in the endeavor to establish a scientifically sound policy on genetically engineered foods. The evidence is comprehensive, clear, and compelling; and its credibility is irrefutable. No one has documented other cases of irresponsible behavior by government regulators and the scientific establishment nearly as well as Druker documents this one. His book should be widely read and thoroughly heeded.”--John Ikerd, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Missouri – Columbia

“Altered Genes, Twisted Truth will stand as a landmark. It should be required reading in every university biology course.”--Joseph Cummins, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Genetics, Western University, London, Ontario
“Steven Druker's meticulously documented, well-crafted, and spellbinding narrative should serve as a clarion call to all of us. In particular, his chapter detailing the deadly epidemic of 1989-90 that was linked with a genetically engineered food supplement is especially significant. I and my Mayo Clinic colleagues were active participants in the attempt to identify the cause of this epidemic. Druker provides a comprehensive analysis of all the evidence and also presents new findings from our work. Overall his discussion of this tragic event, as well as its ominous implications, is the most comprehensive, evenlybalanced and accurate account that I have read.”--Stephen Naylor, PhD CEO and Chairman of MaiHealth Inc., Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, & Pharmacology Mayo Clinic (1991-2001)

“Steven Druker has written one of the few books I have encountered, in my many years of public interest work, with the capacity to drive major change in a major issue. What Ralph Nader’s Unsafe at Any Speed was to the auto industry and what Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring was to synthetic pesticides, Altered Genes, Twisted Truth will be to genetically engineered food. It is profoundly penetrating, illuminating, and compelling, and it could stimulate a monumental and beneficial shift in our system of food production.”--Joan Levin, JD, MPH
“Altered Genes, Twisted Truth is very readable, thorough, logical and thought-provoking. Steven Druker exposes shenanigans employed to promote genetic engineering that will surprise even those who have followed the ag-biotech industry closely for years. I strongly recommend his book.”--Belinda Martineau, Ph.D., a co-developer of the first genetically engineered whole food and author of First Fruit: The Creation of the Flavr Savr™ Tomato and the Birth of Biotech Foods

“Druker’s brilliant expose catches the promoters of GE food red-handed: falsifying data, corrupting regulators, lying to Congress. He thoroughly demonstrates how distortions and deceptions have been piled one on top of another, year after year, producing a global industry that teeters on a foundation of fraud and denial. This book is sure to send shockwaves around the world.” –Jeffrey Smith

“Altered Genes, Twisted Truth is a remarkable work that may well change the public conversation on one of the most important issues of our day. If the numerous revelations it contains become widely known, the arguments being used to defend genetically engineered foods will be untenable.”--Frederick Kirschenmann, Phd Distinguished Fellow, Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Iowa State University, Author of Cultivating an Ecological Conscience

http://www.amazon.com/Altered-Genes-Twis...ASIN=0985616903
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/08/15 12:41 AM

What about the bees, Mr. Farmer, Academics?

Glyphosate & Honeybees, interview with Don Huber 2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HFDeno_5vU&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/08/15 11:38 AM

USDA Under Fire for Rules Permitting Agribusiness Interests like Monsanto to Intimidate Scientists

Groups Challenge Major USDA Change to Organic Rule

(Beyond Pesticides, April 8, 2015)

At issue in the lawsuit is a rule that implements the organic law’s “sunset provision,” which since its origins has been interpreted to require all listed materials to cycle off the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances every five years unless the NOSB votes by a two-thirds majority to relist them. In making its decision, the NOSB is charged with considering public input, new science, and new information on available alternatives.

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15363
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/08/15 12:32 PM

The Glyphosate Saga, & “independent scientific advice” according to Germany, the UK & France

April 2nd 2015

http://corporateeurope.org/food-and-agri...ding-germany-uk
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/08/15 12:39 PM

Ever heard of RACTOPAMINE?

It's a controversial drug lurking in your dinner. The idiocy and irresponsibility never ends!

Ractopamine is a feed additive banned or restricted in dozens of countries – including China, Russia, and all of the European Union – but not in the United States, where it is fed to cattle, pigs, and turkeys to boost growth rates. An estimated 60 - 80% of pork sold in U.S. supermarkets comes from pigs treated with the drug.

What’s wrong with ractopamine? Ractopamine is connected to “downed” animals, muscular tremors, and increased aggressiveness in animals. It was even found to increase incidence of cattle deaths in a 2014 peer-reviewed article.1 Yet its effects on human and environmental health have not been well studied by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the agency responsible for ensuring the safety of animal drugs.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0091177
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/08/15 12:47 PM

"The truth about our deadly "agricultural" system is coming out and there is nothing that can prevent it from happening."

HUGE WIN! Former Monsanto Employee Fired from Major Scientific Journal’s Editor Position

The tides are turning

It looks like one scientific journal has decided to get real, replacing a pro-GMO editor in a major scientific journal. An ‘unbiased’ Editor-in-Chief will be replacing the completely biotech-biased A. Wallace Hayes, who retracted the controversial paper by the Seralini team which showed the toxicity of GMOs beyond any shadow of doubt.

http://naturalsociety.com/huge-win-forme.../#ixzz3WjlmRuUh
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/08/15 04:19 PM

(Maybe a gmo farmer could explain "art." Would that involve chemicals? Glyphosate?


Non-GMO premium draws growers

Amber Selman, The Southern News Services

April 07, 2015

Her family crunched the numbers and found they could increase profits if they weren’t paying a technology fee for GMO traits in addition to receiving a premium on non-GMO ranging from $1.80 to $2.10 per bushel.

Luke Davies, DuPont Pioneer commercial unit lead, said there has been a strong market for non-GMO soybeans because there has been strong demand.

“Growing high-yielding non-GMO beans is an art, and those who have been in the industry awhile have mastered that art,” he said.

http://thesouthern.com/news/local/state-...309f9ba368.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/09/15 12:56 AM

Monsanto Admits Paying for GMO Farmer’s Legal Defense in Australia Court Case

Posted on Apr 8 2015

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/04/08/m...e/#.VSYGto0tGAK
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/09/15 01:03 AM

The Toxins That Threaten Our Brains

Leading scientists recently identified a dozen chemicals as being responsible for widespread behavioral and cognitive problems. But the scope of the chemical dangers in our environment is likely even greater. Why children and the poor are most susceptible to neurotoxic exposure that may be costing the U.S. billions of dollars and immeasurable peace of mind.

By James Hamblin - Illustrations by Jackie Lay - March 18, 2014

“That’s what I advise people who ask me, yes. It’s the best way of preventing exposure to pesticides.” Grandjean estimates that there are about 45 organophosphate pesticides on the market, and “most have the potential to damage a developing nervous system.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/03/the-toxins-that-threaten-our-brains/284466/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/10/15 06:53 AM

http://findourcommonground.com/2015/01/guess-gmos-safe/

Here are the facts about why GMOs are among the safest products on the market today:

Every plant improved through genetic modification is examined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Environmental Protection Agency for potential health risks.
Tests are done on plants before entering the food and animal-feed supply.
Fruits, vegetables and grains from genetically modified crops are indistinguishable from foods developed with other breeding methods.
The FDA has found that GMO foods have the same nutritional value as non-GMO foods.
Out of the trillions of meals consumed that have contained GMO ingredients, not one single substantiated case of harm to human health has been caused by GMOs.
The World Health Organization, American Medical Association, National Research Council, FDA, European Commission and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation all agree that GMOs are safe.

Did you know that no other food ingredient or product costs as much to bring to market or has been studied as much as GMO crop seed? How does that make you feel? If Jimmy Kimmel asked you, what would you say about GMOs now?
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/11/15 02:03 PM

Mr. Farmer:

Thousands of New Yorkers disagree with you. They are shopping at non gmo farms for their meat and the organics in grocery stores. Big stores like Wegman's is contracting with organic farmers for ingredients to produce "Wegman's Organic." Whole Foods grocery chain will label all gmo's by the end of 2015. Down goes the gmo customer base.

They are also the shoppers that are FORCED to eat organic, gluten free, due to the nasty symptoms caused by your gmo food products. Go to Wegmans or Trader Joe's on any day. There is no room to move, always bumping into people. There again, your customer base is shrinking because gmo food, pesticides and herbicides make people sick and the World Health Organization just admitted that Glyphosate, a/k/a, Round Up, "probably causes cancer."

Been to a restaurant lately? Ask the wait staff how many people ask for organic, gluten free options?

Right now your customers are farmers that grow and spray this poison on crops, the animals forced to eat it and grocery and restaurant customers who do not understand the incredible harm from it. Gasoline too. (Non-Ethenol gas is sold at Fast Track gas stations (Geneva/Clyde).) Oh, and the countries that are having this technology forced on them because of dirty politics.

It is only a matter of time. No parent wants to see their family harmed. When they learn about gmo food, your customer base will keep declining. The tipping point of consumer rejection is upon you. Listen.

People are pretty smart nowadays about the trust worthiness of their government, corporations, etc., and are learning that they can't even trust the media and medical professionals. Trust the FDA? Lmao, not a chance.

Everybody is in it for a buck. Even the ones that should be educating you are not and will only educate the ones that have enough money to fill their pockets.

I have no financial interest. My only purpose is to educate and heal my family. If I can get through to someone else in the process, I'm happy with that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyJRR9wMcVs
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/11/15 03:39 PM

Epidemic of fibroid tumors in American women.

What has changed in the last 20 years? Our food.

At 49:00 and check out the charts at 54:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyJRR9wMcVs
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/12/15 03:37 PM

Brazil’s National Cancer Institute names GM crops as cause of massive pesticide use

09 April 2015

The report names GM crops as a key cause of the trend: “Importantly, the release of transgenic seeds in Brazil was one of the factors responsible for putting the country in first place in the ranking of agrochemical consumption – since the cultivation of these modified seeds requires the use of large quantities of these products.”

The report continues:

http://gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archiv...e-pesticide-use
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/12/15 03:46 PM

Roundup is endocrine disruptor in human cells at levels allowed in drinking water

20 March 2015

Findings of new study need confirmation in animal tests

http://gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archiv...-drinking-water
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/12/15 05:30 PM

Autumn's Harvest Farm

April 3 at 9:33am ·

Our CSA packet is now on our website under CSA. All the info you need is under the tab CSA packet.

If you're looking for a great vegetable CSA we're really lucky to work with two great ones in two different locations, check them out: Full Plate Farm Collective and Fellenz Family Farm.

http://www.freewebs.com/fullplatefarms/

http://www.fellenzfamilyfarm.com/

http://www.autumnsharvestfarm.com/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/12/15 05:43 PM

Organic and Local Farm Directory

http://www.nofany.org/directory/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/12/15 05:53 PM

USDA Extends ‘Coexistence’ Comment Period

Posted on April 10, 2015 by Kristina Hubbard

The new comment deadline is May 11, 2015.

USDA is accepting public comments following an invitation-only workshop last month on “coexistence.”

http://blog.seedalliance.org/2015/04/10/usda-seeks-comments-on-coexistence/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/12/15 05:57 PM

Dr. Oz Show

April 7, 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gczNucWsNN4&feature=youtu.be&hc_location=ufi
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/15/15 12:11 AM

Ben and Jerry on Jimmy Fallon to promote new ice cream flavor.

February 18, 2015

"Ben and Jerry's is now 100 percent fair trade and 100 percent non gmo."

At 2:00 if you don't want to watch the hole segment. And yes, I know they are owned by Unilever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTqzeFa2_SI
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/15/15 11:37 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Brazil’s National Cancer Institute names GM crops as cause of massive pesticide use

09 April 2015

The report names GM crops as a key cause of the trend: “Importantly, the release of transgenic seeds in Brazil was one of the factors responsible for putting the country in first place in the ranking of agrochemical consumption – since the cultivation of these modified seeds requires the use of large quantities of these products.”

The report continues:

http://gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archiv...e-pesticide-use



And yet pesticide use is down dramatically since GMOs.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/15/15 11:07 PM

From Union of Concerned Scientists

The School Nutrition Association (SNA) represents the school food professionals who feed our kids – but their lobbyists are contradicting the science, and trying to take fruits & vegetables off kids’ lunch trays. And guess who’s funding their efforts? Junk food companies.

Meet the School Nutrition Association (SNA), one of the main lobbying groups—funded in part by corporate junk food money—standing in the way of healthier school lunch for kids.

SNA not only opposes improved nutrition standards that would keep fruits and vegetables on kids' lunch trays, they're actively flooding Capitol Hill with misinformation.

But we've got what the opposition doesn't have: science. Tell the SNA to stop contradicting the science and support keeping fruits and vegetables on all kids' lunch trays.

https://secure3.convio.net/ucs/site/Advo...subscr=facebook
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/15/15 11:49 PM

Shikimate pathways

Dr. Robert Kremer: GMOs, Glyphosate and Soil Biology

April 15, 2015 by Carol Grieve

...recently retired after a 32-year career as a microbiologist with the U.S.D.A. He spoke with Food Integrity Now about the problems he has studied over the past 18 years with transgenic crops (GMOs) and Glyphosate.

Since we have evidence of Glyphosate being found in our gut where the bacteria do have shikimate pathways, it makes sense why we are seeing the increase of many allergies and diseases that originate in the gut where 80% of our immune system is in our microbiome. The chelation process of Glyphosate can make some of the good gut bacteria unavailable and as Dr. Kremer explained can shift the balance of the microbial population in our gut. Keep in mind, Glyphosate has also been found in our urine, human breast milk, and in our blood. The biotech industry claims that Glyphosate degrades in the soil and it cannot affect humans because we do not have a shikimate pathway–however the bacteria in our gut does have this pathway.

http://foodintegritynow.org/2015/04/15/dr-robert-kremer-gmos-glyphosate-and-soil-biology/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/16/15 12:26 AM

MIT Scientist Exposes Consequence of Monsanto’s Glyphosate & Aluminum Cocktail

by Christina Sarich Posted on September 15, 2014

Aluminum and Glyphosate

Aluminum and glyphosate specifically interrupt the workings of the pineal gland (melatonin sulfate), leading to high rates of autism. She outlines this fact in pinpointing detail in her research, which can be found here.

Furthermore, glyphosate chelates manganese. Dr. Seneff believes that just the absence of appropriate amounts of manganese can help to cause autism. Glyphosate also promotes aluminum uptake into our tissues, and interrupts an important path for amino acid uptake called the shikimate pathway, into our guts.

http://naturalsociety.com/dr-stephanie-s.../#ixzz3XRXVGKKx

Samsel and Seneff's paper

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3945755/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/16/15 12:32 AM

Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation

http://www.greenworldrising.org/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/16/15 07:48 AM

http://www.vox.com/2015/4/13/8385295/science-reporting-ethics
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/16/15 07:50 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation

http://www.greenworldrising.org/


laugh must clear his conscience when he's flying in the private jet. laugh
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/17/15 01:06 PM

I have to buy real corn that is shipped from other countries because most New York farmers want to keep growing corn that poisons the environment, animals and humans. Gee, Mr. Farmer, what is the cost of that?

U.S. Forced to Import Corn as Shoppers Demand Organic Food

April 15, 2015

A growing demand for organics, and the near-total reliance by U.S. farmers on genetically modified corn and soybeans, is driving a surge in imports from other nations where crops largely are free of bioengineering.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2...-demand-organic
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/17/15 02:12 PM

A Generation in Jeopardy: How pesticides are undermining our children’s health & intelligence

Download or read A Generation in Jeopardy, PAN's report reviewing dozens of recent scientific studies on the impacts of pesticides on children's health. If you'd like printed copies of the report to share, please contact us at healthykids(at)panna.org.

http://www.panna.org/publication/generation-in-jeopardy
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/17/15 02:20 PM

Will this facility grow natural marijuana or Monsanto's patented gmo marijuana?

Citiva Medical eyes Seneca County site for proposed medical marijuana growing facility

http://auburnpub.com/blogs/eye_on_ny/cit...a1915f5fc5.html


Monsanto Creates First Genetically Modified Strain of Marijuana

Apr 15, 2015

Although Monsanto’s testing on cannabis is only at an experimental stage, no plan has yet been released by the agriculture business firm as to what purposes the patented strain would be used for, although specialists believe answers should come this fall as rumors of a controversial new bill which could “loosen up laws around medical m*arijuana” is reportedly scheduled to pass before congress coming this fall.

Critics fear genetically modified cannabis will mix with other strains and could destroy the diversity of DNA, a reality dismissed by most studies claim experts.

http://www.conspiracyclub.co/2015/04/15/monsanto-creates-first-genetically-modified-strain-of-marij/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/17/15 04:10 PM

Gagged by Big Ag

Horrific abuse. Rampant contamination. And the crime is…exposing it?

By Ted Genoways July/August 2013 Issue

Ag gag laws allow industry "to completely self-regulate," says a whistleblowers' advocate. That should "scare the pants off" consumers who want to know how their food is made.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/06/ag-gag-laws-mowmar-farms
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/17/15 06:37 PM

Is there Atrazine (herbicide) in your drinking water?

April 6, 2014

“Atrazine is the number one contaminant found in drinking water in the U.S. and probably globally probably in the world”, says University of California Berkeley, scientist Tyrone Hayes.

http://globalnews.ca/news/1248219/is-there-atrazine-in-your-drinking-water/


If Atrazine does this to frogs, what is it doing to humans?

Dr. Tyrone Hayes Speaks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Nom0UX83w
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/18/15 08:43 PM

U.S. regulators may recommend testing food for glyphosate residues

By Carey Gillam April 17, 2015

Glyphosate is used on corn, soybeans, sugar beets and other crops genetically altered to withstand it. It is also used by farmers growing wheat and other crops. Its use has surged with the advancement of genetically engineered crops.

The U.S. government, which annually tests thousands of foods for pesticide residues, does not test for glyphosate, in part because it has been considered safe.

That could change, the EPA said in a statement Friday.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/17/us-food-agriculture-glyphosate-idUSKBN0N82K020150417
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/19/15 12:17 AM

ACTION ALERT (OCA, Organic Bytes #466,

Ready for GMO Labels, Hillary?

It’s official. Hillary Clinton is running for president.

She’s also an official supporter of Monsanto and GMO crops—unless we convince her to listen to the more than 90 percent of Americans (and voters) who have made it clear we want labels on foods containing GMOs.

We already know from her speech (watch Hillary promote Monsanto approximately 29 minutes in) to the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) convention in San Diego in June 2014, that Hillary supports genetic engineering. But she's so far managed to dodge the question of whether or not she supports state GMO labeling laws or the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act, a bill recently reintroduced in Congress, that would preempt state GMO labeling laws. Or whether she supports the Boxer-DeFazio bill for mandatory labeling of GMOs.

Love her or hate her, you know that Hillary stands a good chance of being the next president of the United States.

You also know that the World Health Organization recently declared glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, a probable human carcinogen. And that the majority of GMO crops are sprayed liberally with Roundup.

It’s time to think big. It’s time to make this a campaign issue. It’s time to demand that Hillary tell us where she stands on GMO labeling.

It’s time to tell her where you stand.

If you haven't signed the petition, please sign today. If you've already signed, please ask five of your friends to sign today.

TAKE ACTION: Tell Hillary Clinton: Support GMO Labeling and Public Health, Not Monsanto!

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/hillary-clinton-its-time?source=c.url&r_by=5382364
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/19/15 12:30 AM

Organic Bytes #477

CAMPAIGN UPDATE Bee Proud!

Last week (April 9, 2015), Lowe’s announced it would begin phasing out neonics and working with growers to source alternatives. In Lowe’s own words:

VIDEO OF THE WEEK

Food Rebel, Carbon Farmer
A third-generation farmer and food producer, Wick says he always believed he and his family were farming responsibly. Until they realized they weren’t.

NEW STUDY

‘Enormous Threat’

The report says that excessive nitrogen emissions are still alarmingly high in Germany, and that agriculture is the country’s largest source (60 percent) of nitrogen emissions.

https://www.organicconsumers.org/bytes/organic-bytes-466-ready-gmo-labels-hillary
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/19/15 05:12 PM

Dr. Mercola & Dr. Druker on GMO History (Part 1 - Full Interview)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rBL0MK9Y-o


Dr. Mercola & Dr. Druker on GMO History (Part 2 - Full Inteview)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FRqq42-x0k
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/20/15 10:22 AM

http://grist.org/food/think-big-corn-far...aign=socialflow

Think commodity corn farmers are evil? Meet a few of them

By Liz Core on 15 Apr 2015 33 comments
ShareTweet
If you’ve ever crossed Iowa on I-80 en route to someplace you fancy more exotic, you might recall mile after solitary mile of soybeans and corn and the occasional side-leaning barn. Agriculture, you may have noticed, is Iowa’s most palpable characteristic — but, I’ll wager a guess, you didn’t see more than one or two farmers anywhere in sight.

Even as a small-town Iowa kid, the only farmers I knew personally were my great-grandparents — who, in their heyday, were known state-wide for their prize-winning watermelons. Iowa has undergone a lot of changes since Grandpa Clyde was grooming his gourds, though. In 1950, the state had 206,000 farmers; in 2012, that number was down to 88,637. Iowa land once cultivated a diverse range of crops, but is now seeded almost exclusively with commodity crops like corn, soybeans, and oats that are processed into ethanol or animal feed. Tell me where you can find a watermelon farmer in Iowa now, let alone a famous one, and I’ll buy you one of those blue-ribbon tenderloins.

Farm Size Matters

These charts show why corn is king


Our crazy farm subsidies, explained


2 farmers’ stories: The fall and rise of the mid-size farm

Farm Size Matters is supported by
Lundberg
A few months ago, I traveled home to visit family. Flying from Seattle to Des Moines, I watched the landscape shift from snow-capped mountains to carefully gridded squares. From above, Iowa appears to have been meticulously engineered into one, big corn- and soy-producing machine. Though I was there for mom and dad, I was also on a quest to find my home state’s hidden farmers. After 23 years as an Iowa kid, I’d finally meet the farmers behind those fields, the inconspicuous backdrop to my childhood.

Really, I did more than just meet them. I chatted about agricultural policy over cinnamon-spice tea; toured a thousand-acre farm in a fourwheeler seated next to a labrador; and played peek-a-boo with shy, barefoot farming boys.

Iowa commodity growers are often demonized for what and how they grow, and monocultures and ethanol aren’t exactly healthy for the planet. But all of the farming families I talked to expressed a deep respect for the land and the desire to take good care of it for the next generation. If we want to understand how and why our agriculture system is the way it is, we’d be wise to approach all farmers with an open mind.

So, meet a few of Iowa’s farmers. Here are our edited and condensed conversations:

Brock Hansen

fullsizerender-cropLiz Core
Farm stats: 2,300 acres of corn and soybeans in Baxter, Iowa

What’s the history of your farm?

On my mom’s side, our land goes back five generations. We strictly grow corn and soybeans, along with a small amount of alfalfa. My mom and dad have their own operation, and my wife and I have our own operation — but we work together. Until about 10 years ago, we had beef cows, and sold the calves off in the fall. Dad sold seed corn on the side. Since then, we got out of hogs and cattle. We had a hired man who stepped in and took over. When we sold the hogs, we bought a few semis and hauled grain and bean meal out of Des Moines to a chicken farm.

How do you sell your product?

First, I look up who has the best prices and contracts. Almost 99 percent of our corn goes to ethanol plants, and the byproduct is turned around and fed to livestock. One hundred percent of our beans go to Des Moines for oil and meal production. Have you heard of Unilever? We’re participating in a program so we can trace where the beans come from and what’s being done to them. I think a lot of them go into Hellman’s mayonnaise.

How has your farm changed?

In granddad’s era, the new thing was chemicals — that was probably in the ’50s or ’60s. Then it went to commercial fertilizer and no-till farming in dad’s era. Now, in my era, the newest part is GPS equipment, pin-point location, and all the technology that’s been brought to the farm. Farming is more of world market than it’s ever been. The market used to never move — if there was a $0.10 swing, it’d take years. Now, that’s an everyday thing.

What do you see as the future of your farm?

Who’d a thought 20 years ago we’d have tractors that would drive themselves? Everything gets bigger, it seems like. Is it the best for it? Probably not. People used to live off of 160 or 180 acres — I wish it could go back there. The world might be better, in general, if farming went back to the mom-and-pop shops.

Do I want to get bigger? Well, everyone wants a bigger piece of the pie. I’d like to be the most efficient on the acres I have. But I don’t need 20,000 acres when I can be just as productive on 5,000.

In what ways are the goals of the food movement consistent with the goals on this farm?

I don’t see the consumer, to tell you the truth. It’s a closed circuit for me. I take our grain straight to the ethanol plant. But you know, consumers are asking them for non-GMO bean meal to feed non-GMO pigs at the company we haul our beans to. There’s a growing demand for that. But you as a consumer, and me as a producer, our paths don’t usually cross.

When the consumer asks us what we’re doing, I tell them we’re trying to be better. I don’t think our story is told enough, but we’re trying. I blame some of that on the media — no offense. It’s easy to cover the bad things, not the good things. For instance, we’ve been no-till for 25 or 30 years, which helps with erosion and creates better top soil; we’ve introduced cover crops; we use GPS equipment to help minimize over-use of chemicals; we’ve upgraded grain driers; we applied for an energy grant to make the drier more efficient, to use less natural gas; we’re looking at putting up a wind turbine. We’re trying to be environmental, green — whatever you call it.

Mark and Julie Kenney

Kenney family cropped (1)Julie Kenney
Farm stats: 3,000 acres of corn, soybeans, and oats in Nevada, Iowa

What’s the history of your farm?

Mark: We’re fifth-generation farmers. My great-great-grandfather started farming in central Iowa back in the 1880s. The original parcel of land that he purchased, we still own. Generations have added to it, but I’m proud that original piece is still a part of our family farm.

Julie and I make our livelihood on this farm. Where I go to work is where I grew up as a child. I feel really fortunate. As a duty, as a responsibility, we try to be active in promoting agriculture to those who aren’t involved in it. We invite people to our farm to show day-to-day operations. When it becomes more of a conversation, commodity farming becomes more readily understood. It takes time, but it’s just as much as the job as making sure the crops are planted.

How has your farm changed?

Mark: My dad says he remembers the first commercial seed he planted. It was planted by a two-row, horse-drawn planter. The last crop he planted was with a tractor driven by GPS.

One thing that is the same today as it was generations ago is that we’re producing a commodity, so our competition isn’t only local, it’s global. Technology isn’t something to be shunned or afraid of — it’s to be embraced. We need to find ways to use new technologies to make our farm competitive in world markets. I’ve always been taught that technology can give you an edge.

Julie: The thing I’ve seen change the most is how public perception is influencing what we do. In Iowa, more and more young people are removed from the farm. So now, we have a duty to help open doors to explain to others who aren’t as familiar with what’s going on. I try not to think of it as us educating, because I want it to be a two-way conversation; I want to listen to what the general public’s concerns are.

What do you see as the future of your farm?

Mark: The way my grandpa farmed is different from the way we farm now, but there are certain things that endure time. While the equipment has changed, the core values are the same: attention to detail, being fiscally responsible, understanding that there’s more to the world than just yourself, being a member of the community, and making yourself available to help neighbors in need. That’s what I hope will continue on this farm.

Agriculture will keep getting more competitive and capital intensive. I estimate farms will become larger because technology is allowing that, and we’ll continue to produce more from a smaller resource base.

Julie: I think there will be more non-traditional people who get involved in farming. I think we’ll see more companies like Google that want to be involved in agriculture. I think we’ll continue to get questions from people about where their food comes from, and we’ll have to become more transparent about that.

In what ways are the goals of the food movement consistent with the goals on this farm?

