“The Cry toxin mode of action, we and others have noted, does not necessarily discriminate between
species. Any organism with a membrane-lined gut is, in principle, vulnerable if it consumes
the GMO Bt crop. In these Bt crops the leaves, straw, roots, nectar, and pollen, all typically
contain Cry toxins. Therefore, most organisms in agricultural landscapes will at some point in
their life-cycle be exposed to GMO plant material. As pollinator declines and a more generalised
insect apocalypse have revealed, the question of the effects of such crops on biodiversity is far
from trivial.” Jonathan Latham, PhD https://www.independentsciencenews.org/e...EgWeZbaBZ8wWLTg

...Yes, roundup contains 30 to 40 % glyphosate, but what no one says is that the rest is
composed of oil residues and arsenic!!! Arsenic poison was a banned pesticide in 1974.
This is not stated in the roundup. We find out and publish it in 2018.

Without the need for a political decision, this could change the firms holding the product patent.
Glyphosate was tested alone by Monsanto to establish regulatory standards that are therefore false.
Roundup is 1000 times more toxic.” Gilles-Eric Séralini

“Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission has “temporarily” ban the use of
glyphosate (Roundup) in Lake Okeechobee. Glyphosate needs to be permanently banned... it is
used throughout Florida watersheds... it should be banned in Florida, the United States
and on Earth. Glyphosate feeds toxic algae blooms predominantly Cyanobacteria. When it combines
with agricultural runoff and other nutrient fertilizers... it is a recipe for disaster.

Cyanobacteria algae produce cyanotoxins and microcystins. Cyanobacteria produce B-N-methylation-alanine
(BMAA). BMAA is passed from mother to child. Both result in Neurodegeneration and Glial
Cancers. They can be inhaled, absorbed and consumed.” Erin Brockovich


DOJ Releases Formal Approval of Toxic Mega-Merger between Bayer and Monsanto

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Department of Justice today formally announced its green light for the Bayer-Monsanto merger, conditional to further divestments from the two companies. This decision comes after DOJ received over one million public comments urging the agency to block the merger and overwhelming concern by farmers across the country.

The divestitures will do little to restore bargaining power to family farmers, ensure farmers have access to diverse seed varieties and prevent seed prices from rising. During this time of low commodity prices and struggling farm economy, DOJ failed to listen to the more than 93 percent of polled farmers and over 90 percent of Americans who are concerned about the merger.

In response to the merger’s approval, Tiffany Finck-Haynes, pesticides and pollinators program manager with Friends of the Earth, issued the following statement:

The approval of the Bayer Monsanto merger is a disaster for American farmers and families. This toxic mega-merger will only further entrench the failing model of chemical intensive agriculture, which is poisoning people and the planet. The Department of Justice failed to protect Americans from yet another toxic agricultural monopoly.

Our agricultural economy has become a game of corporate Russian Roulette, eliminating consumer choice and decimating family farms. These woefully inadequate concessions are a blatant sign that the Department of Justice cares more about protecting corporate profits than defending the interests of the American public.


Kerala government bans glyphosate, a deadly weedkiller

As per the law, glyphosate is to be used only in coffee and other types of plantations as well as other lands that are not cultivated. But the chemical is being used in paddy fields as well prior to their cultivation. They are also being used to kill the weeds growing near pineapple and plantain trees.


In France, Monsanto Faces Off With Another Farmer Over Herbicide

Months after a U.S. court ruled that Roundup contributed to a school groundskeeper’s cancer, Monsanto is in a French court to face off with a farmer who claims he was poisoned by a different herbicide produced by the Bayer AG unit.


How Monsanto Bankrupted the American Farm

The chemically intensive operating system of genetically engineered crops and the suite of -cides—pesticides, herbicides, insecticides—required to grow them have allowed a few corporate giants to generate earnings on the backs of American farmers. It’s no wonder Monsanto was sold to a German chemical company. They knew their time here was up, they leveraged the lives of our farmers.

