GMO – Genetically Modified Food effects, reports and news.
|
|
![]() A look at GMO policies in different nationsby Layla Katiraee July2015 https://www.biofortified.org/2015/07/a-look-at-gmo-policies-in-different-nations/ Israel:Israel is one of the most interesting places I’ve visited. However, its summers are very hot and it can be quite dusty. Despite the challenges inherent in its desert-like climate, the local fruits and veggies are spectacular. There are no GMOs commercialized in Israel even though the country is a hotbed for genetic engineering research, which comes as no surprise considering the interest that the nation has in drought-resistant crops. The absence of commercialized GMOs is due to the fact that a very large portion of Israel’s agricultural exports head to the EU, where they are slower and more cautious to approve transgenic crops for import (learn more on EU’s stance on GMOs here). As such, growing GMOs might have financial repercussions if the EU were to decide to be more wary of Israeli produce. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms: Israelhttps://www.loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/israel.php#Structure Back to Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms
I. IntroductionIsrael is considered “an international center for studying genetically modified organisms.”[1] Research involving genetically modified organisms (GMOs) concentrates on the development of seeds and is conducted in Israeli universities, in government research institutions,[2] and by the private sector.[3] Funding for GMO research and testing in Israel derives from Israeli and foreign sources, including the United States.[4] II. Public and Scholarly OpinionA. Government Policies
C. Religious Concerns
In the United States, the Natural Food Certifiers (NFC) Organization, announced that its Apple K Kosher Certification Program would no longer accept applications for products that contain GMOs.[25]
III. Structure of Pertinent LegislationIsraeli law currently does not include any primary legislation on GMOs. Responsibilities for GMO research, development, and use are shared by MARD and the Ministry of Health in accordance with regulations established by these ministries based on their respective authorities.
Legislation specifically regulating labeling of GMO components in food does not appear to have been passed to date. IV. Restrictions on Research, Production, and MarketingA. Rules for Authorizing Research and for Research Laboratories
The regulations authorize the Director to exempt applicants from needing to obtain an experiment permit if he or she is satisfied that the experiment will be conducted in a laboratory equipped with an autoclave facility and its operator and safety officer have ensured that “all experiment residues are destroyed in an incinerator or sterilized with material that the Director has approved.”[35]
The Director is authorized to reject, restrict, or cancel a registration of transgenic propagation material or organisms for sale based on evidence that the plant material or organism may endanger plants, humans, or animals or have unacceptable negative impacts on the environment, or based on noncompliance with labeling requirements that have been authorized by the Director or deviation from the trait description that has been supplied at the time of registration application.[39]
V. Restrictions on Releasing Organisms into the EnvironmentAs explained above, GMOs may be produced in Israel only for research purposes subject to conditions enumerated by the relevant regulations. GMO growth is not authorized for commercial purposes.[42] VI. Restrictions on GMOs in FoodstuffGMO products may be imported, sold, and used in the production of food in Israel,[43] and are not required to be labeled in a way that identifies their GMO components.[44] VII. Liability RegimeIsraeli law does not contain a special liability regime in relation to the development, use, or release of GMOs. VIII. Judicial Decisions / Prominent CasesA search for case law concerning GMO research and use unconnected to patent rights has not identified any relevant court decisions.
[1] Marlene-Aviva Grunpeter, GMOs, A Global Debate: Israel a Center for Study, Kosher Concerns,Epoch Times (Aug. 5, 2013), http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/229556-gmos-a-global-debate-israel-a-center-for-study-kosher-concerns/.
[2] See Agricultural Research Organization (ARO), Volcani Center: Plant Pathology and Weed Research, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD), http://www.agri.gov.il/en/departments/12.aspx (last visited Sept. 12, 2013).[3] See, e.g., Hagai Amit, Homegrown Israeli Idea for Conquering the World Food Shortage, Haaretz (Apr. 12, 2012), http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/homegrown-israeli-idea-for-conquering-the-world-food-shortage-1.423959.
[4] Id. (stating, for example, that the US government was helping to fund pre-field trial tests conducted by an Israeli startup company). For general information on life sciences research in Israel, see Tova Cohen & Steven Scheer, Analysis: After Tech Success, Israel Seeks Life Sciences Growth, Reuters (June 6, 2013), http://www.reuters.com/ article/2013/06/06/us-israel-biomed-idUSBRE9550IU20130606.
[5] Seed Regulations (Genetically Modified Plants and Organisms) 5765-2005, Kovetz Hatakanot [KT] [Subsidiary Legislation] No. 6391 p. 782. An unofficial translation of the regulations is available on the MARD website at http://www.ppiseng.moag.gov.il/PPISENG/GeneticallyModifiedPlants/LicensingandanalysisofGMplants/
[8] Genetically Engineered Food, Ministry of Health, http://www.health.gov.il/unitsoffice/hd/ph/fcs/novelfood/ pages/engfood.aspx (last visited Sept. 12, 2012).
[11] The Knesset Committee for Science and Technology, The 18th Knesset, Use of Genetic Engineering in Agricultural Research in Israel (Hearing in the Committee, Protocol No. 112: Summary of the Committee’s Activity, Part B, p. 50 (Aug. 2011–Nov. 2012), http://www.knesset.gov.il/committees/heb/docs/ mada_18b.pdf (in Hebrew).
[12] For information on the Center’s research activities, see Agriculture Research Organization (ARO) Volcani Center, MARD, http://www.agri.gov.il/units/institutes/default.aspx (last visited Sept. 16, 2013).
[13] The Knesset Committee for Science and Technology, supra note 11, at 51.
[17] Public Health (Food) (Nutritional Labeling) (Amendment) 5771-2011 Regulations, KT No. 7019, p. 1198 (July 31, 2011), as amended by KT No. 7160, p. 1661 (Aug. 30, 2012).
[18] See The 19th Knesset Committee for Labor, Welfare and Health Meeting (Protocol No. 47, July 3, 2013) pp. 18–21, http://www.knesset.gov.il/protocols/data/rtf/avoda/2013-07-03.rtf (in Hebrew).
[19] Grunpeter, supra note1.
[20] Gal Tziperman Lotan, Scientists, Activists Debate if Genetically Modified Foods are Panacea or Plague, The Jerusalem Post (Apr. 30, 2008), http://www.jpost.com/Health-and-Sci-Tech/Science-And-Environment/Scientists-activists-debate-if-genetically-modified-foods-are-panacea-or-plague.
[23] See Natural Food Certifiers, GreenerChoices, http://www.greenerchoices.org/eco-labels/label.cfm? LabelID=198 (last visited Sept. 16, 2013).
[24] Grunpeter, supra note 1.
[25] The NFC has been certifying products as organic since 2002 and is accredited as an organic certifier by the USDA. See GreenerChoices, supra note 23.
[26] Daisy Luther, Kosher Certification Program Bans All GMO Ingredients, The Organic Prepper (Apr. 25, 2013), http://www.theorganicprepper.ca/kosher-certification-program-bans-all-gmo-ingredients-04252013.
[27] Seed Regulations (Genetically Modified Plants and Organisms) 5765–2005, KT No. 6391, p. 728.
[28] Seeds Law, 5716-1956, 10 Laws of the State of Israel [LSI] 99 (5716-1955/56), as amended.
[29] Plant Protection Law, 5716-1956, 10 LSI 75, as amended.
[30] Genetically Modified Plants & Organisms, MARD Plant Protection and Inspection Services, http://www.ppiseng.moag.gov.il/PPISENG/GeneticallyModifiedPlants/LicensingandanalysisofGMplants/ (click on “[l]earn more about the service . . . ”; last visited Nov. 1, 2013). [31] Id.
[32] Genetically Engineered Food, Ministry of Health, http://www.health.gov.il/unitsoffice/hd/ph/fcs/ novelfood/pages/engfood.aspx (last visited Sept. 18, 2012) (translated by author, R.L.).
[33] Seed Regulations (Genetically Modified Plants and Organisms) 5765-2005, § 3.
[34] The National Committee for Transgenic Plants is a committee appointed by the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development for matters concerning experiments with transgenic plants and organisms and their sale. See id. § 2(a).
