Genetically Modified Crops Are Safe, Report Says

[Jericho Mile]

Is it too late for evolution? Sorry to be morbid, but sometimes shit dies, that's life. If food doesn't grow where you live, move somewhere it does? Survival 101.

GMO's are, in my opinion, a dangerous experiment fueled by corporate greed. "You are what you eat." Imagine GMO bugs, bacteria, viruses. Furthermore, if you want to fuck with the genome, do it at your own risk, but keep your tainted GMO pollen and produce away from me and mine. The entire GMO agenda is already spiraling out of control; detrimental GMO lawsuits against organic farmers come to mind.

So no, I am not a proponent of GMO's. I am however a fan of evolution, community gardening, eco-friendly lifestyle, and most importantly condoms. We don't need GMO's, we need cultural and educational reform.

It's ironic how technology is our best friend, yet our worst enemy.

Imagine that GMOs are evolution. Imagine that humanity is also becoming semi organic.

 

[trichrider]

Swing and a miss mr mustard but keep trying lol.

Post proof.

get your program here:

[1] See http://www.aaemonline.org/gmo.php
[2] See www.biointegrity.org
[3] See Part 2, Jeffrey M. Smith, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, Yes! Books, Fairfield, IA 2007
[4] See for example 233-236, chart of disproved assumptions, in Jeffrey M. Smith, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, Yes! Books, Fairfield, IA 2007
[5] J. R. Latham, et al., “The Mutational Consequences of Plant Transformation,” The Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology 2006, Article ID 25376: 1-7; see also Allison Wilson, et. al., “Transformation-induced mutations in transgenic plants: Analysis and biosafety implications,” Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Reviews – Vol. 23, December 2006.
[6] Srivastava, et al, “Pharmacogenomics of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) and the cystic fibrosis drug CPX using genome microarray analysis,” Mol Med. 5, no. 11(Nov 1999):753–67.
[7] Latham et al, “The Mutational Consequences of Plant Transformation, Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology 2006:1-7, article ID 25376, http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jbb/; Draft risk analysis report application A378, Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant sugarbeet line 77 (GTSB77),” ANZFA, March 7, 2001; E. Levine et al., “Molecular Characterization of Insect Protected Corn Line MON 810.” Unpublished study submitted to the EPA by Monsanto, EPA MRID No. 436655-01C (1995); Allison Wilson, PhD, Jonathan Latham, PhD, and Ricarda Steinbrecher, PhD, “Genome Scrambling—Myth or Reality? Transformation-Induced Mutations in Transgenic Crop Plants Technical Report—October 2004,” www.econexus.info; C. Collonier, G. Berthier, F. Boyer, M. N. Duplan, S. Fernandez, N. Kebdani, A. Kobilinsky, M. Romanuk, Y. Bertheau, “Characterization of commercial GMO inserts: a source of useful material to study genome fluidity,” Poster presented at ICPMB: International Congress for Plant Molecular Biology (n°VII), Barcelona, 23-28th June 2003. Poster courtesy of Dr. Gilles-Eric Seralini, Président du Conseil Scientifique du CRII-GEN, www.crii-gen.org; also “Transgenic lines proven unstable” by Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS Report, 23 October 2003, www.i-sis.org.uk
[8] Mark Townsend, “Why soya is a hidden destroyer,” Daily Express, March 12, 1999.
[9] Hye-Yung Yum, Soo-Young Lee, Kyung-Eun Lee, Myung-Hyun Sohn, Kyu-Earn Kim, “Genetically Modified and Wild Soybeans: An immunologic comparison,” Allergy and Asthma Proceedings 26, no. 3 (May–June 2005): 210-216(7).
[10] A. Pusztai and S. Bardocz, “GMO in animal nutrition: potential benefits and risks,” Chapter 17, Biology of Nutrition in Growing Animals, R. Mosenthin, J. Zentek and T. Zebrowska (Eds.) Elsevier, October 2005.
[11] Hye-Yung Yum, Soo-Young Lee, Kyung-Eun Lee, Myung-Hyun Sohn, Kyu-Earn Kim, “Genetically Modified and Wild Soybeans: An immunologic comparison,” Allergy and Asthma Proceedings 26, no. 3 (May–June 2005): 210-216(7).
[12] M. Green, et al., “Public health implications of the microbial pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis: An epidemiological study, Oregon, 1985-86,” Amer. J. Public Health 80, no. 7(1990): 848–852; and M.A. Noble, P.D. Riben, and G. J. Cook, Microbiological and epidemiological surveillance program to monitor the health effects of Foray 48B BTK spray (Vancouver, B.C.: Ministry of Forests, Province of British Columbi, Sep. 30, 1992)
[13] Vazquez et al, “Intragastric and intraperitoneal administration of Cry1Ac protoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis induces systemic and mucosal antibody responses in mice,” 1897–1912; Vazquez et al, “Characterization of the mucosal and systemic immune response induced by Cry1Ac protein from Bacillus thuringiensis HD 73 in mice,” Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research 33 (2000): 147–155; and Vazquez et al, “Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac protoxin is a potent systemic and mucosal adjuvant,” Scandanavian Journal of Immunology 49 (1999): 578–584. See also Vazquez-Padron et al., 147 (2000b).
