DEPOPULATION - what elites want -

[Steven Gaal]

Analysis Finds Monsanto’s GM Corn Nutritionally Dead, Highly Toxic

April 15, 2013

Mike Barrett, Natural Society

Waking Times

http://www.wakingtim...d-highly-toxic/

Get back to us with a source for the supposed report. And then explain why this points to a "depopulation" plot rather than simple corporate greed.

++++++++++++++++

GEE IS KILLING OFF YOUR CUSTOMERS A" intelligent business paradigm" ?????

SEEMS THE RUSSIANS ARE NOT INTO THE GMO IDEA AS OF YET.

GMO Study Broadcast: Russian GMO Rat Experiment to be Broadcast 24/7

by Lisa Garber

October 4th, 2012

Updated 10/31/2012 at 10:30 pm

Russian researchers will stream a live experiment to show the effects of GMO feed on rats. This comes after a French study found GMOs to have negative effects on rats, which lead to a provisional Russian suspension on imported Monsanto genetically modified corn.

Russian Scientists Condemn GMOs, Plan a Unique Experiment

French scientists at the University of Caen sounded the alarm on September 19 after publishing images from their study of tumors on rats fed American GM maize. The National Association for Genetic Safety (NAGS) researchers in Russia have publicly condemned genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and have declared plans to conduct an experiment which members of the public can see, allowing the latter to formulate well-informed opinions about GMOs themselves.

These researchers will install web cameras in the cages of four groups of rats.

• Group 1 will be fed a diet high in GM soybeans and corn.
  

• Group 2 will be fed a diet low in GM soybeans and corn.
  

• Group 3 will be fed a diet with no GMOs.
  

• Group 4 will be fed a diet with standard rat feed.
  

To ensure integrity in the experiment, individuals assigned to tend to the rats will not know what food they are feeding them.

“This is a unique experiment,” says project Elena Sharoykina, who is spearheading the project. “There hasn’t been anything like it before—open, public research by opponents and supporters of GMO.”

Project to Cost $1 Million

If the rats survive (those in the French study became infertile, just as many before them), the experiment will go on for five generations. The public will have to wait until March 2013, however, to see the effects of GMOs while the scientists work out the finer details, such as funding. The research is projected to cost $1 million, which the scientists hope to find in commercial sponsors, government grants, and even public funding.

Sharoykina thinks it’s money well spent. “We will have a chance to understand in what direction we should move,” she says. “If this research proves negative influence, and supporters of GMOs accept it, the next step should be a moratorium on products with GMOs in Russia.”

Obstacles to Natural Food and GMO Labeling

With Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in bed with Monsanto and Dow—as evidenced in a number of political and economic maneuvers, not least of all the removal of 1 million signatures for a GMO labeling campaign—it’s uncertain how easily the United States will end genetic modification practices. Researchers across the world have already provided ample evidence of GMO’s harmful effects, including weight gain, organ disruption, infertility, tumor development, and the development of resistant weeds and pests. The push for change to natural, organic food and GMO labeling must come from the public.

Additional Sources:

Read more: http://naturalsociet.../#ixzz2QcP9H3HF

Edited April 16, 2013 by Steven Gaal

[Steven Gaal]

Study reveals GMO corn to be highly toxic

Posted on April 16, 2013 fromthetrenches

RT News

A leaked study examining genetically-modified corn reveals that the lab-made alternative to organic crops contains a startling level of toxic chemicals.

An anti-GMO website has posted the results of an education-based consulting company’s comparison of corn types, and the results reveal that genetically modified foods may be more hazardous than once thought.

The study, the 2012 Corn Comparison Report by Profit Pro, was published recently on the website for Moms Across America March to Label GMOs, a group that says they wish to “raise awareness and support Moms with solutions to eat GMO Free as we demand GMO labeling locally and nationally simultaneously.” They are plotting nationwide protests scheduled for later this year.

The report, writes the website’s Zen Honeycutt, was provided by a representative for De Dell Seed Company, an Ontario-based farm that’s touted as being Canadian only non-GMO corn seed company.

“The claims that ‘There is no difference between GMO corn and NON Gmo corn’ are false,” says Honeycutt, who adds she was “floored” after reading the study.