At this point, I don’t have words for what they’ve done to generate their earnings on the backs of our farmers, except for one: extortion.


Zen: “You can thank Monsanto, Dow, Dupont, Syngenta's, BASF and BAYER for this.”


USDA Imposes the Worst Regulation Ever

In July 2016, Congress passed a law mandating that all food containing genetic material that has been modified with recombinant DNA or “gene-splicing” techniques bear labels clearly identifying it as “bioengineered.” The statute acknowledged that bioengineered food is neither more nor less safe than other food, but the new rule—the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, or NBFDS—won’t help consumers understand that. It will only leave them confused.

Under the NBFDS, two identical bottles of corn oil on a supermarket shelf could be labeled differently—one as bioengineered, one not—even though both were derived from the same field and are identical in processing and quality. Both labels would comply with the regulation because the new rule doesn’t require a label “if the food does not contain detectable genetically modified material.” The NBFDS allows manufacturers to make voluntary disclosures on such products, but not that they “may contain” bioengineered ingredients.


If anyone in the U.S. Congress is serious about making the federal government work for the American people instead of against them, they’ll take action to stop the USDA from doing this very stupid thing as soon as possible.


Can You Tell Which GMOs Will Be Labeled under the NBFDS?

The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard requires some food producers to put labels on some products that contain GMOs. Unfortunately, there are two glaring problems with this law that mean consumers will still not be able to tell what is in the food they are eating. Let’s take a closer look at disclosure options and exemptions under the NBFDS.


As a reminder, GMO foods won’t say they contain GMOs, they will say they are “bioengineered food.” However, many products will not even say that. A text disclosure is just one of four main options available. Food manufacturers have a few choices when it comes to disclosing GMO content:


While the disclosure methods are confusing and burdensome, the exemptions allowed under the NBFDS are even more perplexing. With all of these loopholes, just a fraction of products that contain GMOs will be labeled at all. Animal feed, pet food, and personal care products are not covered at all. Only products that contain detectable GMO DNA will be labeled—this is a huge problem because so many processed foods contain untestable inputs such as beet sugar and canola oil.


Zen: “This is why our food system, the pharmaceutical industry, climate chaos and health care is a mess. This.”

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez on the For the People Act

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exposes just how much "bad guys" can get away with under the shameful state of our campaign finance laws.

Congress must pass the For the People Act and make our democracy work for EVERY American, not just the wealthy few.


French, German farmers destroy crops after GMOs found in Bayer seeds

PARIS (Reuters) - Bayer said on Wednesday that farmers in France and Germany were digging up thousands of hectares of rapeseed fields after traces of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) banned for cultivation were found in seeds sold by the company.



Moms Across America was live. February 5 at 2:00 PM ·

What is the difference between GMO and traditional Heirloom Corn? Find out with Shannon McCabe of Baker Creek Heirloom Seed Company: https://www.rareseeds.com/corn-study/


A short, 6 page, 2015 Paper, signed by 300 independent scientists that have no
connection to industry.

No scientific consensus on GMO safety

Hilbeck et al. Environmental Sciences Europe (2015) - Open Access Discussion

Abstract: A broad community of independent scientific researchers and scholars challenges recent claims of a consensus over the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In the following joint statement, the claimed consensus is shown to be an artificial construct that has been falsely perpetuated through diverse fora. Irrespective of contradictory evidence in the refereed literature, as documented below, the claim that there is now a consensus on the safety of GMOs continues to be widely and often uncritically aired. For decades, the safety of GMOs has been a hotly controversial topic that has been much debated around the world. Published results are contradictory, in part due to the range of different research methods employed, an inadequacy of available procedures, and differences in the analysis and interpretation of data. Such a lack of consensus on safety is also evidenced by the agreement of policymakers from over 160 countries - in the UN’s Cartagena Biosafety Protocol and the Guidelines of the Codex Alimentarius - to authorize careful case-by-case assessment of each GMO by national authorities to determine whether the particular construct satisfies the national criteria for ‘safe’. Rigorous assessment of GMO safety has been hampered by the lack of funding independent of proprietary interests. Research for the public good has been further constrained by property rights issues, and by denial of access to research material for researchers unwilling to sign contractual agreements with the developers, which confer unacceptable control over publication to the proprietary interests.