[14] Nagui H. Fares, Adel K. El-Sayed, “Fine Structural Changes in the Ileum of Mice Fed on Endotoxin Treated Potatoes and Transgenic Potatoes,” Natural Toxins 6, no. 6 (1998): 219–233.
[15] See for example “Bt cotton causing allergic reaction in MP; cattle dead,” Bhopal, Nov. 23, 2005
[16] http://news.webindia123.com Ashish Gupta et. al., “Impact of Bt Cotton on Farmers’ Health (in Barwani and Dhar District of Madhya Pradesh),” Investigation Report, Oct–Dec 2005; and M. Green, et al., “Public health implications of the microbial pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis: An epidemiological study, Oregon, 1985-86,” Amer. J. Public Health 80, no. 7(1990): 848–852; and M.A. Noble, P.D. Riben, and G. J. Cook, Microbiological and epidemiological surveillance program to monitor the health effects of Foray 48B BTK spray (Vancouver, B.C.: Ministry of Forests, Province of British Columbi, Sep. 30, 1992)
[17] Alberto Finamore, et al, “Intestinal and Peripheral Immune Response to MON810 Maize Ingestion in Weaning and Old Mice,” J. Agric. Food Chem., 2008, 56 (23), pp 11533–11539, November 14, 2008
[18] Joël Spiroux de Vendômois, François Roullier, Dominique Cellier and Gilles-Eric Séralini. 2009, A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health . International Journal of Biological Sciences 2009; 5(7):706-726; and Seralini GE, Cellier D, Spiroux de Vendomois J. 2007, New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2007;52:596-602
[19] FAO-WHO, “Evaluation of Allergenicity of Genetically Modified Foods. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Allergenicity of Foods Derived from Biotechnology,” Jan. 22–25, 2001; ftp://ftp.fao.org/es/esn/food/allergygm.pdf.pdf
[20] Gendel, “The use of amino acid sequence alignments to assess potential allergenicity of proteins used in genetically modified foods,” Advances in Food and Nutrition Research 42 (1998), 45–62; G. A. Kleter and A. A. C. M. Peijnenburg, “Screening of transgenic proteins expressed in transgenic food crops for the presence of short amino acid sequences indentical to potential, IgE-binding linear epitopes of allergens,” BMC Structural Biology 2 (2002): 8–19; H. P. J. M. Noteborn, “Assessment of the Stability to Digestion and Bioavailability of the LYS Mutant Cry9C Protein from Bacillus thuringiensis serovar tolworthi,” Unpublished study submitted to the EPA by AgrEvo, EPA MRID No. 447343-05 (1998); and H. P. J. M. Noteborn et al, “Safety Assessment of the Bacillus thuringiensis Insecticidal Crystal Protein CRYIA(b) Expressed in Transgenic Tomatoes,” in Genetically modified foods: safety issues, American Chemical Society Symposium Series 605, eds. K.H. Engel et al., (Washington, DC, 1995): 134–47.
[21] M. Malatesta, M. Biggiogera, E. Manuali, M. B. L. Rocchi, B. Baldelli, G. Gazzanelli, “Fine Structural Analyses of Pancreatic Acinar Cell Nuclei from Mice Fed on GM Soybean,” Eur J Histochem 47 (2003): 385–388.
[22] Vazquez et al, “Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac protoxin is a potent systemic and mucosal adjuvant,” Scandanavian Journal of Immunology 49 (1999): 578–584. See also Vazquez-Padron et al., 147 (2000b).
[23] V. E. Prescott, et al, “Transgenic Expression of Bean r-Amylase Inhibitor in Peas Results in Altered Structure and Immunogenicity,” Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry (2005): 53.
[24] Arpad Pusztai, “Can science give us the tools for recognizing possible health risks of GM food,” Nutrition and Health, 2002, Vol 16 Pp 73-84
[25] Comments to ANZFA about Applications A346, A362 and A363 from the Food Legislation and Regulation Advisory Group (FLRAG) of the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) on behalf of the PHAA, “Food produced from glyphosate-tolerant canola line GT73,” http://www.iher.org.au/
[26] M. Malatesta, C. Caporaloni, S. Gavaudan, M. B. Rocchi, S. Serafini, C. Tiberi, G. Gazzanelli, “Ultrastructural Morphometrical and Immunocytochemical Analyses of Hepatocyte Nuclei from Mice Fed on Genetically Modified Soybean,” Cell Struct Funct. 27 (2002): 173–180.
[27] M. Malatesta, C. Tiberi, B. Baldelli, S. Battistelli, E. Manuali, M. Biggiogera, “Reversibility of Hepatocyte Nuclear Modifications in Mice Fed on Genetically Modified Soybean,” Eur J Histochem, 49 (2005): 237-242.
[28] I.V. Ermakova, “Diet with the Soya Modified by Gene EPSPS CP4 Leads to Anxiety and Aggression in Rats,” 14th European Congress of Psychiatry. Nice, France, March 4-8, 2006; “Genetically modified soy affects posterity: Results of Russian scientists’ studies,” REGNUM, October 12, 2005; http://www.regnum.ru/english/526651.html; Irina Ermakova, “Genetically modified soy leads to the decrease of weight and high mortality of rat pups of the first generation. Preliminary studies,” Ecosinform 1 (2006): 4–9.