Mark: Above any other law, my No. 1 boss is Mother Nature. The weather is in control — and such a major factor in our yearly income. It impacts if we can work some days. It’s been true since the dawn of time, but it’s still one of the biggest misconceptions in modern agriculture.

I think I can speak for most farmers and say that we enjoy our independence. A trait that successful farmers share is operating our farms the way that we please. For instance, a mile from our house is a small organic farm with vegetables and honey bees. They have a very small acreage, and it’s a lot of labor — but they’re doing it. Another farmer next to us grows organic corn and soybeans. We’re all farmers, it’s all agriculture, we just all do it a little different.

How does agricultural policy affect you?

Mark: Our farm has operated under the auspices of farm bills since the 1930s. I don’t see how that is going to change how we work on the farm. Government doesn’t outweigh market forces — and it certainly doesn’t outweigh the weather. I do think there’s a role for the government to play in food production. Of all the things we must secure, food is No. 1. We wouldn’t want to outsource our food production like we’ve done with energy production — what a terrible thing that would be.

Ward and Sandi Van Dyke

wardsandi-cropWard Van Dyke
Farm stats: 2,000 acres corn and soybeans in Pella, Iowa

What’s the history of your farm?

Ward: We’re third- and second-generation farmers, but we’ve had this farm since 1986. There would be days in high school when I would skip school to help with the crops. Back then, that’s just what we did.

Sandi: We started in cattle and hogs and eventually we went strictly to grain. When we moved here, we added a garden as a project for our kids.

How has your farm changed?

Ward: When I was little, my parents had two- or four-row planters. Now, we can plant 30 rows at a time, and that’s just average — it’s actually kind of small. Our combine harvests with a 35-foot head, rather than 16 like it used to be. We went from having no technology to having full auto-guidance, automatic sprayer shut-off, yield monitors, variable rate planning, and variable rate nitrogen application.

That technology makes us much more efficient. For example, when we’re out in the field planting seeds, we want to know what’s been planted. The machine will shut off so we don’t plant more seeds than we need. Same with the sprayer: It’ll shut off so we don’t put out too much herbicides or insecticides.

What do you see as the future of your farm, and farming in Iowa?

Ward: In general, farms are going to continue to get larger. If labor is an issue, you can eliminate people, and tractors do it.

Sandi: I don’t know, sometimes I wonder. There’s been an influx of smaller, niche farms. I don’t know if the general public will catch on and embrace it, though, because we’re used to cheap food. Everybody wants cheap food.

Ward: You wouldn’t have the critical mass for that. It’s hard, it’s tough.

Sandi: It would be fun to go back, though. Wouldn’t it be nice to go back to how it was when we grew up our parents’ farms? There was livestock, chickens, and grain — it was more self-sufficient. It’d be nice.

How does agricultural policy affect you?

Ward: I’ve been to two meetings already to talk about the farm bill — and it’ll take a meeting or two more before I understand it. The policy is complicated. In general, I think less government is better. There are a lot of hurdles to jump over, paperwork, and time and energy and money, versus just doing what we need to do. Why make it so complicated?

In what ways are the goals of the food movement consistent with your goals on this farm?

Ward: We don’t want our grain hauled any farther than it has to — similar to the farm-to-table movement. The fewer miles the grain has to drive is better, because it’s expending less fossil fuels.

And there’s also a lot of consumer education that needs to happen around here. You know, in our kids’ garden we have these great spaghetti squash, but if consumers don’t even know what a spaghetti squash is, then what? You have to educate consumers, so they want to buy the product.

Sandi: We used to have a CSA, but lots of people quit because they weren’t using all the produce. People are in so many activities and always on the go, so they aren’t able to prepare their own food. It’s interesting; there are so many people who think they want to do eat local until they have to implement it. And they can’t, because it doesn’t fit with their lifestyle.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/20/15 02:00 PM

http://findourcommonground.com/food-facts/local-organically-grown-food/

Local and Organically Grown Food



How do you define local food? Maryland farmer Jennifer Schmidt wants consumers to know that even some canned foods could be considered local for many people. Listen to her story in the video.

Local/Organic FactsInfographic #1Infographic #2
Is buying from local farms better for the environment?
Not necessarily. The Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture at Iowa State University reports that the number of transportation miles and energy used to produce so-called “locally grown” food turns out to be great indicators of what is local, but not of environmental impact. Sometimes it takes more energy to grow and harvest local food than it does to grow it far away and have it shipped. Sustainability has many complicated facets beyond the carbon footprint, including soil tillage, crop protection and fertilizer use, waste handling, shipping and water use.
Buying from local farms helps support area farmers but does not ensure that farmers grow enough food to help feed a rapidly increasing global population. Only 20 percent of U.S. farmland is located near metropolitan areas. As our population grows and competes for land, energy and water, U.S. farmers will need to be even more efficient and productive. Small, local farms will have a niche but cannot alone sustainably or practically address all future food production needs.
Should I always try to buy organic foods?
Organic does not necessarily mean a healthier product. In fact, a comprehensive review of some 400 scientific papers on the health impacts of organically grown foods, published in the journal Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, concluded organic and conventional food remain equally healthy.
All foods – whether organic or nonorganic – must meet certain health and safety regulations before being sold to consumers. Several U.S. government agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), monitor the food production chain through regulations and inspections from farm to fork to ensure that all food is safe.
Understanding what classifies food as organic is complex. The production processes involved in growing or raising food qualify it as organic, not the final product itself. Organic classification should not be an automatic green light indicating the quality or safety of a product.
Is organic food more nutritious?
The USDA, which certifies organic production, makes no claims that organically grown food is more nutritious than conventionally grown food. Organic food proves to be only different in how it is grown, handled and processed.
In the case of milk, stringent government standards include testing all types of milk for antibiotic and other residues to ensure that both organic milk and conventional milk remain equally pure, safe and nutritious. Organic or traditional, all milk contains the same valuable nutrients.
Why is organic food often more expensive?
Organic production can increase management costs and risks for some farmers and ranchers. Organic crop production actually represents only a very small portion of total U.S. food production. U.S. farmers and ranchers plant about 3 million acres of organic crops and have about 2 million acres of rangeland and pasture in organic systems. Those figures represent less than 1 percent of total U.S. land being farmed today.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/21/15 03:57 PM

Regulations to implement GMO food labeling adopted

Posted: Apr 20, 2015

BURLINGTON, Vt. (AP) - The Attorney General's Office in Vermont has formally adopted the regulations implementing a state law requiring the labeling of food produced with genetic engineering.

Vermont became the first state to require the labeling in 2014.

http://www.wcax.com/story/28848117/regulations-to-implement-gmo-food-labeling-adopted
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/21/15 04:16 PM

Institute of Science and Society

Ending GMOs Now - 4/21/15

...GMOs failing old and new, while organic and non-GMO markets continue booming; the days of GMOs are numbered, let’s hasten the demise Dr Mae-Wan Ho

...fraudulent science of the GMO agritech sector. GM foods were first commercialised in 1992 but only because the Food and Drug Administration covered up the extensive warnings of its own scientists about the dangers, lied about the facts and violated federal food safety law by permitting these foods to be marketed without having been proven safe through standard testing.

A thorough analysis of recent research conducted in the US and around the world shows that genetic modification has not significantly improved the yields of crops such as corn and soy. Instead GM crops have increased the use of toxic herbicides and led to herbicide resistant super weeds.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Ending_GMOs_Now.php
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/21/15 09:58 PM

I'm looking forward to the day when New Yorkers can add their names to a class action law suit against this company.

Monsanto sued in Los Angeles County for false advertising

April 21, 2015

Today a class action lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles County, California against the Monsanto corporation. The suit alleges that Monsanto is guilty of false advertising by claiming that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, targets an enzyme only found in plants and not in humans or animals. Monsanto makes this claim to support the contention that glyphosate is harmless to humans.

Today's lawsuit may be the beginning of an avalanche. Earlier this month, Beijing resident Yang Xiao-lu filed a lawsuit against the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture...

Residents of California can become members of the class in this action...

http://www.examiner.com/article/monsanto-sued-los-angeles-county-for-false-advertising
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/21/15 10:17 PM

Moms Across America 4/21/15

Sources say these lobbyists are paid 20K a month and there are 20 of them trolling the hill for the chemical companies every day. Apparently 20K a month is not enough to drink a glass of Roundup.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovKw6YjqSfM
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 01:43 AM

Is Your Vinegar Made From GMOs?

A new lawsuit against Heinz reveals an unpleasant reality about your favorite green cleaner.

April 1, 2014

This is just the latest in a string of lawsuits challenging "natural" claims on foods that contain, or likely contain, GMO ingredients. At least 100 lawsuits have been filed since 2011 against major food brands, including Kellogg Co., Campbell Soup and Nature Valley. Even Trader Joe's and Ben & Jerry's ice cream have been targeted.

http://www.rodalenews.com/what-vinegar-made
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 01:52 AM

The Really Awesome Thing That Lowe's Is Doing

The retail giant takes a big step toward safer lawn products.

April 9, 2015

In an act that suggests that pressure from consumers, advocacy groups, and investors really works, home-improvement giant Lowe's is vowing to get bee-killing chemicals off of its store shelves.

http://www.rodalenews.com/lowes-goes-green
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 02:18 AM

If your bank is lending money to Monsanto, take your money out and let them know why you are leaving.

Moms Across America - 4/22/15

Why is Monsanto borrowing BILLIONS of dollars from the world's largest banks? Is your bank on here? Then whose money are they really borrowing? Might be time for a withdrawal.

"On March 27, 2015, Monsanto Company (“the Company”) entered into a $3 billion, five-year revolving credit agreement (the “Five-Year Credit Agreement”) with certain lender parties thereto, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent, Citibank, N.A., Bank of America, N.A. and Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc., as co-syndication agents, Barclays Bank plc, Goldman Sachs Bank USA, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as co-documentation agents, and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated and Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc., as co-lead arrangers and joint bookrunners. This agreement replaces the Company’s $2.5 billion four-year revolving credit agreement, dated as of April 1, 2011, as amended (the “Prior Agreement”)."

Five-Year Credit Agreement dated March 27, 2015

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1110783/000119312515117966/d901698d8k.htm?hc_location=ufi
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 06:34 PM

Jeffrey Smith

The GMO potato and apple use dsRNA, which could literally change the way our genes are expressed if we eat these. I discuss this on the Daily Show this evening. Here's a more serious look at this urgent health risk.

Why Scientists are Worried about the GMO Potato and Apple

April 22, 2015

For more than a decade, he has been warning the agencies that approve GMOs about the need to test new dsRNAs for safety.

While it’s true that most RNA are not stable, Heinemann points out that “surprisingly, the form of RNA called dsRNA is very very stable. . . . And it’s now been shown that they can be taken up after digestion of the food into our blood supply.” More importantly, in a groundbreaking study conducted in China in 2012,[4] dsRNA fed to mice “transferred to the liver and down-regulated an important liver enzyme.”

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/pos...tato-and-apple/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 07:03 PM

The existential crisis facing GMOs - they don't work and we don't want them

Colin Todhunter

21st April 2015

The GMO industry has legitimised itself via a vast network of lobbyists and the assiduous capture of the politicians, regulators and scientists that should be holding it to account, writes Colin Todhunter. But as the failure of the GM revolution and its disastrous impacts become ever more evident, the industry's legitimacy is fast eroding away.

http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_an..._want_them.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 07:42 PM

Toxic chemical of the year

https://vimeo.com/115304371
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 07:45 PM

Studying Health Outcomes in Farmworker Populations Exposed to Pesticides

Feb 16 2006

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1480483/#__abstractid451092title
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 07:47 PM

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

http://faostat.fao.org/site/424/default.aspx#ancor
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 07:53 PM

Sorry, Monsanto. The Science Is on Our Side, Not Yours

March 24, 2015

Here are just a few examples of the latest reports, articles and books exposing the dangers of GMOs, Big Ag’s toxic chemicals and evidence of a decades-long cover-up to keep consumers in the dark.

One final comment on the climate-denier talking point. How ironic that Enright and the biotech industry would pretend to side with the scientists sounding the alarm on global warming—when the largest contributor to global warming is industrial agriculture, with its GMO monoculture crops. Anyone serious about global warming knows that our best hope is to ditch our chemical-intensive, soil-destroying industrial agriculture and replace it with organic, regenerative farming practices that restore the soil’s ability to capture carbon.

https://www.organicconsumers.org/blog/sorry-monsanto-science-our-side-not-yours
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 07:57 PM

Farmers turn to GMO-free crops to boost income

Christopher Doering April 18, 2015

When Justin Dammann enters his southwestern Iowa cornfield this month, the 35-year-old farmer will sow something these 2,400 acres have not seen in more than a decade — plants grown without genetically modified seeds.

"We never really thought we would go back to (non-GMO). But the consumer, in my opinion, has sent a clear message that a certain percentage of our customers are willing to pay more for the non-GMO lines," Dammann said. "This non-GMO thing has seemed to take hold and gain a lot of traction."

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/agriculture/2015/04/18/non-gmo-farming/25951693/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/22/15 09:48 PM

Free to watch for a limited time: Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of our Lives

https://vimeo.com/125627467
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/23/15 11:38 AM

Dr. Mehmet Oz / 4/23/15 (Link to show video at bottom)

In addition to today's show, I addressed my critics in this TIME piece. I've written about my unwavering commitment to you, the viewer, through my show.

Exclusive: Dr. Oz Says ‘We’re Not Going Anywhere’

"With a few clicks and some simple searches, a remarkable web of intrigue emerged—one that the mainstream media has completely missed. The lead author, Henry I. Miller, appears to have a history as a pro-biotech scientist, and was mentioned in early tobacco-industry litigation as a potential ally to industry. He also furthered the battle in California to block GMO labeling—a cause that I have been vocal about supporting. Another of the letter signees..."

"Whether you support genetically engineered crops or not, the freedom to make an informed choice should belong to consumers. The bill in Congress this month proposing to block states from independently requiring labeling offers a coup to pro-GMO groups."

http://time.com/3831926/dr-oz-criticism-answers/

Today's show:
https://www.facebook.com/droz?fref=ts

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/23/15 02:51 PM

Glyphosate Testing

Why has this validated glyphosate testing been developed?

Are there ‘safe’ levels of glyphosate?

http://feedtheworld.info/glyphosate-testing-test-yourself/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/23/15 04:30 PM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Dr. Mehmet Oz / 4/23/15 (Link to show video at bottom)

In addition to today's show, I addressed my critics in this TIME piece. I've written about my unwavering commitment to you, the viewer, through my show.

Exclusive: Dr. Oz Says ‘We’re Not Going Anywhere’

"With a few clicks and some simple searches, a remarkable web of intrigue emerged—one that the mainstream media has completely missed. The lead author, Henry I. Miller, appears to have a history as a pro-biotech scientist, and was mentioned in early tobacco-industry litigation as a potential ally to industry. He also furthered the battle in California to block GMO labeling—a cause that I have been vocal about supporting. Another of the letter signees..."

"Whether you support genetically engineered crops or not, the freedom to make an informed choice should belong to consumers. The bill in Congress this month proposing to block states from independently requiring labeling offers a coup to pro-GMO groups."

http://time.com/3831926/dr-oz-criticism-answers/

Today's show:
https://www.facebook.com/droz?fref=ts



Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/23/15 04:32 PM



Dr. OZ he's funny
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/23/15 04:33 PM

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/zgdj3q/dana-perino

Watch for free.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/23/15 06:14 PM

Re: The Daily Show segment

Cornell University says the potatoes are safe to eat and won't change your dna.

I say, no thanks, Cornell. I'll stick to the organic potatoes that I know for sure are safe to eat and won't change my dna.

I'm not volunteering for your corporate/academic science experiment and neither will the rest of America when they learn who is behind bringing this product to market.

A nation is waking up.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/23/15 06:31 PM

The consumer doesn't want it and you can't tell them where to spend their dollar. That's our decision.

Oat buyer says no glyphosate pre-harvest

Posted Apr. 22nd, 2015 by Robert Arnason

Grain Millers, a major oat buyer in Western Canada, will no longer purchase oats if the crop has been desiccated with glyphosate.

In an April 20 memo to Prairie oat growers, Grain Millers said the new policy was “driven by functional performance attributes of finished products manufactured from oats known to have been treated with glyphosate and by customer demand.”

Tyson said the company discovered that glyphosate was the cause of the frost-like damage, through a process of elimination.

http://www.producer.com/2015/04/oat-buyer-says-no-glyphosate-pre-harvest/#.VTgXFSVWdhE.facebook
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/23/15 06:42 PM

30,000 Doctors and Health Professionals Demand Glyphosate Ban In Argentina

Jonathan Schoenfeld / April 22, 2015

A union of 30,000 doctors and health professionals announced efforts to eliminate the use of glyphosate-based herbicides following results from an International Agency for Research (IARC) evaluation that classifies glyphosate a probable cause of cancer.

http://theantimedia.org/30000-health-professionals-demand-glyphosate-ban-argentina/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 06:57 AM

Originally Posted By: cwjga


Even the Daily show understands how wacked the anti GMOérs are.
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 12:37 PM

Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: cwjga


Even the Daily show understands how wacked the anti GMOérs are.


If anti GMO bashing existed in your clip...which it does not...it's called parody. Sheez!




Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 01:29 PM

laugh any holes in your cells yet, or maybe you are the person that had a change in DNA. laugh laugh laugh
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 01:30 PM

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/zgdj3q/dana-perino

Yup shows that Smith is an idiot.
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 02:00 PM

Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: cwjga


Even the Daily show understands how wacked the anti GMOérs are.

Originally Posted By: cwjga


Yeah k.

So...at what point in this clip does Perino's pro-GMO rah-rah rant materialize?

Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 03:03 PM

Christine Kumar
What an embarrassment (Jeffrey Smith). "I'm not a scientist." EXACTLY! If he eats a steak, does he turn into a cow? I really hope he is not a Cornell Alumnus.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 09:18 PM

Lawsuit Accuses Monsanto of Lying About Safety of Roundup

By Carey Wedler

Global Research, April 24, 2015

The Anti-Media 23 April 2015

The lawsuit also alleges many adverse health effects of consuming glyphosate:

“Because it kills off our gut bacteria, glyphosate is linked to stomach and bowel problems, indigestion, ulcers, colitis, gluten intolerance, insomnia, lethargy, depression, Crohn’s Disease, Celiac Disease, allergies, obesity, diabetes, infertility, liver disease, renal failure, autism, Alzheimer’s, endocrine disruption, and the W.H.O. recently announced it is ‘probably carcinogenic.’”

The complaint further claims that dogs and cats carry the EPSP synthase enzyme, which puts them at risk for health issues related to ingestion of Roundup-coated products.

The lawsuit seeks to include anyone as a plaintiff who purchased Roundup or Roundup-related products during the last four years. It seeks unspecified damages and anticipates “thousands and thousands of class members.”

http://www.globalresearch.ca/lawsuit-accuses-monsanto-of-lying-about-safety-of-roundup/5444984
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 09:49 PM


Activists Pressing for a Ban on the Main Ingredient in Roundup Weed Killer

Consumer Affairs
by Christopher Maynard

April 23, 2015


The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking another look at glyphosate -- the weed killer more commonly known as Roundup, manufactured by Monsanto. The agency declared it a carcinogen in 1985 but later reversed that decision. The chemical is up for review this year.

Use of glyphosate has increased dramatically in recent years and it is now used on a variety of crops that are grown for consumers. These include wheat, corn, soybeans, and many other foods we eat every day.

Besides the renewed interest from the EPA, the World Health Organization recently reported that the chemical is “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

In 2011, Reuters reported that 271 samples of soybeans out of 300 had glyphosate residue on them. Although the levels found were below EPA tolerance levels, this still raises some concerns among health advocates.

Monsanto officials say the WHO report is “dramatic departure from the conclusion reached by all regulatory agencies around the globe” and say it's not based on any new scientific evidence.

Activists respond

Health and safety advocates are putting heat on the EPA. The Organic Consumers Association (OCA), in conjunction with the Feed the World Project, today said it was launching the world’s first glyphosate testing for the general public. The project, with specific focus on women and children in the U.S., is offering the first-ever validated public glyphosate testing for urine, water and soon breast milk.

“For decades now, the public has been exposed, unknowingly and against their will, to glyphosate, despite mounting evidence that this key active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide is harmful to human health and the environment,” said Ronnie Cummins, OCA’s international director. “Monsanto has been given a free pass to expose the public to this dangerous chemical, because individuals, until now, been unable to go to their doctor’s office or local water testing company to find out if the chemical has accumulated in their bodies, or is present in their drinking water.

https://www.organicconsumers.org//news/activists-pressing-ban-main-ingredient-roundup-weed-killer
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 10:27 PM

Open Letter to the People of China

April 2015

We understand that China already is the largest producer and exporter of glyphosate in the world, including supplies exported to Monsanto for use in the manufacture of Roundup formulations worldwide. Accordingly, we ask that your Government accepts that it shoulders, together with Monsanto, some responsibility for the devastating harm to public health in those countries importing glyphosate/Roundup from China. We are also concerned that there may be massive claims for compensation in the near future.

China is also the largest importer of "Roundup Ready" (RR) soybeans and maize, thus contributing to the ongoing production of these varieties in the USA, Argentina and Brazil. It will be no easy thing to close down factories and to ban the use of the chemical in town and country; and if imports of RR soy and maize are stopped, they will have to be replaced with other products.

http://www.gmfreecymru.org/open_letters/Open_letter24April2015.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/24/15 10:40 PM

Maine's Vaccine Debate - Recorded LIVE!

By Ginger Taylor

This week in Maine an unprecedented event occurred. A mainstream media outlet hosted an extended, live debate on vaccines, invited a balanced panel and a balanced audience, let the audience questions drive the debate, and in no way biased or edited the final product.

http://healthchoice.org/index.php/38-popular-articles/141-maine-s-vaccine-debate-recorded-live
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/25/15 05:06 AM


WHO: Ingredient in Monsanto Roundup 'probably carcinogenic' to humans

Glyphosate, found in world's most widely used herbicide, classified as probable carcinogen by cancer research experts


Aljazeera America
by Renee Lewis

March 21, 2015


The most widely used herbicide in the world, glyphosate, the active ingredient in the Monsanto product Roundup, was classified as "probably carcinogenic to humans,” in a report released Friday by cancer researchers affiliated with the World Health Organization.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) announced its assessment of glyphosate after convening a meeting this month of 17 cancer experts from 11 countries. They looked at the available scientific evidence on five different pesticides, including glyphosate, to determine whether to classify them as carcinogens. Carcinogens are substances that can lead to cancer under certain levels of exposure.

Glyphosate caused DNA and chromosomal damage in mammals, and in human and animal cells studied in laboratories, the report said. Studies of workers who had been exposed to the chemical in the U.S. Canada, and Sweden found “increased risks for non-Hodgkin lymphoma that persisted after adjustment for other pesticides,” the report said.

Glyphosate is usually used on crops, including corn and soybeans, that are genetically modified to survive it. The herbicide has been detected in food water, and in the air after it has been sprayed, according to the IARC report. “Its use has increased sharply with the development of genetically modified glyphosate-resistant crop varieties,” the report said.

Monsanto, the agrochemical giant, objected to the findings.

"We don't know how IARC could reach a conclusion that is such a dramatic departure from the conclusion reached by all regulatory agencies around the globe," Philip Miller, Monsanto's vice-president of global regulatory affairs, said in a statement.

WHO's based its classification of glyphosate on evidence from studies of exposure, mostly agricultural, in the United States, Canada, and Sweden that were published since 2001.

The U.S. government has said the herbicide is considered safe, and the Environmental Protection Agency approved a Monsanto request to increase legal tolerance levels for glyphosate in 2013.

Glyphosate was originally used as a descaling agent to clean out mineral deposits from pipes because of its ability to avidly bind to heavy metals. The chemical bonds to arsenic, cadmium and other heavy metals found in groundwater.

Scientists and farmers elsewhere have raised other concerns over glyphosate and tried to ban its use.

Channa Jayasumana, with Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, published a study in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health in 2014 on a possible link between glyphosate and chronic kidney disease in farmworkers. His research found that excessive heat and dehydration may weaken the workers' bodies, making them more susceptible to pesticides and heavy metals, which can lead to kidney disease.

Based on that research, the Sri Lankan government moved to ban glyphosate in spring of 2014. But Monsanto raised objections to the report's findings, and the ban was lifted. The chemical was, and continues to be, widely used on farms in the country.

The research also suggested a link between glyphosate and a mysterious kidney disease that has killed thousands of farmworkers in Central America. At least 20,000 farm workers have died of chronic kidney disease in Nicaragua in the last two decades, The Guardian reported in February. Researchers who have studied the disease in Central America say that it mainly affects agricultural laborers working under conditions of excessive heat and dehydration, but other factors, including pesticides, may play a role.

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/20...-to-humans.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/25/15 12:53 PM

"I am actually very scared. I feel that the future is dammed unless we make dramatic changes immediately and it may be even too late so I'm doing everything I can to get the message out."

"...he explained how glyphosate disrupts the microbes in the soil and disrupts the microbes in the gut in a similar way and so when the gut microbes get out of wack and you have a over growth of pathogens then you get a lot of issues with leaky gut, inflammatory gut, celiac's disease, all these problems that are epidemic today, can be caused by glyphosate and of course I knew that those problems were linked to autism..."

This weeks podcast episode we speak with Dr. Stephanie Seneff who fills us in on the vaccine program, Genetically modified foods and Glyphosate (round-up) and their effects on our bodies.

http://optimumwellnessandrehab.com/podcast-2/drstephanieseneff/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/25/15 01:22 PM

Monsanto's Department of How to Brainwash a Nation.

They are advertising in magazines, most recently, Oprah, Better Homes and Gardens and just today, on Facebook, NASCAR races and of course, television via Lowes and Home Depot commercials. Write to these companies and tell them you won't shop at their stores until they stop advertising for chemical companies. I wrote Country Max last year. This year, they have organic products out on the end isles, where last year they had Round Up. Thank you Country Max.

"At Monsanto, we’re focused on working with others to deliver sustainable agricultural solutions that address our biggest challenges..."

http://discover.monsanto.com/sustainable...utm_campaign=tm
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/25/15 01:50 PM

Suzanne Sommers on Opening Bell

"We're under the greatest environmental assault in the history of humanity and so there's an epidemic of...and you think about it 10, 15 years ago, you didn't hear about people with brain disorders and autoimmune diseases..."

"When we decided to put poison pesticides on our food, I don't know who thought that was a good idea but, it's reeking havoc with our gi tract. So when the toxins come in and end up in the gi tract, they eat through the barrier wall, leak out, that's that leaky gut you're hearing about that so many people have; roam through the blood stream looking for organs of opportunity, their favorite organ being the brain because that's 65 percent fat, and toxins like to live in fat and here is what is happening to our kids and every age group..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGbUwUcVV-I
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/25/15 04:26 PM

Right to Know GMO Rally and Lobby Day in Albany, NY

Join hundreds of New Yorkers in sending a powerful message to our legislators: We all deserve and demand the right to know what we're buying, eating and feeding our families. Label GMOs now!

On Tuesday, April 28, we will pack the Million Dollar Staircase in the New York State Capitol Building to call for mandatory labeling of GMOs. The rally will be entirely indoors. Buses and carpools will provide transportation from around the state.

http://act.foodandwaterwatch.org/site/Pa...;autologin=true
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/26/15 01:15 PM

Top Pharma-Brand Of Children’s Vitamins Contains Aspartame, GMOs, & Other Hazardous Chemicals

August 20, 2014

...let’s look a little closer at some of these presumably healthy ingredients….