The joint statement developed and signed by over 300 independent researchers, and reproduced and published below, does not assert that GMOs are unsafe or safe. Rather, the statement concludes that the scarcity and contradictory nature of the scientific evidence published to date prevents conclusive claims of safety, or of lack of safety, of GMOs. Claims of consensus on the safety of GMOs are not supported by an objective analysis of the refereed literature.

2 There are no epidemiological studies investigating potential effects of GM food consumption on human Health

It is often claimed that ‘trillions of GM meals’ have been eaten in the US with no ill effects. However, no epidemiological studies in human populations have been carried out to establish whether there are any health effects associated with GM food consumption. As GM foods and other products are not monitored or labelled after release in North America, a major producer and consumer of GM crops, it is scientifically impossible to trace, let alone study, patterns of consumption and their impacts. Therefore, claims that GM foods are safe for human health based on the experience of North American populations have no scientific basis.



Analysis: EPA Ignored Scientific Research Showing Monsanto’s Glyphosate Causes Cancer


Judge Denies Monsanto Bid to Block Certain Evidence from Roundup Trials


EU proposes reform on authorising pesticides following glyphosate scandal


Glyphosate in Cereal: Monsanto’s Weedkiller Detected at Alarming Levels, Report Says - 2018

In the October 2018 batch of testing, EWG commissioned Anresco Laboratories to test a range of oat-based products, including 10 samples of different types of General Mills’ Cheerios and 18 samples of Quaker brand products. These included cereals, snack bars, granola and instant oats. Of the 28 products tested, those with the highest levels of glyphosate include:


What’s in that black mulch you put in your garden and around your yard every spring?

Watch at 9:00…

Former EPA scientist at 13:00

Biosludged - Full Documentary

...there is no Clean Soil Act…government legalized pollution...benadryl…

“...nobody will know it until people start dropping dead.”

13:00 former EPA scientist David Lewis...adverse health effects, faking data,


Two Congresswomen Want an Investigation Into CDC's Crooked Relationship With Coca-Cola

“It is deeply concerning to see CDC engage with data coming from the company on a question so fundamental to its bottom line – especially when data show that outcomes from industry-sponsored research differ significantly from independent studies,” the congresswomen state.


Neonic Pesticide May Become More Toxic in Tap Water

Yet again, our government scientists—the oft neglected but so important brain trust of our Nation—bring the public some very important new data. Pesticide water monitoring experts at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) paired up with scientists from the University of Iowa in a federally-funded collaboration to track neonicotinoid pesticides or “neonics” in tap water, including the potential to form chlorinated disinfection byproducts (DBPs) from the pesticides and their metabolites that may be more toxic than the original compounds. And, the news isn’t good…


French Media Destroys Bayer/Monsanto With New Lobbying, Fake News and Bullying Revelations

Glyphosate: How Monsanto conducts its media war New internal documents unveil the agrochemical giant's aggressive practices to "actively place" favorable content in the press and on the Internet.


Victory! Ag Agency's Efforts to Eliminate Pesticide Reporting Requirements Stopped (For Now)

The good news — for now — is that the House Government Operations Committee took note of the public’s concerns and removed the Ag Agency’s recommended neutering of VPAC in H.16. But the bad news is that the Ag Agency is still dragging its regulatory feet and claiming that, despite the law mandating the pesticide reporting, it doesn’t have the staff or technical prowess to compile the pesticide usage data VPAC needs to do its assessments and progress reports.



T. Jonas: “Have a read of Jonathan Latham's excellent account of what's behind the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation & their CERES2030 initiative - absolutely naked greed and abuse of power.”