According to the analysis, GMO corn tested by Profit Pro contains a number of elements absent from traditional cord, including chlorides, formaldehyde and glyphosate. While those elements don’t appear naturally in corn, they were present in GMO samples to the tune of 60 ppm, 200pm and 13 ppm, respectively.

Honecutt says that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (FDA) mandates that the level of glyphosate in American drinking water not exceed 0.7 ppm and adds that organ damage in some animals has been linked to glyphosate exposure exceeding 0.1 ppm.

“Glyphosate is a strong organic phosphate chelator that immobilizes positively charged minerals such as manganese, cobalt, iron, zinc [and] copper,” Dr. Don Huber attested during a separate GMO study recently released, adding that those elements “are essential for normal physiological functions in soils, plants and animals.”

“Glyphosate draws out the vital nutrients of living things and GMO corn is covered with it,” adds Honeycutt, who notes that the nutritional benefits rampant in natural corn are almost entirely removed from lab-made seeds: in the samples used during the study, non-GMO corn is alleged to have 437-times the amount of calcium in genetically modified versions, and 56- and 7-times the level of magnesium and manganese, respectively.

These studies come on the heels of a recent decision on Capitol Hill to approve an annual agriculture appropriations bill, even though a provision within the act contained a rider that frees GMO corporations such as the multi-billion-dollar Monsanto Company from liability. The so-called “Monsanto Protection Act,” written by a lawmaker that has lobbied for the agra-giant, says biotech companies won’t need federal approval to test and plant GMO-crops, even if health risks are unknown.

“The provision would strip federal courts of the authority to halt the sale and planting of an illegal, potentially hazardous GE crop while the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) assesses those potential hazards,” reads a letter to the House of Representatives that was delivered to Congress last month with the signatures of dozens of food businesses and retailers, as well as interest groups and agencies representing family farmers. “Further, it would compel USDA to allow continued planting of that same crop upon request, even if in the course of its assessment the Department finds that it poses previously unrecognized risks.”

http://rt.com/usa/toxic-study-gmo-corn-900/

[Len Colby]

Study reveals GMO corn to be highly toxic

Posted on April 16, 2013 fromthetrenches

RT News

A leaked study examining genetically-modified corn reveals that the lab-made alternative to organic crops contains a startling level of toxic chemicals.

An anti-GMO website has posted the results of an education-based consulting company’s comparison of corn types, and the results reveal that genetically modified foods may be more hazardous than once thought.

The study, the 2012 Corn Comparison Report by Profit Pro, was published recently on the website for Moms Across America March to Label GMOs, a group that says they wish to “raise awareness and support Moms with solutions to eat GMO Free as we demand GMO labeling locally and nationally simultaneously.” They are plotting nationwide protests scheduled for later this year.

[...]

Yet if one goes to the Moms Across America March website there's no sign of any such report only the exact same table with the supposed values for two types of corn. We are not told what methodology was used let alone which lab(s) did the testing nor even which of the many types each of GMO and GMO corn were tested. There is no sign of the supposed study on either the ProProfit or Da Dell websites, both of which are anti-GMO farm supply companies, neither seems to have lab capable of conducting such a study. Also the GMO corn having close to zero calories doesn't make any sense, if farmers were feeding it to their livestock they presumably would notice the animals were becoming emaciated rather than put on weight. And if a company developed such low calorie corn for people the would champion the fact.

GEE IS KILLING OFF YOUR CUSTOMERS A" intelligent business paradigm" ?????

Well it would depend how much money they would expect to make off them before they died. What percentage of the average American's diet is GMO corn, how long would it take the supposedly heightened levels of the toxins to kill them?

[Steven Gaal]

if farmers were feeding it to their livestock they presumably would notice the animals were becoming emaciated rather than put on weight // COLBY

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

cows dying from gmo corn I put that in GOOGLE .....got some returns !! (DID YOU THINK OF DOING THAT ??)

[Steven Gaal]

10 IRREFUTABLE evidence that GMO can harm you

http://www.seattleor...-harms-dangers/

################################

CHINA/RUSSIA BOTH SKEPTICAL ON GMO FOOD

################################

China Adds Genetically Modified Rice to the List of Rejected GMOs

by Andre Evans

February 2nd, 2012

Updated 11/06/2012 at 12:35

As awareness of genetically modified food and the dangers associated increase, actions are being taken to eliminate the issue entirely. With countries destroying their GMO crops, scientists showing the facts, and individuals voicing their discontent on the matter, there is a large and growing contingent across countries that are taking action to preserve the integrity of our food supply. China is the latest nation to take a stand against GMO crops, rejecting genetically modified rice.