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grocery Store Wars (2005) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() The Cornucopia Institute releases shopper’s guide red-flagging pro/con food brands involved with Colorado and Oregon Initiatives![]() The Cornucopia Institute releases shopper’s guide red-flagging pro/con food brands involved with Colorado and Oregon Initiatives 2014 Last updated February 22, 2016 https://www.cornucopia.org/newsletter/biotech-agribusinesses-spending-heavily-defeat-state-gmo-food-labeling-votes/?utm_source=enews&utm_medium=email&utm_term=2-28-15&utm_campaign=GMOInfographic FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Mark Kastel, 608-625-2042 Biotech and Agribusinesses Spending Heavily to Defeat State GMO Food Labeling Votes The Cornucopia Institute releases red-flagging pro/con food brands involved with Colorado and Oregon Initiatives https://www.cornucopia.org/2014/10/biotech-agribusinesses-spending-heavily-defeat-state-gmo-food-labeling-votes/ Cornucopia, WI: Citizen initiatives on the November 4 ballots in both Colorado and Oregon would mandate clear labeling of genetically engineered (GE) ingredients on food packages. The pending votes have sparked a high-priced battleground pitting consumer and farmer advocates against multi-billion-dollar agribusiness corporations. Opposition to the state food labeling measures is coming from giant biotech companies (DuPont, Dow and Monsanto), that sell genetically engineered crops, and the well-heeled Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), a national business lobbying organization. Millions of dollars are being spent on the two campaigns with advertising blitzes underway. Now The Cornucopia Institute has released a detailed infographic that reveals which food companies are supporting or opposing the food labeling initiatives (with many of the major manufacturers opposing passage owning leading brands in the natural/organic marketplace). “Many consumers will likely be surprised to learn that owners and management of some of their favorite organic and natural brands are fighting against the right of consumers to know what is in their food,” says Mark Kastel, Codirector of The Cornucopia Institute, a farm policy research group. “We want to spotlight this issue so that consumers can vote in the marketplace for manufacturers and brands that reflect their personal values.” Mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food ingredients (commonly called GMOs — standing for genetically modified organisms) at the state level is viewed as a watershed event by many industry observers, given the prolonged inaction at the federal level. Earlier this year Vermont passed a state law requiring GMO food ingredient labeling, and the states of Connecticut and Maine has adopted similar legislation that will take effect when other neighboring states pass such laws. Last year a state GMO food labeling initiative was narrowly defeated in Washington by a 51-49 percent margin. In California in 2012, a GMO food labeling initiative lost by a similarly slim margin. Biotech interests spent close to $50 million opposing the initiatives in California and Washington. And the GMA and the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA), another trade-lobby group, are now suing Vermont over its legislatively adopted food labeling law. At the national level, Monsanto, its biotech allies, and the GMA in particular, have been credited for bottlenecking action on a federal law although they have recently rallied behind a new proposal that would outlaw state GMO food labeling laws while permitting “voluntary” labeling by companies of such ingredients (voluntary labeling is already being allowed by the FDA). More than 60 countries around the world require the labeling of foods containing GMO ingredients. “Interestingly, in Europe where GMO labeling is required, consumers overwhelming choose to buy organic and non-GMO products,” said Kastel. “The industrial food lobby is fully cognizant of the European experience and what’s at stake — that’s why they’re fighting like hell against these grassroots efforts in states like Colorado and Oregon.” North America’s largest independent organic breakfast foods manufacturer, Nature’s Path, has been actively promoting and funding a “yes” vote. “Nature’s Path USA has supported citizens’ fundamental right to know if their food contains GMOs, with a simple label declaration. Then they can choose whether or not they want to buy it,” says Arran Stephens, the company’s CEO and cofounder. “One of many great qualities of organic agriculture is in the superior taste and higher nutrient profile — the natural result of a farming system that emphasizes long term soil fertility, farm family security and non-toxic ecological balance,” Stephens added. Other prominent commercial backers of state citizen initiatives, viewed as heroes in the organic movement, include Dr. Bronner’s and Bob’s Red Mill. “As a lover of science and as an activist, it’s clear to me that labeling genetically engineered food just makes sense. Consumers have a right to know whether the food they’re eating has been genetically engineered to withstand huge amounts of pesticide that contaminates our food, wreaks havoc in the environment and ends up on our dinner plates,” says the company’s CEO David Bronner, describing why the company has donated $715,500 to the state initiative campaigns. Additional organizations throwing their financial weight behind the consumer’s right to know include theOrganic Consumer’s Fund, Food Democracy Action and Mercola.com and Presence Marketing. The biggest single donor to the “NO” vote is biotech giant Monsanto, having poured more than $6.3 million into the state campaigns. Pepsi has donated $2 million and General Mills has donated more than $1.5 million. Other heavyweight opponents include Kraft, Dow AgroSciences, J.M. Smucker, Land O’ Lakes and ConAgra. All told, opponents of the consumers’ right-to-know what is in their food have already raised more than $15.1 million, while supporters of the state initiatives have gathered nearly $3.3 million. “We doubt if loyal customers of Naked Juice (PepsiCo), Dagoba chocolate (Hershey’s) RW Knutson orSanta Cruz juices (Smuckers) realize that their corporate parents are taking the profits from their patronage and stabbing them in the back by investing to defeat GMO labeling on food packages,” the Cornucopia’s Kastel lamented. “Consumers are increasingly interested in ‘voting with their forks,’ and many want to support companies that share their values,” notes Jason Cole, a researcher for Cornucopia who compiled the data for the infographic. “We hope the information we are providing on corporate involvement with the upcoming votes on food labeling will help consumers make informed choices in grocery store aisles.” – 30 – MORE: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() Breakfast With a Dose of Roundup?Weed Killer in $289 Million Cancer Verdict Found in Oat Cereal and Granola BarsWEDNESDAY, AUGUST 15, 2018 By Alexis Temkin, Ph.D., Toxicologist https://www.ewg.org/childrenshealth/glyphosateincereal/#.W3WZJLh9g2y
UPDATE: A second round of tests commissioned by EWG, published on October 24, 2018, found the glyphosate in every sample of popular oat-based cereal and other oat-based food marketed to children that we tested. See the new results here.
Source: EWG, from tests by Eurofin Analytical Laboratories *EWG’s child-protective health benchmark for daily exposure to glyphosate in food is 160 ppb. Oat-Based Samples that Exceeded 400ppb on Average.The highest levels, greater than 1,000 ppb, were detected in two samples of Quaker Old Fashioned Oats. Three samples of Cheerios had glyphosate levels ranging from 470 ppb to 530 ppb. Twelve of the food samples had levels of glyphosate lower than EWG’s health benchmark, ranging from 10 ppb to 120 ppb. Only two samples had no detectable glyphosate.
The problem of glyphosate contamination of organic foods underscores the need to restrict pre-harvest uses of glyphosate and the need for more data on glyphosate levels in products, an area where U.S. federal agencies are falling short. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() DDT pesticide exposure during pregnancy now scientifically linked to autismThursday, August 23, 2018 by: Isabelle Z. https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-08-23-ddt-pesticide-exposure-during-pregnancy-now-scientifically-linked-to-autism.html Study links DDT exposure to autism and autism with intellectual disabilityIn a new study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, an international group of researchers led by scientists from Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health looked at more than a million pregnancies in Finland. They compared maternal serum samples for more than 700 children with autism with matched control cases of children without autism with similar ages and genders to the autistic cases. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() After Reading This, You’ll Probably Never Want To Eat Genetically-Modified Food Againby Tyler Durden 25May2019 https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-25/after-reading-youll-probably-never-want-eat-genetically-modified-food-again
But of course nobody really knows what the long-term health effects will be once humans start eating “synthetic proteins” on a massive scale.
This is an even bigger issue in the agricultural world, and at this point “genetic drift” has become a global problem…
We are monkeying around with life itself, and we really have no idea what the long-term consequences will look like.
None of us would willingly sign up for any of those conditions, but that is what we are potentially doing when we regularly consume food that has been genetically modified.
Could this be a clue as to why there is a “fertility crisis” in the United States today?
If this is what the hard science is telling us, why in the world are we doing this to ourselves?
If you want to live a long and successful life, you have got to take care of your health. And most Americans don’t even realize that genetically-modified corn has actually been designed to produce “built-in pesticide in every cell”…
Do you think that it is actually safe to eat such “food”?
Personally, I am going to re-evaluate my own diet, because doing research for this article has kind of freaked me out. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() Throwing Biotech Lies at TomatoesJeffrey Smith Published on December 31, 2010 09:29 PM ET Updated on December 6, 2017 10:00 PM ET” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/throwing-biotech-lies-at_b_803139.html Throwing Biotech Lies at Tomatoes – Part 1: Killer Tomatoes
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() Throwing Biotech Lies at Tomatoes – Part 2: The LiarsBy Jeffrey Smith Published on December 31, 2010 Updated on December 6, 2017 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/throwing-biotech-lies-at_b_802872.html |
![]() The Future of GMOs, Meat Safety and Organics Under the Influence of the Same Corrupt, Corporate-Lapdog: the USDAby Jérôme Rigot, PhD Last updated September 25, 2015 http://www.cornucopia.org/2015/09/the-future-of-gmos-meat-safety-and-organics-under-the-influence-of-the-same-corrupt-corporate-lapdog-the-usda/ Can we be sure that the “organic” in the USDA Certified Organic seal retains its meaning and remains true to its mandate of assuring consumers that food under this label is truly healthy and grown or raised with minimal impact to the environment and respects the health and well-being of the workers and animals involved?There are growing concerns that the organic label may be losing its meaning. https://www.cornucopia.org/USDA/TheTroubleWithChickenVilsack.mp4?_=1 At another point in the “The Trouble with Chicken,” Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro is asked by David Hoffman, Frontline investigator:
Thus, this incident seems to clearly illustrate that USDA Secretary Vilsack has allowed powerful agribusiness lobbyists influence the USDA’s enforcement actions, as have most of his predecessors appointed by presidents of both political parties.