[29] Irina Ermakova, “Experimental Evidence of GMO Hazards,” Presentation at Scientists for a GM Free Europe, EU Parliament, Brussels, June 12, 2007
[30] L. Vecchio et al, “Ultrastructural Analysis of Testes from Mice Fed on Genetically Modified Soybean,” European Journal of Histochemistry 48, no. 4 (Oct–Dec 2004):449–454.
[31] Oliveri et al., “Temporary Depression of Transcription in Mouse Pre-implantion Embryos from Mice Fed on Genetically Modified Soybean,” 48th Symposium of the Society for Histochemistry, Lake Maggiore (Italy), September 7–10, 2006.
[32] Alberta Velimirov and Claudia Binter, “Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice,” Forschungsberichte der Sektion IV, Band 3/2008
[33] I.V. Ermakova, “Diet with the Soya Modified by Gene EPSPS CP4 Leads to Anxiety and Aggression in Rats,” 14th European Congress of Psychiatry. Nice, France, March 4-8, 2006; “Genetically modified soy affects posterity: Results of Russian scientists’ studies,” REGNUM, October 12, 2005; ; Irina Ermakova, “Genetically modified soy leads to the decrease of weight and high mortality of rat pups of the first generation. Preliminary studies,” Ecosinform 1 (2006): 4–9.
[34] “Mortality in Sheep Flocks after Grazing on Bt Cotton Fields—Warangal District, Andhra Pradesh” Report of the Preliminary Assessment, April 2006, http://gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1...elds-warangal-district-andhra-pradesh-2942006
[35] Mae-Wan Ho, “GM Ban Long Overdue, Dozens Ill & Five Deaths in the Philippines,” ISIS Press Release, June 2, 2006; and Mae-Wan Ho and Sam Burcher, “Cows Ate GM Maize & Died,” ISIS Press Release, January 13, 2004, http://www.isis.org.uk/CAGMMAD.php
[36] Personal communication with Jerry Rosman and other farmers, 2006; also reported widely in the farm press.
[37] See for example Mae-Wan Ho, “GM Ban Long Overdue, Dozens Ill & Five Deaths in the Philippines,” ISIS Press Release, June 2, 2006; “Study Result Not Final, Proof Bt Corn Harmful to Farmers,” BusinessWorld, 02 Mar 2004; and “Genetically Modified Crops and Illness Linked,” Manila Bulletin, 04 Mar 2004.
[38] Arpad Pusztai, “Can science give us the tools for recognizing possible health risks of GM food,” Nutrition and Health, 2002, Vol 16 Pp 73-84; Stanley W. B. Ewen and Arpad Pusztai, “Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine,” Lancet, 1999 Oct 16; 354 (9187): 1353-4; and Arpad Pusztai, “Facts Behind the GM Pea Controversy: Epigenetics, Transgenic Plants & Risk Assessment,” Proceedings of the Conference, December 1st 2005 (Frankfurtam Main, Germany: Literaturhaus, 2005)
[39] Netherwood et al, “Assessing the survival of transgenic plant DNA in the human gastrointestinal tract,” Nature Biotechnology 22 (2004): 2.
[40] Ricarda A. Steinbrecher and Jonathan R. Latham, “Horizontal gene transfer from GM crops to unrelated organisms,” GM Science Review Meeting of the Royal Society of Edinburgh on “GM Gene Flow: Scale and Consequences for Agriculture and the Environment,” January 27, 2003; Traavik and Heinemann, Genetic Engineering and Omitted Health Research; citing Schubbert, et al, “Ingested foreign (phage M13) DNA survives transiently in the gastrointestinal tract and enters the bloodstream of mice,” Mol Gen Genet. 242, no. 5 (1994): 495–504; Schubbert et al, “Foreign (M13) DNA ingested by mice reaches peripheral leukocytes, spleen, and liver via the intestinal wall mucosa and can be covalently linked to mouse DNA,” Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94, no. 3 (1997): 961–6; Schubbert et al, “On the fate of orally ingested foreign DNA in mice: chromosomal association and placental transmission to the fetus,” Mol Gen Genet. 259, no. 6 (1998): 569–76; Hohlweg and Doerfler, “On the fate of plants or other foreign genes upon the uptake in food or after intramuscular injection in mice,” Mol Genet Genomics 265 (2001): 225–233; Palka-Santani, et al., “The gastrointestinal tract as the portal of entry for foreign macromolecules: fate of DNA and proteins,” Mol Gen Genomics 270 (2003): 201–215; Einspanier, et al, “The fate of forage plant DNA in farm animals; a collaborative case-study investigating cattle and chicken fed recombinant plant material,” Eur Food Res Technol 212 (2001): 129–134; Klotz, et al, “Degradation and possible carry over of feed DNA monitored in pigs and poultry,” Eur Food Res Technol 214 (2002): 271–275; Forsman, et al, “Uptake of amplifiable fragments of retrotransposon DNA from the human alimentary tract,” Mol Gen Genomics 270 (2003): 362–368; Chen, et al, “Transfection of mEpo gene to intestinal epithelium in vivo mediated by oral delivery of chitosan-DNA nanoparticles,” World Journal of Gastroenterology 10, no 1(2004): 112–116; Phipps, et al, “Detection of transgenic and endogenous plant DNA in rumen fluid, duodenal digesta, milk, blood, and feces of lactating dairy cows,” J Dairy Sci. 86, no. 12(2003): 4070–8.
[41] William E. Crist,Toxic L-tryptophan: Shedding Light on a Mysterious Epidemic; and Jeffrey M. Smith, Seeds of Deception, Yes! Books, Fairfield, IA 2003, chapter 4, Deadly Epidemic