China Rejects Genetically Modified Rice

China recently suspended the distribution of genetically modified rice within its commercial food supplies.

Rice, being perhaps the most common and prominently used food within Chinese diet makes its safety and reliability very significant. Acting as a staple food for over 1.3 billion Chinese people, any compromise to the integrity of their food supply should be accordingly assessed and acted against based upon the interests of the population.

This action helps to preserve the sovereignty and safety of their food supply, something that largely must still be addressed in our own country. In the United States GMO foods are not only accepted by loose regulation standards, but are not even labeled appropriately.

The dangers of GMO foods are so great that they are still not — and may never be — fully assessable. With a large number of documented negative effects on its consumers, GMO foods are a highly dangerous threat to individual health alone.

If this weren’t enough, genetically engineered crops actually threaten the integrity of the food supply altogether by devastating the environment with powerful superweeds and mutant bugs. The nature of genetic engineering is so volatile that unless properly handled, the integrity of the entire world food supply could be ruined. No wonder China added genetically modified rice to the GMO rejection list.

As such, any form of action that a government takes to prevent or eliminate GMOs from the equation is significant. Reassessing the nature and scale of the threat in light of new evidence should compel even more action in even momore locations around the world.

Edited April 17, 2013 by Steven Gaal

[Len Colby]

if farmers were feeding it to their livestock they presumably would notice the animals were becoming emaciated rather than put on weight // COLBY

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

cows dying from gmo corn I put that in GOOGLE .....got some returns !! (DID YOU THINK OF DOING THAT ??)

All the hits were to obscure sites, none alleged the cows died from malnutrition.

[Steven Gaal]

if farmers were feeding it to their livestock they presumably would notice the animals were becoming emaciated rather than put on weight // COLBY

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

cows dying from gmo corn I put that in GOOGLE .....got some returns !! (DID YOU THINK OF DOING THAT ??)

All the hits were to obscure sites, none alleged the cows died from malnutrition.

###################

COWS HAVE DIFFERENT DIGESTION ,THAT MAY LESSEN TOXIC EFFECTS

BUT STILL HEALTH PROBLEMS GMO FOODS SEE

http://www.academia....on_Human_Health

*********************************************

Health Risks

Download the PDF of the Health Risks brochure

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

Starting in 1996, Americans have been eating genetically modified (GM) ingredients in most processed foods. Why isn't the FDA protecting us?

In 1992, the Food and Drug Administration claimed they had no information showing that GM foods were substantially different from conventionally grown foods. Therefore they are safe to eat, and absolutely no safety studies were required. But internal memos made public by a lawsuit[2] reveal that their position was staged by political appointees who were under orders from the White House to promote GMOs. In addition, the FDA official in charge of creating this policy was Michael Taylor, the former attorney for Monsanto, the largest biotech company, and later their vice president.

In reality, FDA scientists had repeatedly warned that GM foods can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects, including allergies, toxins, new diseases, and nutritional problems. They urged long-term safety studies, but were ignored.

Today, the same biotech companies who have been found guilty of hiding toxic effects of their chemical products are in charge of determining whether their GM foods are safe. Industry-funded GMO safety studies are too superficial to find most of the potential dangers, and their voluntary consultations with the FDA are widely criticized as a meaningless façade.[3]

GM plants, such as soybean, corn, cottonseed, and canola, have had foreign genes forced into their DNA. The inserted genes come from species, such as bacteria and viruses, which have never been in the human food supply.

Genetic engineering transfers genes across natural species barriers. It uses imprecise laboratory techniques that bear no resemblance to natural breeding, and is based on outdated concepts of how genes and cells work.[4]Gene insertion is done either by shooting genes from a "gene gun" into a plate of cells or by using bacteria to invade the cell with foreign DNA. The altered cell is then cloned into a plant.