In summary, Bayer’s Flintstone’s vitamin brand is far from a natural product, and the consumer should be aware of the unintended, adverse health effects that may occur as a result of using it.

http://earthweareone.com/top-pharma-bran...dous-chemicals/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/26/15 01:39 PM

Monsanto/Roundup Class Action Lawsuit

Monsanto claims that Roundup targets enzymes supposedly found only in plants -- not in people -- but this is blatantly false.

The truth is, Roundup targets enzymes found in both plants AND people -- specifically in our gut bacteria -- which are vulnerable to potent pesticides like Roundup.

Monsanto’s claim -- that Roundup targets enzymes "not found in people" -- is objectively false and inherently misleading.

PLEASE Read the lawsuit @ www.monsantoclassaction.org
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/26/15 01:43 PM

Investers...hold or sell?

Monsanto Company EVP Sells $3,292,224.60 in Stock

Posted by Seth Barnet on Apr 19th, 2015

http://www.wkrb13.com/markets/558419/monsanto-company-evp-sells-3292224-60-in-stock-mon/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/26/15 10:52 PM

SeaChoice

Description

The movement towards sustainable seafood is about solutions for our oceans. We understand that choosing sustainable seafood can be challenging, that’s why SeaChoice has created this easy-to-use application to help you identify the most sustainable seafood choices you can make everywhere you go!
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/seachoice/id318613515?mt=8
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/26/15 11:07 PM

Texas Pushes for GMO Labeling with Introduction of New Bill
Following Vermont's GMO labeling victory

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/texas-pushes-for-gmo-labeling-with-introduction-of-new-bill/#ixzz3YTXRCRK7
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/26/15 11:26 PM

Rounding Us Up and Exposing Us All to Cancer

31 March 2015

By Brian Moench

The shocking results prove that glyphosate does in fact bioaccumulate. Certainly, the last thing a newborn should be ingesting is Roundup from its mother's milk.

Pesticides like Roundup are "biocides" - biologic poisons. They destroy living cells.

Cancer is far from the only concern about Roundup. The medical and toxicological literature examining the health consequences of pesticides reads like a horror show.

In fact, in 2013, well after much of the alarming research on glyphosate had already surfaced, the EPA actually increased the "acceptable" levels of glyphosate contamination of numerous foods, anywhere from twice for soybeans to 25 times higher for carrots.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/29946-rounding-us-up-and-exposing-us-all-to-cancer
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 12:36 AM

Potato grower's move into forest land raises water, wildlife concerns

By Archie Ingersoll : April 27, 2015

Offutt, known for supplying McDonald's with potatoes, says it's committed to maintaining water quality around its farms.

http://admin.inforum.com/news/3731551-potato-growers-move-forest-land-raises-water-wildlife-concerns
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 12:54 AM

Goodall on GMO’s: “I Truly Believe We’re Poisoning Ourselves”

By Andrea Smardon • Apr 24, 2015

“We’re poisoning the land, we’re poisoning animals, and I truly believe we’re poisoning ourselves,” Goodall said. She pointed to superbugs that have become resistant to pesticides, weeds resistant to herbicides, and isolated animal studies in Europe and Australia where she said rats and pigs suffered from a variety of health issues when consuming genetically engineered crops.

http://kuer.org/post/goodall-gmo-s-i-truly-believe-we-re-poisoning-ourselves
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 01:19 AM

14 year old girl picks fight with bully TV host - and WINS!

Aug 1, 2013

14 year old Rachel Parent debates Kevin O'Leary on the issue of Genetically Modified Food

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIXER_yZUBg

Added bonus: Monsanto propaganda ads now being shown on You Tube.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 04:47 PM

http://agricultureproud.com/2014/05/20/my-chat-with-chipotle-on-food-with-integrity-part-1/

In and of itself, a noble cause on most any day, except that their chosen route to this plan is founded on a campaign utilizing fear-based marketing that perpetuates misinformation and berates the work of most farmers and ranchers in this country. And for the life of their marketing teams, they cannot admit to understanding why this has angered, frustrated, and antagonized so many farmers and ranchers. To state it briefly, Chipotle Mexican Grill is taking advantage of current food trends and buzzwords to build a campaign that fills their pocketbooks.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 06:07 PM

Monsanto and Others Caught Paying Internet ‘Trolls’ to Attack Activists

...paid internet trolling is becoming a new career path.

There’s the real difference. And, besides common sense dictating that corporations would surely hire a fleet of internet warriors to protect their brand reputation in the age of open source online communication, we now know for sure that companies like Monsanto have in fact dedicated ‘entire departments’ to trolling scientists and ‘discrediting’ those who oppose their GMO creations.

...Dr. William “Bill” Moar raved that Monsanto had established:


“An entire department” (waving his arm for emphasis) dedicated to “debunking” science which disagreed with theirs.”

http://www.infowars.com/monsanto-and-others-caught-paying-internet-trolls-to-attack-activists/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 06:41 PM

The food at this restaurant is delicious.

Chipotle Won’t Serve Genetically Modified Foods

Chipotle is the first major restaurant chain to remove GMOs from its food

http://time.com/3836356/chipotle-genetically-modified-food-gmo/

BAM! Chipotle goes 100% non-GMO; flatly rejecting the biotech industry and its toxic food ingredients

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/049510_Chipotle_non-GMO_foods_clean_fast_food.html#ixzz3YYJje9yL
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 06:53 PM

Monsanto has taken over You Tube advertisements.

Feel free to stop over to their facebook page and let them know what you think.

https://www.facebook.com/MonsantoCo

http://coalitionforsafeaffordablefood.org/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 07:51 PM

MUST WATCH: how Monsanto is doing the OPPOSITE of feeding the world

"There's a humongous food shortage" she says because after they grow a gmo crop no other food will grow in the soil.

The first of a series of videos from mothers across the world talking about GMOs and chemical farming in their communities.

Alice from Uganda, Africa talks about the impact of GMOs and chemical farming on her health, her family and her village. With intro by Vandana Shiva, co creator of Moms Across the World. Interviewed and filmed by Zen Honeycutt of Moms Across America.

3:20 Alice share about her long term infertility issues and being able to conceive after going organic
5:09 Alice shares about the loss of her father and the health issues which led up to his passing.
6:28 Alice learns the connection between the health of her village and the crops they are growing
7:18 Alice describes the crops her father and his village are growing with chemicals and the impact on the soil and the health of her village7:49 Alice describes food shortages since growing Monsanto's con and cotton
10:00 Alice share what she learned from Vandana and from the www.MADGE.org talks in Australia
14:24 Vandana Shiva tells Alice what she needs to do.
14:55 "It has to be stopped"
15:22 Do they have more food or less with GMOs?
16:37 Do you believe the GMO seed companies are feeding the world?

http://www.momsacrosstheworld.com/videos
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 10:21 PM

Joel Fuhrman, M.D. : #1 New York Times Bestselling author, family physician specializing in nutritional medicine and natural methods

Unjust Attacks Against Dr. Oz

Posted: 04/23/2015

I have known Mehmet Oz, M.D. for over 30 years, well before he became famous on television.

To understand these issues, it is necessary to understand who these medical critics of Dr. Oz are and what their possible agenda is.

Was this recent public attack orchestrated to discredit Dr. Oz and protect Monsanto against his questioning the safety of genetically-modified food?

Many big egos in the medical profession demand respect, as if their medical drugs and procedures are anointed with a high degree of scientific certainty, when the reality is most of the studies are sponsored and influenced by pharmaceutical companies. These individuals often act like they have a superior intellect to understand and adjudicate scientific claims and findings, contemptuously attacking all that they do not know with the term "quackery."

I think it is important to recognize that drugs have real potential to do harm -- and what your doctor doesn't know about nutrition and healthy lifestyle can kill you, too.

There are thousands of doctors across the country who feel he represents the modern medical profession well. I am one of them.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joel-fuhrm...rOzUnjustAttack
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/27/15 11:47 PM

Judge: Vermont law on GMO food to stand

DAVE GRAM, Associated Press 8 p.m. EDT April 27, 2015

U.S. District Court Judge Christina Reiss in Burlington on Monday ruled against the Grocery Manufacturers' Association and other industry groups in their request for a preliminary order to block the law from going into effect as scheduled on July 1, 2016.

"The safety of food products, the protection of the environment, and the accommodation of religious beliefs and practices are all quintessential governmental interests, as is the State's desire 'to promote informed consumer decision-making,'" she wrote, quoting from the state's court filings.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story...eling/26471455/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 01:03 AM

Moms Across America : 4/28/15

Syngenta makes a whole mess of extremely toxic chemicals, glyphosate parquat, atrazine and one which is so toxic Traxion (44.9% glyphosate) that it is not even allowed in the USA, only Canada. There is "no known antidote" for this chemical if ingested. Ummmmm...but they spray it on the ground for "burn off" and then plant our food in that same soil!

Syngenta is also Astra Seneca by the way...so they both make the toxic chemicals that make us sick and then they make the pharmaceuticlas to make us feel better.

Here is a list of the pharmaceuticals they make with the illness they treat. The therapy areas have been linked to be linked to toxic chemical exposure.

Brand name Generic name Therapy area

Accolate, Accoleit, Vanticon zafirlukast Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity
Arimidex anastrozole Oncology
Atacand, Atacand HCT, Atacand Plus candesartan cilexetil Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Axanum acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and esomeprazole Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Bricanyl Turbuhaler terbutaline in a dry powder inhaler Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity
Brilinta, Brilique ticagrelor Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Bydureon exenatide Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Byetta exenatide injection Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Caprelsa vandetanib Oncology
Casodex, Cosudex bicalutamide Oncology
Crestor rosuvastatin Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Cubicin daptomycin Infection
Diprivan propofol Neuroscience
Duaklir Genuair aclidinium/formoterol Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity
EMLA EMLA Neuroscience
Eklira Genuair/Tudorza/Bretaris aclidinium, a LAMA Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity
Entocort budesonide Gastrointestinal
Faslodex fulvestrant Oncology
FluMist, Fluenz influenza virus vaccine live, intranasal Infection
FluMist Quadrivalent/Fluenz Tetra influenza vaccine live, intra-nasal Infection
Forxiga dapagliflozin Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Iressa gefitinib Oncology
Kombiglyze XR saxagliptin and metformin XR Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Komboglyze saxagliptin and metformin HCl Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Losec, Gastroloc, Mopral, Omepral, Prilosec omeprazole Gastrointestinal
Lynparza olaparib Oncology
Merrem/Meronem meropenem Infection
Naropin ropivacaine Neuroscience
Nexium esomeprazole Gastrointestinal
Nolvadex, Istubal, Valodex tamoxifen citrate Oncology
Onglyza saxagliptin Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Plendil, Modip, Splendil, Munobal, Flodil felodipine Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Pulmicort Respules budesonide inhalation suspension Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity
Pulmicort Turbuhaler budesonide Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity
Rhinocort budesonide Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity
Seloken ZOK, Toprol-XL, Betaloc ZOK metoprolol succinate Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Seroquel IR quetiapine fumarate Neuroscience
Seroquel XR quetiapine fumarate Neuroscience
Symbicort Turbuhaler budesonide/formoterol Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity
Symbicort pMDI budesonide/formoterol Respiratory, Inflammation and Autoimmunity
Symlin pramlintide acetate Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Synagis palivizumab Infection
Tenormin, Tenormine, Prenormine, Atenol atenolol Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Vimovo naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium Neuroscience
Vimovo naproxen and esomeprazole magnesium Neuroscience
Xylocaine lidocaine Neuroscience
Zestril lisinopril dihydrate Cardiovascular & Metabolic
Zinforo ceftaroline fosamil Infection
Zoladex goserelin acetate implant Oncology
Zomig, Zomig Rapimelt, Zomig Nasal Spray, AscoTop, Zomigon zolmitriptan Neuroscience

https://www.facebook.com/MomsAcrossAmerica/posts/448328908666985
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 08:21 AM

http://agricultureproud.com/2014/05/22/c...fficult-part-2/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 10:19 AM

http://gizmodo.com/chipotles-anti-gmo-stance-is-some-pandering-bullshit-1700437048

Chipotle's Anti-GMO Stance Is Some Anti-Science Pandering Bullshit
59,54845

Sarah Zhang

Chipotle's Anti-GMO Stance Is Some Anti-Science Pandering Bullshit

Chipotle, a company known for making oversized burritos and publishing literary fiction on items of trash, announced today that it has stopped serving food made from genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Oh hooray, yet another victory for misinformation.

There is a broad scientific consensus that genetic modification is a safe and likely necessary technology for feeding the world’s growing population. But lots of organic-minded people are still unwilling to accept the stance. Sure, Chipotle is giving people a choice here, but it’s also capitulating to the idea there is something fundamentally wrong with GMOs—while burnishing its own corporate image.

Here’s why Chipotle’s move especially smells like pandering BS. For the past couple of years, Chipotle has been getting its suppliers to get rid of GM corn and soybean. Today’s “GMO-free” announcement comes as Chipotle has switched over to non-GMO corn and soybean oil, but it still serves chicken and pork from animals raised on GMO feed. (Its beef comes from pasture-fed cows.) A good chunk of the GM corn and soybeans grown in America actually goes to feed livestock, so a truly principled stance against GMOs should cut out meat from GM-fed animals, too.

Any guesses why Chipotle hasn’t stopped serving GMO-fed chicken and pork? Because it’s not economical to do so. What is good for business, though? Declaring yourself GMO-free for publicity points.


FYI pasture fed beef is fed grain at the end to fatten it for sale. OOps
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 11:17 AM

Update from Moms Across America : 4/28/15

Our leader, Zen Honeycutt is in Switzerland. She was to attend the Syngenta board meeting. You can close your doors on us, but we're not going away. We have mom (and dad) members from all over the world educating parents every day.

Zen Honeycutt

"The Syngenta Shareholder meeting was eventful. Great people gathered to protest outside. Thank you all who called Syngenta! When I tried to register and enter the Head of Legal said no ( after several rounds of discussion) and they offered to have heads of Dept's meet with me. Which might have been better. We'll see. I met with three mothers: two heads of R&D for pesticides and GM and one Head of Social Policy and Performance. They listened and we talked for nearly 2 hours. Much longer than 3 minutes and Mothers! I gave them everything I got. I think they really got that as the world's largest pesticide producer, they have the hardest to fall. They seemed to really listen and be genuinely concerned. Again we'll see. It's time for them to change direction and mitigate risks. Thanks again to all who called!"

.........

Syngenta makes a lot of products. If you haven't heard of Tyrone Hayes, you've got to see his talk about the frogs being desexed because of Atrazine getting in our water. See my post, Frogs under Pets and Animals.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 12:19 PM

http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/04/27/chipotle-the-strangest-restaurant-menu-ever/

Chipotle: The Strangest Restaurant Menu Ever
Comment Now Follow Comments

Chipotle announced that it will now be GMO-free. (Photographer: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Chipotle Mexican grill CMG +0.98% announced that beginning today (April 27), none of the offerings at its more than 1,800 restaurants will contain ingredients from “genetically modified organisms.” According to Steve Ells, founder and co-chief executive, “This is another step toward the visions we have of changing the way people think about and eat fast food.”

If Chipotle makes good on that commitment, their menu will certainly accomplish that. In fact, it will be the strangest ever in an American restaurant.


Mr. Ells and his colleagues need a primer on genetic modification, which I am happy to provide.

There is a seamless continuum of techniques for genetic modification of crops, animals, and microorganisms that both predates and includes the advent of molecular techniques, which were invented during the 1970’s. Farmers and plant breeders have been selecting and hybridizing plants to enhance their desirable characteristics for millennia. See, for example, the second figure here, of modern corn and its antecedents, an illustration of how drastically corn has been modified by selective breeding. Tomatoes and wheat and innumerable other food plants have similar histories.

Another common technique for creating new plant varieties, which originated about a century ago, is radiation mutagenesis–subjecting seeds to radiation to scramble their DNA and create mutants. Thousands of plant varieties–including lettuce, wheat, rice, oats and the popular Rio-Sweet and Rio Star pink grapefruit–that we consume routinely were derived this way.

Some of the skeptics about modern genetic engineering would remonstrate that using “conventional,” or pre-molecular, techniques, adds no “foreign” genes to the genome of the resulting plant. They’re wrong.

Since the 1930&#8242;s plant breeders have performed “wide cross” hybridizations, in which large numbers of “foreign,” or “alien,” genes have been moved across what used to be thought of as “natural breeding boundaries” to create plant varieties that cannot and do not exist in nature. In these hybridizations, which are performed between organisms of different species or genera, the parental plants may be sufficiently compatible to produce a viable zygote but not compatible enough to permit the embryo to develop into a mature plant. To overcome this obstacle, laboratory scientists devised mechanical and biochemical ways to “rescue” the embryos and make them viable, and common commercial crops derived from wide crosses include tomato, potato, sweet potato, oat, rice, wheat, corn and pumpkin, among others.


Wide-cross hybridizations and radiation-induced mutagenesis represent far more drastic “tinkering with Nature” and create far greater attendant uncertainty about the results than the modern molecular techniques. As the U.S. National Research Council said in a groundbreaking 1989 analysis:


With classical techniques of gene transfer, a variable number of genes can be transferred, the number depending on the mechanism of transfer; but predicting the precise number or the traits that have been transferred is difficult, and we cannot always predict the [traits] that will result. With organisms modified by molecular methods, we are in a better, if not perfect, position to predict the [traits].

Let’s consider a real-world example, the man-made species Triticum agropyrotriticum, which was created by wide-cross hybridization from the combination of bread wheat and quackgrass (also known as couchgrass). The entire genome of quackgrass was transferred haphazardly into wheat. This new variety could in theory pose several types of problems because it takes an established plant variety, wheat, and introduces tens of thousands of foreign genes into it. Concerns include the potential for increased invasiveness of the plant and the possibility that quackgrass-derived proteins could be toxic or allergenic for some humans.

But neither regulators nor activists nor, apparently, the deep thinkers at Chipotle have evinced any concern about these possibilities. Plant varieties like T. agropyrotriticum, which harbor “foreign” genes and are indeed “genetically modified” according to any reasonable definition, are subject to no mandatory testing or review before entering the food chain. In contrast, if a single gene from quackgrass (or any other organism) were introduced into wheat using modern, precise molecular genetic engineering techniques, the resulting variety would be subject to hugely expensive—and increasingly biased and politicized—regulation. Inevitably, they would be targeted by activists…and shunned by Chipotle.

Where, then, does that leave Chipotle’s “no genetic modifcation” promise? That should limit their menu to wild berries, wild game, wild mushrooms, and wild-caught fish and shellfish. Virtually all of the other foods in our diets come from organisms that have been genetically modified in some way; and about three-quarters of the processed foods in American markets contain ingredients from organisms genetically engineered with molecular techniques.

I hope the chefs at Chipotle are cleverer than the people who run the company.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 05:41 PM

Fyi, if you feel the need, this website has an "ignore" feature you can use so that you do not see a particular person's posts.

Via Naples Citizens for Positive Change

GMO OMG

First Friday Film Series
Unitarian Universalist Church of Canandaigua
3024 Cooley Road
Friday, May 1, 7pm

Please join us. No admission. All are welcome.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 05:56 PM

http://www.iowacornstalk.com/2014/02/6-things-chipotle-doesnt-want-you-to.html

6 Things Chipotle Doesn’t Want You To Know
Nicole Patterson_CommonGroundAs a woman who grew up on a crop and hog farm, and as a woman who will be joining another crop and hog farm I consider myself to be a pretty lucky girl. I consider myself lucky because I know the truths about today’s farmers and the awesome job they are doing to provide quality products for our stomachs. When my crops and hogs get attacked, it gets personal. It get personal because I know what’s really going on because I’ve lived it for 20 years. It gets personal because it’s attacking my families’ way of life.
The Chipotle series called Farmed and Dangerous is using humor, and scary marketing ploys to scare consumers into buying organic and antibiotic free food. They are creating fear in food, not farmers. My family has been treating their hogs with antibiotics for years, and none of us has ever gotten sick from consuming our products. We consume the pork we grow, so it’s in our best interest to use the best practices in our operation to get the best products on the market possible.

Six things Chipotle doesn’t want you to know:
1. 96% of farms are family farms. Look at these awesome farm families that are working hard to put that food on your plate today! farmersfeedus.org

2. Antibiotics that are used in livestock production are out of the animals system before entering the market. Farmers have to follow strict regulations of withdrawal periods before sending their livestock to market. (Meaning, the antibiotics must have completely left the animals system) Click here for more information.

3. Organic producers still use certified chemicals on their crops, they are just derived from a natural source rather than a synthetic source. Don’t believe this? Check it out from the EPA here. e

4. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) go through several tests and approximately 13 years of approvals before entering the market. The government also regulates this. Want to know more about GMOs? Check out this great source.

5. GMOs allow farmers to use less chemicals on their land, not more. (Ask a farmer, he/she’ll tell you!) Here’s another great source for your GMO questions.

6. Pork and poultry are not treated with hormones, because it’s been tested to see there is no added benefit. Look at this great site to explain more on hormone use!

We as farmers have nothing to hide. We don’t have any secret laboratories or facilities where we are concocting a new way to make money. In fact, I bet most farmers would be glad to have you out to their farm to talk about how they are growing the corn that is going into your corn flakes, or the beef that makes your juicy hamburgers, or how about the soybeans that are put into your Hershey’s chocolate? (Soy lecithin, an oil coming from soybeans to make your chocolate creamy and smooth)

Our farms are not top secret or restricted. We’re not hiding anything behind our barn doors. Come take a peek as to what’s really going on, and I promise it isn’t anything close to what Chipotle is insinuating.

Chipotle, I’m disappointed that you had to go so low as to put down a farmers way of life and use scare tactics in order for you to make more money. Is it getting too expensive for you to provide only organic, hormone and antibiotic free products for your customers that you’re begging for more business in the wrong way?
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 06:10 PM

Please text "label" to 69866.

Food & Water Watch

Hundreds of people, including Ben & Jerry's own Jerry Greenfield, turned out to the New York state capitol building in Albany today to call for labels on GMO foods!

https://www.facebook.com/FoodandWaterWat...tif_t=notify_me
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 06:28 PM

Gary Hooser Defends Kaua'i and Speaks at Syngenta Shareholder Meeting 2015 in Basel Switzerland : 4/28/2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdZxGDl87Zw&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueSdW2TA77o&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 06:35 PM

Victory!!!

US District Court Upholds Vermont GMO Labeling Law

Apr 28 2015 - by Sustainable Pulse

Today, Center for Food Safety (CFS) hailed the just-issued federal court decision from the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont affirming the constitutionality of Vermont’s genetically engineered food labeling law, Act 120. The ruling fully denied the preliminary injunction motion brought by the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association, Snack Food Association, and other plaintiffs to try and halt the law’s implementation, and granted the State of Vermont’s motion to dismiss on several claims.

“This important ruling affirms the constitutionality of genetically engineered food labeling, as well as the rights of Vermonters and U.S. citizens across the country,” said George Kimbrell, senior attorney for Center for Food Safety and counsel in the case. “Americans are demanding the right to know if their food is produced through genetic engineering, for health, environmental and many other reasons. This decision is a crucial step in protecting those rights.”

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/04/28/u...w/#.VUALDY0tH3h
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 06:48 PM

We all need to fight TPP which will remove all gmo labels and much more. It has passed house and senate committees, time is short.

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 06:56 PM

Don't buy this poison...



Buy this...and it works without the salt and the dishsoap...remember to buy non gmo vinegar...



Don't spray these...



Protect our bees.

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:06 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:07 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:09 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:10 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:12 PM

Gmo cotton used in the making of your personal care products.

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:14 PM

Fast Track in Geneva and Clyde sell Non Ethanol gasoline. They even have a discount program. Go inside and ask for the discount card.

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:15 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:17 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:18 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/28/15 07:30 PM

This man has been standing up to his colleagues and corporations to fight for your rights regarding your money, food and environment.

Bernie Sanders To Launch Presidential Campaign

The Huffington Post | By Sam Levine / Posted: 04/28/2015 5:10

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/28/bernie-sanders-presidential-campaign_n_7165270.html


Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 02:31 AM

News story about GMOs and the rally from a Syracuse news station:

Hundreds expected at Albany rally for GMO labeling law

04/27/2015

http://www.localsyr.com/story/d/story/hu...qz0iGfj8E-nU2sw
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 02:42 AM

"Genetic engineering as we currently practice it is really an infectious-type disease," says Dr. Don Huber, Professor Emeritus, Plant Pathology, Purdue University. "it's much more like a virus infection than a breeding program." A disease, yes, Dr. Huber, we agree - one that cannot be contained.

Listen to this 8 minute interview with Dr. Huber:

http://www.valleynewslive.com/news/pov/h...-297181531.html
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 11:14 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
News story about GMOs and the rally from a Syracuse news station:

Hundreds expected at Albany rally for GMO labeling law

04/27/2015

http://www.localsyr.com/story/d/story/hu...qz0iGfj8E-nU2sw



Can't wait until they start labeling NON-GMO foods so that I know what I am eating.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 11:18 AM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty


? This is a problem Why? Almost all commercial seed is treated. Always has been.
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 11:51 AM


Yep. The established sick side of conventional agri-biz.

Thanks for reminding us.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 01:10 PM

Originally Posted By: Teonan

Yep. The established sick side of conventional agri-biz.

Thanks for reminding us.


? What the hell are you ranting about now. Bet you did not know that commercial organic seed is treated also.

Good thing your not a farmer. You'd be broke before you started.
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 02:13 PM

Originally Posted By: cwjga
Originally Posted By: Teonan

Yep. The established sick side of conventional agri-biz.

Thanks for reminding us.


? What the hell are you ranting about now. Bet you did not know that commercial organic seed is treated also.


There's actually more than a few suppliers of untreated commercial-grade organic seeds.

Try fact-checking while editing your post next time.

Sources of untreated organic seeds:
https://attra.ncat.org/sorg/seeds.html
http://www.seedway.com/vegetable_seed/Pages/Organic-and-Untreated-Seed.aspx
http://www.neseed.com/
http://www.greenpeople.org/seeds.htm

Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 03:09 PM

And you can get un-treated non-organic seed as well. What's your point, oh yea you don't have one.
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 03:31 PM

Originally Posted By: cwjga
And you can get un-treated non-organic seed as well. What's your point, oh yea you don't have one.

Originally Posted By: cwjga
Bet you did not know that commercial organic seed is treated also.


Using "is" incorrectly implies that organic seeds are routinely poison dusted.

Try keeping your pro-chemical shilling in line next time. wink
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 05:35 PM

Erin Brockovich

4/29/15

Did you know Quaker Oats' parent company, PepsiCo, is spending millions to keep you and your family in the dark about what’s in your food? So much for choice Pepsi!

Quaker is one of the many Big Food companies using their deep pockets to lobby against GMO labeling. They’re supporting a bill in Congress we call the DARK Act – because it would deny Americans the right to know whether our food has been genetically engineered.

Click here right now to urge Quaker to join us and support mandatory FDA labeling of GMOs!

http://action.ewg.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=2146&tag=201504GMOCorpAct
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/29/15 06:10 PM

Altered Genes, Twisted Truth Author interviewed in this article in NG...

Is Genetically Engineered Food A Fraud?

Claims author: It’s the biggest fraud in the history of science and not the answer to feeding the world.

"First, the subversion of science has been much deeper than most people could imagine. There has been a consistent degradation of science and twisting of the truth on the part of numerous eminent scientists and scientific institutions on behalf of genetically engineered foods. The aggregate fraud to promote genetically engineered foods is by far the biggest fraud in the history of science. The corruption of government has also been very deep and multifaceted."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/...lth-ngbooktalk/

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/30/15 12:23 AM

Moms Across America

We hope you will be inspired by our series of videos from mothers across the world talking about GMOs and chemical farming in their communities and what they are doing about it.