http://responsibletechnology.org/gmo-education/health-risks/


through with that pretense?

 

[Jericho Mile]

That is just depressive bullshit.

Money doesn't warm your heart.

Love conquers all.

Hate destroys what money can buy.

Get over yourself and wake up.

You may do everything for money.

I do not.

I would rather have love over money.

Robins get no money to build a nest, lay eggs, and raise their young to flight.

But you can't tell.

You need to think outside of your box.

Yes, humans are disgusting examples of nature these days....

But you can tell firsthand how we got to where we are.

Let's move on up.

Or you could tell me how much rabbits pay in taxes for their "illusion"....

Sure Mustard....let's Rise Above the Muck....let's point our fingers at all the bad monkeys...and say..."hey you're not thinking like me...you're not for the brotherhood of man....yer a bad bad bad monkey"

and then let's You Tube them a tutorial and let someone else explain it to them...or maybe...sing them a love song

Love = a chemical reaction within humans that may or may not create a positive or rational emotion. Some have the conviction that there is a thin line between love and hate....as they are very similar

page #11

 

[Jericho Mile]

My sister's boyfriend is diabetic and takes porcine insulin created by inserting the pig insulin gene in bacteria.
Well I'll tell you people, he looks like a porker even more now than ever. Then again the phucker won't stop eating.

Maybe, that's a GMO side effect.

...but he's alive...yeah?

 

[FoothillFarming]

Its hard to debate someone who thinks their "opinion" are facts...

You REALLY think Organic growers only use Neem and pyrethrine? That alone kinda shows I cant have an intelligent debate with you...

Have fun yo...

Check out Advancing Eco Agriculture. They are turning thousands of acres of pesticide run farms, into organic farms that are out producing any yields from the pesticide run farms.

People have been farming for 10's of thousands of years using only organics. I would say the opposite, the world cannot sustain any population on chemical fertilizers for more than 500 years. The soils will become void of any microbial life, as we see in the farmlands across the USA right now.

WHy do you think chemical growers are inventing new pesticides every single season? Why do you think the brix levels in our fruits have plummeted? With all the lack of minerals in our food, why do you think cancer is so high? Then take into account who benefits from chemical grown food? Petroleum companies, health care companies, politicians, Monsanto.......Starting to get the picture yet? Who lobbies for organics? I mean, you have to stick a label on your organics, but GMO chemical grown "food" doesn't have to........

 

[Jericho Mile]

Check out Advancing Eco Agriculture. They are turning thousands of acres of pesticide run farms, into organic farms that are out producing any yields from the pesticide run farms.

People have been farming for 10's of thousands of years using only organics. I would say the opposite, the world cannot sustain any population on chemical fertilizers for more than 500 years. The soils will become void of any microbial life, as we see in the farmlands across the USA right now.

WHy do you think chemical growers are inventing new pesticides every single season? Why do you think the brix levels in our fruits have plummeted? With all the lack of minerals in our food, why do you think cancer is so high? Then take into account who benefits from chemical grown food? Petroleum companies, health care companies, politicians, Monsanto.......Starting to get the picture yet? Who lobbies for organics? I mean, you have to stick a label on your organics, but GMO chemical grown "food" doesn't have to........

Cancer/heart disease is probably linked more to the modern acidic diet...the consumption of an overabundance of farmed animal proteins and processed foods....and way too much sugar

every man for himself....because it's a done deal. Can't wait on change.

 

[FireIn.TheSky]

We really have to thank the ignorant trolls in this thread for bringing so much attention to the cause. Thanks to these trolls this thread has been topped for days. Keep up the good work trolls.

 

[shithawk420]

Hit the nail on the head foothill.your exactly right.

 

[Jericho Mile]

We really have to thank the ignorant trolls in this thread for bringing so much attention to the cause. Thanks to these trolls this thread has been topped for days. Keep up the good work trolls.

You talking to yourself again? Attempting to give yourself that special glow of being someone...having your convictions...being popular and being right?

I define you as being transparently simple...an impotent sort

 

[trichrider]

we could try to not get this thread binned...

emotional flaming distracting dialogue, so sophomoric and antithetical to our purpose. can we keep it civil or pass this off as bad gas...

see what i did there...