Widespread, unpredictable changes

The genetic engineering process creates massive collateral damage, causing mutations in hundreds or thousands of locations throughout the plant's DNA.[5] Natural genes can be deleted or permanently turned on or off, and hundreds may change their behavior.[6] Even the inserted gene can be damaged or rearranged,[7] and may create proteins that can trigger allergies or promote disease.

GM foods on the market

There are eight GM food crops. The five major varieties—soy, corn, canola, cotton, and sugar beets—have bacterial genes inserted, which allow the plants to survive an otherwise deadly dose of weed killer. Farmers use considerably more herbicides on these GM crops and so the food has higher herbicide residues. About 68% of GM crops are herbicide tolerant.

The second GM trait is a built-in pesticide, found in GM corn and cotton. A gene from the soil bacterium called Bt (for Bacillus thuringiensis) is inserted into the plant's DNA, where it secretes the insect-killing Bt-toxin in every cell. About 19% of GM crops produce their own pesticide. Another 13% produce a pesticide and are herbicide tolerant.

There is also Hawaiian papaya and a small amount of zucchini and yellow crookneck squash, which are engineered to resist a plant virus.

Growing evidence of harm from GMOs

GM soy and allergic reactions

• Soy allergies skyrocketed by 50% in the UK, soon after GM soy was introduced.[8]
  
• A skin xxxxx allergy test shows that some people react to GM soy, but not to wild natural soy.[9]
  
• Cooked GM soy contains as much as 7-times the amount of a known soy allergen.[10]
  
• GM soy also contains a new unexpected allergen, not found in wild natural soy.[11]
  

Bt corn and cotton linked to allergies

The biotech industry claims that Bt-toxin is harmless to humans and mammals because the natural bacteria version has been used as a spray by farmers for years. In reality, hundreds of people exposed to Bt spray had allergic-type symptoms,[12] and mice fed Bt had powerful immune responses[13] and damaged intestines.[14] Moreover, the Bt in GM crops is designed to be more toxic than the natural spray and is thousands of times more concentrated.

Farm workers throughout India are getting the same allergic reactions from handling Bt cotton[15] as those who reacted to Bt spray.[16] Mice[17] and rats[18] fed Bt corn also showed immune responses.

GMOs fail allergy tests

No tests can guarantee that a GMO will not cause allergies. Although the World Health Organization recommends a screening protocol,[19]the GM soy, corn, and papaya in our food supply fail those tests—because their GM proteins have properties of known allergens.[20]

GMOs may make you allergic to non-GM foods

• GM soy drastically reduces digestive enzymes in mice.[21] If it also impairs your digestion, you may become sensitive and allergic to a variety of foods.
  
• Mice fed Bt-toxin started having immune reactions to formerly harmless foods.[22]
  
• Mice fed experimental GM peas also started reacting to a range of other foods.[23] (The peas had already passed all the allergy tests normally done before a GMO gets on the market. Only this advanced test, which is never used on the GMOs we eat, revealed that the peas could actually be deadly.)
  

GMOs and liver problems

• Rats fed GM potatoes had smaller, partially atrophied livers.[24]
  
• The livers of rats fed GM canola were 12-16% heavier.[25]
  
• GM soy altered mouse liver cells in ways that suggest a toxic insult.[26]The changes reversed after they switched to non-GM soy.[27]
  

GMOs, reproductive problems, and infant mortality

• More than half the babies of mother rats fed GM soy died within three weeks.[28]
  
• Male rats[29] and mice[30] fed GM soy had changed testicles, including altered young sperm cells in the mice.
  
• The DNA of mouse embryos functioned differently when their parents ate GM soy[31]
  
• The longer mice were fed GM corn, the less babies they had, and the smaller their babies were.[32]
  
• Babies of female rats fed GM soy were considerably smaller, and more than half died within three weeks (compared to 10% of the non-GM soy controls).[33]
  
• Female rats fed GM soy showed changes in their ovaries and uterus.
  
• By the third generation, most hamsters fed GM soy were unable to have babies.
  