Source: |
|
![]() Corrupt EPA official found guilty of money laundering, fraudOctober 08, 2013 by: L.J. Devon, http://www.naturalnews.com/042387_epa_corrupt_officials_money_laundering.html What do you get when you trust the EPA?For one, you get more chemicals like glyphosate blasted into the environment. EPA manager guilty on ten charges of fraudThe Justice Department has recently brought up ten charges on a former EPA project manager, Gordon McDonald. McDonald was initially responsible for cleaning up two New Jersey superfund sites, the Diamond Alkali in Newark and the Federal Creosote in Manville. EPA manager guilty of accepting 1.5 million in kickbacks while accepting highest bids from companies he initially tipped offMcDonald and co-conspirators from his former company indulged in several kickbacks over a seven year period, awarding subcontractors big paying jobs at two EPA cleanup sites. McDonald went as far as tipping off Bennett Environmental Inc. from Canada about competitor’s bids. McDonald accepted Bennett’s kickbacks, which totaled in excess of 1.5 million dollars, and in return, McDonald accepted Bennett’s over-the-top bids, brushing off any low bids from competitors. |
|
![]() Breaking: New USDA Report Proves Environmental Impact of GMO is ‘Questionable’By Christina Sarich Posted On February 26, 2014 https://naturalsociety.com/breaking-new-usda-report-proves-environmental-impact-gmo-questionable/ Financial and Legal Liability isn’t Enough: GMO DangersThis report, released online February 20th, comes at a pivotal time in the genetically modified crop debate. Mandatory labeling would force corporations who ruin our food supply to be liable for the damage they cause. But even beyond legal and monetary liability- can you really replace millions of butterflies, or repopulate bee colonies? Can you undo the cross-pollination of organic crops once they’ve been polluted with GM seed? Or can we undo the bodily damage we’ve induced on animals and ourselves? Read: What MUST Be Done to Stop GMO Destruction
GMOs are FailingSince the mid-1990s, through Monsanto’s propaganda campaign to farmers promising higher yields and insect-resistant crops, RoundUp Ready soybeans, corn, cotton, canola, and other crops have been sewn across our nation. |
|
The Natural EffectOnly Organic January 28, 2014
Beware of ‘natural’ pretender foods that pose as organicApril 02, 2014 by: Ethan A. Huff, http://www.naturalnews.com/044552_all_natural_organic_food_deceptive_labeling.html Many ‘natural’ dairy products made with milk from cows fed GMOsYogurt is one example of a health food item that, depending on the brand, may not actually be all that healthy. As you may recall, Whole Foods Market recently pulled the Chobani brand of Greek yogurt from its shelves because the milk used to make it appears to come from cows fed GM corn and soy, which is anything but natural. The same is true for other brands like Dannon and Yoplait, both of which are likely getting their milk from cows fed GMOs, not to mention adding processed sugar from GM sugar beets to their flavored varieties. Other ‘all natural’ pretenders include vegetable oils, snack chips and granolaSome other examples of this include so-called “all natural” vegetable oils, which more often than not are derived from GM soy, canola, corn, cottonseed and other unhealthy oils. Granola bars and snack chips from many “natural” brands are also often tainted with GM ingredients, including the infamous high-fructose corn syrup, or HFCS, which is typically derived from GM corn. |
|
![]() Organic food vastly more nutritious than genetically modified food: huge new science study reveals the differencesMarch 24, 2016 by: S. Johnson http://www.naturalnews.com/053416_GMO_food_organic_nutritional_comparison.html Comparing apples to plastic orangesTo analyze the difference between the two products, the researchers examined 170 peer reviewed papers on a host of animal products, like cheese, butter and milk, as well as 67 papers on various meats, making it unprecedented in this respect. The results of the study were published in the British Journal of Nutrition. Teeming with antioxidantsThe latter study was published in the same respected scientific journal, the British Journal of Nutrition, which analyzed 343 peer-reviewed studies from across the globe. At the time, it was the largest study to analyze the difference between organic and non-organic fruits, vegetables and cereals. |
![]() Infographic unveiled: Top Ten GMO Foods to Avoid EatingJune 01, 2012 by: J. D. Heyes Be aware and bewareWith that latter thought in mind, we’ve developed an infographic to highlight the top 10 GMO (genetically modified organism) foods to avoid, in no particular order: |
|
![]() Kosher Certification Bans All GMO IngredientsAuthor Daisy Luther 25April2013 http://www.theorganicprepper.ca/kosher-certification-program-bans-all-gmo-ingredients-04252013 One group after another is denouncing the genetically modified poison on grocery store shelves, adding to the chorus of voices demanding real untainted food. Natural Food Certifiers has announced today that any food product that contains GMOs is no longer eligible to be certified as kosher under their “Apple K” kosher certification program. A press release stated:
Over the next 12 months, the company will phase out the certification of any product that contains GMO ingredients, and will no longer accept applications for certification of products that contain GMOs. |
|
![]() Shopping Guidehttps://gmo.mercola.com/sites/gmo/shopping-guide.aspx How to Avoid Foods Made With Genetically Modified OrganismsThe unsavory truth is that you have a 75 percent chance of picking food made with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) at the supermarket, because at least seven out of every 10 items have been genetically modified! You can find a comprehensive list of GMO free products in this Non-GMO Shopping Guide. FREE and in handy PDF format, this brochure prepared by Dr. Mercola and the Non-GMO Project (NGP) lists manufacturers who produce GMO free:
|
|
![]() Top 7 Myths About GMO Foods & Monsantoby Christina Sarich June 17th, 2013 Updated 05/07/2014 https://naturalsociety.com/top-7-myths-about-gmo-foods-monsanto/ With all the controversy circling in the mainstream media about the necessity of GMO farming due to world population explosions and a diminishing global food supply, it is time to debunk some of the biggest myths about GMO foods. Don’t be fooled by the propaganda being fed to you by Monsanto and other corporate industrialists who want to keep you on their fishing line with lies about the ‘importance’ of genetic modification. Natural Society is here to bust the myths with solid proof: 1. GMO seeds are sterile. FALSE. However, GMO seeds have been called suicide seeds or terminator seeds because they have an approximate termination date so that farmers have to keep purchasing new seed from the companies that make them, like Monsanto. This, in turn, allows those companies to maintain a monopoly on the world food supply. Once all our major crops are sewn with patented seeds with specific termination dates, Monsanto and its cohorts will be able to collect royalties just like Michael Jackson’s family does on the song ‘Thriller.’ 2. GMO foods taste as good or better than organics. FASLE. Most people can taste the difference between an organic apple and a poison one. Even squirrels can taste the difference in organic vs. non-organic food. 3. Monsanto can sue farmers who grow organic crops but later grow ‘contaminated’ or GMO cross-bred plants – FALSE. However, organic farmers recently lost a federal court battle with Monsanto when they tried to sue the company for contaminating their organic fields. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a previous ruling that found ‘organic growers had no reason to try to block Monsanto from suing them as the company had pledged it would not take them to court if biotech crops accidentally mix in with organics.” This still makes Monsanto-crops a concern for farmers who don’t trust that Monsanto will be good for their word. Monsanto, is after all, suing farmers who save seed, claiming they are violating patents. 4. You can keep bio-tech seeds and organic or heirloom seeds separate. FALSE. Mother nature will always blend seed. Wind, rain, storms, bees, etc. can’t be controlled. Recently two organic farmers in Australia talked about how easily their crops were cross-contaminated with GMO seed after a big storm. The more GMO seed that is planted, the more acreage it covers, the more we need to worry about a non-GMO seed supply.
Also consider one March, 2012 report by Anthony Gucciardi that reveals over 900 scientists working under the United Nations were forced to admit that traditional farming actually outperformed GMO crops following their research. |
|
![]() 10 GMO Myths Monsanto Wants You To BelieveMonsanto and their biotech buddies would have you believe that they are super-heroes, set on saving hungry children from starvation wearing a dazzling fake-green cape.By Daisy Luther TheOrganicPrepper.ca July 20, 2013
![]() KAHULUI, HAWAII – March Against Monsanto protestors hold up a sign as they march down the main road in protest of Monsanto’s GMO foods. (Photo: Shepard Ambellas/Intellihub.com) Monsanto and their biotech buddies would have you believe that they are super-heroes, set on saving hungry children from starvation wearing a dazzling fake-green cape. In fact, in a recent attack on activists, Monsanto’s CEO Hugh Grant said that because critics “can afford” organic food, we don’t care about the plight of those who can’t afford it. “There is this strange kind of reverse elitism: If I’m going to do this, then everything else shouldn’t exist,” said Grant. “There is space in the supermarket shelf for all of us.” Even Monsanto’s website is on the defense, with page after page attempting to justify what the biotech industry is doing to our food supply. It must be true if even leading “philanthropists” (and I use this term loosely) like Bill and Melinda Gates are behind the distribution of Monsanto crops across the globe. Right? Actually, it’s all about the public’s perception. The push for acceptance of GMO foods has, thus far, been all about which team has the most money. Monsanto and their ilk can afford more television ads and more PR than anti-GMO activists can. Because the biotech companies, Big Food, and Big Agri can pay to spread their message, many people are convinced by their pure propaganda that GMOs are a necessary evil if the Third World is to avoid millions of slow, agonizing deaths by starvation. Because biotech is able to afford to blanket the media with their perspective, their view point is accepted as the correct one because that is the only perspective that many people ever hear. But just because they shout the loudest, that doesn’t make it true. How we address these misconceptions can mean the difference between swaying people to examine these claims more closely or causing them to stick their fingers in their ears and sing, “lalalalala…” to block us out. Here are some of the most common myths that Monsanto and friends would like you to believe about the wonderful world of GMOs. Myth #1: No one has ever proven that GMOs are harmful to people.Monsanto mouthpieces have been quoted time, time, and time again stating the untruth that genetically modified organisms have never been proven to harm people. It seems that they believe, like Joseph Goebbels, the uncontested King of Propaganda, that if you repeat a lie often enough, and with enough conviction, that it becomes the accepted truth. Myth #2: GMO crops are the only way to solve world hunger.The most common pro-GMO argument that you will hear these days is that genetically modified crops are the only way to feed the worlds burgeoning population. Without them, proponents claim that hunger will claim the lives of millions over the next decade. In the gospel of biotech, GMOs are the answer to world hunger. If you protest against GMO technology, you are cast as a cold-hearted elitist and the deaths of all of those suffering children in ***** (pick-a-3rd-world-country) rest firmly on your doorstep.
Myth #3: GMOs need less pesticide spraying.Monsanto claims that their Bt products require less spraying. It’s right HERE on their website (emphasis mine):
Other organizations concur and even the mainstream media has been forced to report that pesticide and herbicide usage is on the rise. Check out these recent articles from Huffington Post and Reuters for more information. Myth #4: GMO technology is comparable to the cross-breeding that our ancestors did to create hardier versions of heritage crops.Check out this condescending blurb, straight from the horse’s …ummm….mouth (the Monsanto website):
The reality: What our ancestors did, and what responsible farmers do, is cross-pollination of different varieties of the same plant. It is a low tech method that can occur naturally – but they just gave it a little bit of help in order to bring forth the desirable characteristics, like the drought-hardiness of one type of wheat combined with the shorter growing season required for another type of wheat. This is selective breeding. Genetically modifying seeds is a whole different ballgame, however. Here’s a great explanation from the Food Renegade website:
What’s even worse is that biotech has the ability to produce their seeds with a built in “terminator technology.” This means that the seeds cannot be saved from one year to the next (unlike the cross-pollinated seeds with which they try to claim kinship). Monsanto has patented the technology (called gene use restriction technology) but claims not to use it. This would produce sterile, lifeless seeds that could not be reused, leaving the farmers utterly dependent on the biotech companies for future crops while providing an ongoing stream of income for those companies. At this point they maintain their monopoly through a series of contracts and patents that require the repurchase of seeds annually. Myth #5: If the FDA and the USDA allow GMO’s, they must be safe to consume.Organizations like the FDA, the EPA, and the USDA all wear a shiny halo. They receive their power and influence from the mere fact that the public believes that their number one priority is the health and safety of the citizens they are supposed to be serving. All of the agencies vow that they are there to protect the public on their websites:
The Vision Statement of the USDA:
The EPA:
The reality: All of the above is just feel-good, warm and fuzzy rhetoric. Perhaps there are employees that truly believe in what they’re doing, but the leadership is as sickeningly tainted as Bt Corn.