Doctors Warn: Avoid Genetically Engineered Foods

Jeffrey Smith
soybeanplants.jpg

Photo (link is external) by Roberto Ribeiro, Copyright 2012 / freeimages.com


Soybean plants




Why are thousands of physicians advising patients to avoid eating GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) [1] and how did these high-risk foods get onto the market in the first place? The answers are disturbing, even shocking, but may help you get healthy and stay healthy.
Foods with added bacterial or viral genes were quietly slipped into your diet two decades ago. Using the excuse that GMOs weren't that much different, the FDA didn't require labels or even a single safety study from GMO makers like Monsanto. But a lawsuit forced the agency to release their files and the truth finally came out.
FDA scientists repeatedly warned (link is external) that GMOs could create allergies, toxins, new diseases and nutritional problems, and that rigorous safety testing was needed. But the White House had instructed the FDA to promote biotechnology, and Michael Taylor, Monsanto's former attorney, was put in charge of FDA policy. (Taylor later became Monsanto's chief lobbyist, and has returned to FDA as US Food Czar.)
Can you trust Monsanto with your family's health? That same company that told us that Agent Orange, DDT and PCBs were safe.
Now Monsanto's "Roundup Ready" (RR) crops are engineered to withstand their Roundup herbicide, which gets absorbed into the food and can't be washed off. A 2014 study found Roundup the most toxic of all herbicides and insecticides (link is external) they tested. According to MIT scientist Stephanie Seneff (link is external), Roundup may be "the most important factor in the development of multiple chronic diseases and conditions." She co-authored a seminal paper (link is external) linking it to including obesity, heart disease, inflammatory bowel, IBS, autism, allergies, MS, Parkinson's, depression, infertility, Alzheimer's and cancer.
Some GMOs, e.g. corn, have built-in pesticides that break open holes in the stomach of insects. A 2012 laboratory study confirmed (link is external) that the toxin, called Bt-toxin, opens holes in human cells. And a Canadian study found both Bt-toxin and Roundup (link is external) in the blood of most pregnant women and their fetuses.
Cancer and GMOs

The link between consumption of genetically engineered foods and cancer came into sharp focus recently with the publication of a long-term feeding study by a team of French scientists. They fed Monsanto’s RR corn to rats for two years. Starting just after 90 days – which is normally the cutoff time for feeding studies by Monsanto and the other GMO producers – the first rat developed a tumor. By the end of the experiment, up to 80% of the female rats had tumors of the mammary glands, and up to 50% of the male rats also had tumors. These numbers were far greater than the control group, which had been fed the equivalent non-genetically modified corn. The GMO-fed group also died at 2-3 times the rate, and had damaged livers, kidneys, and pituitary glands.
In addition to feeding rats RR corn that had been sprayed with Roundup, they also fed a group of rats the RR corn that had not been sprayed. And other groups of rats were fed various levels of Roundup alone without the RR corn. They wanted to see whether any changes were due to the GMO corn or the Roundup. Ironically, all three experimental groups developed multiple massive tumors, early death, and organ damage. This means that both the GMO and the herbicide are implicated.
Other studies have linked Roundup with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and the growth of breast cancer cells. Roundup is also linked to permeable gut, whereby the walls of the intestines develop gaps. This so-called “leaky gut” is also linked to cancer. Bt-toxin may also promote leaky gut since it can poke holes in intestinal cells. (The intestinal lining is only one cell thick.)
Genetic engineering process may cause diseases

While one or both of these two toxins, Roundup and Bt-toxin, are found in nearly all GMOs, even the process of creating a genetically engineered crop might promote cancer or other diseases. When producing a GMO, scientists insert a foreign gene into a plant cell using either a gene gun or via bacterial infection. They then clone that cell into a plant. The insertion and cloning process cause massive collateral damage in the normal functioning plant DNA. Genes can be switched on, shut off, deleted, of damaged.
New carcinogens, toxins, or allergens can be created in the plant, or levels of existing carcinogens, etc. might be accidentally elevated. In Monsanto’s most popular Bt corn, for example, a normally silent gene found in the corn genome was switched on and now produces an allergen not previously produced by corn. Similarly, their GMO soy inadvertently has levels of a known soy allergen that is as much as seven times higher than natural soy.
This same type of side effect had a tragic outcome in human genetic engineering. While the inserted gene was supposed to cure a genetic defect, the process switched on a gene that caused leukemia in the patient.
Unfortunately, the GMO crop producers don’t pay much attention to potentially disastrous unintended consequences that result from the engineering process. One early study, however, commissioned by the UK government, did expose such consequences. Rats fed GMO potatoes developed potentially precancerous cell growth in their digestive tracts in just 10 days. They also had damaged immune systems, smaller brains, livers, and testicles, and partially atrophied livers. The study’s design implicated the process of GMOs, not the particular gene that was inserted into the potatoes.
Non-GMO eaters report health improvements