Bt crops linked to sterility, disease, and death

• Thousands of sheep, buffalo, and goats in India died after grazing on Bt cotton plants after harvest. Others suffered poor health and reproductive problems.[34]
  
• Farmers in Europe and Asia say that cows, water buffaloes, chickens, and horses died from eating Bt corn varieties.[35]
  
• About two dozen US farmers report that Bt corn varieties caused widespread sterility in pigs or cows.[36]
  
• Filipinos in at least five villages fell sick when a nearby Bt corn variety was pollinating.[37]
  
• The stomach lining of rats fed GM potatoes showed excessive cell growth, a condition that may lead to cancer. Rats also had damaged organs and immune systems.[38]
  

<a name="dangers">

Functioning GM genes remain inside you

Unlike safety evaluations for drugs, there are no human clinical trials of GM foods. The only published human feeding experiment revealed that the genetic material inserted into GM soy transfers into bacteria living inside our intestines and continues to function.[39] This means that long after we stop eating GM foods, we may still have their GM proteins produced continuously inside us.

• If the antibiotic gene inserted into most GM crops were to transfer, it could create super diseases, resistant to antibiotics.
  
• If the gene that creates Bt-toxin in GM corn were to transfer, it might turn our intestinal bacteria into living pesticide factories.
  
• Animal studies show that DNA in food can travel into organs throughout the body, even into the fetus.[40]
  

GM food supplement caused deadly epidemic

In the 1980s, a contaminated brand of a food supplement called L-tryptophan killed about 100 Americans and caused sickness and disability in another 5,000-10,000 people. The source of contaminants was almost certainly the genetic engineering process used in its production.[41] The disease took years to find and was almost overlooked. It was only identified because the symptoms were unique, acute, and fast-acting. If all three characteristics were not in place, the deadly GM supplement might never have been identified or removed.

If GM foods on the market are causing common diseases or if their effects appear only after long-term exposure, we may not be able to identify the source of the problem for decades, if at all. There is no monitoring of GMO-related illnesses and no long-term animal studies. Heavily invested biotech corporations are gambling with the health of our nation for their profit.

Help end the genetic engineering of our food supply

When the tipping point of consumer concern about GMOs was achieved in Europe in 1999, within a single week virtually all major food manufacturers committed to remove GM ingredients. The Campaign for Healthier Eating in America is designed to reach a similar tipping point in the US soon.

Our growing network of manufacturers, retailers, healthcare practitioners, organizations, and the media, is informing consumers of the health risks of GMOs and helping them select healthier non-GMO alternatives with our Non-GMO Shopping Guides.

Start buying non-GMO today. Help us stop the genetic engineering of our food supply.

Download your free Non-GMO Shopping Guide or ShopNoGMO iPhone App

The health information featured on this page is excerpted fromGenetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risk of Genetically Engineered Foods, by Jeffrey M. Smith. © Copyright 2010. Institute for Responsible Technology.

[1] See http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html

[2] See www.biointegrity.org

[3] See Part 2, Jeffrey M. Smith, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, Yes! Books, Fairfield, IA 2007

[4] See for example 233-236, chart of disproved assumptions, in Jeffrey M. Smith, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, Yes! Books, Fairfield, IA 2007

[5] J. R. Latham, et al., "The Mutational Consequences of Plant Transformation," The Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology 2006, Article ID 25376: 1-7; see also Allison Wilson, et. al., "Transformation-induced mutations in transgenic plants: Analysis and biosafety implications," Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Reviews – Vol. 23, December 2006.

[6] Srivastava, et al, "Pharmacogenomics of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) and the cystic fibrosis drug CPX using genome microarray analysis," Mol Med. 5, no. 11(Nov 1999):753–67.

[7] Latham et al, "The Mutational Consequences of Plant Transformation, Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology 2006:1-7, article ID 25376, http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jbb/; Draft risk analysis report application A378, Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant sugarbeet line 77 (GTSB77)," ANZFA, March 7, 2001; E. Levine et al., "Molecular Characterization of Insect Protected Corn Line MON 810." Unpublished study submitted to the EPA by Monsanto, EPA MRID No. 436655-01C (1995); Allison Wilson, PhD, Jonathan Latham, PhD, and Ricarda Steinbrecher, PhD, "Genome Scrambling—Myth or Reality? Transformation-Induced Mutations in Transgenic Crop Plants Technical Report—October 2004," www.econexus.info; C. Collonier, G. Berthier, F. Boyer, M. N. Duplan, S. Fernandez, N. Kebdani, A. Kobilinsky, M. Romanuk, Y. Bertheau, "Characterization of commercial GMO inserts: a source of useful material to study genome fluidity," Poster presented at ICPMB: International Congress for Plant Molecular Biology (n°VII), Barcelona, 23-28th June 2003. Poster courtesy of Dr. Gilles-Eric Seralini, Président du Conseil Scientifique du CRII-GEN, www.crii-gen.org; also "Transgenic lines proven unstable" by Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS Report, 23 October 2003, www.i-sis.org.uk

[8] Mark Townsend, "Why soya is a hidden destroyer," Daily Express, March 12, 1999.