Make no mistake, the commissioners, directors, and secretaries of these agencies are put in place for a reason. That reason is to grease the wheels for the wealthy biotech firms (and drug companies and Big Food companies and…well, you get the idea). Through an abuse of trust placed in them by the American people, they abuse their power and practice deception on the grandest scale imaginable. Myth #6: There is no nutritional difference between GMO’s and non-GMO’s.Biotech will tell you that there is absolutely no nutritional difference between genetically modified food and its organic counterpart. They will cite the calories, the fiber, and all of the macronutrients, pointing out that they are identical. They will scoff and roll their collective eyes at the “ignorance” of people who pay double to triple the price to avoid GMOs in their kitchens. Even television’s Dr. Oz came out on his show in support of the nutritional equality of GMO foods, saying that organic food was “undemocratic”.
There is more evidence of higher nutrient levels in non-GMO, organic foods:
Myth #7: GMOs are impossible to avoid.It’s true that GMOs lurk in over 70% of the processed foods that line the grocery store shelves. Even the mainstream media has reported on the omnipresence of genetically modified ingredients. This makes it very difficult to avoid them. The biotech companies have spent millions and millions of dollars in the fight against GMO labeling in an attempt to convince the public that the grocery costs will go up without their seeds.
Myth #8: Monsanto has our best interests in mind.All you need to do is read Monsanto’s website and it becomes clear. These people are the benevolent saviors of all mankind and their genetically modified seeds are the vehicle with which all of the world will be fed. Monsanto’s CEO Hugh Grant writes:
At the risk of your breakfast, click HERE to learn more about Monsanto’s commitment to integrity, dialogue, transparency, sharing, benefits, respect, acting as owners to achieve results, and creating a great place to work. The reality: A German magazine, Sustainable Pulse, views it a little differently. Last week they came out with an article that outlined the mysterious mishaps that have been befalling activists and researchers across Europe. Here’s a link to the enlightening article (English version). Last month, just days before researchers were to present a damaging study, their computers were attacked by sophisticated hackers. The scheduled press conference had to be cancelled.
The article above also speculates that the US government itself is on board with spying on anti-Monsanto activists…it’s a must-read.
Monsanto is taking surreptitious action against the movement, whether on their own or through the use of “contractors”. They have engaged in a social media war against activists. Mysterious things have been occurring on the social networks: posts have disappeared, some posts are hidden from the timelines of readers, and trolls abound on pages like March Against Monsanto and Occupy Monsanto. Readers often have difficulty sharing pertinent anti-GMO articles on social media. The internet war is ON. Myth #9: GMOs are not harmful to the environment.Biotech would have you believe that the farming of GMOs is as green an industry as organic farming, bringing prosperity and abundance to all. Myth #10: Get used to it. GMOs are here to stay.Biotech wants you to believe that there is no sense in fighting them. They want you to just accept what they have to say and eat their tainted products. They hope that people feel like they are too powerful to fight and like the battle has already been won. Become a grocery store revolutionary.This is war. If something could mean the difference between life and death for your children, between health and disease, between fertility or barrenness, wouldn’t you do anything to keep them safe? That’s why we can’t just sit there and watch this go on from the sidelines, shaking our heads. |
|
![]() Match Made In Hell: Bayer-Monsanto Partnership Signals Death Knell for HumanityTyler Durden Sat, 06/30/2018 – 19:00 https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-30/match-made-hell-bayer-monsanto-partnership-signals-death-knell-humanity
Bayer, which built a department specifically for the research and development of gas agents, went on to develop increasingly lethal chemical weapons, such as phosgene and mustard gas. “This phosgene is the meanest weapon I know,” Duisberg remarked with a stunning disregard for life, as if he were speaking about the latest bug spray. “I strongly recommend that we not let the opportunity of this war pass without also testing gas grenades.”
The criminal-like behavior has continued right up until modern times. Mike Papantonio, a US attorney and television presenter discussed one of the more heinous acts committed by this chemical company on Thomas Hartmann’s program, The Big Picture: “They produced a clotting agent for hemophiliacs, in the 1980s, called Factor VIII. This blood-clotting agent was tainted with HIV, and then, after the government told them they couldn’t sell it here, they shipped it all over the world, infecting people all over the world. That’s just part of the Bayer story.”
Yet it’s hard to imagine the situation getting any worse for the American farmer, who is now facing the highest suicide rate of any profession in the country. The suicide rate for Americans engaged in the field of farming, fishing and forestry is 84.5 per 100,000 people – more than five times that of the broader population. Zyklon B Use in the HolocaustFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zyklon_B#History Effects of Monsanto’a Agent Orange on the Vietnamese peopleFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange#Health_effects Bayer + Monsanto = A Match Made in Hell |
|
From Rabbi Lazer Brody: Bayer and Monsanto: Axis of EvilMonday, 13 August 2018 http://lazerbrody.typepad.com/lazer_beams/2018/08/gmo-bayer-and-monsanto-axis-of-evil-.html ![]() Block 10 was the medical experimentation block in Auschwitz. German doctors, most of whom also participated in selections applied for permission to come work in Block 10 at Auschwitz with human subjects Block 10 was the infamous hellhole in the bowels of the Auschwitz purgatory where the epitome of evil Josef Mengele performed his atrocious experiments on humans. Block 10 leads to Mengele, Mengele leads to Bayer, Bayer leads to Monsanto and Monsanto leads to the convenience food you’re eating,either at home or on vacation. Sounds surreal? We wish it were… The closer we get to Moshiach, the more we see Divine justice settling unfinished scores. An apparently innocuous item on the international newswire reveals an iceberg of evil that Hashem’s fiery wrath will soon erase from the face of the earth. The shares of Bayer Pharmaceuticals just fell 10%, the result of their subsidiary Monsanto’s failure to warn of the cancer risks posed by its infamous weed killer, Roundup. Before I tell you who Bayer is, they bought Monsanto earlier this year for $63 Billion. Our sages teach that evil attaches itself to evil. In short, Monsanto is a conglomerate of evil that creates pesticides that destroy every type of viable seed – not only weeds – except for seeds that Monsanto genetically engineers. So, once you spray your field with Roundup, your soil is poisoned to regular seeds and you can only use Monsanto’s genetically-engineered seeds. But, new types of weeds set in that are immune to conventional weed killers, which require more and newer Monsanto weed killers. With mafia-like tactics, Monsanto has gone around the world, not only impoverishing farmers, poisoning their soil and indenturing them into virtual slavery, but causing an epidemic of farmer suicides, especially in India. Monsanto also hijacks faculties of agriculture in the world’s universities, so that agronomy students will learn to use their products only. Thank goodness I majored in horticulture and deciduous orchards, where Monsanto’s poisoned hands didn’t yet reach my teachers. Fortunately, you can grow an apple, a peach or a plum without spraying Roundup… Back to Bayer, who owns Monsanto. Do you know who Bayer is? Have you ever heard of IG Farben? Both my pulse and my mind are racing much faster than I can type (chill, Lazer!) – let’s take it slow. Do you know that IG Farben was behind the Nazi’s mutilation of our holy teacher, Rav Shalom Arush’s spiritual guide, Rabbi Yehuda Zev Leibowitz of saintly and blessed memory? That’s why he could never have children. Let me be more specific: IG Farben financed Hitler’s electoral campaign and became a staunch supporter of the Nazis. IG Farben worked closely with the Nazi party to take over manufacturing plants when the Germans invaded other European countries. IG Farben also held stock in and was represented on the board of the company which produced the gas used in the Holocaust gas chambers. IG Farben tested its products on the concentration-camp prisoners of Auschwitz. Even more, IG Farben had its own concentration camp. Josef Mengele, the gruesome butcher of Auschwitz, the SS doctor (sic) and Hitler’s right-hand man in the planned annihilation of European Jewry, worked with IG Farben in doing his experimentation on human guinea pigs, one of whom was our sacred and beloved teacher Rabbi Yehuda Zev Leibowitz who succeeded in surviving the Holocaust. Bayer is the successor and continuation of IG Farben. Monsanto belongs to Bayer. Is the GMO and GE domination of our fields, crops and foodstuffs a continuation of the Nazi conspiracy to dominate the world? You make your own conclusions. For anyone who seeks my advice, eat natural and organic as much as possible. Steer clear of US commercially grown corn and soybeans as well as processed foods that are full of such derivatives as corn syrup solids and soy isolate. If you have a headache, don’t take Bayer aspirin. Chances are that your headache – and many other ills, such as your close friend’s, your relative’s or your own autistic child – come from the use of Roundup in growing the food you eat. The closer we get to Moshiach, the more we’ll see evil’s foundations crumble. Meanwhile, don’t lose heart, because the darkest darkness is right at the end of night, before the dawn of a new day. TOP |
|
Seeds of Death Monsanto Exposed
Monsanto’s History of Death and DestructionThe Complete History of Monsanto, “The World’s Most Evil Corporation”First published by Waking Times, posted by Global Research in May 2014, this article provides a historical viewpoint. It is of particular relevance in relation to the Monsanto-Bayer merger. Monsanto-Bayer is relentlessly pushing the Worldwide adoption of glyphosate, which is carcinogenic.
Even though PCBs were eventually banned after fifty years for causing such devastation, it is still present in just about all animal and human blood and tissue cells across the globe. Documents introduced in court later showed Monsanto was fully aware of the deadly effects, but criminally hid them from the public to keep the PCB gravy-train going full speed!
Monsanto’s Disneyfied vision of the future: 1960s: Monsanto, along with chemical partner-in-crime DOW Chemical, produces dioxin-laced Agent Orange for use in the U.S.’s Vietnam invasion. The results? Over 3 million people contaminated, a half-million Vietnamese civilians dead, a half-million Vietnamese babies born with birth defects and thousands of U.S. military veterans suffering or dying from its effects to this day! Monsanto is hauled into court again and internal memos show they knew the deadly effects of dioxin in Agent Orange when they sold it to the government. Outrageously though, Monsanto is allowed to present their own “research” that concluded dioxin was safe and posed no negative health concerns whatsoever. Satisfied, the bought and paid for courts side with Monsanto and throws the case out. Afterwards, it comes to light that Monsanto lied about the findings and their real research concluded that dioxin kills very effectively.