If you don't trust GMOs, you're not alone. According to a 2013 survey by Hartman Group, over 120 million Americans say they try to avoid them. That number has more than doubled since 2007. [2].
When people eliminate GMOs, they (and their physicians) often report more energy, weight loss, better digestion, reduced allergies and skin conditions, and relief from numerous chronic conditions. [3] Veterinarians, farmers and pet owners describe similar improvements with animals taken off GMOs. According to a research review by the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, many of these disorders also afflict lab animals fed GMOs. We believe it is not a coincidence that the rise of these types of health issues in the US population parallels the use of GMOs and Roundup (link is external).
In addition to the health dangers, independent studies (link is external) also show that GMOs don't increase yields, don't solve world hunger, and massively increase herbicide use.
GMO advocates aggressively deny any evidence against them. According to Nature (link is external), a "large block of scientists [...] denigrate research by other legitimate scientists in a knee-jerk, partisan, emotional way." Tactics include threats, gag orders and termination. The author of the potato study cited above, for example, was fired from his institute and gagged with threats of a lawsuit. It took an order from the UK Parliament to ungag him, which eventually led to the publication of the results.
And the French team that conducted the two year rat study on RR corn came under intense attack; pressure on the journal forced them to retract it after 15 months, but it was soon republished a few months later by a more “independent” journal. (That study has successfully passed three separate peer reviews, and is far more comprehensive than any research by the GMO companies.)
The industry's research, on the other hand, is widely criticized as "tobacco science," carefully designed to cover up problems (link is external). And just as a Monsanto man guided FDA policy, GMO review committees worldwide are often stacked with industry representatives who rubber stamp approvals or declare GMOs safe by ignoring data to the contrary.
Now FDA is considering approval of GMO salmon, as well as allowing GMO mosquitoes loose in the Florida Keys. In fact, countless GMO plants, animals, fish, insects and bacteria are being developed in labs around the world. Each could irreversibly contaminate the gene pool. There are also new varieties of corn and soybeans being considered for approval, which tolerate a new range of herbicides that are linked to cancer, birth defects, and other disorders.
Before we let Monsanto replace nature, let's demand independent, comprehensive long-term safety studies. Until then, stop feeding us the products produced by this immature science.


http://www.faim.org/doctors-warn-avoid-genetically-engineered-foods

Health Risks

“Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with genetically modified (GM) food (AAEM 2009),” including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. The AAEM has asked physicians to advise all patients to avoid GM foods.[1]



http://responsibletechnology.org/gmo-education/health-risks/

 

[stoned-trout]

we need more testing..i say we cage some Monsanto executives and feed them nothing but gmo foods for a year ...yeehaw

 

[Jericho Mile]

we could try to not get this thread binned...

emotional flaming distracting dialogue, so sophomoric and antithetical to our purpose. can we keep it civil or pass this off as bad gas...

see what i did there...

Doctors Warn: Avoid Genetically Engineered Foods

Jeffrey Smith
soybeanplants.jpg

View ImagePhoto (link is external) by Roberto Ribeiro, Copyright 2012 / freeimages.com


Soybean plants




Why are thousands of physicians advising patients to avoid eating GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) [1] and how did these high-risk foods get onto the market in the first place? The answers are disturbing, even shocking, but may help you get healthy and stay healthy.
Foods with added bacterial or viral genes were quietly slipped into your diet two decades ago. Using the excuse that GMOs weren't that much different, the FDA didn't require labels or even a single safety study from GMO makers like Monsanto. But a lawsuit forced the agency to release their files and the truth finally came out.
FDA scientists repeatedly warned (link is external) that GMOs could create allergies, toxins, new diseases and nutritional problems, and that rigorous safety testing was needed. But the White House had instructed the FDA to promote biotechnology, and Michael Taylor, Monsanto's former attorney, was put in charge of FDA policy. (Taylor later became Monsanto's chief lobbyist, and has returned to FDA as US Food Czar.)
Can you trust Monsanto with your family's health? That same company that told us that Agent Orange, DDT and PCBs were safe.
Now Monsanto's "Roundup Ready" (RR) crops are engineered to withstand their Roundup herbicide, which gets absorbed into the food and can't be washed off. A 2014 study found Roundup the most toxic of all herbicides and insecticides (link is external) they tested. According to MIT scientist Stephanie Seneff (link is external), Roundup may be "the most important factor in the development of multiple chronic diseases and conditions." She co-authored a seminal paper (link is external) linking it to including obesity, heart disease, inflammatory bowel, IBS, autism, allergies, MS, Parkinson's, depression, infertility, Alzheimer's and cancer.
Some GMOs, e.g. corn, have built-in pesticides that break open holes in the stomach of insects. A 2012 laboratory study confirmed (link is external) that the toxin, called Bt-toxin, opens holes in human cells. And a Canadian study found both Bt-toxin and Roundup (link is external) in the blood of most pregnant women and their fetuses.
Cancer and GMOs