[9] Hye-Yung Yum, Soo-Young Lee, Kyung-Eun Lee, Myung-Hyun Sohn, Kyu-Earn Kim, "Genetically Modified and Wild Soybeans: An immunologic comparison," Allergy and Asthma Proceedings 26, no. 3 (May–June 2005): 210-216(7).

[10] A. Pusztai and S. Bardocz, "GMO in animal nutrition: potential benefits and risks," Chapter 17, Biology of Nutrition in Growing Animals, R. Mosenthin, J. Zentek and T. Zebrowska (Eds.) Elsevier, October 2005.

[11] Hye-Yung Yum, Soo-Young Lee, Kyung-Eun Lee, Myung-Hyun Sohn, Kyu-Earn Kim, "Genetically Modified and Wild Soybeans: An immunologic comparison," Allergy and Asthma Proceedings 26, no. 3 (May–June 2005): 210-216(7).

[12]M. Green, et al., "Public health implications of the microbial pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis: An epidemiological study, Oregon, 1985-86," Amer. J. Public Health 80, no. 7(1990): 848–852; and M.A. Noble, P.D. Riben, and G. J. Cook, Microbiological and epidemiological surveillance program to monitor the health effects of Foray 48B BTK spray (Vancouver, B.C.: Ministry of Forests, Province of British Columbi, Sep. 30, 1992)

[13] Vazquez et al, "Intragastric and intraperitoneal administration of Cry1Ac protoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis induces systemic and mucosal antibody responses in mice," 1897–1912; Vazquez et al, "Characterization of the mucosal and systemic immune response induced by Cry1Ac protein from Bacillus thuringiensis HD 73 in mice," Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research 33 (2000): 147–155; and Vazquez et al, "Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac protoxin is a potent systemic and mucosal adjuvant," Scandanavian Journal of Immunology 49 (1999): 578–584. See also Vazquez-Padron et al., 147 (2000b).

[14] Nagui H. Fares, Adel K. El-Sayed, "Fine Structural Changes in the Ileum of Mice Fed on Endotoxin Treated Potatoes and Transgenic Potatoes," Natural Toxins 6, no. 6 (1998): 219–233.

[15] See for example "Bt cotton causing allergic reaction in MP; cattle dead," Bhopal, Nov. 23, 2005

[16] http://news.webindia123.com Ashish Gupta et. al., "Impact of Bt Cotton on Farmers' Health (in Barwani and Dhar District of Madhya Pradesh)," Investigation Report, Oct–Dec 2005; and M. Green, et al., "Public health implications of the microbial pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis: An epidemiological study, Oregon, 1985-86," Amer. J. Public Health 80, no. 7(1990): 848–852; and M.A. Noble, P.D. Riben, and G. J. Cook, Microbiological and epidemiological surveillance program to monitor the health effects of Foray 48B BTK spray (Vancouver, B.C.: Ministry of Forests, Province of British Columbi, Sep. 30, 1992)

[17] Alberto Finamore, et al, "Intestinal and Peripheral Immune Response to MON810 Maize Ingestion in Weaning and Old Mice," J. Agric. Food Chem., 2008, 56 (23), pp 11533–11539, November 14, 2008

[18] Joël Spiroux de Vendômois, François Roullier, Dominique Cellier and Gilles-Eric Séralini. 2009, A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health . International Journal of Biological Sciences 2009; 5(7):706-726; and Seralini GE, Cellier D, Spiroux de Vendomois J. 2007, New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2007;52:596-602

[19] FAO-WHO, "Evaluation of Allergenicity of Genetically Modified Foods. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Allergenicity of Foods Derived from Biotechnology," Jan. 22–25, 2001; http://www.fao.org/es/ESN/food/pdf/allergygm.pdf