Monsanto partners with I.G. Farben, makers of Bayer aspirin and the Third Reich’s go-to chemical manufacturer producing deadly Zyklon-B gas during World War II. Together, the companies use their collective expertise to introduce aspartame, another extremely deadly neurotoxin, into the food supply. When questions surface regarding the toxicity of saccharin, Monsanto exploits this opportunity to introduce yet another of its deadly poisons onto an unsuspecting public. Coke leads the way once again (remember saccharin?) and begins poisoning Diet Coke drinkers with aspartame in 1983. As expected, sales skyrocket as millions become hopelessly addicted and sickened by the sweet poison served in a can. The rest of the soft drink industry likes what it sees and quickly follows suit, conveniently forgetting all about their initial reservations that aspartame is a deadly chemical. There’s money to be made, lots of it and that’s all that really matters to them anyway! Worse yet, dairy companies who refuse to use this toxic cow pus and label their products as“rBGH-free” are sued by Monsanto, claiming it gives them an unfair advantage over competitors that did. In essence, what Monsanto was saying is “yeah, we know rBGH makes people sick, but it’s not alright that you advertise it’s not in your products.” The following year, the diabolical company begins producing GMO crops that are tolerant to their toxic herbicide Roundup. Roundup-ready canola oil (rapeseed), soybeans, corn and BT cotton begin hitting the market, advertised as being safer, healthier alternatives to their organic non-GMO rivals. Apparently, the propaganda worked as today over 80% of canola on the market is their GMO variety. A few things you definitely want to avoid in your diet are GMO soy, corn, wheat and canola oil, despite the fact that many “natural” health experts claim the latter to be a healthy oil. It’s not, but you’ll find it polluting many products on grocery store shelves. Because these GM crops have been engineered to ‘self-pollinate,’ they do not need nature or bees to do that for them. There is a very dark side agenda to this and that is to wipe out the world’s bee population. Monsanto knows that birds and especially bees, throw a wrench into their monopoly due to their ability to pollinate plants, thus naturally creating foods outside of the company’s “full domination control agenda.” When bees attempt to pollinate a GM plant or flower, it gets poisoned and dies. In fact, the bee colony collapse was recognized and has been going on since GM crops were first introduced. Because Roundup-ready crops are engineered to be toxic pesticides masquerading as food, they have been banned in the EU, but not in America! Is there any connection between that and the fact that Americans, despite the high cost and availability of healthcare, are collectively the sickest people in the world? Of course not! As was Monsanto’s plan from the beginning, all non-Monsanto crops would be destroyed, forcing farmers the world over to use only its toxic terminator seeds. And Monsanto made sure farmers who refused to come into the fold were driven out of business or sued when windblown terminator seeds poisoned organic farms. Their next step was to spend billions globally buying up as many seed companies as possible and transitioning them into terminator seed companies in an effort to wipe out any rivals and eliminate organic foods off the face of the earth. In Monsanto’s view, all foods must be under their full control and genetically modified or they are not safe to eat! They pretend to be shocked that their critics in the scientific community question whether crops genetically modified with the genes of diseased pigs, cows, spiders, monkeys, fish, vaccines and viruses are healthy to eat. The answer to that question is obviously a very big “no way!” Because rival DuPont is too large a corporation to be allowed to merge with, they instead form a stealth partnership where each agrees to drop existing patent lawsuits against one another and begin sharing GMO technologies for mutual benefit. In layman’s terms, together they would be far too powerful and politically connected for anything to stop them from owning a virtual monopoly on agriculture; “control the food supply & you control the people!” Not all is rosy as the monster is repeatedly sued for $100s of millions for causing illness, infant deformities and death by illegally dumping all manner of PCBs into ground water, and continually lying about products safety – you know, business as usual. The global terrorism spreads to India as over 100,000 farmers who are bankrupted by GMO crop failure, commit suicide by drinking Roundup so their families will be eligible for death insurance payments. In response, the monster takes advantage of the situation by alerting the media to a new project to assist small Indian farmers by donating the very things that caused crop failures in the country in the first place! Forbes then names Monsanto “company of the year.” Sickening, but true. More troubling is that Whole Foods, the corporation that brands itself as organic, natural and eco-friendly is proven to be anything but. They refuse to support Proposition 37, California’s GMO-labeling measure that Monsanto and its GMO-brethren eventually helped to defeat. Why? Because Whole Foods has been in bed with Monsanto for a long time, secretly stuffing its shelves with overpriced, fraudulently advertized “natural & organic” crap loaded with GMOs, pesticides, rBGH, hormones and antibiotics. So, of course they don’t want mandatory labelling as that would expose them as the Whole Frauds and Whore Foods that they really are! However, when over twenty biotech-friendly companies including WalMart, Pepsico and ConAgra recently met with FDA in favor of mandatory labelling laws, this after fighting tooth and nail to defeat Prop 37, Whole Foods sees an opportunity to save face and becomes the first grocery chain to announce mandatory labelling of their GMO products…in 2018! Uh, thanks for nothing, Whore. And if you think its peers have suddenly grown a conscience, think again. They are simply reacting to the public’s outcry over the defeat of Prop 37 by crafting deceptive GMO-labelling laws to circumvent any real change, thus keeping the status quo intact. To add insult to world injury, Monsanto and their partners in crime Archer Daniels Midland, Sodexo and Tyson Foods write and sponsor The Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009: HR 875. This “act” gives the corporate factory farms a virtual monopoly to police and control all foods grown anywhere, including one’s own backyard, and provides harsh penalties and jail sentences for those who do not use chemicals and fertilizers. President Obama decided this sounded reasonable and gave his approval. With this Act, Monsanto claims that only GM foods are safe and organic or homegrown foods potentially spread disease, therefore must be regulated out of existence for the safety of the world. If eating GM pesticide balls is their idea of safe food, I would like to think the rest of the world is smart enough to pass. The world has begun to awaken to the fact that the corporate monster does not want control over the global production of food simply for profit’s sake. No, it’s become clear by over a century of death & destruction that the primary goal is to destroy human health and the environment, turning the world into a Mon-Satanic Hell on Earth! Research into the name itself reveals it to be latin, meaning “my saint,” which may explain why critics often refer to it as “Mon-Satan.” Even more conspiratorially interesting is that free masons and other esoteric societies assigned numbers to each letter in our latin-based alphabet system in a six system. Under that number system, what might Monsanto add up to? Why, of course 6-6-6! Know that all is not lost. Evil always loses in the end once it is widely exposed to the light of truth as is occurring now. The fact that the Monsanto-led government finds it necessary to enact desperate legislation to protect its true leader proves this point. Being evicted elsewhere, the United States is Monsanto’s last stand so to speak. Yet, even here many have begun striking back by protesting against and rejecting GMO monstrosities, choosing to grow their own foods and shop at local farmers markets instead of the Monsanto-supported corporate grocery chains. The awakening people are also beginning to see they have been misled by corporate tricksters and federal government criminals poisoned by too much power, control and greed, which has resulted in the creation of the monstrous, out-of-control corporate beast. Notes The original source of this article is Waking Times
Copyright © E Hanzai, Waking Times, 2019
|
|
Kalina Androlova – “Monsanto: Control by starvation,” commentary on “Deconstruction” on National RadioThis is a Google Translation of the original post at http://freeoldmen.blog.bg/politika/2013/05/28/monsanto-kontrol-chrez-glada.1114541 I apologize for the translation. Please visit the site and give the artist and author proper credit |
|
One of the greatest minds of Germany, Goethe said something very profound and meaningful indeed true: “A man sees as much as he knows.” Modern political elites superb understand this, so now do not need masses of people to be held as serfs, it is sufficient to control the information. So benighted many people and nations are bound to obedience. Through ignorance gradually become literally owned by large corporations and supranational capital. For example, the company “Monsanto” is practically fascist corporation. “Monsanto” destroys the normal genetic condition of certain crops and also protects the invasion in his own private investigators, private army and so on. |
|
![]() |
|
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
Judge for yourself! If “Monsanto” decided to destroy Canada will simply leave the country without an ounce of grain. Is this an independent Canada! Otherwise we love the word diversification. But when it comes to American control, it immediately eliminated. World is coming to a near future, which we may call “opportunity for full control of hunger.”![]() |
||
![]() TOP |
||
![]() Glyphosate Found to Fuel Cancer Cell Growth, Pose Carcinogenic Threatby Mike Barrett June 13th, 2013 Updated 05/07/2014 https://naturalsociety.com/glyphosate-fuel-breast-cancer-cell-growth/
Additionally, the researchers concluded that due to glyphosate’s estrogenic properties, the chemical is likely considered what is known as a “xenoestrogen“. As NaturalSociety has covered before, xenoestrogen is foreign estrogen which mimics real estrogen in our bodies. This type of xenohormone can cause numerous problems, including increased risk of various cancers, infertility, thyroid issues, early onset puberty, and more.
But of course this is far from the only nasty effect Roundup has on the human body. Scientists have found in some research that Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Roundup causes toxicity to human cells, and actually kills human kidney cells at low doses. |
||
![]() Hard-Hitting Report: Pigs Fed GM Diet Experience Significant Health Problemsby Mike Barrett June 12th, 2013 Updated 05/07/2014 https://naturalsociety.com/groundbreaking-pigs-fed-gm-diet-experience-significant-health-problems/
|
||
![]() Analysis Finds Monsanto’s GM Corn Nutritionally Dead, Highly Toxicby Mike Barrett April 28th, 2013 Updated 05/08/2014 https://naturalsociety.com/analysis-monsanto-gm-corn-nutritionally-dead-toxic/ Non-GMO Corn 20x Richer in Nutrition than GMO CornThe 2012 report, entitled 2012 Nutritional Analysis: Comparison of GMO Corn versus Non-GMO Corn, found numerous concerning and notable differences between GMO and non-GMO corn, none of which are particularly surprising. First, the report found that non-GMO corn has considerably more calcium, magnesium, manganese, potassium, iron, and zinc. Non-GMO corn has 6130 ppm of calcium while GMO corn has 14 – non-GMO corn has 437 times more calcium.