Chailin from Taiwan about a group of Mothers and their Non GMO School Lunch project, and

Alice from Uganda, Africa talks about the impact of GMOs and chemical farming on her health, her family and her village. With intro by Vandana Shiva, co creator of Moms Across the World. Interviewed and filmed by Zen Honeycutt of Moms Across America.

http://www.momsacrosstheworld.com/videos

People across the world are questioning the safety of these gmo plants and chemicals.

Mothers are demystifying Genetic Engineering (MADGE)

http://www.madge.org.au/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/30/15 01:40 AM

*********************Upstate New York tested .33 for Glyphosate in the water - 3X Higher than allowed in Europe*******************

Moms Across America's Zen Honeycutt speaks in Sydney, Australia - March 24, 2015

"I'm not a scientist and I'm not a doctor. I'm an expert Mom. I'm the expert of my children. You're your children's expert. If you're not a parent, you are your expert."

"A concerned Mom does better research than the FBI."

"Gmo's are a chemical delivery system to humans."

"Glyphosate stayes viable in dark salty water for up to 351 days, does not biodegrade like they say it does, this has been proven so when I went in front of the Monsanto Shareholder meeting this past January and spoke to them about their products harming our children on behalf of mothers, I said to them what is in our womb? Dark salty water and what is the size of a fetus? It's the size of a shrimp. You must be responsible for the contamination of our children and the pollution of our planet and I believe many of them got it."

"We have the knowledge and power to do something about this."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpkjMP3xhx8#t=33

https://www.facebook.com/MomsAcrossAmerica?fref=ts
http://www.momsacrossamerica.com/
http://www.momsacrosstheworld.com/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 04/30/15 07:51 AM

How Are GMOs Created?
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/01/15 01:31 AM

Lab Sees 3400% Increase in Testing Food for Monsanto’s Toxic Glyphosate

by Jefferey Jaxen : Posted on April 16, 2015

...what we are witnessing is a further continuation of the rapid paradigm shift away from biotech, GMO food, and its poisons. GMO food and its associated chemicals have officially been shown to not only be toxic for humans, but also for any company’s bottom line that decides to associate themselves with them.

In the last year, McDonald’s, Starbucks, Kellogg’s, and others have all sustained major damage to their brand and financial health for dragging their feet to public demands for product changes away from GMOs. What Microbe Inotech Laboratories and others across the world are representing is the next, and potentially final, wave to swamp biotech’s “settled science.”

http://naturalsociety.com/independent-la.../#ixzz3YrUePMsB
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/01/15 01:38 AM

Printable List of Monsanto Owned “Food” Producers

May 15, 2014 by True Activist

List of companies that uses Monsanto products.

http://www.trueactivist.com/printable-list-of-monsanto-owned-food-producers/

Buycott

Vote with your wallet

Buycott helps you to organize your everyday consumer spending so you can fund causes you support and avoid funding those you disagree with.

http://www.buycott.com/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/01/15 02:09 AM

Jerry Greenfield of Ben & Jerry's ice cream speaking the truth on GMO labeling in Albany!

"Food companies are changing their food labels and packaging all the time whether it's different ingredients, whether its new marketing claims and it's just something that's in the normal course of business."

https://www.facebook.com/MarchAgainstMonstanto/videos/1002809633070890/
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/01/15 08:52 AM


Clear as glass, just as sharp! Jerry gets it.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/01/15 01:45 PM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Jerry Greenfield of Ben & Jerry's ice cream speaking the truth on GMO labeling in Albany!

"Food companies are changing their food labels and packaging all the time whether it's different ingredients, whether its new marketing claims and it's just something that's in the normal course of business."

https://www.facebook.com/MarchAgainstMonstanto/videos/1002809633070890/


Amazing B&J can label their products the way they want to, without government. Who knew. whistle
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/01/15 01:54 PM

How I Got Converted to G.M.O. Food
By MARK LYNASAPRIL 24, 2015


NAIROBI, Kenya — Mohammed Rahman doesn’t know it yet, but his small farm in central Bangladesh is globally significant. Mr. Rahman, a smallholder farmer in Krishnapur, about 60 miles northwest of the capital, Dhaka, grows eggplant on his meager acre of waterlogged land.

As we squatted in the muddy field, examining the lush green foliage and shiny purple fruits, he explained how, for the first time this season, he had been able to stop using pesticides. This was thanks to a new pest-resistant variety of eggplant supplied by the government-run Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute.

Despite a recent hailstorm, the weather had been kind, and the new crop flourished. Productivity nearly doubled. Mr. Rahman had already harvested the small plot 10 times, he said, and sold the brinjal (eggplant’s name in the region) labeled “insecticide free” at a small premium in the local market. Now, with increased profits, he looked forward to being able to lift his family further out of poverty. I could see why this was so urgent: Half a dozen shirtless kids gathered around, clamoring for attention. They all looked stunted by malnutrition.

In a rational world, Mr. Rahman would be receiving support from all sides. He is improving the environment and tackling poverty. Yet the visit was rushed, and my escorts from the research institute were nervous about permitting me to speak with him at all.

The new variety had been subjected to incendiary coverage in the local press, and campaign groups based in Dhaka were suing to have the pest-resistant eggplant banned. Activists had visited some of the fields and tried to pressure the farmers to uproot their crops. Our guides from the institute warned that there was a continuing threat of violence — and they were clearly keen to leave.

Why was there such controversy? Because Mr. Rahman’s pest-resistant eggplant was produced using genetic modification. A gene transferred from a soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis (more commonly known by the abbreviation “Bt”), produces a protein that kills the Fruit and Shoot Borer, a species of moth whose larvae feed on the eggplant, without the need for pesticide sprays. (The protein is entirely nontoxic to other insects and indeed humans.)

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story
RELATED COVERAGE

Starting Monday, nothing at Chipotle’s more than 1,800 restaurants will contain genetically modified organisms, or G.M.O.s.Chipotle to Stop Using Genetically Altered IngredientsAPRIL 26, 2015
Conventional eggplant farmers in Bangladesh are forced to spray their crops as many as 140 times during the growing season, and pesticide poisoning is a chronic health problem in rural areas. But because Bt brinjal is a hated G.M.O., or genetically modified organism, it is Public Enemy No.1 to environmental groups everywhere.

The stakes are especially high because Mr. Rahman is one of only 108 farmers in Bangladesh currently permitted to try out the new variety. Moreover, this is among the first genetically modified food crops to be grown by farmers anywhere in the developing world. Virtually every crop, in every other country, has so far been blocked.

In neighboring India, green campaigners managed to secure a nationwide moratorium against the genetically modified eggplant in 2010. In the Philippines, a Greenpeace-led coalition has tied up the variety in litigation for two years. Greenpeace activists took the precaution of wrecking field trials first, by pulling up the plants.

Continue reading the main story
I, too, was once in that activist camp. A lifelong environmentalist, I opposed genetically modified foods in the past. Fifteen years ago, I even participated in vandalizing field trials in Britain. Then I changed my mind.

After writing two books on the science of climate change, I decided I could no longer continue taking a pro-science position on global warming and an anti-science position on G.M.O.s.

There is an equivalent level of scientific consensus on both issues, I realized, that climate change is real and genetically modified foods are safe. I could not defend the expert consensus on one issue while opposing it on the other.

In Africa, however, countries have fallen like dominoes to anti-G.M. campaigns. I am writing this at a biotechnology conference in Nairobi, where the government slapped a G.M.O. import ban in 2012 after activists brandished pictures of rats with tumors and claimed that G.M. foods caused cancer.

The origin of the scare was a French scientific paper that was later retracted by the journal in which it was originally published because of numerous flaws in methodology. Yet Kenya’s ban remains, creating a food-trade bottleneck that will raise prices, worsening malnutrition and increasing poverty for millions.

Continue reading the main story
RECENT COMMENTS

Scott Hayden Beall 4 days ago
GMOs: Yes, safe to eat. Yes, short term environmental benefits. Yes, economically advantageous. BUT, it is folly to believe we can...
Lazlo Finkman 4 days ago
"In his speech, Lynas called glyphosate 'benign.' Perhaps he missed the report last year by the Institute of Science in Society, with its...
bb 4 days ago
Is the writer being sponsored by companies making GMO seeds. Doesn't the writer know that these GMO plants are killing bees because of...
SEE ALL COMMENTS
In Uganda, the valuable banana crop is being devastated by a new disease called bacterial wilt, while the starchy cassava, a subsistence staple, has been hit by two deadly viruses. Biotech scientists have produced resistant varieties of both crops using genetic modification, but anti-G.M.O. groups have successfully prevented the Ugandan Parliament from passing a biosafety law necessary for their release.

An eminent Ghanaian scientist whom I met recently had received such a high level of harassment from campaigners that he was considering taking a dossier to the police. Activists in his country have also gone to court to stall progress in biotech development.

The environmental movement’s war against genetic engineering has led to a deepening rift with the scientific community. A recent survey by the Pew Research Center and the American Association for the Advancement of Science showed a greater gap between scientists and the public on G.M.O.s than on any other scientific controversy: While 88 percent of association scientists agreed it was safe to eat genetically modified foods, only 37 percent of the public did — a gap in perceptions of 51 points. (The gap on climate change was 37 points; on childhood vaccinations, 18 points.)

On genetic engineering, environmentalists have been markedly more successful than climate change deniers or anti-vaccination campaigners in undermining public understanding of science. The scientific community is losing this battle. If you need visual confirmation of that, try a Google Images search for the term “G.M.O.” Scary pictures proliferate, from an archetypal evil scientist injecting tomatoes with a syringe — an utterly inaccurate representation of the real process of genetic engineering — to tumor-riddled rats and ghoulish chimeras like fish-apples.

Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story
In Europe, leaders in Brussels propose to empower all member states of the European Union to ban genetically modified crops, if they so wish. Hungary has even written anti-G.M.O. ideology into its Constitution. Peru has enacted a 10-year moratorium.

As someone who participated in the early anti-G.M.O. movement, I feel I owe a debt to Mr. Rahman and other farmers in developing countries who could benefit from this technology. At Cornell, I am working to amplify the voices of farmers and scientists in a more informed conversation about what biotechnology can bring to food security and environmental protection.

No one claims that biotech is a silver bullet. The technology of genetic modification can’t make the rains come on time or ensure that farmers in Africa have stronger land rights. But improved seed genetics can make a contribution in all sorts of ways: It can increase disease resistance and drought tolerance, which are especially important as climate change continues to bite; and it can help tackle hidden malnutritional problems like vitamin A deficiency.

We need this technology. We must not let the green movement stand in its way.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/01/15 04:38 PM

Dr. Mercola and Ronnie Cummins Talk About GMO Updates

R.C. is the founder of the Organic Consumers Association : Apr 19, 2015

"...and we'd better know what's in our food and we better pay attention to that because it's impacting our health in a very serious way. Right now we have an epidemic...of chronic disease across the country it's getting worse and worse and it's directly related to toxins in the environment in our food and our water."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIQM0NnYqzU&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/01/15 05:13 PM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
Dr. Mercola and Ronnie Cummins Talk About GMO Updates

R.C. is the founder of the Organic Consumers Association : Apr 19, 2015

"...and we'd better know what's in our food and we better pay attention to that because it's impacting our health in a very serious way. Right now we have an epidemic...of chronic disease across the country it's getting worse and worse and it's directly related to toxins in the environment in our food and our water."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIQM0NnYqzU&feature=youtu.be



Ronnie Cummins of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has spent a lifetime as a professional activist. Since getting his start in anti-war activism in 1967, he has dabbled in the “human rights, anti-nuclear, labor, consumer, and sustainable agriculture” movements. From 1992 to 1998 he served as a campaign consultant and director for anti-technology zealot Jeremy Rifkin’s Foundation on Economic Trends.

The guy makes a living getting people worked up. laugh laugh
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/02/15 10:28 AM

These chemicals are used in agriculture, playgrounds, roadsides, paths and railroads, just to name a few.

Railway weed control

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KiTxRNY1vE
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/02/15 11:23 AM

Op-Ed: Roundup's glyphosates are killing our gut microbes

By Karen Graham Apr 12, 2015.

Celiac disease and gluten-intolerance is a growing problem worldwide, but especially in North America and Europe. The causative factor in the increase of these disorders can be explained by studies done on the use of Roundup on the foods we eat.

Even though many private laboratories have seen an increase in the number of food products being tested for glyphosate residues, it is with surprise that this Digital Journalist discovered the Internet is filled with studies on the dangers of Monsanto's Roundup, and its effects on the human gut microbes.

Most studies of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup have not gained a great deal of media attention, perhaps because the signature product of the internationally known company is being used on all our food crops. But studies being done around the world are all coming up with similar results.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/life/healt...3#ixzz3YzlG1oGG
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/02/15 04:21 PM

Farmer Cooperatives, Not Monsanto, Supply El Salvador With Seeds

Tuesday, 03 March 2015 12:57 By Nathan Weller

In the face of overwhelming competition skewed by the rules of free trade, farmers in El Salvador have managed to beat the agricultural giants like Monsanto and Dupont to supply local corn seed to thousands of family farmers. Local seed has consistently outperformed the transnational product, and farmers helped develop El Salvador’s own domestic seed supply–all while outsmarting the heavy hand of free trade.

Producing seed locally was no small feat. It involved savvy farming techniques, better business practices, and advocacy. It also required a government willing to take a critical look at the transnational agribusiness model that dominates the farming sector the world over.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/29419...ador-with-seeds
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/02/15 06:09 PM

This is what happens when a livestock farmer took away antibiotics, hormones and corn

March 9, 2015

(at :55, 7 minutes)

In this clip from Food Forward, a rancher in Bluffton, Georgia de-industrializes his five generation old farm for the sake of his animals and the environment.

https://www.minds.com/blog/view/42173265...rmones-and-corn
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/02/15 08:06 PM

Oregon needs our help.

Help Family Farmers Stand Up to Monsanto's GMOs!

We need your help defending farmers' ballot measure victory banning GMOs from Jackson County, Oregon and creating a GMO free sanctuary.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/gmofree/help-family-farmers-stand-up-to-monsantos-gmos
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/02/15 08:09 PM

Argentina: 30,000 doctors and health professionals demand ban on glyphosate

on 16 April 2015

Following on from the conclusion of the International Agency for Research on Cancer that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen, Argentina’s union of doctors and health professionals, FESPROSA, has issued a statement throwing the support of its 30,000 members behind the decision:

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/ar...n-on-glyphosate
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/02/15 08:19 PM

2015 National Organic Standards Board Meeting

The NOSB was created by Congress to represent the interests of the organic community, rather than allowing the industry to be dominated by corporate lobbyists, as is the custom in Washington.

http://www.cornucopia.org/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/02/15 08:43 PM

AG UNDERSECRETARY TRAVELING COUNTRY SELLING TPP ..

..Leaders of commodity groups that include pork, corn, rice and cattle traveled to San Antonio last week for a meeting with Alexis Taylor, U.S. Department of Agriculture undersecretary for farm and foreign agricultural services.

The approximately 90-minute round table at the Wyndham Riverwalk hotel on Thursday was closed to the media. Alexis Taylor, U.S. Department of Agriculture deputy undersecretary for farm and foreign agricultural services, said Texas growers and livestock producers widely favored the Trans Pacific Partnership’s potential to open new markets and lower tariffs that for beef are as high as 50 percent.

“By 2030, 66 percent of the world’s middle-class population is going to be in Asia,” Taylor said. “That’s huge market potential. And what’s the first thing people do when they make more money? They want to buy better food. They want to buy meat and protein, meat and dairy, fresh fruits and vegetables, things Texas really excels

Taylor has been traveling the country for similar meetings. This was her eighth such round table and first in Texas. Nationally, the USDA has held 30 so far.

Judith Canales, a Uvalde native who is state executive director for the USDA Farm Service Agency, said San Antonio was chosen for the Texas meeting because it was the site of the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement and is seen as a city whose economy has benefited from post-NAFTA trade with Mexico.

”http://www.expressnews.com/…/Texas-ag-open-to-trade-pact-wi…
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/03/15 05:06 PM

Astoturfing. How corporate America controls your opinion.

Emmy Award Winning Journalist Exposes Corporate Censorship in Mainstream Media

By Dr. Mercola - May 3, 2015

http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/emmy-aw...h.CNYcVc9K.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/03/15 05:35 PM

Erin Brockovich: Why Do We Stand Around While Monsanto Hurts People?

by Erin Brockovich

How long must we standby and watch our elected and appointed leaders in Washington DC turn a blind eye to liars, cheats and killers? "We just want to feed the world"...really? Corporate greed hurts farmers and consumers alike.

A history of Monsanto lies:

http://offgridquest.com/green/erin-brockovich-why-do-we-stand-around-w
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/03/15 05:55 PM

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/03/15 08:13 PM

Milkweed is a monarch's best defence

April 30, 2015

A recent study suggests glyphosate is merely the first of a one-two toxic punch from industrial agricultural operations. The second is neonicotinoids, the controversial nicotine-based insecticides that have been identified as a chief culprit in the decline of honeybees, along with a host of birds, bees and butterflies. It appears that even at one part per billion, these chemicals can affect monarch caterpillar development, delivering a potential knockout blow for the imperilled insects.

Find out more about milkweed and information about how to bring monarchs back from the brink at the David Suzuki Foundation's Got Milkweed campaign website.

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2015/04/milkweed-is-a-monarchs-best-defence/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/03/15 09:23 PM

Why You Can’t Have Organic Food Without Soil

Hydroponic farming is missing one very important ingredient, and a whole way of thinking that goes along with it.

By Eliot Coleman on April 13, 2015

Fertile soil is the most important factor in organic growing because of all its known and yet to be discovered benefits on the nutritional quality of crops. Hydroponic growing removes the crucial soil factor and replaces it with soluble nutrient solutions that can in no way duplicate the complex benefits of soil.

http://civileats.com/2015/04/13/why-you-cant-have-organic-food-without-soil/#sthash.UnrIvlyF.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/03/15 09:57 PM

US Lawmaker Slams Monsanto Provision in Fast Track Bill for TPP

Published 29 April 2015

“Call it the smoking gun,” said Oregon Congressman Peter DeFazio. “Proof that fast track and massive free trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership are written by and for multinational corporations such as agriculture giant Monsanto. Instead of using trade deals as an opportunity to protect and strengthen consumer rights by joining the countries which require genetically engineered food to be labeled, this administration wants to benefit wealthy corporations at the expense of the public.”

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/US...50429-0030.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/03/15 10:09 PM

Moms Across America...

Moms Meetup May 2, 2015 Live Broadcast Moms Across the World

Streamed live on May 2, 2015

Does you family have allergies, asthma, auto immune, diabetes, digestive disorders, depression or cancer? Let's gather up for a live International Call to Action for Healthy Communities! Experts Jeffrey M. Smith, Dr. Vandana Shiva, Evagellos Valliantos, Dr. Michelle Perro, Karen Austin Dagget with Zen Honeycutt hosting. Great info and new solutions! The call is geared towards Moms, but all are welcome. Ask questions on the page of www.momsacrosstheworld.com/live

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecmjNR0_jvA
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/04/15 12:14 PM

Dr Michael Antoniou, Molecular Biologist: 'MADGE Talks: Sources and mechanisms of health risks from GMO foods and glyphosate-based herbicides

Sydney, Australia, 24 March 2015

"In summary, I would say that based on the current evidence alone a safe dose of glyphosate or round up is actually unknown and that we should simply just withdraw it from the market and in terms of gmos in general...I believe that the studies conducted to date show clear evidence of toxicity especially to liver and kidney function in controlled animal feeding studies including even on the short term basis. What is causing this toxicity from gmo consumption can be from the gmo transgenic product, the bt toxin, the herbicide, especially glyphosate, and the adjuvant residues or the mutagentic effect of the gm transformation process. I believe there is evidence that it is a combination of all of these three but particulary the glyphosate adjuvant residues I believe are a major contributing factor and so on that note, I would say that we need to conduct, we need to withdraw, I would go as far to say since it has not been possible you cannot claim based on the inadequacy of the test requested by regulators and on the available evidence, at present no gmo crop or food can be categorically stated as safe to consume especially on a long term life long basis and as we published and as a result, we say there is no scientific consensus on gmo food safety despite what the industry and the pro gmo lobby may say."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1U-gRNp4Rz4
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/04/15 01:08 PM

http://findourcommonground.com/food-facts/local-organically-grown-food/

Local and Organically Grown Food

How do you define local food? Maryland farmer Jennifer Schmidt wants consumers to know that even some canned foods could be considered local for many people. Listen to her story in the video.

Local/Organic FactsInfographic #1Infographic #2
Is buying from local farms better for the environment?
Not necessarily. The Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture at Iowa State University reports that the number of transportation miles and energy used to produce so-called “locally grown” food turns out to be great indicators of what is local, but not of environmental impact. Sometimes it takes more energy to grow and harvest local food than it does to grow it far away and have it shipped. Sustainability has many complicated facets beyond the carbon footprint, including soil tillage, crop protection and fertilizer use, waste handling, shipping and water use.
Buying from local farms helps support area farmers but does not ensure that farmers grow enough food to help feed a rapidly increasing global population. Only 20 percent of U.S. farmland is located near metropolitan areas. As our population grows and competes for land, energy and water, U.S. farmers will need to be even more efficient and productive. Small, local farms will have a niche but cannot alone sustainably or practically address all future food production needs.
Should I always try to buy organic foods?
Organic does not necessarily mean a healthier product. In fact, a comprehensive review of some 400 scientific papers on the health impacts of organically grown foods, published in the journal Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, concluded organic and conventional food remain equally healthy.
All foods – whether organic or nonorganic – must meet certain health and safety regulations before being sold to consumers. Several U.S. government agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), monitor the food production chain through regulations and inspections from farm to fork to ensure that all food is safe.
Understanding what classifies food as organic is complex. The production processes involved in growing or raising food qualify it as organic, not the final product itself. Organic classification should not be an automatic green light indicating the quality or safety of a product.
Is organic food more nutritious?
The USDA, which certifies organic production, makes no claims that organically grown food is more nutritious than conventionally grown food. Organic food proves to be only different in how it is grown, handled and processed.
In the case of milk, stringent government standards include testing all types of milk for antibiotic and other residues to ensure that both organic milk and conventional milk remain equally pure, safe and nutritious. Organic or traditional, all milk contains the same valuable nutrients.
Why is organic food often more expensive?
Organic production can increase management costs and risks for some farmers and ranchers. Organic crop production actually represents only a very small portion of total U.S. food production. U.S. farmers and ranchers plant about 3 million acres of organic crops and have about 2 million acres of rangeland and pasture in organic systems. Those figures represent less than 1 percent of total U.S. land being farmed today.
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/04/15 01:15 PM

http://www.nbcneb.com/home/headlines/Som...hl7zD-I.twitter


Some Farmers on Edge After Chipotle's GMO-free Move (Except it's not, false advertising, but anything to make a buck for a giant corporation.)

Updated: Wed 5:11 AM, Apr 29, 2015
By: Kim Cung - Email
Home / Headlines List / Article

Some farmers in Nebraska are on edge after Chipotle made an unprecedented move. The fast-casual chain is the first national restaurant company to use only non-GMO ingredients. Some farmers say Chipotle's move adds to the idea that GMOs are harmful.

A spokesperson with Chipotle says this isn't about good or bad, but about choice, and Chipotle makes their choices based off what they think is best for their restaurants and customers.

Since he was a teenager working on his parents farm in Giltner, Zach Hunnicutt remembers GMOs.

"We've been raising GMOs for close to 20 years, about as long as they've been available," said Hunnicutt.

In a statement Monday, Chipotle Founder Steve Ells said, "There is a lot of debate about genetically modified foods. Though many countries have already restricted or banned the use of GMO crops, it's clear that a lot of research is still needed... While that debate continues, we decided to move to non-GMO ingredients."

That statement doesn't sit tight with Hunnicutt. "To make this big public announcement that kind of implies that the vast majority of farmers are doing something wrong, that's pretty frustrating."

In addition to burritos, Chipotle is known for its "Food with Integrity" mantra. On its website, Chipotle says they make an extra effort in partnering with farmers and ranchers who focus on quality and responsibility. Hunnicutt says differently.

"No farmer has an interest in hurting their animals. Sacrificing their integrity for a dollar. Blending the two, I think, adds to the fear and division around food," said Hunnicutt.

Speaking of fear, Hunnicutt says GMOs aren't harmful. The sweet corn he grows on his farm is GMO and he said there's no downside.

"It tastes better than it used to, it's healthier, it has fewer bugs in it, it's easier to keep weeds away from it and my kids will eat as much of it as we'll give to them," said Hunnicutt. He added he keeps his children away from dangerous things on the farm, including moving equipment, but GMOs aren't dangerous.

Before buying into it, Hunnicutt said he hopes consumers do their own research.

"This goes right along with the Willie Nelson ad," said Hunnicutt, referencing Chipotle's most famous ad featuring a farmer who decides to let his animals roam free set to Willie Nelson's rendition of The Scientist. "It's not helpful to anything except selling burritos. There's a bigger story to be told with our food supply then just Chipotle's view."

From a farming perspective, Hunnicutt and other farmers said GMOs have significantly improved farming for them. They don't have to do as much tillage, use as much fuel and the soil is healthier.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/04/15 02:36 PM

Clinton Foundation a cesspool of corporate poisoners, junk food companies, and pushers of vaccines and GMOs

Sunday, May 03, 2015 by: Jonathan Benson

...top contributors include the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which is on record as wanting to see every child in the world jabbed with dozens of vaccines; the Walmart corporation, which is the world's leading supplier of Chinese-made consumer crap; Coca-Cola, one of the top contributors to the diabetes epidemic; Goldman Sachs, which profited heavily from the central bank-caused housing collapse; and many other corporate players.

http://www.naturalnews.com/049579_Hillary_Clinton_GMOs_election.html#ixzz3ZCF548j1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-...ndation-donors/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/04/15 02:50 PM

MAY 1, 2015 by MARCO TORRES

6 Natural Solutions To Decontaminate Soil

Keep in mind that no matter what urban farmers have to do to grow them, they're better off enjoying their own fruits and vegetables than those bought at a grocery store. , In fact, lead contamination may be a minor issue when you consider the dangers of conventional agriculture when farmers are spraying their crops with pesticides and herbicides whose concentrations are far more lethal.

http://preventdisease.com/news/15/050115...tm_medium=email
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/04/15 02:58 PM

What the Attack on Dr. Oz Is Really All About

Date: 05/02/2015 Written by: Jon Barron

That said, the attacks on Dr. Oz expressed in the letter to Columbia (as well as in the Senate subcommittee hearings held earlier this year) are demonstrably designed to support Monsanto and the GMO industry as a whole. This is not guesswork. You can actually trace the money back to Monsanto. Let's start by taking a look at the letter in question.

At this point, I think it's worth taking a look at the doctors who signed the letter, for it is there that we begin to learn what the true purpose of the letter really was.

http://jonbarron.org/doctors-and-drugs/attack-dr-oz-GMO-columbia-university#.VUfAcI0tH3g
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/04/15 03:34 PM

Originally Posted By: MissingArty
What the Attack on Dr. Oz Is Really All About

Date: 05/02/2015 Written by: Jon Barron

That said, the attacks on Dr. Oz expressed in the letter to Columbia (as well as in the Senate subcommittee hearings held earlier this year) are demonstrably designed to support Monsanto and the GMO industry as a whole. This is not guesswork. You can actually trace the money back to Monsanto. Let's start by taking a look at the letter in question.