The link between consumption of genetically engineered foods and cancer came into sharp focus recently with the publication of a long-term feeding study by a team of French scientists. They fed Monsanto’s RR corn to rats for two years. Starting just after 90 days – which is normally the cutoff time for feeding studies by Monsanto and the other GMO producers – the first rat developed a tumor. By the end of the experiment, up to 80% of the female rats had tumors of the mammary glands, and up to 50% of the male rats also had tumors. These numbers were far greater than the control group, which had been fed the equivalent non-genetically modified corn. The GMO-fed group also died at 2-3 times the rate, and had damaged livers, kidneys, and pituitary glands.
In addition to feeding rats RR corn that had been sprayed with Roundup, they also fed a group of rats the RR corn that had not been sprayed. And other groups of rats were fed various levels of Roundup alone without the RR corn. They wanted to see whether any changes were due to the GMO corn or the Roundup. Ironically, all three experimental groups developed multiple massive tumors, early death, and organ damage. This means that both the GMO and the herbicide are implicated.
Other studies have linked Roundup with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and the growth of breast cancer cells. Roundup is also linked to permeable gut, whereby the walls of the intestines develop gaps. This so-called “leaky gut” is also linked to cancer. Bt-toxin may also promote leaky gut since it can poke holes in intestinal cells. (The intestinal lining is only one cell thick.)
Genetic engineering process may cause diseases

While one or both of these two toxins, Roundup and Bt-toxin, are found in nearly all GMOs, even the process of creating a genetically engineered crop might promote cancer or other diseases. When producing a GMO, scientists insert a foreign gene into a plant cell using either a gene gun or via bacterial infection. They then clone that cell into a plant. The insertion and cloning process cause massive collateral damage in the normal functioning plant DNA. Genes can be switched on, shut off, deleted, of damaged.
New carcinogens, toxins, or allergens can be created in the plant, or levels of existing carcinogens, etc. might be accidentally elevated. In Monsanto’s most popular Bt corn, for example, a normally silent gene found in the corn genome was switched on and now produces an allergen not previously produced by corn. Similarly, their GMO soy inadvertently has levels of a known soy allergen that is as much as seven times higher than natural soy.
This same type of side effect had a tragic outcome in human genetic engineering. While the inserted gene was supposed to cure a genetic defect, the process switched on a gene that caused leukemia in the patient.
Unfortunately, the GMO crop producers don’t pay much attention to potentially disastrous unintended consequences that result from the engineering process. One early study, however, commissioned by the UK government, did expose such consequences. Rats fed GMO potatoes developed potentially precancerous cell growth in their digestive tracts in just 10 days. They also had damaged immune systems, smaller brains, livers, and testicles, and partially atrophied livers. The study’s design implicated the process of GMOs, not the particular gene that was inserted into the potatoes.
Non-GMO eaters report health improvements

If you don't trust GMOs, you're not alone. According to a 2013 survey by Hartman Group, over 120 million Americans say they try to avoid them. That number has more than doubled since 2007. [2].
When people eliminate GMOs, they (and their physicians) often report more energy, weight loss, better digestion, reduced allergies and skin conditions, and relief from numerous chronic conditions. [3] Veterinarians, farmers and pet owners describe similar improvements with animals taken off GMOs. According to a research review by the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, many of these disorders also afflict lab animals fed GMOs. We believe it is not a coincidence that the rise of these types of health issues in the US population parallels the use of GMOs and Roundup (link is external).
In addition to the health dangers, independent studies (link is external) also show that GMOs don't increase yields, don't solve world hunger, and massively increase herbicide use.
GMO advocates aggressively deny any evidence against them. According to Nature (link is external), a "large block of scientists [...] denigrate research by other legitimate scientists in a knee-jerk, partisan, emotional way." Tactics include threats, gag orders and termination. The author of the potato study cited above, for example, was fired from his institute and gagged with threats of a lawsuit. It took an order from the UK Parliament to ungag him, which eventually led to the publication of the results.
And the French team that conducted the two year rat study on RR corn came under intense attack; pressure on the journal forced them to retract it after 15 months, but it was soon republished a few months later by a more “independent” journal. (That study has successfully passed three separate peer reviews, and is far more comprehensive than any research by the GMO companies.)
The industry's research, on the other hand, is widely criticized as "tobacco science," carefully designed to cover up problems (link is external). And just as a Monsanto man guided FDA policy, GMO review committees worldwide are often stacked with industry representatives who rubber stamp approvals or declare GMOs safe by ignoring data to the contrary.
Now FDA is considering approval of GMO salmon, as well as allowing GMO mosquitoes loose in the Florida Keys. In fact, countless GMO plants, animals, fish, insects and bacteria are being developed in labs around the world. Each could irreversibly contaminate the gene pool. There are also new varieties of corn and soybeans being considered for approval, which tolerate a new range of herbicides that are linked to cancer, birth defects, and other disorders.
Before we let Monsanto replace nature, let's demand independent, comprehensive long-term safety studies. Until then, stop feeding us the products produced by this immature science.


http://www.faim.org/doctors-warn-avoid-genetically-engineered-foods

are you farting at me?

 

[trichrider]

DARK Act defeated in U.S. Senate as lawmakers receive tidal wave of calls from angry food consumers who are tired of being LIED to about GMO in their food

Wednesday, March 16, 2016
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Tags: DARK Act, Senate defeat, mandatory GMO labeling

DARK Act
(NaturalNews) The DARK Act was defeated in the U.S. Senate today, achieving a massive victory for consumers and also for the Environmental Working Group, which helped organize large-scale opposition to the bill.

The DARK Act would have outlawed state-level GMO labeling laws nationwide, condemning American food consumers to remaining completely in the dark over the genetically engineered content of their food.