As far as energy content goes, non-GMO corn was found to ‘emit 3,400 times more energy per gram, per second compared to GMO corn’, as reported by NaturalNews. Overall, the paper found that non-GMO corn is 20 times richer in nutrition, energy and protein compared to GMO corn. Image from www.momsacrossamerica.com. GMO Corn Also Found to be Highly ToxicNot surprisingly, the report found what many of us already know – that GMO corn is highly toxic. While non-GMO corn was found to be free of chlorides, formaldehyde, glyphosate (active ingredient in Monsanto’s best selling herbicide Roundup), and other toxic substances, GMO corn is riddled with these toxins. Image from www.momsacrossamerica.com. Biotech Giants Like Monsanto Caught Lying AgainMonsanto has been making the claim for years that genetically modified foods are equivalent or even of higher quality than non-GMOs, but nothing could be further from the truth. Numerous studies have shown us the dangers of GMO foods such as GMO corn, along with the dangers of the massive amount of pesticides that accompany GMO crops. This 2012 report reminds us once again that corporations like Monsanto simply can not be trusted, and that the company will continue making false claims until the end of days in order to profit and slowly genetically engineer the world. Read more: https://naturalsociety.com/analysis-monsanto-gm-corn-nutritionally-dead-toxic/#ixzz6cDHARXsy
Follow us: @naturalsociety on Twitter | NaturalSociety on Facebook Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/analysis-monsanto-gm-corn-nutritionally-dead-toxic/#ixzz34VeXJ8RO |
||
![]() Voracious Worm Evolves to Eat Biotech Corn Engineered to Kill ItOne of agricultural biotechnology’s great success stories may become a cautionary tale of how short-sighted mismanagement squandered the benefits of genetic modification. After years of predicting that it would happen, scientists have documented the rapid evolution of corn rootworms resistant to modified corn.By Brandon Keim 17March2014 https://www.wired.com/2014/03/rootworm-resistance-bt-corn/
|
||
![]() New Study Links GMO Food To LeukemiaSunday, May 12th 2013 at 8:00 am https://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/new-study-links-gmo-food-leukemia ![]() Journal of Hematology & Thromboembolic Diseases Study: Hematotoxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis as Spore-crystal Strains Cry1Aa,Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac or Cry2Aa in Swiss Albino Mice A groundbreaking new study published in the current issue of the Journal of Hematology & Thromboembolic Diseases reveals the potential “leukemogenic” properties of the Bt toxin biopesticides engineered into the vast majority of GMO food crops already within the US food supply. Last September, the causal link between cancer and genetically modified food was confirmed in a French study, the first independent long-term animal feeding study not commissioned by the biotech corporations themselves. The disturbing details can be found here: New Study Finds GM Corn and Roundup Causes Cancer In Rats Now, a new study published in the Journal of Hematology & Thromboembolic Diseases indicates that the biopesticides engineered into GM crops known as Bacillus Thuringensis (Bt) or Cry-toxins, may also contribute to blood abnormalities from anemia to hematological malignancies (blood cancers) such as leukemia.[i] A group of scientists from the Department of Genetics and Morphology, Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Brasilia, Brasilia/DF, Brazil set out to test the purported human and environmental biosafety of GM crops, looking particularly at the role that the Bt toxin found within virtually all GM food crops plays on non-target or non-insect animal species. The research was spurred by the Brazilian Collegiate Board of Directors of the National Sanitary Surveillance Agency (ANVISA), who advocated in 2005 for evaluations of toxicity and pathogenicity of microbiological control agents such as Bt toxins, given that little is known about their toxicological potential in non-target organisms, including humans. While Bacillus Thurigensis spore-crystals have been used since the late 1960’s in agriculture as a foliar insecticide, it was only after the advent of recombinant DNA biotechnology that these toxin-producing genes (known as delta endotoxins) were first inserted into the plants themselves and released into commercial production in the mid-90’s, making their presence in the US food supply and the bodies of exposed populations ubiquitous. What the new study revealed is that various binary combinations and doses of Bt toxins are capable of targeting mammalian cells, particularly the erythroid (red blood cell) lineage, resulting in red blood cell changes indicative of significant damage, such as anemia. In addition, the study found that Bt toxins suppressed bone marrow proliferation creating abnormal lymphocyte patterns consistent with some types of leukemia. The researchers also found that one of the prevailing myths about the selective toxicity of Bt to insects, the target species, no longer holds true:
The study also found:1) That Cry toxins are capable of exerting their adverse effects when suspended in distilled water, not requiring alkalinization via insect physiology to become activated as formerly believed. They concluded:
Did you get that? Their conclusion is that it is premature to consider GM toxins to be safe in mammals. Billions have already been exposed to Bt toxins, in combination with glyphosate-based herbicide formulations such as Roundup, and yet, most biotech research scientists and industry regulators still claim they are unequivocally safe. This has much to do with the well-known relationship that biotech corporations like Monsanto have with so-called ‘check book’ science firms who are basically paid to obfuscate adverse health outcomes of their products, such as the GMO-Cancer link. [see: Monsanto-Funded Science Denies Emerging Roundup Cancer Link] Additional important research resources on GreenMedInfo.com
Sayer Ji is founder of Greenmedinfo.com, a reviewer at the International Journal of Human Nutrition and Functional Medicine, Co-founder and CEO of Systome Biomed, Vice Chairman of the Board of the National Health Federation, Steering Committee Member of the Global Non-GMO Foundation. |
||
![]() McDonald’s McRib Sandwich a Franken Creation of GMOs, Toxic Ingredients, Banned IngredientsBy Natural Society Posted On January 8, 2013 https://naturalsociety.com/mcdonalds-mcrib-sandwich-a-franken-creation-of-gmos-toxic-ingredients-banned-ingredients/ What’s Inside a McDonald’s McRib Sandwich?But what’s really inside the McRib specifically that makes it such a food abomination? Containing over 70 ingredients, the McRib is full of surprises — including ‘restructured meat’ technology that includes traditionally-discarded animal parts brought together to create a rib-like substance. Here’s some of the disturbing substances found within the McDonald’s McRib sandwich: A flour-bleaching agent used in yoga matsOut of the 70 ingredients that make up the ‘pork’ sandwich, a little-known flour-bleaching agent known as azodicarbonamide lies among them. At first glance, this strange ingredient sounds concerning enough to look into. After a little research, you will find that even mainstream media outlets have generated content revealing how azodicarbonamide is actually used in the production of foamed plastics. Foamed plastics like yoga mats and more. ‘Restructured Meat’ from Pig Heart, Tongue, StomachMcDonald’s McRib is famous in some circles for utilizing what’s known as ‘restructured meat’ technology. Since McDonald’s knows you’d never eat a pig heart, tongue, or stomach on your plate, they decided instead to grind up these ingredients and put them into the form of a typical rib. That way, consumers won’t know what they’re putting into their mouths. As the Chicago Mag reported, the innovator of this technology back in 1995 said it best:
So in other words, it’s not actually a rib. Instead, it’s a combination of unwanted animal scraps processed down in major facilities and ‘restructured’ into the form of a rib. Then, 70 additives, chemicals, fillers, and GMO ingredients later, you have a ‘meat’ product that tastes like ribs. |
||
![]() Genetic Engineers Agree: GMOs Neither Safe Nor NecessaryBy Heather Callaghan May 20, 2014 https://www.activistpost.com/2014/05/genetic-engineers-agree-gmos-neither.html
Here is Earth Open Source’s annotated list of important additions in the new report, and their page numbers:
Author Claire Robinson added:
As Earth Open Source points out, the authors and their featured researchers are not alone in exposing the detrimental nature of GMOs – late last year, almost 300 scientists and legal experts signed a statement affirming that there was “No scientific consensus on GMO safety.” Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) – Myths and TruthsMercola September 20, 2012 |
![]() Europe rejects GMO crops; kinder gentler America seeks labelingJon Rappoport Activist Post June 4, 2013 https://www.activistpost.com/2013/06/europe-rejects-gmo-crops-kinder-gentler.html It’s a scandal. Monsanto has just announced it’s giving up on most of Europe: people there don’t want GMO food. In America, the struggle is for labeling GMOs. This is some kind of “fairness doctrine.” Let the US consumer decide what kind of food to buy. Choice. It’s the American way, right? No, actually it isn’t. The evidence gathered over the last 10 years is staggering. GMO food and the herbicides sprayed on them constitute a major health hazard, to say the least. And this doesn’t begin to cover the lying business practices of Monsanto, who promised farmers that Roundup would kill weeds in the fields. Instead, the weeds have proliferated to the point where the farmers have to kill everything growing with stronger, more dangerous herbicides, like Paraquat. In the US, laws exist to prosecute crimes involving endangerment of health and crimes related to false marketing practices. These laws are on the books. When it comes to Monsanto, they’re gathering dust on the shelves. Choice and fairness apply to competitive products that are safe. The consumer picks one type of tomato over another. The consumer buys walnuts rather than pecans. The consumer chooses black olives over green olives. Choosing non-GMO corn instead of GMO corn still leaves dangerous GMO corn in produce bins. Should a bottle of cyanide sit on a store shelf next to a bottle of salt, just to be fair to the consumer? To give him a choice? Three or four federal law-enforcement agencies would arrest and prosecute the store owners who sell cyanide, as well as the distributors, and the packagers. But in the case of GMO food, the FDA and USDA, the relevant agencies, do nothing. Neither does the Dept. of Justice. Aside from several counties in America that have banned the growing of GMO crops, the big push is for labeling of GMO food in stores. That’s it. The theory is, when consumers have a choice, they’ll overwhelmingly reject GMOs and put a serious crimp in Monsanto’s business. That may or may not happen (if labeling is widespread), but the theory doesn’t directly address Monsanto’s crimes. The “kinder, gentler” approach is based on two assumptions. One, American consumers need soft activism. They won’t demand legal rejection of GMO food. They will, however, choose the right food. And two, Monsanto has made such a powerful inroad on food-crop farming, it’s too late to take it back. It’s too late to declare all the GMO crops illegal. “You see, so many people are taking Vioxx, we can’t go to court over it. It’s a done deal, even though patients are dropping like flies.” It wasn’t a done deal. Neither are GMOs. In a previous article, “Meet Monsanto’s number-one lobbyist: Barack Obama,” I detailed Obama’s horrendous record when it comes to allowing new GMO crops to enter the food chain, and his outrageous appointments of ex-Monsanto stalwarts to important and key positions in his administration. But Obama is “a good man.” He must be doing the right thing. He’s popular, so it wouldn’t be wise to attack him on the issue. Better to lay back, paste a smile on our faces, and try to secure labeling for GMOs. Of course, that’s exactly the wrong strategy. But as in all campaigns, the longer people wait and do nothing and remain timid, the less likely it is they can succeed, if and when they decide to move. That’s why Monsanto now has so many acres of GMO food growing in the United States. That’s why Monsanto has been able to push its unconscionable propaganda down the throat of the American consumer. That’s why Whole Foods