At this point, I think it's worth taking a look at the doctors who signed the letter, for it is there that we begin to learn what the true purpose of the letter really was.

http://jonbarron.org/doctors-and-drugs/attack-dr-oz-GMO-columbia-university#.VUfAcI0tH3g


What it is really about is that he is a Dr. using his position to sell crap.

Even his Columbia colleagues are calling for him to resign or stop.
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/04/15 08:40 PM


Fair-minded article I'd say.



Defending Dr. Oz

Christina Pirello
Huffpost Healthy Living

04/27/2015


"There's more than one way to wellness... and it's not always conventional.

The information he shares is designed to open our eyes to ideas; ideas that could guide our feet on the path to feeling... and being our best selves (and yes, to provide entertaining, informative... and sometimes dramatic television).

Some of the ideas and theories he shares are in direct conflict with the thinking of conventional medicine and yet he fearlessly moves forward. When Dr. Oz discusses the possibilities of natural products aiding in the relief of any number of symptoms that ail us, is the outrage he experiences from his colleagues the result of noble concern for the American public?

Or could it be something else? Could special interests like GMO proponents and the pharmaceutical machine that thrives on Americans remaining out of shape and sick be driving this witch hunt?

What's really going on here?

As these 10 doctors (and a host of journalists) call for Dr. Oz's head on a platter, I might offer another idea. As a professor at the Department of Surgery at Columbia University since 2001, he directs the Cardiovascular Institute and Complementary Medicine Program at New York Presbyterian Hospital. Pretty impressive, I'd say. Do we really think that Dr. Oz doesn't understand how medicine (alternative or otherwise) works in the body?

And while he does enthusiastically and passionately endorse the effectiveness of various natural products or ideas, Dr. Oz rarely endorses a product outright. That doesn't excuse the fact that companies lift clips and quotes from his show and use them as evidence that he does, in fact, endorse a product. The "Dr. Oz" affect is a real thing and he certainly has responsibility when his name is used in association with a product. He did launch a campaign asking people to report to his producers when they saw his name as a product endorsement, but advertising and free speech have given rise to his association with a number of dubious products and their claims. That's on him... and on us to decipher what is sensible and what is, well, not so much...

But is that the problem? Or is the problem that evidence-based science has not empirically proven that alternatives to conventional medicine can be effective? At one time, we thought the world was flat and lashed out at anyone who said otherwise."


Read on: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-pirello/defending-dr-oz_b_7139636.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/04/15 11:43 PM

The "Massive Con" Causing a Suicide Every 30 Minutes

April 03, 2012

The introduction of genetically engineered seeds, and the coercion of Indian farmers to use them, has led to the largest wave of recorded suicides in human history.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/04/03/gmo-crops-affect-farmers.aspx
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/05/15 12:00 AM

Video of the top ten (10) food companies in the entire World. 11 minutes.

https://www.facebook.com/MarchAgainstMonstanto/videos/1003238469694673/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/05/15 12:06 AM

Please Stand with Senator Bernie Sanders: Make secret trade agreements (TPP) public. Please sign this petition. Only your name, email and zip code are needed.

http://act.credoaction.com/sign/Bernie_Sanders_TPP/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/05/15 12:12 AM

Top scientists warn the most commonly used herbicide in the world probably causes cancer!

Monsanto is demanding the World Health Organisation retract their ground-breaking report. And experts say the only way to ensure the science is not silenced is if the public demands action, now.

The regulatory system is renowned for being secretive and captured by the agro-chemical industry. But we have a unique moment right now -- the US is officially reassessing glyphosate, with similar processes underway in Canada, Europe, and Brazil. And the Netherlands, Sri Lanka, and El Salvador are all looking at a ban.

The threat is clear -- this poison is used on our food, our fields, our playgrounds, and our streets. Let's get it suspended.

Join the urgent call on the right and tell everyone.

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/monsanto_dont_silence_science_us_rb/?bpAjTcb&v=57326
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/05/15 12:17 AM

Infant formula is genetically engineered

Narrated by Mrs. Lisa Oz (2 minutes)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE13HC01kxI&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/05/15 12:31 AM

Are GMO Foods, Vaccines, and Big Pharma Producing an Infertile Generation?

May 5, 2015

We are being warned that our exposure to pesticides, industrial chemicals, processed food, food additives, sugar, trans fats, genetically modified food, vaccines, medications, radiation, tobacco, excessive alcohol, recreational drugs, cleaning products, synthetic fragrances, and other toxins are all having a negative effect upon the ability to conceive and produce healthy babies.

There are research studies scattered throughout various scientific disciplines, which are raising serious warnings about the harmful consequences of our lifestyle choices. These choices are threatening our capacity to produce healthy children.

Sadly, these warnings are largely being ignored by the mainstream media.

http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/are-gmo...ile-generation/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/05/15 12:59 AM

This is what can happen when a small group of concerned, informed citizens rally together!

Public outrage reverses shellfish plan.

http://www.king5.com/media/cinematic/video/26899031/public-outrage-reverses-shellfish-plan/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/05/15 01:11 AM

May 2006

German tofu company grows soybeans locally to ensure GMO-free

“Most North Americans don’t understand why we insist on 100 percent non-GMO,” he says. “There is no acceptance in our society for any GMOs in food.”

http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/may06/soybeans_GMO_free.php
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/06/15 02:28 AM

EPA completes glyphosate review; findings expected no later than July

May 5, 2015

Jim Jones, assistant administrator for the EPA Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, said the agency’s review of the health and environmental impacts of glyphosate was concluded months ago, but its report was delayed to allow the agency to learn more about the WHO findings.

After the EPA issues the preliminary risk assessment for glyphosate, the agency will take public comments before formalizing a final regulatory proposal.The EPA’s upcoming draft risk assessment on glyphosate comes at a time when Monsanto and other agrichemical companies are developing biopesticides, which are based on natural organisms like plant and soil microbes rather than synthetic chemicals, and seen by some as alternatives to traditional pesticides.

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/e...efebadc192.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/06/15 10:21 PM

FBI: Plot to steal seed corn a national security threat

March 30, 2015

Does protecting America's lucrative genetically modified seed corn industry warrant the use of national security laws intended to fight terrorists and government spies?

The FBI says yes, and it has invoked the broader powers afforded by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, to surreptitiously gather evidence against two Chinese siblings accused of plotting to steal patented seed from Iowa cornfields, according to court records.

Stealing hybrid seeds enhanced with traits such as drought resistance doesn't pose the same immediate threat as a suicide bomber, but the FBI treats economic espionage and similar trade secret theft as dangerous threats to national security.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/n...y-fbi/70643462/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/06/15 10:42 PM

Sales Of Organic Food Skyrocket

By Dan Nosowitz on May 4, 2015

The increase in organic purchasing is partly due to public outcry, which leads to larger companies offering organic products. If you offer it, people will buy it...

http://modernfarmer.com/2015/05/sales-of-organic-food-skyrockets/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/06/15 10:49 PM

What happens when a family that usually doesn’t eat organic food suddenly starts?

The study was conducted by the Swedish Environmental Research Institute IVL, and the full report is available here:

2 minute video

https://www.coop.se/organiceffect
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/07/15 07:20 AM

National Science Foundation Awards $5.5 Million Grant for Rice Research
MAY 5, 2015 9:02 PM0 COMMENTS
By REBECCA BLAIR

Cornell researchers received a $5.5 million grant from the National Science Foundation to use genome editing techniques to improve rice cultivation on Friday.

Genome editing is a process by researchers can alter an organism’s DNA. Cornell researchers will use this grant to “focus on such quantitative traits in rice as disease resistance and tolerance to acidic soils,” according to a University press release.

“We have the ability to open the genome like a book, go to a certain chapter and a specific word and change the word or correct its spelling,” said lead scientist Adam Bogdanove in the release.

This is significant because rice is a “staple crop that feeds half the world’s people,” according to the University. Increasing the quality and reliability of the rice crop could have profound humanitarian implications.

“Scientists are also in a race against time to double the production of cereal crops on limited arable land by 2050, when the global population could reach 9.5 billion,” the University said.

Bogdanove said researchers have already identified section of rice DNA which could present the opportunity for beneficial genome editing.

“Now, we don’t have to do years of breeding; we can just make the precise changes needed in a few short steps,” he said.
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/08/15 07:35 AM

Tests Confirm Rare Cancer in Susquehanna River Smallmouth Bass

Beyond Pesticides, May 7, 2015

Though the findings do not point to a specific cause for the cancer found on the smallmouth bass (SMB), agricultural pesticides, particularly endocrine disrupting chemicals, that have been found in the watershed, likely play a part in the rampant disease issues in SMB in the Susquehanna River.

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15593
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/08/15 09:46 AM

Lessons in communication strategy from Big Soda

by Fernando Quintero posted on 08/20/2014

Tobacco control advocates taught us that we could use media advocacy to hold a powerful industry accountable for creating unhealthy environments. Their success in passing policies to reduce smoking rates has been partly the result of decades of studying Big Tobacco's playbook, anticipating the industry's arguments against regulation, and using the power of the media to reframe the issue and shape the opinions of policymakers and the public.

http://www.bmsg.org/blog/communication-strategy-big-soda
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/08/15 09:58 AM

Pesticides in Paradise: Hawai‘i’s Health & Environment at Risk

May 06, 2015

On O‘ahu, Kaua‘i, Maui, and Moloka‘i, chemical and biotechnology companies Monsanto, Syngenta, DuPont-Pioneer, Dow Chemical, and BASF have purchased prime agricultural land, taking advantage of Hawai‘i’s isolation and year-round growing season, in order to field test crops that have been genetically engineered to withstand greater applications of pesticides.

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/repor...ronment-at-risk
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/08/15 09:45 PM

Did the Media Just Buckle from Biotech Industry Pressure?

May 5, 2015

The smear job does have one merit. It brings out into the open what GMO investigators have to deal with every day: constant intimidation and threat. Any scientist who dares take on GMO special interests will be told that his or her career will be ruined, and then ever more intense pressure will follow. Why? Because the biotech and Big Pharma companies involved have huge sums of money at their disposal—money that can make or break university research budgets, and money that is channeled to media advertising, which is keeping traditional media alive.

Rather than adding anything meaningful to the debate, the major media outlets are sending a clear message to the restaurant industry: “If you follow in Chipotle’s footsteps, we will make an example of you.” It seems clear to us that such a frontal attack by major news outlets must have been instigated by the biotech industry’s PR departments.

http://www.anh-usa.org/did-the-media-just-buckle-from-biotech-industry-pressure/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/08/15 10:02 PM

Moms for GMO Labeling

By Just Label It &#61555; May 6th, 2015

http://www.justlabelit.org/right-to-know-center/moms-for-gmo-labeling/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/08/15 10:17 PM

Stand with Senators Sanders, Warren, and Brown: President Obama must release full text of TPP

http://act.credoaction.com/sign/tpp_reve...rce=fb_share_sp
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/08/15 11:45 PM

Is Genetically Engineered Food A Fraud?

Claims author: It’s the biggest fraud in the history of science and not the answer to feeding the world.

April 22, 2015

For opponents of GMOs, Monsanto is the villain. Yet you say scientists themselves are the main “propagandists.” Why would they do this – if they didn’t believe they are right?

[Laughs] Oh, I do think that most of them believe that they’re right. That’s not the issue. A large percentage of “life scientists” have financial interests, one way or another, in genetic engineering. Either they have helped found biotech firms, or they have consulting contracts with biotech firms. Even those scientists and foundations that don’t have such conflicts of interest, have overlooked many of the risks. Contrary evidence has been suppressed, research showing risks is attacked unfairly, the scientists who did the research have had their reputations destroyed. Even the American Association for the Advancement of Science released a statement calculated to defeat a labeling initiative in California, which had several significant misrepresentations in it. When those misrepresentations were called to their attention, they would not retract them. That helped swing the election and defeated the labeling initiative, by misleading many Californians.

I challenge any fair thinking, good-willed scientist, or intelligent man or women, to read this book and decide for him or herself where the evidence lies—who has been telling the truth and has not been telling the truth.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/...itation_ro_all#
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/09/15 12:38 AM

Second wave of conventional retailers now demanding natural, organic, non-GMO, says Hain Celestial

By Elaine Watson+, 08-May-2015

Second wave of conventional retailers now demanding natural, organic, non-GMO, says Hain Celestial

Retailers want growth, and CPG giants such as Heinz and Kraft are no longer delivering it, said Hain Celestial bosses this week.

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Manufac...organic-non-GMO
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/09/15 01:09 PM

EXCLUSIVE: INTERVIEW AND CALL TO ACTION- California Attorney T. Matthew Phillips Shares His Class Action Lawsuit Against Monsanto, Free For The Taking

by Jennifer Long • May 8, 2015

He informed me that “I was just kicking it, enjoying life as an entertainment lawyer…then I learned about GMO’s….my life changed – can’t sit still no more! This is the most unique lawsuit I have ever written, or read.” He states that this case is so simple and the evidence so compelling, “almost anyone could do it.” He is asking private citizens, and States’ Attorneys General to file lawsuits there to demand truth, transparency and accountability on the “safety” of Roundup.

http://thefifthcolumnnews.com/2015/05/ex...for-the-taking/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/09/15 01:11 PM

Petition

To EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, authorities in Canada, the EU and Brazil, and all government Ministries and regulators responsible for Health and Environmental Policy:

As citizens around the world we are alarmed that glyphosate is "probably carcinogenic to humans." We call on you to exercise the precautionary principle and immediately suspend approval of glyphosate, present in herbicides like Monsanto’s RoundUp. We request you include the studies in the International Agency for Research on Cancer's report in your current safety assessments, and ensure all reviews are transparent, based on independent studies, and evaluated by independent researchers without conflicts of interest. Until glyphosate can be proven safe, you must ensure people are not exposed to it.

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/monsanto_dont_silence_science_us_rb/?bpAjTcb&v=57326
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/09/15 05:59 PM

Grandparents, are you wondering why your grandkids are so sick and having extreme behaviors? Here's your answer from a pediatrician who did her homework.

March 24, 2015

Dr Michelle Perro, Pediatrician

MADGE, Sydney, Australia

Negative health effects of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and Glyphosate/Round-up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iUT9t8JGYo
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/09/15 06:14 PM

The Truth About GMOs with Dr. Don Huber

Mar 22, 2015

THE TRUTH ABOUT GMOs. There is a lot of debate about the impact of GMOs on human health and crop development. We are putting together a series of interviews to help give YOU the TRUTH about this controversial topic. We kicked off our series with a doctor of plant pathology from Purdue University Don Huber.

http://www.valleynewslive.com/news/pov/h...-297181531.html

Bio: Dr. Don M. Huber

Dr. Huber is Professor Emeritus of Plant Pathology at Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. He received B.S. and M.S. degrees from the University of Idaho (1957, 1959), a Ph-D from Michigan State University (1963), and is a graduate of the US Army Command & General Staff College and Industrial College of the Armed Forces. He was Cereal Pathologist at the University of Idaho for 8 years before joining the Department of Botany & Plant Pathology at Purdue University in 1971.

His agricultural research the past 50 years has focused on the epidemiology and control of soilborne plant pathogens with emphasis on microbial ecology, cultural and biological controls, and physiology of hostparasite relationships. Research also includes nitrogen metabolism, micronutrient physiology, inhibition of nitrification, and nutrient-disease interactions.

In addition to his academic positions and research, Dr. Huber has had several concurrent careers including 14 years as a professional labor-relations mediator with 7 years service on the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board as a Mediatory/Fact Finder/Conciliator, and served 12 years on two school boards with recognition as a Master Board Member from the Indiana School Board Association and Honesty in Public Service Award from Taxpayers United For Fairness. He retired in 1995 as Associate Director of the Armed Forces Medical Intelligence Center (Colonel) after 41+ years of active and reserve military service.

He has received various awards for his scientific accomplishments and contributions to government. Dr. Huber is an active scientific reviewer; international research cooperator with projects in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Germany, Japan, Mexico, and Russia; and a consultant to academia, industry, and government. He is author or co-author of over 300 journal articles, Experiment Station Bulletins, research presentations, book chapters and review articles; 3 books, and 84 special invited publications. He is internationally recognized for his expertise in the development of nitrification inhibitors to improve the efficiency of N fertilizers, interactions of the form of nitrogen, manganese and other nutrients in disease, herbicide-nutrient-disease interactions, techniques for rapid microbial identification, and cultural control of plant diseases.

His greatest accomplishment has been his marriage to Paula Huber and their 11 children and 35 grandchildren. Dr. Huber currently serves as APS coordinator of the USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System (NPDRS).
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/09/15 06:30 PM

New Report Criticizes Yogurt Industry

Major Brands Accused of Turning Health Food into Junk Food

“What is most egregious about our findings,” said Mark A. Kastel, Codirector of The Cornucopia Institute, “is the marketing employed by many of the largest agribusinesses selling junk food masquerading as health food, mostly aimed at moms, who are hoping to provide their children an alternative, a more nutritious snack. In some cases, they might as well be serving their children soda pop or a candy bar with a glass of milk on the side.”

http://www.cornucopia.org/yogurt/?utm_so...gn=YogurtReport
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/10/15 12:01 AM

GMO food fight heats up

May 9, 2015

http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/story...inues/70895790/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/10/15 12:22 AM

Moms Across America

Volunteer for Moms Across America.

Research, data entry/calls or grant writing if you have the back ground.

http://www.signupgenius.com/go/20f084ea4a829a0fc1-volunteer
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/10/15 12:42 AM

USDA seeks input on new GMO rules

Published:

May 5, 2015 3:42PM

The USDA wants the public to weigh in on its authority to regulate biotech crops, possibly setting the stage for newly proposed genetic engineering rules.

http://www.capitalpress.com/Nation_World/Nation/20150505/usda-seeks-input-on-new-gmo-rules
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/10/15 01:12 AM

WAIMEA, KAUAI RESIDENTS WIN FIRST ROUND ON CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST BIOTECH. THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING!

EXCERPT:

A federal court jury awarded a total of $507,090 in damages to 15 Wai­mea residents who say they can't enjoy their homes because of red dust from test fields operated by DuPont Pioneer on Kauai.

The verdict said DuPont Pioneer failed to follow generally accepted agricultural and management practices from Dec. 13, 2009, to Dec. 31, 2011, and that the "seriousness of the harm to each plaintiff outweighs the public benefit of Pioneer's farming operation."

http://www.staradvertiser.com/s?action=login&f=y&id=303166291
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/10/15 01:24 AM

Brazilian research company cancels release of GM bean

on 28 April 2015.

In an unprecedented, bold, and responsible decision, the current board of Embrapa cancelled the evaluation experiments on the transgenic beans and prevented their cultivation and consumption. This transgenic variety was developed by Embrapa and was announced with much hype three years ago.

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/ar...ease-of-gm-bean
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/10/15 01:33 AM

VICE’ Takes on GMOs, Pesticides, and the Megacorporations Behind Your Food

May 8, 2015

http://munchies.vice.com/articles/vice-t...ehind-your-food
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/11/15 03:42 AM

WV-Based OVEC and SkyTruth to Receive Jean and Leslie Douglas Pearl Award

April 14, 2015

Tyrone B. Hayes, Ph.D.

Professor of Integrative Biology, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, Endocrinology, Molecular Toxicology, and Energy and Resources Group

"Hayes’ research focuses on developmental endocrinology with an emphasis on evolution and environmental regulation of growth and development. For the past 10 years, the role of endocrine disrupting contaminants, particularly pesticides, has been a major focus. Hayes is interested in the impact of chemical contaminants on environmental health and public health, with a specific interest in the role of pesticides in global amphibian declines and environmental justice concerns associated with targeted exposure of racial and ethnic minorities to endocrine disruptors and the role that exposure plays in health care disparities."

http://ohvec.org/pearl-award/

Dr. Tyrone Hayes Speaks on Maui

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Nom0UX83w
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/11/15 05:45 AM

Colombia to stop spraying coca crops with glyphosate herbicide

May 10, 2015

Colombia, which, along with Peru, is the world's leading producer of cocaine, has used glyphosate for years to eradicate illicit coca.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/colombia-stop-spraying-coca-fields-glyphosate-181028005.html#FDfcNr4
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/11/15 07:16 AM




Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 01:23 AM

Some good news...

Farmers back decision to ban Roundup spray

By Sarah Lagan Published May 12, 2015
Members of the farming community have supported Government’s decision to ban the importation of the weed spray Roundup amid fears that it can cause cancer in humans.

“We as farmers here in Bermuda do not grow any genetically modified crops or any round-up ready crops so it is not a concern for us from that standpoint.”

http://www.royalgazette.com/article/20150511/NEWS/150519966
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 01:42 AM

Moms Across America's next stops...Dupont...then Dow...

https://www.facebook.com/MomsAcrossAmerica?fref=ts
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 01:54 AM

Victory: German Retail Giant Removes Glyphosate from 350 Stores

...a German retail giant will no longer carry glyphosate-containing products as of September 30, 2015

However, by the end of 2013, toom Baumarkt had begun to remove this product and approximately 60 percent of glyphosate-containing products were removed from their shelves.

Instead, Toom Baumarkt offers its customers alternative, environmentally acceptable products. As the EU determines whether or not to ban glyphosate, the store will likely see sales soar, as people around the world are becoming educated about just how problematic glyphosate can be to humans, animals and the ecosystem.

http://naturalsociety.com/victory-german.../#ixzz3Zzlg8XzP

German press release:

http://www.rewe-group.com/de/newsroom/pressemitteilungen/1422.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 02:04 AM

Something Horrible Was Done To Our Wheat In The 60’s That We’re Just Realizing Now

May 19, 2015

William Davis, MD, says it’s when big agriculture stepped in decades ago to develop a higher-yielding crop. Today’s “wheat,” he says, isn’t even wheat, thanks to some of the most intense crossbreeding efforts ever seen. “The wheat products sold to you today are nothing like the wheat products of our grandmother’s age, very different from the wheat of the early 20th Century, and completely transformed from the wheat of the Bible and earlier,” he says.

http://www.realfarmacy.com/something-hor...-realizing-now/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 02:09 AM

March Against Monsanto to Launch International Protests May 23rd

Yvonne Holterman | May 12, 2015

From the official March Against Monsanto release: “On May 23, 2015, hundreds of thousands of concerned individuals will gather across 38 countries and 428 cities to join in peaceful protest against the Monsanto Company as a part of the March Against Monsanto grassroots campaign, which seeks to bring awareness over the dangers surrounding Monsanto’s genetically modified seeds and cancer-linked herbicide Roundup. The campaign comes as the demand for GMO labeling and non-GMO food alternatives continues its exponential climb, with states like Vermont enacting “mandatory GM labeling legislation that will require food corporations to let consumers know if their products contain GM ingredients.” - See more at: http://www.enlightened-consciousness.com...h.qtQdJvRF.dpuf

http://www.enlightened-consciousness.com...h.qtQdJvRF.dpuf

http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/events/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 11:05 AM

Must Watch: March Against Monsanto Activist Takes on GMO Scientist in Fox News Debate

By Nick Meyer On May 12, 2015

http://althealthworks.com/5947/must-watc...h.dB9kXjzv.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 12:22 PM

So would Schumer vote for this bill with this change, knowing full well that it would take away a state's right to gmo labeling? Sounds to me like his priorities are in the wrong place.

Please contact Schumer and Gillibrand and tell them that when it comes to you and your family's health, there is no "compromise." Tell them to vote "no" to any TPP bill that includes legislation prohibiting state's from making their own rules about gmo labeling. (In addition to all the other good reasons why this bill should be voted down.)

According to Democratic leadership aides, Senators Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, and Chuck Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democrat, have proposed a compromise to Republican leaders: First, hold a separate vote on legislation aimed at discouraging so-called currency manipulation by American trading partners, which could be vetoed by the president. Then, wrap the fast-track authority he is seeking with a more encompassing bill, including assistance for displaced workers, extension of an African trade accord and other trade enforcement measures.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/13/business/senate-vote-obama-fast-track-trade-deal.html

https://www.facebook.com/chuckschumer?fref=ts
http://www.schumer.senate.gov/
https://twitter.com/chuckschumer

https://www.facebook.com/KirstenGillibrand?fref=ts&rf=112137098813206
http://www.gillibrand.senate.gov/
https://twitter.com/sengillibrand
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 01:15 PM

STOP SCOTTS' GMO GRASS IN ITS TRACKS NOW

author: GMO Free USA

target: Jim Hagedorn Chairman & Chief Executive Officer of The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company; Frank Blake, CEO, Home Depot; Robert Niblock, CEO, Lowes

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/354/661/966/stop-scotts-gmo-grass-in-its-tracks-now/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 01:16 PM

Sierra Pizza goes GMO-free

May 12, 2015

http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/news/16301556-113/sierra-pizza-goes-gmo-free
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 01:51 PM

Brainwashing money.

Bill Gates Foundation Giving Millions to Top University In Order to Add a “Stronger Voice” to GMO “Debate”

By Nick Meyer On August 26, 2014

Cornell University, a private New York state-based Ivy League college, is expected to lead a new international effort that “will seek to add a stronger voice for science,” according to an article in the school’s Cornell Chronicle.

The program, made possible through the Gates Foundation’s $5.6 million grant, reportedly seeks to help inform decision-makers an consumers through an online information hub as well as training programs, with the goal of educating on “how (agricultural technology, presumably GMOs) works,” as well as the “potential impacts” of agricultural technology.

Sarah Evanega, senior associate director of International Programs in Cornell’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (CALS), who will lead the project according to the report, said that “pro-biotech activists share a lot of the same anti-pesticide, low-input, sustainable-agriculture vision as the organic movement.”

Will Objectivity Be Included in New Program? Considering Gates’ clear bias in favor of GMOs, can we reasonably expect to see any sort of objectivity in Cornell’s upcoming program?

Regardless of whether or not Cornell’s new program will be even remotely objective considering the funding behind it, one thing’s for sure: the consumer is becoming smart enough to make up their own mind on GMOs, and that development is likely to be a problem for the Biotech companies’ bottom lines going forward.

http://althealthworks.com/3638/bill-gate...h.CXE3h5au.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 02:23 PM

The flip side to Bill Gates’ charity billions

April 2012

Microsoft’s former CEO has made record-breaking donations to global health programmes – but an investigation by Andrew Bowman reveals some unpleasant side-effects.

‘Depending on what side of bed Gates gets out of in the morning,’ he remarks, ‘it can shift the terrain of global health.’

In 2008 the WHO’s head of malaria research, Aarata Kochi, accused a Gates Foundation ‘cartel’ of suppressing diversity of scientific opinion, claiming the organization was ‘accountable to no-one other than itself’.

‘The Foundation wants the private sector to do more on global health, and sets up partnerships with the private sector involved in governance. As these institutions are clearly also trying to influence policymaking, there are huge conflicts of interests… the companies should not play a role in setting the rules of the game.’

The Foundation itself has employed numerous former Big Pharma figures, leading to accusations of industry bias.

http://newint.org/features/2012/04/01/bill-gates-charitable-giving-ethics/#sthash.6JX5e0o2.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 02:52 PM

Are Chemical Companies Telling the Truth About How Long to Stay Off of Lawns After Spraying?

By Nick Meyer On July 8, 2014

As the Post article added, a 2001 study also found that a week after lawn treatment, the notoriously harmful pesticide 2, 4-D was found on all indoor air surfaces after wafting in through various openings in homes. Exposure of the chemical was found to be 10 times higher than the previous week to children, according to the study.

http://althealthworks.com/2961/2961/#sthash.ojs8vrpD.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 10:57 PM

Via Erin Brocovich

"This really pisses me off... If you want to sell your crap in the United States of America... SHOW YOUR DATA. The days of backroom deals and political payoffs and payouts are over.

It is 2015 and this must stop...we the PEOPLE have had enough!!!