The Gates Foundation’s Ceres2030 Plan Pushes Agenda of Agribusiness - 2018

This then is the context for a new Gates Foundation endeavor, Ceres2030, launched at the recent gathering of the Committee on World Food Security in Rome, Italy, on October 16. Co-funded with the Germany’s Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development with a starting grant of $3.1 million, Ceres2030 is a nonprofit based at Cornell University.

Ceres2030 is also a partnership with the International Food Policy Research Institute of Washington, DC, and The International Institute for Sustainable Development of Winnipeg, Canada — organizations, detractors will note, with solid neoliberal credentials and strong corporate connections.

The endgame for Ceres2030, according to Porciello’s Cornell presentation, is to publish “7 to 11” highly visible academic reviews in Nature magazine in early 2020 designed to showcase and promote science specifically chosen by Ceres2030, the Gates Foundation, and behind them, it is harder than ever to doubt, agribusiness.

Whoever conceived it, the creation of a specific organization for the express purpose of infiltrating the scientific literature at the very highest level represents an expensive and sophisticated marketing and PR strategy. And it appears that Nature magazine is already lined up. Nature has decided that pay-to-play is consistent with reputable science publishing. It is a business model that should remunerate Nature handsomely. The apex of the scientific literature is exceedingly valuable real-estate. It will buy priceless influence with policymakers — unless, that is, someone informs them exactly how it was achieved.


Jonas: “And another grim piece from Jonathan (Latham) on gene drives - a topic we'll be discussing in Rome next week at the Commission on Genetic Resources for Food & Agriculture…”

Gates Foundation Hired PR Firm to Manipulate UN Over Gene Drives by Jonathan Latham, PhD - 2017

“There is no transparency about who is influencing decisions on the future of global ecosystems, people’s livelihoods, or our food system,” said Dana Perls of Friends of the Earth, U.S. “Gene drives could have profound ecological, health and socio-economic impacts, and the emails reveal a secretive attempt to game the system by gene drive proponents aiming to minimize regulations and oversight.”

Despite the public perception that conservation and public health are what motivates gene drive research, it is known that, besides the contribution of the Gates Foundation, most gene drive funding comes from the DARPA, the technology foresight arm of the US Dept of Defense.

“Gene drives are a powerful and dangerous new technology and potential biological weapons that could have disastrous impacts on peace, food security and the environment, especially if misused,” said Jim Thomas of ETC Group. “The fact that gene drive development is now being primarily funded and structured by the US military raises alarming questions about this entire field.”


Jonas: “And then there's this piece on the Gates Foundation, 'The Gates Foundation maintains that “access to diverse, nutritious foods is fundamental to good health” but its food related investments go almost exclusively to the fast food industry. A stunning $3.1 billion went to companies like Coca Cola, McDonald’s, Pepsico, Burger King, and KFC in 2012. The Foundation has $1 billion tied up in the world's largest supermarket chain, Walmart, which is a major force driving out small farms in favour of large suppliers. The Gates Foundation has also bought $23 million in shares of the world's leading producer of genetically engineered crops, Monsanto.”

How does the Gates Foundation spend its money to feed the world?


Two scientists receive an award for uncovering the deadly effects of Glyphosate.

Now they’ve cancelled the ceremony and are “reassessing.”

What powerful industry would be behind this? Bayer/Monsanto?

Latham: “The American Association for the Advancement of Science takes down its "Freedom and Responsibility" award for Sri Lankan scientists who survived death threats to show how glyphosate leads to a kidney disease that has killed tens of thousands.

..The ceremony has been cancelled and they are "reassessing”.”

Global Fight Against Lethal Herbicides Earns 2019 AAAS Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award

Two public health researchers who battled powerful corporate interests to uncover the deadly effects of industrial herbicides, solving a medical mystery and protecting the health of farming communities across the world, will receive the 2019 Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award from the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Jeopardizing the profits of glyphosate distributors, subsidiaries and importers, however, did not come without consequences. Gunatilake and Jayasumana received death threats, and twelve scientists who had obtained industry-funded grants filed a research misconduct complaint against Gunatilake. Eventually, he was exonerated, after a California State University, Long Beach scientific investigation panel dismissed the Complaint.