and other major health-food companies decided to surrender the real battles and opt for co-existence with Monsanto. When there is continuing crime in a community, the people, the citizens have to go after and expose the public officials who are doing nothing about it, who are indeed profiting from it. In the case of Monsanto, the officials are, among others, President Barack Obama, Tom Vilsack, head of the USDA, and Michael Taylor, food czar at the FDA. But health-food companies, who should be leading the battle, are either friendly or neutral toward these bad actors. They’re hedging their bets. They’re saying, “We’ll inform consumers so they can make good choices, we’ll do labeling, but don’t expect us to be more aggressive than that. Don’t expect us to get mad.” Neutrality is apparently the American way. First and foremost, the business of America is business. And the idea of consumers staging a full-bore boycott against Whole Foods? Out of the question. No, consumers are too busy loading up bags with groceries. Monsanto relies on that. Monsanto knows Americans are tuned up to buy, buy, and consume, and then buy more. Americans consider it their right not to be distracted from that obsession. Obama, like Bush and Clinton before him, are silent on the GMO issue. They all pretend it doesn’t exist. They sell out the people at the drop of a hat, and they don’t lose any sleep over it. Conscience? Never heard of it. Ditto for major mainstream news outlets. “We don’t cover the Monsanto story in depth because it’s a he-said he-said thing. The scientific issues are complex. People on both sides make interesting points. But there’s no traction…” That’s a bunch of crap. Make me the managing editor of the Washington Post for a year and I’ll send sales of the paper through the roof. I’ll let the hounds loose on Monsanto 24/7 and pound on the story day after day. The bottom line of the Post will look healthier than it has since Watergate, a minor topic compared to GMOs. But the Post doesn’t really care about their bottom line. They would go bankrupt before they’d venture into these waters. They’re sold out from the top down. They’re part of the cover-up. I’ve written about this before, but here it is again. In the early 1990s, when the US health freedom movement was at a fever pitch, when people were going after the FDA for raiding natural practitioners’ offices and trying to limit access to nutritional supplements in stores, I sat in on several significant meetings of activists. People who controlled those meetings, who were connected to supplement companies, wanted a bill in Congress to protect the consumer. To give the consumer choice and access to supplements. That’s all they wanted. I told them, in no uncertain terms, that this wouldn’t work over the long term. We had to go after the FDA. We had to attack. I had a dossier on the FDA. I, like others, knew a lot about their crimes going back a long way. I was told this was the wrong strategy. “First,” they said, “let’s get a good bill passed in Congress. Then we can attack the FDA.” They had no such intention, and I told them so. They were never going to support going after the FDA and exposing it down to the ground as a criminal agency. They had no stomach for it, and they were sold out themselves. They had a confined agenda, which had to do with helping to guard supplement companies’ profits. They were slick operators. They knew how to present themselves as neutral and rational. They could spout New Age garble at appropriate moments. “Anger can be self-defeating.” “You achieve your aims when you come from a place of doing service.” The same thing is happening now. “Give people the right to know, the right to choose what’s in their food.” It plays well, because it caters to the wholly absorbed self-interest of the health-food consumer with discretionary income. It doesn’t work in the long run. It papers over the fact that corporate criminals, in partnership with the highest government officials, are committing RICO crimes against the health of the American people. The appropriate emotion is outrage. In case you hadn’t noticed, for the past 40 years there has been a major psyop in progress against righteous outrage and on behalf of Nice. Be nice. Be friendly. Be happy. Be self-contained. Don’t make waves. Anger is a sign of a mental disorder. Outrage isn’t Spiritual. You’ll injure your Karma. Karma was invented to prop up a caste system. It was used to promote passivity. Silence is not golden. Profits are. Labeling food that isn’t poisonous, while permitting the sale of poison, is let’s-pretend virtual reality. I’ve met so-called health entrepreneurs who’ve adopted squeaky clean New Age cover-personalities to obscure their sleazebag cynical motives. They’re very slippery characters. They do their real work in conference rooms where they look at spread sheets. The chance of them going after GMO criminals is zero. Once in a while, if you wait for it, or if you push them a little, you’ll see something come into their eyes. A dead cold nothing. It’s a sign of the personal Arctic region where they really live. They don’t till, they don’t plant, they don’t harvest. They sell. They’re very much like the Sunday television preachers who are there to hustle dollars. Only they take a kinder, gentler approach. They’re all about “consciousness” and saving the planet. If the planet were alive in the way they claim it is, the planet would have long ago consigned them to a desert island under a blazing sun. Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com TOP |
|
![]() NY Times Publishes Kraft Mac & Cheese Warning LabelBy Food Babe
Lynne Galia, the spokeswoman I met at Kraft headquarters when I delivered thousands of signatures, has still not responded to me directly. She will not answer my emails or my phone calls. She will gladly talk to the NY Times and other news agencies, but not to me or the other 290,000 people I represent who signed a petition asking Kraft to remove artificial food dyes. I find it bizarre that Kraft wouldn’t genuinely want to answer basic questions about their product – especially after I posted this concerning information that could have health implications to millions of people and children. I want to leave you with a clarification note I received from Flo (who is definitely a hero for finding this label!) She would like to share her unedited thoughts about Kraft Mac & Cheese here:
|
|
![]() The Chemicals in Your Mac and CheeseBy Roni Caryn Rabin https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/12/well/eat/the-chemicals-in-your-mac-and-cheese.html Potentially harmful chemicals that were banned from children’s teething rings and rubber duck toys a decade ago may still be present in high concentrations in your child’s favorite meal: macaroni and cheese mixes made with powdered cheese. The chemicals, called phthalates, can disrupt male hormones like testosterone and have been linked to genital birth defects in infant boys and learning and behavior problems in older children. The chemicals migrate into food from packaging and equipment used in manufacturing and may pose special risks to pregnant women and young children. The Food and Drug Administration has not banned their presence in foods, though a 2014 report to the Consumer Product Safety Commission urged federal agencies to assess risks “with a view to supporting risk management steps.” The report concluded that food, drugs and beverages, and not toys, were the primary source of exposure to phthalates. Now a new study of 30 cheese products has detected phthalates in all but one of the samples tested, with the highest concentrations found in the highly processed cheese powder in boxed mac and cheese mixes. The report, which was conducted by an independent laboratory and paid for by environmental advocacy groups, has not been published in a peer-reviewed journal. “The phthalate concentrations in powder from mac and cheese mixes were more than four times higher than in block cheese and other natural cheeses like shredded cheese, string cheese and cottage cheese,” said Mike Belliveau, executive director of the Environmental Health Strategy Center, one of four advocacy groups that funded the report. Others were the Ecology Center, Healthy Babies Bright Futures and Safer States. The groups tested 10 different varieties of mac and cheese, including some that were labeled organic, and found high levels of phthalates in all of them. The tested products were purchased in the United States and shipped in the original packaging to VITO, the Flemish Institute for Technological Research in Belgium, where fat extracted from each product sample was analyzed for 13 phthalates using validated test methods, Mr. Belliveau said. Some two million boxes of mac and cheese, a relatively inexpensive food that can be whipped up in minutes, are sold every day in the United States, according to 2013 figures from Symphony/IRI Group. Mr. Belliveau said consumers would have a hard time avoiding the chemical. “Our belief is that it’s in every mac ‘n’ cheese product — you can’t shop your way out of the problem,” said Mr. Belliveau, who is urging consumers to contact manufacturers and pressure them to investigate how phthalates are getting into their products and take steps to eliminate it. Nine of the cheese products tested were made by Kraft, which makes most of the macaroni and cheese products sold, though the group did not disclose the names of specific products tested. Officials with Kraft did not respond to requests for comment on the report and its findings. Devon Hill, a lawyer in Washington who has experience with companies that make phthalates, said many phthalates have been phased out of food processing and packaging, and that those still in use result in very low exposures. The cheese tests looked for the presence of 13 different phthalates and detected all but two, with some food items containing up to six different phthalates in a single product. Environmental and food safety groups petitioned the F.D.A. last year to remove all phthalates from food, food packaging and food processing and manufacturing equipment, though the petition has been delayed temporarily for technical reasons, said Tom Neltner, chemicals policy director for the Environmental Defense Fund, which is coordinating the petition process for 11 advocacy groups, including the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Natural Resources Defense Council, the Environmental Working Group and others. “A chemical is not allowed in food unless there is a reasonable certainty it will cause no harm,” Mr. Neltner said, adding that because of all the evidence regarding the potential harms of phthalates, “We don’t think the F.D.A. can say there is a reasonable certainty of no harm.” An F.D.A. spokeswoman said the agency regulates all substances in food contact materials that can be expected to migrate into food, including phthalates, and said there must be “sufficient scientific information to demonstrate that the use of a substance in food contact materials is safe under the intended conditions of use before it is authorized for those uses.” The spokeswoman said: “The F.D.A. continues to monitor literature and research on these compounds as it becomes available.” Phthalates are not deliberately added to food. They are industrial chemicals used to soften plastics and are used as solvents, in adhesives and in ink on packaging. The chemicals migrate into food from food processing equipment like plastic tubing, conveyor belts and gaskets and other plastic materials used in the manufacturing process, and can also seep in from printed labels or plastic materials in the packaging. Since they bind with fats, they tend to build up in fatty foods, including not just cheese but baked goods, infant formula, meats, oils and fats, and fast food, studies show. Europe has banned many phthalates from use in plastics that come into contact with fatty foods, including baby food, but the F.D.A. allows the use of many phthalates in such materials and classifies them as indirect food additives. Although the concentration of phthalates in food may be quite low, measured in parts per billion, they are still present at higher levels than the natural hormones in the body, said Heather B. Patisaul, a professor of biological sciences at the Center for Human Health and the Environment at North Carolina State University in Raleigh. There is strong evidence that phthalates block the production of the hormone testosterone. “That means there is less testosterone available to the developing male fetus, and since testosterone is absolutely vital to build his reproductive organs, the worry