Actions like this that result in death and medical mutations among our children... Hell is too good a place for the corrupt politicians that participate in these games of information manipulation."

Chemical reactions: glyphosate and the politics of chemical safety

13 May 2015

Controversy over a new evaluation of glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide, lifts the lid on aspects of chemical safety regulation that often remain hidden from public view.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/polit...chemical-safety
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/13/15 11:39 PM

Published on May 13, 2015

Moms Across America supporters sent Zen Honeycutt to attend Dupont AGM 2015. As You Sow had Zen speak on behalf of a lobbying proxy. Report covers what happened and the surprising result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpK4zG3oxPw
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/15/15 10:03 AM

TPP trade deal alert!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chuck Schumer is going to vote Yes.

Please call his office and say "I'm calling to ask the Senator to vote no on the TPP deal."

The secretary will ask for your zip code and tell you she will pass your message on to the Senator. Takes one minute to do this.

Schumer: 202-224-6542

Kirsten Gillibrand is going to vote no but, it's still a good idea to call and make sure she knows what you want her to do.

Gillibrand: 212-688-6262

These people work for us and it's time we let them know that.

http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/call/stop_Fast_Track_Monsantos_Secret_Trade_Deal/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/15/15 11:25 AM

Our Truth about GMO's series continues with Thierry Vrain, a former genetic engineer and soil biologist with Agriculture Canada, and former supporter of GMO's, who is now anti-GMO's.

http://www.valleynewslive.com/news/pov/headlines/The-Truth-about-GMOs-Thierry-Vrain-303833151.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/15/15 11:34 AM

Dow Chemical Shareholder Meeting by Zen Honeycutt

May 14, 2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrEqEgwg4hc&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/15/15 12:10 PM

Ban Monsanto’s toxic Roundup herbicide on federal land

https://www.credomobilize.com/petitions/...time=1431697409
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/15/15 12:21 PM

Via MIT Scientist Stephanie Seneff

"Where have these guys been?"

Scientists get together to talk about the autism-microbiome link. The gut-brain connection is a key factor in maintaining health, and researchers are finally taking notice!

http://ow.ly/MOF1x
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/15/15 09:30 PM

Our success would not be possible without the interest, involvement and support of individuals like you. Your gift will ensure we get our message out to millions more each month. Working together, we can end the genetic engineering and chemical application of our food supply.

https://org2.salsalabs.com/o/6236/p/salsa/donation/common/public/?donate_page_KEY=3143
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/15/15 09:39 PM

EPA finally issued its long-awaited response (five years!) to a Citizen Petition filed by Beyond Pesticides and Food & Water Watch, denying the request to cancel registered products that contain the antibacterial pesticide triclosan, often sold under the trade name microban.

May 15, 2015

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15654
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/15/15 09:51 PM

Hawaii’s Gary Hooser Takes on Syngenta in Switzerland

May 13, 2015 by Carol Grieve'

Hooser’s message to the Syngenta Shareholders and their Board of Directors was this: honor the laws of Hawaii and drop their lawsuit against Bill 2491; stop spraying their chemicals such as Atrazine and Paraquat that are banned in many other countries including Switzerland; and to offer Kauai and all Hawaii the same respect and protection that is afforded to the residents of Switzerland. Hooser also delivered a Petition which had over 7,000 signatures to the government of Switzerland and Syngenta.

kauai polutionKauai’s population, which is around 65,000, has been called “Ground Zero” because it is a GE testing ground to four chemical companies, including Dow, BASF, DuPont Pioneer, and Syngenta. Hooser stated that over half of the island’s population can’t avoid driving by these test fields daily and that they are spraying these toxic chemicals within 100 feet of schools and hospitals. Many residents are reporting health issues. The bigger concern is what will happen after years of this toxic spraying?

http://foodintegritynow.org/2015/05/13/hawaiis-gary-hooser-takes-on-syngenta-in-switzerland/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/15/15 10:26 PM

The Cornucopia Institute

The Communications and Development Assistant will assist with Cornucopia’s many communications (reports, newsletters, infographics, etc.) as well as the organization’s revenue development efforts (grants, fundraising mailings, occasional fundraising events, etc.). Reporting directly to the Communications and Development Director, this is an early-career position that offers great opportunity for advancement.

Job description here:

http://www.cornucopia.org/2015/05/cornucopia-is-hiring/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/16/15 12:18 AM

Hungary Destroys All Monsanto GMO Corn FieldsBy Global Research News

Global Research, July 16, 2013

Hungary has taken a bold stand against biotech giant Monsanto and genetic modification by destroying 1000 acres of maize found to have been grown with genetically modified seeds, according to Hungary deputy state secretary of the Ministry of Rural Development Lajos Bognar.

Unlike many European Union countries, Hungary is a nation where genetically modified (GM) seeds are banned. In a similar stance against GM ingredients, Peru has also passed a 10 year ban on GM foods.

Almost 1000 acres of maize found to have been ground with genetically modified seeds have been destroyed throughout Hungary, deputy state secretary of the Ministry of Rural Development Lajos Bognar said.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/hungary-destroys-all-monsanto-gmo-corn-fields/5342913
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/16/15 01:35 PM

Grandma and Grandpa, Mom and Dad...

Cornell starting to spend some of that 5.6 million to try and convince your grandkids that their food is safe.

GMOs: Should they be on our shelves?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jqQLrRR-0U


Anyone who is sick right now and is in the process of seeing your doctor at least once a month, being sent to other doctors for psoriasis, arthritis, fibromyaligia, celiac, IBS, gall bladder removal, thryroid problems, and/or you are on multiple medications, and/or you are on a food elimination diet, finding that you can't eat certain foods, especially anything containing wheat, you have to ask yourself why. What is wrong with the food that is making me or my grandchild so sick?

No one needs a science degree to figure this out and that's why Moms Across America was created. It was started by a Mom who met other Moms that found out the same thing. When they took their kids off of these "safe" foods that Mr. Davies says we've been eating for "18 years," our kids got better. These unstoppable Moms have figured out why our families are sick and these corporations and universities don't like it. We're hitting them in their wallets.

You have to ask, if their food is so safe, then why not just let it be labeled? Why are are they spending "billions" of dollars to stop gmo labeling legislation? They successfully stopped the gmo labeling bills in California and Washington. So far, they have not been successful in Vermont. Why does Cornell need a "5.6 million" dollar grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation to convince you gmo food is safe? Did you know that the Bill Gates is a Monsanto stockholder?

It's because they have patents on all these chemicals and seeds and as people are finding out about this, they are buying less of their "safe" food and more organic food and they are starting to feel it in their wallets. Food companies and restaurants are starting to listen to their customers. When this happens, food companies buy less gmo food products, thus hitting the gmo food companies in the wallet. If no one wants to buy their food grown from gmo seed, no one will want to buy the chemicals you have to have to grow the gmo seed. The academics (Cornell for example) have monetary interests in this, as they have patents for plants, processes and equipment, etc.

Soon you will start seeing advertising in social media, newspapers, magazines (Monsanto is already advertising in Oprah and Good Housekeeping - boycott!), and television and I wouldn't even be surprised to see something right here on finger lakes 1 as we are smack dab in the middle of gmo college country. I also wouldn't be surprised to be personally attacked or even banned from posting on FL1. If that happens, you can find me on "Moms Across America" on facebook.

https://www.facebook.com/MomsAcrossAmerica?fref=ts

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/16/15 04:01 PM

Backlash forces nutrition academy to end partnership with Kraft Singles

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS / Tuesday, March 31, 2015

The decision comes after a petition by dietitians called for an end to the partnership, saying putting the logo on packages amounted to an endorsement of the cheese product. The petition also called for transparency about the terms of the deal that allowed Kraft to use the logo.

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/he...ticle-1.2168438

Is This Cheese? Kraft Singles

http://blog.fooducate.com/2012/04/25/is-this-cheese-kraft-singles-cheese-miniseries-part-3-3/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/16/15 04:54 PM

Via Institute for Responsible Technology

"Happiness is seeing mainstream media features like this. :))"

Dr. Samadi is a board-certified urologic oncologist trained in open and traditional and laparoscopic surgery, and an expert in robotic prostate surgery. He is chairman of urology, chief of robotic surgery at Lenox Hill Hospital and professor of urology at Hofstra North Shore-LIJ School of Medicine. He is a medical correspondent for the Fox News Channel's Medical A-Team and the chief medical correspondent for am970 in New York City, where he is heard Sundays at 10 a.m.


I avoid GMOs, and I’d advise you to do all you can to adopt a diet free of genetically engineered food

BY Dr. David Samadi / May 1, 2015

"... it’s obvious that companies are feeling the need to carefully consider their customers’ concerns about food production.

I don’t know about you, but I find it distasteful having any of this associated with my food.

Even though GM foods have been proven to break down following the normal pathway for human digestion, questions remain. As our body breaks down these foods, are the chemicals released into our system potentially harmful? Could they lead to long-term health issues?

Many of the studies we have were funded by companies that sell GMO seeds...

...we have the American Academy of Environmental Medicine warning of serious health risks associated with GM foods...

FDA scientists also warn that altering some foods could create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects including...

Transparency from restaurants, fast-food chains and grocery stores, all the way down to your local farmer’s market, is key. Any food that has been touched by genetic engineering should be properly labeled.

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/doctor-adopt-gmo-free-diet-article-1.2207158
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/16/15 08:08 PM

If they profit and exploit us here in America--they get to pay taxes here in America--end of story!

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/stop-monsanto-from-dodging.fb50?source=s.fb&r_by=11022488
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/16/15 09:50 PM

Pesticide drift - a big problem, but some are working hard to document the effects.

Apr 30, 2015 by Lex Horan

What does it take to recruit a group of Iowa farmers and rural residents to an all-day, indoor training on one of the first beautiful days of spring? An issue as serious as pesticide drift.

http://www.panna.org/blog/catching-drift-iowa
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/17/15 03:38 PM

Corporate irresponsibility over GMOs
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Plus Share via Email More Options

Resize Text Print Article Comments 775

MIAMI, FL - APRIL 27: Chipotle restaurant workers fill orders for customers on the day that the company announced it will only use non-GMO ingredients in its food on April 27, 2015. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

By Michael Gerson Opinion writer May 14

Pass any Chipotle these days — and it is my gastronomic preference to pass rather than enter — and you will see signs claiming credit for removing ingredients that contain GMOs (genetically modified organisms) from the menu. It is the first big chain to do so, and probably not the last. The business press has pronounced it “a savvy move to impress millennials” and a “bet on the younger generations in America.”

This milestone in the history of fast-food scruples (and of advertising) is also a noteworthy cultural development: the systematic incorporation of anti-scientific attitudes into corporate branding strategies. There is no credible evidence that ingesting a plant that has been swiftly genetically modified in a lab has a different health outcome than ingesting a plant that has been slowly genetically modified through selective breeding. The National Academy of Sciences, the American Medical Association, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the World Health Organization have concluded that GMOs are safe to eat. This scientific consensus is at least as strong as the one on human-caused climate change.

Michael Gerson is a nationally syndicated columnist who appears twice weekly in The Post. View Archive
RSS
Yet Whole Foods promises “full GMO transparency” by 2018. Its Web site emphasizes “your right to know.” But you will search the site in vain for any explanation of how or why GMOs are harmful, because an actual assertion would not withstand scrutiny. Evidently your right to know does not include serious scientific arguments. Chipotle co-chief executive Steve Ells set out his rationale this way: “They say these ingredients are safe, but I think we all know we’d rather have food that doesn’t contain them.”

“They” say. “We” know. It brought to mind an argument made by Dan Kahan of Yale in the journal Nature concerning global warming. If you are, say, a Republican in the Deep South, your capacity to confront global climate disruption directly is vanishingly small (assuming that you think it is a problem). And the cost of bucking your neighbors on the issue may be considerable. They are likely to view you as an oddity or a turncoat, and to question your judgment on other matters. So the decision to conform to the views of your cultural group or team, while not heroic, is not irrational. (The same argument could be made about the team composed of enlightened corporate chief executives.)

“The trouble starts,” says Kahan, “when this communication environment fills up with toxic partisan meanings — ones that effectively announce that ‘if you are one of us, believe this; otherwise, we’ll know you are one of them.’ ” This use of scientific opinion as a cultural signifier is evident in the vaccination debate. A certain kind of trendy parent believes that everything natural is preferable, forgetting that natural levels of mortality from childhood diseases are high. It is the same ideological impulse — the belief that nature is pure and artifice is unwholesome — that causes corporate leaders to spout pseudoscientific nonsense about GMOs, while employing the issue as a cultural marker.

ADVERTISING

Although it may be rational for people to conform to the views of their team, the problem comes when those individual decisions are tallied up. As opinions on climate have become a cultural identifier, the prospects of legislative action on the issue have faded. When it comes to vaccines, herd ideology can disrupt herd immunity, leaving kids with dangerous and preventable diseases.

What is being lost as GMOs become a trendy identifier? Directly, probably not much. Genetically altered plants — which resist drought and disease, control pests without the spraying and runoff of chemicals, allow no-till farming, prevent soil erosion and limit greenhouse gas emissions — are too wildly popular with farmers to be stigmatized out of existence. About 90 percent of the corn and soybeans grown in the United States are GMOs.

But Chipotle, Whole Foods and those who follow their examples are doing real social harm. They are polluting public discourse on scientific matters. They are legitimizing an approach to science that elevates Internet medical diagnosis, social media technological consensus and discredited studies in obscure journals. They are contributing to a political atmosphere in which people pick their scientific views to fit their ideologies, predispositions and obsessions. And they are undermining public trust in legitimate scientific authority, which undermines the possibility of rational public policy on a range of issues.

Whatever the intention of those involved, embracing pseudoscience as the centerpiece of an advertising and branding effort is an act of corporate irresponsibility.

Read more from Michael Gerson’s archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook .

Read more on this issue:

The Post’s View: Chipotle’s GMO gimmick is hard to swallow

The Post’s View: Genetically modified crops could help improve the lives of millions

Joel Achenbach: Why science is so hard to believe

The Post’s View: We don’t need labels on genetically modified foods

Fred Hiatt: Science that is hard to swallow
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/18/15 10:18 AM

International Treaty Bans Pentachlorophenal, U.S. Continues Use on Utility Poles and Railroad Ties

Beyond Pesticides, May 18, 2015

Switzerland triggered the voting procedure – the first in the history of the convention. Ninety-four countries voted in favor of global prohibition of pentachlorophenol; two opposed; and eight countries abstained.

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15659
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/18/15 11:32 AM

Glyphosate Map of America - 1992 to 2012

http://feedtheworld.info/glyphosate-map-of-america/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/18/15 11:39 AM

10 Crazy Things Pesticides Are Doing to Your Body

Agrochemicals, home bug sprays, and lawn treatments could be causing chronic illness in your family.

By Leah Zerbe & Emily Main - August 2, 2012

Agrochemical supporters tend to fall back on a "the dose makes the poison" theory, assuming that small exposures aren't harmful. Increasingly, though, independent scientists are debunking that belief, even proving that incredibly tiny doses could set a person up for health problems later in life. Luckily, eating organic, less processed foods can cut back on your pesticide exposure.

Here are 9 health problems associated with pesticide-based agrochemicals.

http://www.rodalenews.com/agrochemicals
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/18/15 12:10 PM

GMO Free NY - 5/18/2015

I can't stress enough how good a job the biotech and big food lobbyists have been doing in Albany convincing our legislators to keep us in the dark. I hear their b.s. talking points coming out of the mouths of our elected officials over and over again! So we need to fight back NOW by drowning out their b.s.!

http://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/Brian-M-Kolb/


STEP 1. Find out who your Assemblymember is: http://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/ and make note of their ALBANY office phone number.

STEP 2: See if they are already a cosponsor of bill A.617 (check the list below). If yes, go to Step 3. If no, go to Step 4.

STEP 3: If they ARE a cosponsor, call their ALBANY office, identify yourself as a constituent, and say something like: "Thank you for supporting GMO labeling by cosponsoring bill A.617. However, the bill has not moved since it was voted out of the Consumer Affairs committee over two months ago and session is almost over. I need to know if the food I'm buying is GMO -- it's unacceptable that we're all being kept in the dark about something as fundamental as the way our food is being produced because of corporate interests. Would you please talk to Speaker Heastie and ask him to bring the bill to a floor vote? Thank you!"

STEP 4: If they are NOT a cosponsor, call their ALBANY office, identify yourself as a constituent, and say something like, "I need to know if the food I'm buying is made with GMOs -- it's unacceptable that we're all being kept in the dark about something as fundamental as the way our food is being produced because of corporate interests. Please cosponsor bill A.617 this session and help bring it to a floor vote. Thank you!"

STEP 5: If you got an answer one way or the other, please post a comment below.

Bill A.617
Sponsor: Linda Rosenthal
Cosponsors: Abinanti, Arroyo, Barron, Benedetto, Bichotte, Blake, Braunstein, Brennan, Brindisi, Brook-Krasny, Ceretto, Clark, Colton, Cook, Crespo, Curran, Davila, Dinowitz, Englebright, Fahy, Farrell, Galef, Glick, Goldfeder, Gottfried, Hevesi, Jaffee, Jean-Pierre, Kaminsky, Katz, Kavanagh, Kearns, Kim, Lavine, Lentol, Lifton, Linares, Lopez, Magnarelli, Markey, Mayer, McDonald, Mosley, Moya, Murray, Nolan, Ortiz, Otis, Paulin, Peoples-Stokes, Perry, Persaud, Pichardo, Quart, Ramos, Rivera, Roberts, Robinson, Rodriguez, Rozic, Schimel, Seawright, Sepulveda, Simon, Simotas, Skartados, Steck, Thiele, Walker, Weinstein, Weprin
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/18/15 04:54 PM

We don’t need labels on genetically modified foods


By Editorial Board March 29
E IGHTY-EIGHT percent of scientists polled by the Pew Research Center in January said genetically modified food is generally safe to eat. Only 37 percent of the public shared that view. The movement to require genetically modified food products to be labeled both reflects and exploits this divergence between informed opinion and popular anxiety.

Mandated labeling would deter the purchase of genetically modified (GM) food when the evidence calls for no such caution. Congress is right to be moving toward a more sensible policy that allows companies to label products as free of GM ingredients but preempts states from requiring such labels.

Lawmakers and voters in some states have considered requiring GM labeling, but only a few have chosen to label, and none have yet started. That’s good: The GM-food debate is a classic example of activists overstating risk based on fear of what might be unknown and on a distrust of corporations. People have been inducing genetic mutations in crops all sorts of other ways for a long time — by, for example, bathing plants in chemicals or exposing them to radiation. There is also all sorts of genetic turbulence in traditional selective plant breeding and constant natural genetic variation.


Yet products that result from selective gene splicing — which get scrutinized before coming to market — are being singled out as high threats. If they were threatening, one would expect experts to have identified unique harms to human health in the past two decades of GM-crop consumption. They haven’t. Unsurprisingly, institutions such as the National Academy of Sciences and the World Health Organization have concluded that GM food is no riskier than other food.

Promoters of compulsory GM food labeling claim that consumers nevertheless deserve transparency about what they’re eating. But given the facts, mandatory labeling would be extremely misleading to consumers — who, the Pew polling shows, exaggerate the worries about “Frankenfood” — implying a strong government safety concern where one does not exist. Instead of demanding that food companies add an unnecessary label, people who distrust the assurances that GM food is safe can buy food voluntarily labeled as organic or non-GM.

This isn’t just a matter of saving consumers from a little unnecessary expense or anxiety. If GM food becomes an economic nonstarter for growers and food companies, the world’s poorest will pay the highest price. GM crops that flourish in challenging environments without the aid of expensive pesticides or equipment can play an important role in alleviating hunger and food stress in the developing world — if researchers in developed countries are allowed to continue advancing the field.


A House bill introduced last week would facilitate a voluntary labeling system and prevent states and localities from going any further to indulge the GM labeling crowd. It would also empower the Food and Drug Administration to require labels on GM products that materially differ from their non-GM cousins in ways that can affect human health. Yes, food industry interests back the bill. That doesn’t make it wrong.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/w...8f1c_story.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/18/15 05:11 PM

Jeffrey Smith on The Doctor's TV Show today

May 18, 2015

Dr. Worden was moving his head affirmatively while Jeffrey was talking and after he also commented that "there is evidence to support that theory."

http://www.thedoctorstv.com/articles/3077-debate-over-potential-cancer-risk-of-widely-used-herbicide

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlhkVXmtIkc

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/18/15 11:12 PM



U.S. of Allergies: The Cost of Food Allergies in America

May 12, 2015/By Robyn O'Brien/

Food allergies are not a niche, it is a growing epidemic that is challenging how we think about our food and how it is made. Genetic factors don’t change this quickly, environmental factors do. Are we allergic to food or to what’s been done to it?

While the chemical companies selling these new ingredients say there is no evidence of harm, consumers are saying: there is no evidence since these ingredients were never labeled in the United States. There are also no long term studies to show us that they are safe."

http://robynobrien.com/25-billion-cost-food-allergies/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/19/15 10:36 PM

March Against Monsanto 2015 Official Press Release

By Nick Meyer On May 18, 2015

For immediate release:

WORLDWIDE – On May 23, 2015, hundreds of thousands of concerned individuals will gather across 38 countries and 428 cities to join in peaceful protest against the Monsanto Company as a part of the March Against Monsanto grassroots campaign. This movement seeks to raise awareness to the dangers surrounding Monsanto’s genetically modified seeds and cancer-linked herbicide Roundup.

http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/march-against-monsanto-2015-official-press-release/

The World According To Monsanto

Full Length Video - 1 hour, 49 minutes

The story starts in the White House, where Monsanto often got its way by exerting disproportionate influence over policymakers via the “revolving door”. One example is Michael Taylor, who worked for Monsanto as an attorney before being appointed as deputy commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1991. While at the FDA, the authority that deals with all US food approvals, Taylor made crucial decisions that led to the approval of GE foods and crops. Then he returned to Monsanto, becoming the company’s vice president for public policy.

http://covvha.net/the-world-according-to-monsanto-full-length-video/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/20/15 12:15 PM

Bird Flu Is Slamming Factory Farms But Sparing Backyard Flocks. Why?

By Tom Philpott | Wed May 20, 2015

But it's largely leaving backyard flocks unscathed. Why?

http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2015/05/ongoing-bird-flu-crisis-stumps-experts
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/20/15 12:32 PM

Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Monsanto. Media Silent

May 18

by PAUL FASSA

Efforts to publicize this lawsuit against Monsanto for false advertising with Roundup, filed in Los Angeles County Court on April 20, 2015, have been rejected by the LA Times, Huffington Post, CNN, and Reuters, one of the world’s largest news agencies. The plaintiff’s attorney, T. Matthew Phillips, has been posting the suit in Wikipedia’s Monsanto litigation section, but it keeps getting removed.

http://www.realfarmacy.com/class-action-lawsuit-monsanto/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/20/15 12:36 PM

It's time for the "spring flush"... of pesticides

May 13, 2015 by Emily Marquez

What, you may ask, is the "spring flush?" In late spring and early summer, large concentrations of herbicides are flushed from croplands. These chemicals — like the herbicide atrazine — then get transported far and wide through surface water systems.

Herbicides are water-soluble and thus have the potential to leach into groundwater supplies as well as streams, lakes and other surface waters. Atrazine is a frequently found contaminant in drinking water supplies throughout the Corn Belt, and every year the spring flush raises concerns over the potential of atrazine spikes in drinking water supplies.

http://www.panna.org/blog/its-time-spring-flush-pesticides
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/20/15 01:27 PM

"Cornell University has meanwhile received a $5.6 million grant by the Gates Foundation to “depolarize” negative GMO publicity"

Monsanto’s Worst Fear May Be Coming True

May 18, 2015 by Jonathan Latham, PhD, Independent Science News

The media lynching of Chipotle has an explanation that is important to the future of GMOs.

Hain Celestial told The Food Navigator that: “We sell organic products…gluten-free products and…natural products. [But] where the big, big demand is, is GMO-free.”

Why the pressure to remove GMOs will grow

...the spraying of 2,4-D and Dicamba on the newer herbicide-resistant crops will not eliminate the need for Roundup, whose use will not decline...2,4-D and Dicamba-resistant GMOs are thus a PR disaster waiting to happen.

GMO roll-outs in other countries have relied on three things: the deep pockets of agribusinesses based in the United States, their political connections, and the notion that GMOs represent “progress”. If those three disappear in the United States, the power to force open foreign markets will disappear too. The GMO era might suddenly be over.

http://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/monsantos-worst-fear-may-be-coming-true/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/20/15 01:42 PM

Big Box Goes Organic as Target Pulls Canned Soups, Easy Mac

May 19, 2015 By Josh Scherer

Toucan Sam, Cap'n Crunch, Tony the Tiger, and even the Wheaties athlete du jour are all printed on cereal boxes to give the illusion of eye contact, which, according to Cornell food psychology professor Brian Wansink, increases brand loyalty by 16 percent.

That's just one of the tried-and-true product placement gimmicks that supermarkets use to manipulate customer purchases. It may become a thing of the past, however, as big-box retailers like Walmart are making big money on organic and other "healthy" food items. Which is partly why Target, which has been beefing up its grocery game in recent years, is throwing a wrench into the corporate status quo.

http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/05/...-eml-2015-05-19
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/21/15 02:53 PM

Via MIT Scientist Stephanie Seneff

"Hector is one of my personal heroes. Read about how his university is treating him..."

“I saw the removal of my field laboratory as an infringement of my academic freedom,” he says. “The college prevented me from exploring new methods of agriculture that challenged the college’s central vision about the future of agriculture in Hawai‘i.”

Banned from Three Islands

...Keyser stated in an email that if Valenzuela held one more community meeting on the island he could no longer use the university’s research station there to conduct workshops.

Monsanto Money and Influence

...taking money from corporations like Monsanto can influence “in troubling ways” the intellectual inquiry that should be at the heart of education and research.

Valenzuela “Shocked, Insulted and Humiliated” by Attacks

Valenzuela said many of the personal attacks against him came from university administrators “under the approving eye of the dean, as they continued to persist over the years.”

“Silicon Valley of the Plant World”

...the university started to market seeds for a genetically modified type of papaya that it had co-developed with Cornell University.

New Pesticides, Old Concerns

...they are applying chlorpyrifos at a rate that’s five times the national average. Chlorpyrifos, the most widely used bug killer in the world, is a neurotoxin found to damage the brains of developing children.

...they are applying the weed killer atrazine at a rate that’s 14 times the national average.

Silencing Valenzuela’s Allies

A few other faculty members at the University of Hawai‘i have privately revealed in emails to Valenzuela their concerns about biotechnology and the way he has been treated. But none of the other faculty members were willing to divulge their names, for fear of retaliation.

http://times.org/2015/05/19/the-silencing-of-hector-valenzuela/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/21/15 03:15 PM

What a disgrace.

We send our children to college to learn a skill so they can support themselves through their lifetime and be good citizens. They end up being used as pawns to promote agendas for colleges, industry and government.

If you are one of these folks who are afraid to speak out, you can show your support, anonymously, by financially supporting organizations like Moms Across America, Organic Consumers Association, Institute of Responsible Technology, among many others. Personal information of financial donors is kept confidential.

If there are any of you that would like to speak out, now would be a good time. You are our nation's heroes. Our children need you to speak now.

The above article referred to Dr. Tyrone Hayes. Here is his story about atrazine and what it does to frogs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Nom0UX83w

Silencing the Scientist: Tyrone Hayes on Being Targeted By Herbicide Firm Syngenta

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP-6Gp5RbjQ
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/21/15 11:30 PM

SAVE MONARCHS FROM DOW'S CHEMICAL ASSAULT!