Latham: “This paper by Joseph Baines is exceptionally useful. How the biofuel industry was born. It details a grand ole 20yr fight for the soul of American agriculture between the ADM/Monsanto/JohnDeere/Bunge/Tate and Lyle/Dupont and Union Pacific Railroad nexus representing corn ethanol versus the Bayer/Kraft/Walmart/the meat industry (Wendy's/Burger King/Purdue/Smithfield) nexus wanting corn as feed for cows and hogs and chickens. The outcome is why 35% of all corn now goes to fuel cars (badly).”

Fuel, Feed and the Corporate Restructuring of the Food Regime


Rigging the Science of GMO Ecotoxicity by Jonathan Latham, PhD

The resulting crops are usually called Bt crops. Cry toxins kill insects that eat the GMO crop because the toxin punches a hole in the membranes of the insect gut when it is ingested, causing the insect to immediately stop feeding and eventually die of septicaemia.

Cry toxins are controversial. Although the biotech industry claims they have narrow specificity, and are therefore safe for all organisms except so-called ‘target’ organisms, plenty of researchers disagree. They suspect that Cry toxins may affect many non-target species, even including mammals and humans (e.g. Dolezel et al., 2011; Latham et al., 2017; Zdziarski, et al., 2018).

Off-target toxicity

The Cry toxin mode of action, we and others have noted, does not necessarily discriminate between species. Any organism with a membrane-lined gut is, in principle, vulnerable if it consumes the GMO Bt crop. In these Bt crops the leaves, straw, roots, nectar, and pollen, all typically contain Cry toxins. Therefore, most organisms in agricultural landscapes will at some point in their life-cycle be exposed to GMO plant material. As pollinator declines and a more generalised insect apocalypse have revealed, the question of the effects of such crops on biodiversity is far from trivial.


Bill Moyers…

Vandana Shiva on the Problem with Genetically-Modified Seeds - 10 minutes




Arsenic and Lead Are in Your Fruit Juice: What You Need to Know

CR finds concerning levels of heavy metals in almost half of tested juices. Here’s how to protect yourself and your family.


Brockovich: “This report is absolutely terrifying...Our groundwater supplies are usually not subjected to this type of pollution. What are we doing to ourselves? What ever happened to watershed protection? Groundwater recharge plans? Source water protection? I'll tell you what... lip service from the USEPA...spend millions having your consultant buddies write a report...put it on a shelf... never take any action...check the box mission complete...go back to your cubicles and hideout.”

Microplastic contamination found in groundwater in U.S.


Wisconsin case shows how sewage plants spread unregulated toxins across landscape


Exclusive: Trump EPA won't limit 2 toxic chemicals in drinking water


16-year-old who sparked climate change protests across Europe delivers striking message to global elites

"Adults keep saying we owe it to the young people, to give them hope. But I don't want your hope. I don't want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel every day. I want you to act,...”

“I want you to act as you would in a crisis. I want you to act as if the house is on fire, because it is."


What is GMO?

Genetic Roulette The Gamble of Our Lives


Secret Ingredients

The secret ingredients in our food may be a lead driver of our obesity, infertility, cancer, digestive problems, autism, brain fog, skin conditions, gluten sensitivity, allergies, fatigue, anxiety, and many other conditions. Meet more than a dozen people whose turned around serious health conditions after adopting a diet that avoids genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and food sprayed with toxic herbicides like Roundup. Learn from leading physicians who say that these are not coincidences. They see illness and recovery like this every day in their practice. And listen to the scientists who explain why.


Moms Across America - Communities Rising

Across the country, citizens are taking action to protect their families from GMOs and toxic chemicals. Watch and share this moving and inspiring story.

Arty turns 11 this summer.