is that you will get malformations and other kinds of problems that translate to health effects later,” Dr. Patisaul said. Those include “infertility, low sperm counts, altered male reproductive behavior and changes in the area of the brain that are important for sex differences between men and women,” as well as a heightened risk of testicular cancer later on, she said. “If you asked most scientists about the top 10 or 20 endocrine-disrupting chemicals they worry about, phthalates would be on that list,” Dr. Patisaul said. “We have an enormous amount of data.” Emerging research has also suggested links between early childhood exposure to phthalates and neurodevelopmental and behavior problems in young children, including aggression, hyperactivity and possible cognitive delays, said Dr. Sheela Sathyanarayana, associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Washington in Seattle, who studies phthalates. If you’re pregnant or planning a pregnancy, have young children or want to reduce your family’s exposure to phthalates for other reasons, here are some suggestions: ■ Eat more whole fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables, and minimize the amount of processed food you eat. “Avoid anything you find in a box that could sit around for many years,” said Dr. Sathyanarayana. “There are so many steps to get to that boxed product, and every step along the way, there’s usually plastic involved.” ■ Choose low-fat dairy products such as skim milk and low fat cheeses, and avoid high-fat foods such as cream, whole milk and fatty meats. “We know these more toxic phthalates accumulate in fat,” Dr. Sathyanarayana said. ■ Use glass, stainless steel, ceramic or wood to hold and store food instead of plastics, Dr. Sathyanarayana suggested, and if you are using sippy cups and baby bottles made from hard polycarbonate plastics, don’t put hot liquids in them. ■ Wash your hands frequently, and take your shoes off at home to avoid household dust that may be contaminated with chemical traces. Vacuum and wet dust frequently. ■ Food isn’t the only source of exposure. Many fragrances contain phthalates, Dr. Patisaul said, so choose unscented personal care products, from cleansers, moisturizers and cosmetics to shampoo and detergents as well. ■ If you’d like to try making your own macaroni and cheese, here are a few recipe options from the Cooking section of The New York Times: Creamy Macaroni and Cheese; Crusty Macaroni and Cheese; The Best Macaroni and Cheese. |
|
With all the scandal in the press about Kraft Macaroni and Cheese Having GMO (genetically modified wheat etc.) I pulled out one of my favorites. If you want REAL Food with the same amount of time and half the price try: Easy Stove Top Macaroni and CheeseTotal Time:30 mins Prep Time:15 mins Cook Time:15 mins Auntie’s Note: An easy way to do macaroni and cheese when there is little time until dinner. No baking required. Ingredients:Servings: 4 8 ounces elbow macaroni 1/4 cup butter 1/4 cup flour 1/2 teaspoon salt 1 dash black pepper 2 cups milk 2 cups cheddar cheese, shredded (8oz) Directions: 1) Cook macaroni according to package directions. 2) In medium saucepan, melt butter over medium heat; stir in flour, salt and pepper; slowly add milk. 3) Cook and stir until bubbly. 4) Stir in cheese until melted. 5) Drain macaroni; add to cheese sauce; stir to coat. TOP |
|
![]() Soy-based lunch kills 22 children in India: Have GMOs and pesticides become instant killers?Saturday, July 20, 2013 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer https://www.naturalnews.com/041282_school_lunch_deadly_poisons_dead_children.html All government food programs, including those in US, a threat to childrenThough this incident took place in one of India’s poorest regions, where corruption is rampant, the moral of the story is that this type of situation could happen anywhere. In the U.S., for instance, where the federal government is currently seizing control of school lunch programs nationwide, children are being fed some of the very same soy- and chemical-laden garbage for lunch. |
|
![]() Scientists discover what’s killing the bees and it’s worse than you thoughtBy Todd Woody © AP Photo/Ben Margot Outlawing a type of insecticides is not a panacea. As we’ve written before, the mysterious mass die-off of honey bees that pollinate $30 billion worth of crops in the US has so decimated America’s apis mellifera population that one bad winter could leave fields fallow. Now, a new study has pinpointed some of the probable causes of bee deaths and the rather scary results show that averting beemageddon will be much more difficult than previously thought. Scientists had struggled to find the trigger for so-called Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) that has wiped out an estimated 10 million beehives, worth $2 billion, over the past six years. Suspects have included pesticides, disease-bearing parasites and poor nutrition. But in a first-of-its-kind study published today in the journal PLOS ONE, scientists at the University of Maryland and the US Department of Agriculture have identified a witch’s brew of pesticides and fungicides contaminating pollen that bees collect to feed their hives. The findings break new ground on why large numbers of bees are dying though they do not identify the specific cause of CCD, where an entire beehive dies at once. When researchers collected pollen from hives on the east coast pollinating cranberry, watermelon and other crops and fed it to healthy bees, those bees showed a significant decline in their ability to resist infection by a parasite called Nosema ceranae. The parasite has been implicated in Colony Collapse Disorder though scientists took pains to point out that their findings do not directly link the pesticides to CCD. The pollen was contaminated on average with nine different pesticides and fungicides though scientists discovered 21 agricultural chemicals in one sample. Scientists identified eight ag chemicals associated with increased risk of infection by the parasite. Most disturbing, bees that ate pollen contaminated with fungicides were three times as likely to be infected by the parasite. Widely used, fungicides had been thought to be harmless for bees as they’re designed to kill fungus, not insects, on crops like apples. “There’s growing evidence that fungicides may be affecting the bees on their own and I think what it highlights is a need to reassess how we label these agricultural chemicals,” Dennis vanEngelsdorp, the study’s lead author, told Quartz. Labels on pesticides warn farmers not to spray when pollinating bees are in the vicinity but such precautions have not applied to fungicides. Bee populations are so low in the US that it now takes 60% of the country’s surviving colonies just to pollinate one California crop, almonds. And that’s not just a west coast problem—California supplies 80% of the world’s almonds, a market worth $4 billion. In recent years, a class of chemicals called neonicotinoids has been linked to bee deaths and in April regulators banned the use of the pesticide for two years in Europe where bee populations have also plummeted. But vanEngelsdorp, an assistant research scientist at the University of Maryland, says the new study shows that the interaction of multiple pesticides is affecting bee health. “The pesticide issue in itself is much more complex than we have led to be believe,” he says. “It’s a lot more complicated than just one product, which means of course the solution does not lie in just banning one class of product.” The study found another complication in efforts to save the bees: US honey bees, which are descendants of European bees, do not bring home pollen from native North American crops but collect bee chow from nearby weeds and wildflowers. That pollen, however, was also contaminated with pesticides even though those plants were not the target of spraying. “It’s not clear whether the pesticides are drifting over to those plants but we need take a new look at agricultural spraying practices,” says vanEngelsdorp. |
|
![]() Risk Expert: GMOs Could Destroy the Planetby George Washington on 03/26/2014 15:52 -0400 https://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-03-26/risk-expert-gmos-could-destroy-global-ecosystem
Risk analyst Nassim Nicholas Taleb predicted the 2008 financial crisis, by pointing out that commonly-used risk models were wrong. Distinguished professor of risk engineering at New York University, author of best-sellers The Black Swan and Fooled by Randomness, Taleb became financially independent after the crash of 1987, and wealthy during the 2008 financial crisis.
Taleb shreds GMO-boosters – including biologists – who don’t understand basic statistics:
In other words, lack of knowledge of basic statistical principles leads GMO supporters astray. For example, they don’t understand the concept that “interdependence” creates “thick tails” … leading to a “black swan” catastrophic risk event:
(This concept is important in the financial world, as well.)
![]() 1. The Risk of Famine If We Don’t Use GMOs. Taleb says:
In addition, the United Nations actually says that small organic farms are the only way to feed the world. And growing your own food helps prevent tyranny.
4. People Brought Potatoes from the Americas Back to Europe, Without Problem. Taleb says that potatoes evolved and competed over thousands of years in the Americas, and so proved that they did not disrupt ecosystems. On the other hand, GMOs are brand spanking new … created in the blink of the eye in a lab. GMOs Also INCREASE Pesticide Use, DECREASE Crop Yield, And May Be VERY Dangerous to Your HealthAs if the risk of “ecocide”isn’t enough, there are many other reasons to oppose GMO foods – at least without rigorous testing – including:
On the plus side? A few companies will make a lot of money. |
|
![]() It’s Official – Russia Completely Bans GMOsBy . https://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/04/15/its-official-russia-completely-bans-gmos/
Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev recently announced that Russia will no longer import GMO products, stating that the nation has enough space, and enough resources to produce organic food.
Russia has been considering joining the long list (and continually growing) of anti-GMO countries for quite some time now. It does so after a group of Russian scientists urged the government to consider at least a 10-year moratorium on GMOs to thoroughly study their influence on human health.
A number of scientists worldwide have clearly outlined the potential dangers associated with consuming GMOs. I recently published an article titled “10 Scientific Studies Proving GMOs Can Be Harmful To Human Health,” you can read that in full here. These are just a select few out of hundreds of studies that are now available in the public domain, it seems that they continue to surface year after year. Within the past few years, awareness regarding GMOs has skyrocketed. Activism has played a large role in waking up a large portion of Earths population with regards to GMOs. People are starting to ask questions and seek answers. In doing so, we are all coming to the same conclusion as Russia recently came to. |
|
![]() China protects its massive Army from GMOsby Jon Rappoport June 4, 2014 https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2014/06/05/china-protects-its-massive-army-from-gmos/ |
|
![]() The Seeds Of Suicide: How Monsanto Destroys FarmingBy Dr. Vandana Shiva
These are the promises Monsanto India’s website makes, alongside pictures of smiling, prosperous farmers from the state of Maharashtra. This is a desperate attempt by Monsanto and its PR machinery to delink the epidemic of farmers’ suicides in India from the company’s growing control over cotton seed supply — 95 per cent of India’s cotton seed is now controlled by Monsanto. |
|
![]() Federal court nixes FDA’s approval of genetically engineered “Frankenfish”Monday, November 23, 2020 by: Divina Ramirez https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-11-23-court-rejects-fda-approval-of-frankenfish.html Frankenfish can still be soldUnfortunately, the ruling does not stop AquaBounty’s facilities in Canada and Indiana from operating despite the deficiencies in the FDA’s approval. This means that AquAdvantage salmon could still end up in restaurant menus and supermarket freezers. Genetically modified animals could threaten biodiversityAquaBounty’s genetically engineered salmon was created using DNA from the endangered Atlantic salmon, Chinook salmon – the largest species of Pacific salmon – and ocean pout, which can be found in the northwestern Atlantic Ocean. |