Industrial agricultural giant Dow Chemical just unveiled its newest toxic herbicide, Enlist Duo, which would destroy milkweed plants that monarch butterflies depend on to survive. And monarch populations are crashing from nearly 1 billion butterflies 20 years ago to just 57 million last winter. Tell Dow's CEO to reverse course and shelve the company's plan for selling this potent chemical cocktail — before it can wreak more destruction on monarchs.

https://secure.nrdconline.org/site/Advoc...PETSOC0515VIDNR
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/23/15 06:03 PM

"Trending" on Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/topic/March-Aga...189641859955019

Protesters Are Going to Hit the Streets This Weekend in Over 400 Cities to March Against Monsanto

https://news.vice.com/article/protesters...gainst-monsanto
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/24/15 12:17 AM

Glyphosate on Your Plate

1/1/2015

It is no surprise that 'generally recognized as safe' (GRAS) has no meaning other than to provide a rubber stamp of government approval for whatever the chemical corporations want.

To this end, the USDA has allowed glyphosate applications on the following crops up to and including harvest time...

The USDA allows growers to spray these crops between rows throughout the growing season up until harvest...

http://www.beyondgodzillagardening.org/glyphosate-on-your-plate
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/24/15 11:53 AM

Hillary Clinton: Monsanto’s Next Poster Puppet

by Christina Sarich - Posted on May 24, 2015

– but she doesn’t represent me. That’s because she supports GMOs.

Hillary Rodham Clinton doesn’t represent the American people, either. Recently, she stated her desire to get industry representatives around a table to have an “intensive discussion” about “how the federal government could help biotechs with insurance against [financial] risk.”

That’s right – when the news comes out, and it will (WHO recently declared chemicals like glyphosate ‘probably carcinogenic’) – she wants to make sure the pubic has no recourse against these eco-terrorism companies.

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/hillary-clinton-monsantos-next-poster-puppet/#ixzz3b4Vl8dzj
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/24/15 12:06 PM

Hawaii Islands March Against Monsanto events on Fox News

Hawaii groups protest Monsanto, plant coconut trees

Published May 24, 2015·Associated Press

HONOLULU – Demonstrators spent Saturday planting coconut trees and waving signs in rallies across the Hawaiian Islands as part of an international day of protests against agriculture business Monsanto.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/24/hawaii-groups-protest-monsanto-plant-coconut-trees/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/24/15 12:19 PM

Missouri farmer helps Chipotle go beyond non-GMO to organic

By Ken Roseboro Published: April 30, 2015

Without the cotton harvesters and gin, they switched to growing organic rice and found greater success. Today, their farm is thriving more than ever, as they supply organic rice to Chipotle restaurants in Missouri, Tennessee, and Arkansas.

http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/ma...h.ndoy9WxD.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/24/15 12:22 PM

World’s First Public Testing for Monsanto’s Glyphosate Begins Today

April 23, 2015

https://www.organicconsumers.org/press/world%E2%80%99s-first-public-testing-monsanto%E2%80%99s-glyphosate-begins-today
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/24/15 12:31 PM

How to eliminate pesticides from your community

May 22, 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMUsssYSiMY&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/24/15 03:35 PM

Jim Turner Recalls Rumsfeld Meeting over Nutrasweet Toxicity - Uploaded on Oct 7, 2011

Rumsfeld was heard to say by many, "I don't care how many people it [NutraSweet] kills, I want it on the market".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL8vRVEjYB8&feature=youtu.be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 10:19 AM

Via Thierry Vrain

This excellent french documentary documents the pressure from Industry to avoid regulating endocrine disruptor chemicals. Europe under extreme pressure does regulate the RoundUp Ready technology.

Glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor in human cells.
Gasnier et al.
Toxicology 2009: 262: 184
Glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor at 500 parts per billion.

"By artificially misrepresenting or increasing this doubt, industry is turning science against itself."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ks5OSVDl00#t=869
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 10:38 AM

The Message From Scotland: Autism Up In Schools 13.6 Times In 16 Years And Accelerating

By John Stone - May 22, 2015

http://www.ageofautism.com/2015/05/the-m...celerating.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 11:17 AM

EU dropped pesticide laws due to US pressure over TTIP, documents reveal

US trade officials pushed EU to shelve action on endocrine-disrupting chemicals linked to cancer and male infertility to facilitate TTIP free trade deal.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2...ocuments-reveal
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 11:29 AM

Did you know Syngenta is the largest manufacturer of pesticides in the world? Yes, even more than Monsanto. In addition to glyphosate, they make Atrazine and Parquat; chemicals that are banned in their own country, spray them within a few hundred feet from homes and schools in Hawaii, and then when that country (Kauai) passes a law for disclosure (when they are spraying) and buffer zones (further away from the homes or schools) Syngenta SUES THEM for passing a law ( disclosure and buffer zones) to protect their kids!!!! Shame on them!!!!

https://www.facebook.com/HawaiiAllianceForProgressiveAction
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 11:33 AM

March Against Monsanto London 2015 Mums Say No To GMOs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7_lUE01TEE#t=99
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 11:45 AM

Sri Lanka’s New President Puts Immediate Ban on Glyphosate Herbicides

Posted on May 25 2015

Sri Lanka’s ban comes after two scientific studies led by Dr. Jayasumana showed that drinking water from abandoned wells, where the concentrations of glyphosate and metals are higher, as well as spraying glyphosate, increased the risk of the deadly chronic kidney disease (CKDu) by up to 5-fold.

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/05/25/s.../7#.VWNDLY3bL3g
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 12:06 PM

10 Documented Reasons GMOs are Anti-American

By Nick Meyer On July 3, 2014

1. Freedom of Choice?
2. They’re Harming Our Interests Abroad
3. The Right to a Fair Trial?
4. “In God We Trust”
5. “A Man’s Home is His Castle”
6. “…For Cutting Off Our Trade with All Parts of the World”
7. “For Imposing Taxes On Us Without Our Consent”
8. Consent of Governed Rights
9. “Certain Inalienable Rights, That Among These Are Life…”
10. “…Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”

http://althealthworks.com/2892/the-top-t...h.TWTb67gD.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 12:24 PM

Moms Across America Autism One 2015 Chicago Recap

Published on May 24, 2015

Zen Honeycutt of Moms Across America gives a brief report on Autism One Conference and Dr. Stephanie Seneffs talk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc9YwI_2tUM
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 02:49 PM

If there is one group of people &#8234;#&#8206;Monsanto&#8236; (and Syngenta) should be afraid of, it's the growing number of mothers that have woken up to the fact their children are being poisoned for profit. You have awakened a sleeping giant. They will not be silent. They will not back down. &#8234;#&#8206;MarchAgainstMonsanto&#8236; &#8234;#&#8206;MAMorlando&#8236; &#8234;#&#8206;MAM2015&#8236;
Are you a concerned mother? Check out --> Moms Across America

https://www.facebook.com/MomsAcrossAmerica

10-year old Daniel Bissonnette March Against Monsanto Vancouver 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiHNdOywxoE&app=desktop
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 02:58 PM

Moms Across America

Chicago March Against Monsanto was awesome. Thank you to OCA for this great video!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCMlKqLqdWo&t=1m36s
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 04:06 PM

Newsweek: Worm now thrives on GMO corn designed to kill it, study says

May 25, 2015 by Erin Elizabeth

Scientists have confirmed that corn-destroying worms have evolved to be resistant to the Bt corn engineered to kill them. So, wait for it: they’re still going to use the GMO corn but just add pesticides. You couldn’t make this stuff up.

- See more at: http://www.healthnutnews.com/newsweek-wo...h.bQlfV0AS.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 04:18 PM

'Monsanto's Dream': Pro-GMO DARK Act Comes to Congress

Kansas Republican Rep. Mike Pompeo to reintroduce anti-consumer, anti-choice, anti-labeling, pro-GMO law

March 25, 2015 - Lauren McCauley, staff writer

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/03/25/monsantos-dream-pro-gmo-dark-act-comes-congress

https://www.facebook.com/CongressmanPompeo?fref=ts
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/25/15 04:59 PM

March Against Monsanto South Africa.

By Staff | May 23, 2015

http://thephaser.com/2015/05/march-against-monsanto-south-africa/#sthash.XJnvyxIH.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/26/15 12:21 AM

Samsel on Glyphosate safety tests - Part 1 - 19 minutes - Published on May 25, 2015

Dr. Anthony Samsel got the US-EPA to reopen files containing safety tests on Glyphosate that had been sealed since 1981 as "Trade Secret" on request of Monsanto. In those files of thousands of pages of data, Dr. Samsel found enough evidence that prompts him to say that Glyphosate is not just a "probable" carcinogen - it is unequivocally a carcinogen. He is legally bound not to show the documents to anybody, but is allowed to say what he feels about them. Here he is speaking about them to me. Tony Mitra.

------------

It could be that they're recording the conversation...the NSA, FBI...they're recording every American conversation particularly those of scientists.

I can discuss it. I can't send you the documents. I can't give them to anyone because I signed an agreement with the EPA, but I can talk about them and I can give you my opinion of those documents because I've read them all.

Monsanto did do long term studies. Monsanto asked epa to seal the documents as trade secrets.

Well, that's a lie. That's false...Our bacteria...they do have a shikimate pathway. When we disrupt our bacteria, we disrupt our immune system...They dismissed the affect the glyphosate had been absorbed through the skin and into the animal...there was tissue damage happening.

Glyphosate goes right to the bone marrow...that's where your new cells are born...end up to the thymus gland...where those cells mature...t cells...helper cells...to fight off cancer...

Rat and mice study...26 months...the highest effects were in the pituitary gland, the thyroid glad and the thymus gland, mammary gland of the females, testicles of male rats...tumorigenic growth...they found that glyphosate induced chronic kidney disease...it also affected the pancreas, liver and lung...

So what did they do, they brought in multiple studies, historical control studies, that had incidences of tumors in the controls and they used that to wipe out the data and say that it wasn't the glyphosate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13yO9VpjwLQ#t=783
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/26/15 12:33 AM

Similac Advance Infant Formula to Be Offered G.M.O.-Free

By STEPHANIE STROMMAY 25, 2015

The maker of Similac Advance, the top commercial baby formula brand in the United States, says it will begin selling the first mainstream baby formula made without genetically altered ingredients by the end of the month at Target.

Similac’s maker, the global health care company Abbott, said it would first offer a “non-G.M.O.” version of its best-selling Similac Advance, followed by a non-G.M.O. version of Similac Sensitive. Depending on sales, Abbott may offer other formulas free of such ingredients.

Abbott will join a growing number of companies offering popular products without genetically modified organisms. Consumer demand for such products has been growing, despite a concerted and expensive effort by trade groups representing major food manufacturers and the biotech industry to convince them that genetically altered ingredients are not harmful to human health.

“We listen to moms and dads, and they’ve told us they want a non-G.M.O. option,” said Chris Calamari, general manager of Abbott’s pediatric nutrition business. “We want to make sure we meet the desires of parents.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/26/busine...-free.html?_r=1
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/26/15 08:10 PM

Hungary To Become First Member State To Implement New EU Regulations On GMOs

2015-05-11 |

Árpád Rácz pointed out that keeping the country GMO free is even included in Hungary’s constitution and the country has come to a broad consensus on the issue that is irrespective of political affiliations. The Government would also like to contribute to ensuring that as many EU member states as possible become GMO-free zones, and this is why Minister of Agriculture Sándor Fazekas has launched the “Alliance for a GMO-free Europe” initiative.

http://hungarytoday.hu/news/hungary-become-first-member-state-implement-new-eu-regulations-gmo-75561
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/26/15 08:25 PM

Monsanto helps fund all-expense-paid ‘reporter boot camp’ for food writers

Published time: May 23, 2015

Biotech company Monsanto is helping fund a “reporter boot camp” that will be hosted by the National Press Foundation, featuring an all-expense-paid journalism conference called “Food, From Farm to Table.”

The event includes a visit to an organic farm and Monsanto’s research lab.

Twenty journalists will be selected as National Press Foundation fellows to attend the conference in July, which includes travel, meals and hotel accommodation in St. Louis, Missouri. It offers “to take a holistic look at the issues: hunger, food waste, organic, GMOs, food science, feeding the world’s population, and more.”

http://rt.com/usa/261377-monsanto-helps-fund-reporter-conference/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/26/15 08:29 PM

Taco Bell and Pizza Hut Chuck Artificial Ingredients

By Ben Popken - May 26, 2015

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/taco-bell-pizza-hut-chuck-artificial-ingredients-n364581
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/26/15 08:41 PM

Steven Druker's book has been blacked out in the mainstream media.

Druker has publicly challenged Monsanto, CEO, Robb Fraley to find one inaccuracy in his book:

http://rinf.com/…/altered-genes-twisted-truths-author-chal…/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/26/15 09:20 PM

GMO that kills: GM-cotton problems drive Indian farmers to suicide

Published time: May 24, 2015 - 26 minutes

http://rt.com/news/261673-india-gmo-cotton-suicides/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/26/15 09:35 PM

Hillary Clinton Endorses GMOs. White House Meals are Organic

By Stephen Lendman - Global Research, May 25, 2015

First families continue getting wholesome pesticide/GMO-free foods while promoting frankenfoods hazardous to human health for Monsanto and other biotech giants.

Hillary’s biotech/agribusiness ties surfaced in the 1980s as a Rose Law firm lawyer. Monsanto and Tyson Foods were clients.

Monsanto gave the Clinton Foundation from half a million to one million dollars – Ag giant Dow Chemical from one to five million dollars, according to Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation disclosures.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clinton-endorses-gmos-white-house-meals-are-organic/5451481
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/28/15 09:59 AM

Argentina: GMs’ New Frontline

Listen in pop-out player

May 8, 2014

The transgenic revolution in agricultural production has turned Argentina into one of the world's largest producers and exporters of genetically modified soybean and corn. But there is unease across the nation’s vast GM belt, especially about health. In the northern province of Chaco, the minster of Public Health wants an independent commission to investigate cases of cancer and the incidence of children born with disabilities.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01y9dw0
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/28/15 10:00 AM

From Just Label It:

Quaker, a brand that prides itself on its honest and healthy image, is not being fully transparent to parents, families and consumers across the country – marketing their products on trust, but funding anti-labeling efforts at the same time.

Join us in asking Quaker to just label it and support mandatory FDA labeling of GMOs.

http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50202/p/sa...amp;tag=F-F-GMO
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/28/15 10:04 AM

Don't Fall for These Food Front Groups

By Martha Rosenberg 5/27/2015

Welcome to the world of food "front groups"--faux grassroots groups, sometimes called Astroturf, created by Big Food to keep health and safety regulations from cutting into sales and profits.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Don-t-F...150527-814.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/28/15 10:52 AM

Parents and tax payers are paying for this...

The GMO Debate – Science and Society - New University Course - 4 Credits

Course Objectives

To enable students to understand the scientific background about GMO crops and food, to objectively assess claims made in the media and on the internet, to present cogent reports on the science, government regulation and social attitudes, and to defend their viewpoints with well-referenced, reasoned arguments both verbally and in writing.

http://www.hort.cornell.edu/gmodebate/



Pro-terrorist Cornell University takes money from globalist Bill Gates to push GMOs destroying America

March 31, 2015 - By J.D. Heyes

“We taxpayers deserve to know the details about when our taxpayer-paid employees front for private corporations and their slick PR firms,” Ruskin said.

“This use of surrogates is par for the course with the biotech industry,” wrote Tim Schwab of Food & Water Watch in September. “Sometimes called the soft lobby, corporations routinely engage neutral-appearing scientists and impartial-sounding front groups to help advance their political and economic agendas.”

And while Lesser said the study contained his personal observations rather than those of Cornell, GMO backers nevertheless began to refer to his findings as “the Cornell study” in their efforts to stave off initiatives by states to force food makers to include labeling of GMO ingredients in their products.

The Alliance for Science site, then, is essentially Cornell’s GMO propaganda instrument.

Fast forward six months to the latest alliance effort to quash the FOIA requests; it’s as if Cornell believes that Americans should not be told whether professors at the public universities they help fund are being influenced at all in their support of GMO foods by the corporate and philanthropic interests developing and promoting them.

https://www.intellihub.com/pro-terrorist...roying-america/



Is Cornell the Go-To University for Industry Science?

August 28, 2014

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/blogs/is-cornell-the-go-to-university-for-industry-science/



Public Research, Private Gain - Corporate Influence Over University Agricultural Research

Starting in the 1980s, however, federal policies including the Bayh-Dole Act of 1982 began encouraging land-grant schools to partner with the private sector on agricultural research. A key goal was to develop agricultural products such as seeds, which
were sold to farmers under an increasingly aggressive patent regime.1

By 2010, private donations provided nearly a quarter of the funding for agricultural research at land-grant universities. !is funding steers land-grant research toward the goals of industry. It also discourages independent research that might be critical of the industrial model of agriculture and diverts public research capacity away from important issues such as rural economies, environmental quality and the public health implications of agriculture.

Private-sector funding not only corrupts the public research mission of land-grant universities, but also distorts the science that is supposed to help farmers improve their practices and livelihoods. Industry funded academic research routinely produces favorable results for industry sponsors. Because policymakers and regulators frequently voice their need for
good science in decision-making, industry-funded academic research influences the rules that govern their business operations.

http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/PublicResearchPrivateGain.pdf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/28/15 11:45 AM

Former Pro-GMO Scientist Speaks Out on Dangers of Genetically Modified Food

By Dr. Thierry Vrain - Guest Writer for Wake Up World

I retired 12 years ago after a long career as a research scientist for Agriculture Canada. When I was on the payroll, I was the designated scientist of my institute to address public groups and reassure them that genetically engineered crops and foods were safe.

I refute the claims of the biotechnology companies...

We should all take these studies seriously and demand that government agencies replicate them rather than rely on studies paid for by the biotech companies.

There are no long-term feeding studies performed in these countries to demonstrate the claims that engineered corn and soya are safe. All we have are scientific studies out of Europe and Russia, showing that rats fed engineered food die prematurely. These studies show that proteins produced by engineered plants are different than what they should be. Inserting a gene in a genome using this technology can and does result in damaged proteins.

http://wakeup-world.com/2015/01/27/forme...-modified-food/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/28/15 12:04 PM

EU Regulators Bow to Pressure from American Trade Lobby on Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals

Beyond Pesticides, May 28, 2015

...she sent a letter to the EC’s Environment Director-General Karl Falkenberg telling him to scrap draft criteria that could have led to a ban on over 30 endocrine (hormone) disrupting chemical (EDCs) in the European Union (EU).

...the Guardian reported that a scientific paper that would have adequately established ways to identify problematic EDCs was suppressed by EU officials at the behest of the chemical industry.

Despite attempts from a number of U.S. Senators, including Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), fast-track legislation has passed the Senate and is on its way to the U.S. House of Representatives. In an opinion article to the Washington Post, Senator Warren wrote on a clause within TTIP regarding “investor-state dispute settlements,” which would allow multinational corporations to challenge US laws it views as unfavorable by leapfroging the court system, and pleading its case in front of an international panel of arbitrators. “If the company won, the ruling couldn’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions — and even billions — of dollars in damages,” Senator Warren wrote. “If that seems shocking, buckle your seat belt. ISDS could lead to gigantic fines, but it wouldn’t employ independent judges. Instead, highly paid corporate lawyers would go back and forth between representing corporations one day and sitting in judgment the next.”

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15748
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/28/15 01:17 PM

The people of Hawaii demand protections from pesticides and GMO research!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7n4YG66iio
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/28/15 06:19 PM

Special Report: The war on big food

by Beth Kowitt May 21, 2015

And that has brought the entire colossal, $1-trillion-a-year food retail business to a tipping point. Steve Hughes, a former ConAgra executive who co-founded and now runs natural food company Boulder Brands, believes so much change is afoot that we won’t recognize the typical grocery store in five years. “I’ve been doing this for 37 years,” he says, “and this is the most dynamic, disruptive, and transformational time that I’ve seen in my career.”

Fortune spent months getting inside several of the industry’s key corporations to understand how they’re responding to the mounting threat. One thing is clear: Big Food is suddenly looking like an underdog.

http://fortune.com/2015/05/21/the-war-on-big-food/

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/29/15 09:17 PM

Ever wonder how one of the leading producers of warfare and agricultural chemicals was able to become the leader in seed production? Check out this article to learn how Monsanto created its monopoly of food production.

1901: Pharmaceutical company agent John F. Queeny launches Monsanto to produce saccharin, an artificial sweetener then only manufactured in Germany.

1907: The USDA investigates whether replacing saccharin with sugar violates the Pure Food and Drug Act, a consumer protection law. President Theodore Roosevelt, a saccharin consumer, objects to the investigation.

1911: The USDA proclaims foods with saccharin “adulterated,” thus banning it except for use by medical patients who must avoid sugar.

1914: World War I starts, and sugar shortages prompt the government to lift saccharin restrictions.

1915: With caffeine and vanillin added to Monsanto's product line, and Coca-Cola as a chief customer, sales reach $1 million.

1917: Monsanto begins producing aspirin, becoming the top producer in the U.S., a title it held until the 1980s.

1901: Pharmaceutical company agent John F. Queeny launches Monsanto to produce saccharin, an artificial sweetener then only manufactured in Germany.

1907: The USDA investigates whether replacing saccharin with sugar violates the Pure Food and Drug Act, a consumer protection law. President Theodore Roosevelt, a saccharin consumer, objects to the investigation.

1911: The USDA proclaims foods with saccharin “adulterated,” thus banning it except for use by medical patients who must avoid sugar.

1914: World War I starts, and sugar shortages prompt the government to lift saccharin restrictions.

1915: With caffeine and vanillin added to Monsanto's product line, and Coca-Cola as a chief customer, sales reach $1 million.

1917: Monsanto begins producing aspirin, becoming the top producer in the U.S., a title it held until the 1980s.

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/heres-how-worlds-largest-biotech-company-came-be
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/29/15 10:59 PM

Leaky Gut: Is it Becoming an Epidemic?

May 27, 2015 by Carol Grieve

For instance, specific molecules and nutrients are allowed to pass through but toxins and large undigested food particles are blocked. When you have leaky gut, the pores in your small intestine widen and this allows undigested food particles and toxins, that would normally be blocked, to enter your bloodstream. These particles and toxins aren’t recognized and the immune system goes into attack mode because they are not supposed to be in the blood. In essence, the immune system literally recognizes these undigested particles as dangerous. This can lead to allergies and much worse conditions. These particles that shouldn’t be there cause an immune response and build up antibodies to protect–it is just basically doing its job. The problem is the immune system doesn’t just build up antibodies to the food particles; it attacks your healthy cells, too. This is one of the ways food allergies and autoimmune disorders develop.

Keeping in mind that 70% of our immune system is in our gut, doesn’t it seem important to have a healthy one?

http://foodintegritynow.org/2015/05/27/leaky-gut-is-it-becoming-an-epidemic/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/30/15 05:25 PM

Dr Michelle Perro paediatrician talks leaky gut, NCGS, toxicity & children

Published on May 17, 2015

"The gut's unhealthy, the brain's going to be unhealthy and vise versa."

This is the first talk of 3 'Children, Food & Health' presented by Food Matters Aotearoa, New Zealand, 2015.

At 17:00ish she talks about glyphosate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbhnIVcKLQ8#t=17
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/30/15 05:33 PM

Moms Across America in New Zealand

Zen Honeycutt Moms Across America discusses health, toxicity, gut dysbiosis & healing children

Published on May 18, 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tud3It_TPY
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/30/15 08:01 PM

Judge upholds Jackson County GMO ban

May 29, 2015

The judge has recognized that genetically engineered crops pose a significant commercial threat to non-biotech growers, which was a key issue in the litigation, Kimbrell said. “This case is a resounding affirmation of the right of farmers to protect themselves from GE contamination.”

http://www.capitalpress.com/Oregon/20150529/judge-upholds-jackson-county-gmo-ban

https://www.facebook.com/events/431073007073321/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/30/15 08:10 PM

Tell the FDA:

NO GMO MOSQUITOES IN THE FLORIDA KEYS! Or anywhere for that matter. The Florida Keys Mosquito Control District has deferred the decision to approve genetically engineered mosquitoes to the FDA.

Please comment to the FDA TODAY - they need to hear from you! Post your comment, to include any and all environmental, public health, economic, or ethical questions you may have with this uncontrolled genetic modification experiment here:

COMMENT HERE: http://www.regulations.gov/#!submitComment;D=FDA-2015-P-1433-0001
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/30/15 08:25 PM

House panel votes to repeal country-origin meat labeling law

May 20, 2015

Debbie Barker of the Center for Food Safety said the WTO’s ruling, and the House’s action, show no regard for shoppers who want to know where their meat comes from.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/c...e1df_story.html

Autumn's Harvest Farm, Romulus

Felenz Family Farm, Phelps
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/30/15 08:29 PM

Chicken farm uses oregano oil instead of antibiotics

October 17, 2014

Sometimes the best remedies are found in nature.

http://complete-health-and-happiness.com/chicken-farm-uses-oregano-oil-instead-antibiotics/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/30/15 08:34 PM

GMO Free USA

Monsanto is already poisoning us with their Roundup-drenched GMOs. And now they want conventional farmers to to spray toxic Roundup on everything else as well. Check out this pre harvest guide to spraying Roundup on your Non-GMO food. How can it be OK to spray a carcinogen on your food 3 days before harvest?

The World Health Organization says that glyphosate causes cancer in animals and is a probable human carcinogen. Got carcinogens in your food? BUY ORGANIC.

READ:

http://roundup.ca/_uploads/documents/MON-Preharvest%20Staging%20Guide.pdf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/31/15 12:30 AM

“Maui Outgrow Monsanto”

Event Draws 200 Participants

May 26, 2015

While communities around the world participated in “March Against Monsanto” events, GMO Free Maui and Simpmli Fresh Farms hosted a special “Outgrow Monsanto” community food planting event on Saturday, May 24, 2015 in West Maui.

Musicians Neil Young, Darryl Hannah, and Lukas & Mika Nelson made an appearance at the event. They helped plant sweet potatoes and an ulu tree, before playing a song off of their new album titled “The Monsanto Years.”

http://mauinow.com/2015/05/24/maui-outgrow-monsanto-event-draws-200-participants/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/31/15 12:35 AM

400 Companies That DO NOT Use GMOs in Their Products

Yvonne Holterman | May 23, 2015

http://www.enlightened-consciousness.com...h.0lo9fUDX.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/31/15 12:48 AM

Monsanto’s Glyphosate Blankets GMO Crops Near Schools

By Mary Ellen Kustin - May 8, 2015

GMO corn and soybeans have been genetically engineered to withstand being blasted with glyphosate – an herbicide that the World Health Organization recently classified as “probably carcinogenic to humans.” The proximity of many schools to fields blanketed in the chemical puts kids at risk of exposure.

But it gets worse.

Overreliance on glyphosate has spawned the emergence of “superweeds” that resist the herbicide, so now producers of GMO crops are turning to even more harmful chemicals. First up is 2,4-D, a World War II-era defoliant that has been linked to non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Parkinson’s disease and reproductive problems. Young children are especially vulnerable to it.

A new EWG interactive map shows the amounts of glyphosate sprayed in each U.S. county...

http://www.ewg.org/agmag/2015/05/monsanto-s-glyphosate-blankets-gmo-crops-near-schools
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/31/15 12:56 AM

Survival of the unfittest: GMOs and animal disease epidemics

24 May 2015

Non-GMO-fed birds stayed healthy in the avian flu epidemic – but will be culled anyway, according to livestock nutrition advisor Howard Vlieger.

http://gmwatch.org/news/latest-news/1618...sease-epidemics
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/31/15 09:00 AM


India's independent farmers embrace organic

“I had confidence in my own method and my own labor,” he said. “I’m convinced that organic farming works.”