Natural News thanks all our readers who took action to help defeat the DARK Act. We are fighting for your right to know what you're eating, and with your help, we really can defeat Monsanto and its minions like Ted Cruz. ("Monsatan's Preacher.")

Tidal wave of calls slammed Senators nationwide
I spoke to industry insiders this morning who confirmed that the offices of many U.S. Senators were hit hard with a "tidal wave of calls" from concerned Americans. Even many Republican senators are starting to come around on this issue, and GMO labeling continues to gain steam across the country as food consumers increase their demand for honest food labels and overall food transparency.

The Environmental Working Group released a statement on the victory:

In a major win for consumers, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) failed to earn the votes he needed to stop debate on a bill known to opponents as the Deny Americans the Right to Know Act, or DARK Act.

According to EWG, the defeat of the DARK Act offers Congress the opportunity to find a compromise for a national mandatory GMO labeling measure that consumers and industry can support.

Scott Faber, senior vice president for government affairs, said:

"Consumers have made their voices heard to their elected representatives in the Senate and they said clearly, 'We want the right to know more about our food.' We are pleased that the Senate made the right decision to stop the DARK Act, and we remain hopeful that Congressional leaders can craft a national mandatory compromise that works for consumers and the food industry. We applaud Senators Debbie Stabenow, Jeff Merkley, Jon Tester, Barbara Boxer and Pat Leahy for their efforts to defeat the DARK Act."

Scott Faber vindicated after mini civil war inside the labeling movement
The defeat of the DARK Act vindicates Scott Faber, who was previously accused by several pro-labeling industry insiders as siphoning money away from state ballot measures (Natural News covered this story and quoted three industry sources). However, it is clear from today's victory that Scott Faber is working hard for labeling at the national level, and he deserves tremendous credit for today's victory, regardless of the previous disagreements among labeling advocates in the "states vs. federal" debate.

It's clear that the Environmental Working Group and the Just Label It campaign are both on the right track so far, and the EWG now tells Natural News that they fully support the Merkley bill created by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore) which creates a national mandatory standard for GMO labeling.

As explained by Consumers Union:

Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, today praised the introduction of the Biotechnology Food Labeling Uniformity Act. The legislation, sponsored by Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), would create a national standard for GMO labeling and require food manufacturers to label products with GMO ingredients via one of several options on the ingredients list section of the Nutrition Facts Panel. Another option would give FDA the authority to develop a symbol, in consultation with food manufacturers, which would disclose the presence of GM ingredients on packaging.

Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives for Consumers Union, said, "This is what real disclosure looks like. This bill finds a way to set a national standard and avoid a patchwork of state labeling laws while still giving consumers the information they want and deserve about what's in their food. This compromise offers food companies different labeling options and ensures that all consumers – no matter where they are in the country or whether they own a smartphone – have the information they overwhelmingly say they want. We urge Senators to support this proposal as they move forward on GMO labeling legislation."

Merkley's bill comes the day after the Senate Agriculture Committee voted to move forward an anti-consumer bill that would preempt state GMO labeling laws and direct USDA to develop duplicative standards for voluntary labeling and promote biotechnology. The legislation, which is supported by biotech giants and some of the country's largest food companies, is the latest attempt to block a Vermont law requiring labeling on the package of genetically engineered food sold in the state before it goes in to effect July 1.

Consumers Union is urging consumers to call on their lawmakers to oppose preemption of state GMO labeling laws, and to support meaningful, mandatory on-package labeling for GMO foods, including engineered animals like salmon and engineered produce and processed food. To learn more, visit ConsumersUnion.org/RightToKnow.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/053330_DARK_Act_Senate_defeat_mandatory_GMO_labeling.html#ixzz49IpwIWKL

 

[FireIn.TheSky]

I define you as being transparently simple...an impotent sort

Someone here is impotent but it sure isn't me. Perhaps I should start eating some gmo soy to get my estrogen levels up it might be easier on the old lady lmfao.

 

[Weird]

Cancer/heart disease is probably linked more to the modern acidic diet...the consumption of an overabundance of farmed animal proteins and processed foods....and way too much sugar

every man for himself....because it's a done deal. Can't wait on change.

I like how you demand conclusive evidence until someone challenges you with a counter argument and you answer "is probably"

Where is all the hooting and hollering for "concrete evidence"?

I think the start of the second to last sentence sums it up.

 

[trichrider]

are you farting at me?

did it smell like a fart?

 

[dannykarey]

Lol.....this thread is a testament to how little the public knows about science. Perfect example.

Jericho...go to school lol. Yer posts are hilarious, kinda like mr mustards.

Sam really......where do you think we learned it from???

Lol....carry on.

 

[corky1968]

...but he's alive...yeah?

For now.

Accidents do happen on the way to the refrigerator.

 

[dannykarey]

And yea......Jericho is a no nothing troll who is thriving on the bs attention that is thrown his way.....stop feeding him.

 

[corky1968]

And yea......Jericho is a no nothing troll who is thriving on the bs attention that is thrown his way.....stop feeding him.

I guess ok chow.