Singh is not alone in switching to organic. Punjab now has approximately 1,500 hectares of certified organic land, and India has emerged as a global leader in organic farming, with 600,000 certified producers. The countries with the second- and third-largest outputs are Uganda and Mexico, according to a report based on 2012 data, both of which have fewer than 200,000 organic producers.

Read on: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/5/31/indias-independent-farmers-embrace-organic.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/31/15 05:54 PM

Environ Toxicol Chem. 2014 Jun;33(6):1283-93. doi: 10.1002/etc.2550. Epub 2014 Apr 4.

Pesticides in Mississippi air and rain: a comparison between 1995 and 2007.

Atrazine, metolachlor, and propanil were detected in &#8805;50% of the air and rain samples in both years. Glyphosate and its degradation product, aminomethyl-phosphonic acid (AMPA), were detected in &#8805;75% of air and rain samples in 2007 but were not measured in 1995. The 1995 seasonal wet depositional flux was dominated by methyl parathion (88%) and was >4.5 times the 2007 flux. Total herbicide flux in 2007 was slightly greater than in 1995 and was dominated by glyphosate.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24549493
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 05/31/15 06:09 PM

Killing GMO Bill Would Force Industry 'to the Table,' Critics Say

May 21, 2015 - by Philip Brasher

Just Label It released the results of a recent nationwide poll by the Mellman Group that found that 88 percent of respondents wanted mandatory labeling of foods that have "genetically modified" ingredients. Eight-six percent of the Republicans and independents surveyed supporting labeling. The poll was conducted by telephone April 28 through May 3 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/killing-gmo-bill-would-force-industry-table-critics-say
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 02:01 AM

Date: May 27, 2015

Source: Ohio State University Center for Clinical and Translational Science

Summary: The microbiome of a toddler's gut may influence their behavior, a new study suggests. Scientists found correlations between temperament and the presence of specific types of intestinal bacteria in both girls and boys.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150527091438.htm
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 02:05 AM

THANK YOU FOR BEING A LEADER, UVM!!

UVM Medical Center kitchen reducing GMOs

Sally Pollak, May 31, 2015

A few years ago, the hospital identified an interest in reducing the use of products that have genetically modified organisms in them, she said.

"We don't believe that the safety of those products has been proven," Imrie said.

The medical center developed two tactics in its effort to reduce its use of food with GMOs: Purchase more organic food, which by definition is GMO-free, and seek GMO-free products.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story...-gmos/28168737/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 02:19 AM

Two retired EPA scientists (Ray Seidler & E.G. Valliantatos) on Women's Weekly gmo meeting.

Streamed live on Jul 21, 2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84AhDuk3Jrc
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 02:28 AM

May 27, 2015

Kennedy: Bill Passed Today Will Protect Connecticut’s Children From Toxic Pesticides

Senate Bill 366 bans pesticide use on municipal playgrounds

“There is growing evidence that pesticides do far more harm than good to our communities, and Connecticut must act judiciously to minimize their impact,” said Senator Kennedy, Senate Chair of the Environment Committee. “By keeping pesticides off of playgrounds and school property, we are protecting those who are most susceptible to the health impacts of pesticide exposure. Notifying parents of any emergency application also helps parents make informed decisions on whether their children are exposed to pesticides.”

http://senatedems.ct.gov/pr/kennedy-150527.php
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 02:43 AM

FREE WORLDWIDE ONLINE SCREENING

Plus Bonus Interviews and Exclusive Footage

May 31, 2015 - June 11, 2015

http://www.boughtmovie.com/free-viewing/...ite+Conversions
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 03:15 AM

BREAKING NEWS:

GMO Free USA will be taking GMO education on the road - going on tour with Neil Young + Promise of the Real for the new studio album, The Monsanto Years. GMO Free USA, along with other nonprofits, will join Neil Young + Promise of the Real to rock America and educate about GMOs and other related issues. Neil Young and Team have formed a broad coalition of nonprofits that will booth before and after concert shows to raise awareness and offer solutions to many of the injustices that we face. With The Monsanto Years, GMOs will take center stage. We’re honored to join with Neil and this coalition and we hope we’ll see you on the tour!

MORE DETAILS TO COME. Follow our pages to get the latest:

https://www.facebook.com/GMOFreeUSA
https://www.facebook.com/NeilYoung
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 03:20 AM

MAA: Endocrine disruptors are implicated in fertility, fetal outcome, and reproductive health. Endocrine disruptors are not allowed to be marketed in Europe, but they are allowed in the US! Please spread the word to anyone who is experiencing difficulty getting or staying pregnant that they should try going organic! If the EPA is not going to do it's job then moms have to take care of their own!

Glyphosate. Hormone Hacking

http://feedtheworld.info/glyphosate/hormone-hacking/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 03:30 AM

Nationalists ponder prison sentences for selling unmarked GMO products

May 26, 2015

If passed the bill would amend the existing article of the criminal code that orders punishment for concealing any information about potential hazards for human life and health. It would include violation of the rules for marking goods containing GMO material. Those found guilty would face fines of up to 300,000 rubles (about $6000), or up to two years in prison or penal labor. The bill specifies that, depending on the crime’s circumstances, the punishment could be applied to the head of the company and the workers involved in the violations.

http://rt.com/politics/261985-russia-gmo-prison-law/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 03:37 AM

From Soup to Fries: Amy’s Joins the “Clean” Fast Food Club The well-known organic food brand will launch Amy’s Drive Thru later this summer.

By Leilani Clark on May 26, 2015

In late June, the meticulously sourced french fries will debut at the official launch of the first Amy’s Drive Thru.

http://civileats.com/2015/05/26/amys-clean-fast-food/#sthash.2VXFIsg4.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 10:55 AM

Julian Assange: TPP Isn't About Trade. It's About Corporate Control.

By Democracy Now! 30 May 15

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange warns the plan could chill the adoption of health and environmental regulations.

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: We turn now to a Democracy Now! exclusive with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who has spent nearly three years inside Ecuador’s Embassy in London, where he has political asylum. Assange faces investigations in both Sweden and the United States. Here in the U.S., a secret grand jury is investigating WikiLeaks for its role in publishing a trove of leaked documents about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, as well as State Department cables. In Sweden, he’s wanted for questioning on allegations of sexual misconduct, though no charges have been filed. Earlier this month, Sweden’s Supreme Court rejected his appeal to lift his arrest warrant. Swedish prosecutors are reportedly preparing to travel to London to interview Assange after refusing to do so for years.

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/5/27/julian_assange_despite_congressional_standoff_nsa
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 11:09 AM

EPA’s “New” Restrictions Fail to Protect Honey Bees as Promised

Beyond Pesticides, June 1, 2015

Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a proposal intended to create “physical and temporal space” between bees and toxic pesticides. While touted as monumental progress on bee health by the agency, the reality is that the proposal will only result in modest changes to pesticide labels. EPA’s new rules contain only a temporary ban on foliar applications of acutely bee-toxic pesticide products, including neonicotinoid class insecticides, during bloom and when a beekeeper is on site and under contract. The proposal doesn’t address the widespread contamination and detrimental effects of these toxic, systemic (wh0le plant poisons) chemicals that will continue to occur even during the temporary prohibition.

Gary Tate Riverside CA Honey Bee taking flight Riverside CaMedia reports have generally overstated the implications of the proposal, applauding the “new” restrictions, and labeling the small portion of agricultural land that is affected as “pesticide-free zones,” which couldn’t be further from the truth. The restrictions are not anything new – EPA pesticide labels already prohibit applications while in bloom where bees are foraging. Neal Bergman, a commercial beekeeper in Missouri, said in a statement to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that the proposal is “basically enforcing label guidelines,” further highlighting the fact that EPA has failed to protect bees in the past. EPA did make one label change that eliminated the 48-hour rule exception, which previously allowed foliar application of pesticides while honey bees were on the property, as long as bee keepers were given notice no less than 48 hours in advance. Unfortunately, this minor label change won’t stop the widespread contamination of landscapes or prevent harm associated with systemic neonicotinoids. These dangerous pesticides have been linked to the global disappearance of honey bees and other non-target organisms, such as earthworms, birds, and aquatic invertebrates.

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15770
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 12:30 PM

GMO Free NY - 6/1/15

**** URGENT: TAKE ACTION FOR GMO LABELING! ******

Although last Thursday’s Codes Committee vote was not an official vote -- the bill was tabled due to too many absentee committee members -- there were a number of Assembly members who voted AGAINST bill A.617 and your right to know if the food you buy contains GMOs. They voted with Monsanto and the Big Food companies instead of with the 93% of us who say we want GMO labeling! If one of these people is your Assembly member (find out here: http://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/), please CALL THEM TODAY to let them know they are not representing your interests when they vote against GMO labeling! Ask them to vote YES on bill A.617 the next time it comes up for a vote! They need to hear this message from those who have the power to vote them out of office. Remind them that they represent YOU, not Monsanto! Please share this with every New Yorker you know who cares about what they're eating. Thanks!

The "NO" List -- CALL THEM TODAY!

--Steve Cymbrowitz (Brooklyn)
Albany: 518-455-5214 | District Office: 718-743-4078

--Joe Giglio (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Steuben)
Albany: 518-455-5241 | District Office: 716-373-7103

--Al Graf (Suffolk)
Albany: 518-455-5937 | District Office: 631-585-0230

--Tom McKevitt (Nassau)
Albany: 518-455-5341 | District Office: 516-228-4960

--Michael Montesano (Nassau)
Albany: 518-455-4684 | District Office: 516-937-3571

--Gary Pretlow (Westchester)
Albany: 518-455-5291 | District Office: 914-667-0127

--Robin Schimminger (Erie, Niagara)
Albany: 518-455-4767 | District Office: 716-873-2540

--Claudia Tenney (Delaware, Orange, Sullivan, Ulster)
Albany: 518-455-5334 | District Office: 315-736-3879

https://www.facebook.com/GMOFreeNYnet/ph...3223621/?type=1
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 10:13 PM

Agribusiness nervous as WHO cancer unit analyzes popular pesticide

Reuters By Carey Gillam May 29, 2015 3:37 PM

Twenty-four scientists representing WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) will analyze scientific findings regarding links between cancer in humans and the herbicide known as 2,4-D at a June 2-9 meeting in Lyon, France.

A separate group of IARC scientists in March unanimously decided to classify glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto Co's Roundup weedkiller, as "probably carcinogenic to humans." The designation prompted outrage and calls for a retraction from Monsanto, and demands by some public officials and consumers for bans on the pesticide.

Many believe the same could happen for 2,4-D.

http://news.yahoo.com/agribusiness-nervo...3--finance.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 10:19 PM

Michael Hansen, Ph.D Senior Scientist with Consumers Union

Monsanto, RoundUp and Junk Science

Posted: 05/29/2015 Updated: 06/01/2015

Whether you march against Monsanto or not, there are clearly new safety concerns -- the cancer risks -- and environmental impacts -- superweeds and Monarch losses -- linked to Monsanto's herbicide. They demand serious consideration by regulators.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-ha...html?1432954296
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 10:23 PM

Canadian Risk Assessment Finds GMO Salmon Susceptible to Disease

Posted on May 30 2015 - 2:19am by Sustainable Pulse

“The findings from the Canadian risk assessment show that FDA has based its assessment of this totally unnecessary technology on blind trust,” said Wenonah Hauter. “It’s clear that there are unique safety issues that FDA has failed to consider, which is why we are calling on the agency to terminate its review of GMO salmon.”

http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/05/30/c...e/#.VW0TT43bL3g
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 10:29 PM

It should be banned from every park, state park and playgrounds.

May 27 2015

Pesticide Used in City’s Parks Again Shown to Have Possible Cancer Link

by Sarah Crean

Citing what he described as “unnecessary, toxic pesticide use,” Kallos said in a statement that “all families should be able to enjoy our city parks and resources without having to worry about what chemicals are being used.”

http://www.nyenvironmentreport.com/pesti...le-cancer-link/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 10:31 PM

Another GMO Insider Victory!

Hellmann’s Offers Non-GMO Mayo Option!

By Anna • May 26, 2015

2015 shows us that tides are changing and food companies are finally realizing it is time to meet consumer demands around health and sustainability by providing non-GMO products.

http://gmoinside.org/another-gmo-insider-victory-hellmanns-offers-non-gmo-mayo-option/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 10:37 PM

Vermont Corn Trials Reveal Higher Non-GMO Yields Over GMOs

June 1, 2015/By Ken Roseboro/

University of Vermont (UVM) field trials of short- and long-season corn found that non-GMO seed varieties performed as well as or even better than some genetically modified varieties. A cropping system trial found that corn grown in a diversified crop rotation produced higher yields and better soil quality than corn grown continuously year after year.

http://robynobrien.com/vermont-corn-trials-reveal-higher-non-gmo-yields-over-gmos/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/01/15 10:43 PM

Steven Druker's challenge to Monsanto

http://alteredgenestwistedtruth.com/challenge-to-monsanto/
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/02/15 09:33 PM

Erin Brockovich

Recently we demanded Home Depot stop selling formaldehyde contaminated wood flooring products ...and they did! Now we need to stop them from selling these deadly neoniconoids contaminated plants.

Do not, I repeat, do not buy plants treated with neoniconoids. Bees take the pollen back to the hive and feed it to the brood.
This is the number one cause of colony collapse!

Neonicotinoid residues are found in pollen and nectar consumed by pollinators such as bees and butterflies. The residues can reach lethal concentrations in some situations.

Neonicotinoids can persist in soil for months or years after a single application. Measurable amounts of residues were found in woody plants up to six years after application.

Untreated plants may absorb chemical residues left over in the soil from the previous year.

Products approved for homeowners to use in gardens, lawns, and on ornamental trees have manufacturer-recommended application rates up to 120 times higher than rates approved for agricultural crops.

There is no direct link demonstrated between neonicotinoids and the honey bee syndrome known as Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). However, recent research suggests that neonicotinoids may make honey bees more susceptible to parasites and pathogens, including the intestinal parasite Nosema, which has been implicated as one causative factor in CCD.

Many neonicotinoid pesticides that are sold to homeowners for use on lawns and gardens do not have any mention of the risks of these products to bees, and the label guidance for products used in agriculture is not always clear or consistent.

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/02/15 10:19 PM

WikiLeaks issues call for $100,000 bounty on monster trade treaty

Today WikiLeaks has launched a campaign to crowd-source a $100,000 reward for America’s Most Wanted Secret: the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP).

https://wikileaks.org/WikiLeaks-issues-call-for-100-000.html
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/03/15 04:18 PM

Non-GMO Uprising: GMO-free groups emerging across the US

By Ken Roseboro - April 30, 2013

She was driven by her fear and opposition to GMOs. “I was appalled that our seed supply was being taken over.”

“People are really energized by it and really want to get behind the fight for our right to know what’s in our food,” she says.

Regardless of whether the bills pass or not, Cook-Littman says “We will keep going and ignite our flame higher.”

http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/ma...h.j5AxliQX.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/03/15 04:19 PM

ISIS Report 01/06/15

Roundup Listed Carcinogen by Danish Authority

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Roundup_Listed_Carcinogen_by_Danish_Authority.php
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/03/15 04:21 PM

GMO Lie Exposed - No Benefit in Feeding Hungry

https://www.facebook.com/DavidAvocadoWolfe/videos/10152609435381512/?fref=nf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/03/15 04:49 PM

GMO Free NY *** BREAKING NEWS ***

Last night the NY Senate Consumer Protection committee moved the GMO labeling bill (S.485-A) forward to the Rules committee! (The Senate has a rule that allows them to "discharge" bills from committees without having actually voted on them, but the net effect is the same as if the bill had been successfully voted on -- it moves forward to the next committee.) WOOHOO!

Here's the press release from our coalition:

For Immediate Release: Wednesday, June 3, 2015

Contact: CJ Macklin, 646-355-0718, cj.macklin@berlinrosen.com

GMO LABELING BILL CONTINUES TO BUILD MOMENTUM AS IT MOVES ONE STEP CLOSER TO PASSAGE

Bipartisan Bill Successfully Moved out of NYS Senate’s Consumer Protection Committee

Pressure Now on Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, Senate Leadership to Get Something Done in Final Weeks of Session, Bring Bill to Floor Vote

Albany – The bipartisan GMO labeling bill moved one step closer to passage yesterday when it was moved out of the New York State Senate’s Consumer Protection Committee (S.485-A) by Senator Michael Venditto, chairman of the committee. Through the stewardship and leadership of bill-sponsor Senator Ken Lavalle (R-Port Jefferson), the legislation continues to build momentum, and it now heads directly to the Senate’s Rules Committee. The pressure is now on Senate Majority Leader John Flanagan and NY State Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie to act in the final weeks of session and bring this bill to a floor vote.

“We applaud Senator Venditto for talking the lead on moving this bill forward. His support, along with the leadership of Majority Leader Flanagan and Senator LaValle, means New York parents and families are one step closer to knowing what’s on their dinner plates,” said Alex Beauchamp, Northeast Region Director at Food & Water Watch. “Now it’s time for Senate leadership and Speaker Heastie to choose a side. They can either join the millions of New Yorkers and members of their delegation and bring this bill to a floor vote, or they can cave to giant corporations like Monsanto trying to maximize profits.”

The bipartisan state bill – also sponsored by Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal (D-Manhattan) – is currently before the Assembly’s Codes Committee (A.617-A).

Although agrichemical companies like Monsanto and big food and beverage companies like Kraft and Coca-Cola claim that GMOs are safe to eat, the Food & Drug Administration does not have a safety approval process in place.

"When it's my family's health we're talking about, I can't take a chance on not knowing what I'm feeding them. And the only way I can know for sure if I'm giving them GMO-produced foods is if they are labeled properly," said Margaret Maher, a Long Island mother of two. "I need the leaders in Albany to step-up and look out for my family. I need them to act on GMO labeling legislation now."

Last Monday, the makers of Similac Advance, the top commercial baby formula brand in the U.S., announced it would offer a GMO-free version of its product by the end of the month.

And in March, the World Health Organization reclassified glyphosate – the key ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup – as a probable human carcinogen. The use of Roundup on farmland has skyrocketed since GMO crops were engineered to withstand it, and since then, agricultural use of the herbicide has increased 16-fold.

The U.S. currently lags behind 64 countries that already require GMO labeling. According to polls by Consumer Reports and The New York Times, over 90% of US consumers support GMO labeling. Alaska, Connecticut, Maine and Vermont already have labeling laws.

https://www.facebook.com/GMOFreeNYnet/ph...tif_t=notify_me
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/03/15 04:59 PM

Home » New York » News » U.S. District Court »

Organic Similac the subject of new class action lawsuit

May 27, 2015 1:28 PM By LocalLabs News Service

The maker of organically labeled infant formula is being sued over allegations that its formula wasn't actually organic.

The lawsuit claims about 26 of the ingredients, which is more than half of the 49 ingredients listed, are not allowed in organic food. The suit said the ingredients were “irradiated substances, synthetic compounds, or produced from hazardous substances.”

The plaintiffs claim Abbot listed the product as organic in order to get consumers to purchase it, and to increase its own sales and profits.

http://legalnewsline.com/issues/class-ac...-action-lawsuit
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/03/15 05:17 PM

Samsel on Glyphosate safety tests - Part 2 - Published on May 28, 2015

"...shows that that particular vitamin that they are adding to these feeds does induce cancers...In my last paper I cited a half a dozen different patents of how glyphosate works synergistically increases the toxicity of other chemicals...Bacteria communicate with our own cells and they turn our genes on and off, through the bio-molecules that they produce. So, when we start messing with our micro biome and bacterial species, all kinds of serious stuff happens. And we when we mess up our enzymes like CYP 450, and other enzymes, and we mess up our amino acids through herbicides, we are setting ourselves up for a life of isease and misery.

So, it would be my recommendation that every government on this earth, no matter where they are they need to ban herbicides. Not just glyphostate, all herbicides from the food supply and from the food supply of animals. It's unconscionable to feed animals with food that's contaminated with herbicides. It sets them up for disease and misery, just like it sets us up for disease and misery.

...they knew that glyphosate was problematic. They used historical controls to cancel out the truth. They still use historical controls today, to do that very same thing and that practice should be banned from science. We should not be using historical controls to get rid of the evidence."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPBPfWrFwuI
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/03/15 10:16 PM

What Bill Nye Got Wrong in His About-Face on GMOs

The Science Guy’s errors let the pesticide/biotech industry off the hook.

By Doug Gurian-Sherman and Margaret Mellon on June 3, 2015

Until recently, he spoke and wrote about GMOs as environmentally risky technology.

To illustrate his point, he explained that GMO crops “put the herbicides and pesticide inside the plant, rather than spraying it on them and having it run down into streams.” In the case of herbicides, Nye is simply incorrect, and it’s an important error to point out.

http://civileats.com/2015/06/03/what-bil...h.vnSOT0rs.dpuf
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/03/15 11:36 PM

ISIS Report 03/06/15

How Grain Self-Sufficiency, Massive GM Soybean Imports & Glyphosate Exports Led China to Devastate People & Planet

China owns 70 % of world’s production capacity for glyphosate, more than 80% exported, mainly to USA, Brazil and Argentina, countries that have greatly expanded GM soybean production for export to China; excessive glyphosate spraying has sickened people & wildlife in GM soybean producing countries while a billion Chinese people are poisoned with toxic soybeans

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/China_to_Devastate_People_and_Planet.php
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/04/15 10:56 PM

GMO Free NY - 6/4/15

Funny how the so-called "Cornell study" constantly cited by those opposed to the NY GMO labeling bill as evidence that food prices will rise if the bill is passed clearly states at the bottom of the cover page that the work does NOT reflect the opinion of Cornell University and was commi$$ioned by the Council for Biotechnology Information--a lobbying group that represents Monsanto, Dow, DuPont, etc. Then again, why should the facts ever get in the way of a good sound bite?



https://www.facebook.com/GMOFreeNYnet/ph...tif_t=notify_me
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/04/15 11:30 PM

Reno, Nevada approves Pesticide Free Parks

Published on May 28, 2015

Goes to show you that with a little persistence and courage, you can accomplish great things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvCra2Y51QY&feature=youtu.be

https://www.facebook.com/groups/809015852551493/?hc_location=ufi

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/04/15 11:37 PM

Institute for Responsible Technology

Stop the rising tide of poison. Organize your community to ban glyphosate. This graph from the U.S. Geological Survey shows the incredible increase in use of glyphosate since the beginning of Roundup Ready crops. This cannot be "safe" for people or the planet. Look for more information about glyphosate at IRT's new website: http://rounduprisks.com/

Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/05/15 10:43 AM

Congress Continues Attacks on Clean Water Act Protections

(Beyond Pesticides, June 05, 2015)

Contrary to Senator Crapo’s claims, the CWA permit serves as a valuable tool that lets authorities know what is sprayed and when it is sprayed, so that the public may know what chemicals are used in their waterways and the potential dangers to sensitive aquatic ecosystems. Existing pesticide regulations under FIFRA do not achieve these protections and most agricultural pesticide applications are exempt from CWA permit requirements. Permits do not prevent applicators from using pesticides, especially for public health emergencies. The permits do require basic protections for water quality and aquatic wildlife. Applicators must record their pesticide applications and monitor application sites for any adverse incidents, which must be reported. For many states, the cost of the permit is as low as $25. The myth that the CWA permits for pesticide discharges near waterways are burdensome for farmers has not been substantiated.

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=15807
Posted by: MissingArty

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/05/15 11:09 AM

TPP Corporate Insiders

Below is a list of 605 corporate advisers who have been allowed access to the TPP text, while the public and members of congress have been kept in the dark. (This list was originally published by Sojourners.)

http://www.flushthetpp.org/tpp-corporate-insiders/
Posted by: cwjga

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/05/15 11:47 AM

http://podcasts.joerogan.net/podcasts/kevin-folta

For those that want reality.
Posted by: Teonan

Re: State of the Science of the Health Risks of GMO Food - 06/05/15 12:17 PM

Originally Posted By: cwjga

For those that want reality.


Reality is Folta's a Monsanto-cheerleading nutbar...

The truth according to Kevin Folta

GMWatch
15 February 2015


The pro-GMO scientist Kevin Folta says he bases his statements on GMO safety on science – but some of his views look more like ideology. An expert in nutrition and public health weighs in with a commentary exclusive to GMWatch

Kevin Folta is a scientist and a pro-GMO activist who vigorously goes after anyone that disagrees with his ideology. Folta claims – as though he is the arbiter of truth – that GMO opponents are fearmongers who spread misinformation.

But let's take a look at Folta’s background and compare some of his claims to published research, the perspective of a prominent nutrition expert, and obvious fact.

Folta is a molecular biologist with no known health background. On GMOanswers, a website run by the GMO industry, it says, “Kevin Folta is a professor in and chairman of the Horticultural Sciences Department at the University of Florida, Gainesville. He got his PhD in Molecular Biology from University of Illinois at Chicago in 1998, and he has worked at University of Wisconsin before settling in at University of Florida. Dr Folta researches the functional genomics of small fruit crops, the plant transformation, the genetic basis of flavors, and studies at photomorphogenesis and flowering. He has also written many publications and edited books, most recently was the 2011 Genetics, Genomics, and Breeding of Berries. Dr Folta received the NSF CAREER Award, an HHMI Mentoring Award and was recognized as "University of Florida Foundation Research Professor" in 2010.”

If you want to know about the genetic basis of flavours or the functional genomics of small fruit crops, Folta is your man. But how likely is it that Folta, a professor in the horticultural sciences department, will know and understand the impact of diet on human health? Is he a doctor, dietitian or nutritionist? Nope. Does he have a master’s degree in public health or PhD in a related field? Nope. Does he understand how we determine if something is safe for humans? Nope. The bottom line is that he does not have the qualifications to weigh in on diet and human health. But does he? Yes, all the time.

In a recent blog post he implied that food additives are safe, saying, “Food additives need FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approval, and that requires testing.”

However, a recent study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine found that between 1997 and 2012 all of the members on panels to determine if a food additive was safe had ties to the industry that created them, either as an employee or consultant. Additionally, the FDA allowed companies that created food products to determine whether or not a food additive was generally recognized as safe, also known as GRAS. In some cases, these companies did not even notify the FDA of this determination!

Food politics guru Marion Nestle, PhD, who actually has a degree in nutrition, wrote a commentary on the study, saying, "How is it possible that the FDA permits manufacturers to decide for themselves whether their food additives are safe?" How indeed.

Folta says, “After 17 years no epidemiological trends have been established between GM and health concerns.” But this is clearly a reflection of his lack of scientific understanding. To date, there is not a single human epidemiological study. To say there are no epidemiological trends between GMOs and health is actually impossible to confirm since GMOs are not labeled. And as Consumer Reports says, “Saying there’s no evidence of harm isn’t the same as saying they’ve been proved safe.”

Folta also says that there is no “plausible mechanism” for harm from GMOs. When it comes to diet and health, we often have no idea why a particular substance causes harm, but that does not stop health professionals or health organizations from making recommendations. A case in point is sugar. NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) recently published research that found a 38 per cent increased risk of heart disease for those who consumed 17 to 21 per cent of calories from sugar compared with those who consumed less. They also go on to say, “The biological mechanisms underlying the association between added sugar intake and CVD (cardiovascular disease) risk are not completely understood.” This highlights the well known fact that we often do not know the mechanism for harm for particular foods, such as sugar or red meat, but we do recommend limiting these foods since they are linked with negative health outcomes.

In response to the claim that organic produce is higher in vitamins and minerals, Folta says, “notsomu