[20]Gendel, "The use of amino acid sequence alignments to assess potential allergenicity of proteins used in genetically modified foods," Advances in Food and Nutrition Research 42 (1998), 45–62; G. A. Kleter and A. A. C. M. Peijnenburg, "Screening of transgenic proteins expressed in transgenic food crops for the presence of short amino acid sequences indentical to potential, IgE-binding linear epitopes of allergens," BMC Structural Biology 2 (2002): 8–19; H. P. J. M. Noteborn, "Assessment of the Stability to Digestion and Bioavailability of the LYS Mutant Cry9C Protein from Bacillus thuringiensis serovar tolworthi," Unpublished study submitted to the EPA by AgrEvo, EPA MRID No. 447343-05 (1998); and H. P. J. M. Noteborn et al, "Safety Assessment of the Bacillus thuringiensis Insecticidal Crystal Protein CRYIA( Expressed in Transgenic Tomatoes," in Genetically modified foods: safety issues, American Chemical Society Symposium Series 605, eds. K.H. Engel et al., (Washington, DC, 1995): 134–47.

[21] M. Malatesta, M. Biggiogera, E. Manuali, M. B. L. Rocchi, B. Baldelli, G. Gazzanelli, "Fine Structural Analyses of Pancreatic Acinar Cell Nuclei from Mice Fed on GM Soybean," Eur J Histochem 47 (2003): 385–388.

[22] Vazquez et al, "Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac protoxin is a potent systemic and mucosal adjuvant," Scandanavian Journal of Immunology 49 (1999): 578–584. See also Vazquez-Padron et al., 147 (2000b).

[23] V. E. Prescott, et al, "Transgenic Expression of Bean r-Amylase Inhibitor in Peas Results in Altered Structure and Immunogenicity," Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry (2005): 53.

[24] Arpad Pusztai, "Can science give us the tools for recognizing possible health risks of GM food," Nutrition and Health, 2002, Vol 16 Pp 73-84

[25] Comments to ANZFA about Applications A346, A362 and A363 from the Food Legislation and Regulation Advisory Group (FLRAG) of the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) on behalf of the PHAA, "Food produced from glyphosate-tolerant canola line GT73," http://www.iher.org.au/

[26] M. Malatesta, C. Caporaloni, S. Gavaudan, M. B. Rocchi, S. Serafini, C. Tiberi, G. Gazzanelli, "Ultrastructural Morphometrical and Immunocytochemical Analyses of Hepatocyte Nuclei from Mice Fed on Genetically Modified Soybean," Cell Struct Funct. 27 (2002): 173–180.

[27] M. Malatesta, C. Tiberi, B. Baldelli, S. Battistelli, E. Manuali, M. Biggiogera, "Reversibility of Hepatocyte Nuclear Modifications in Mice Fed on Genetically Modified Soybean," Eur J Histochem, 49 (2005): 237-242.

[28] I.V. Ermakova, "Diet with the Soya Modified by Gene EPSPS CP4 Leads to Anxiety and Aggression in Rats," 14th European Congress of Psychiatry. Nice, France, March 4-8, 2006; "Genetically modified soy affects posterity: Results of Russian scientists' studies," REGNUM, October 12, 2005; http://www.regnum.ru/english/526651.html; Irina Ermakova, "Genetically modified soy leads to the decrease of weight and high mortality of rat pups of the first generation. Preliminary studies," Ecosinform 1 (2006): 4–9.

[29] Irina Ermakova, "Experimental Evidence of GMO Hazards," Presentation at Scientists for a GM Free Europe, EU Parliament, Brussels, June 12, 2007

[30] L. Vecchio et al, "Ultrastructural Analysis of Testes from Mice Fed on Genetically Modified Soybean," European Journal of Histochemistry 48, no. 4 (Oct–Dec 2004):449–454.

[31] Oliveri et al., "Temporary Depression of Transcription in Mouse Pre-implantion Embryos from Mice Fed on Genetically Modified Soybean," 48th Symposium of the Society for Histochemistry, Lake Maggiore (Italy), September 7–10, 2006.

[32] Alberta Velimirov and Claudia Binter, "Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice," Forschungsberichte der Sektion IV, Band 3/2008

[33] I.V. Ermakova, "Diet with the Soya Modified by Gene EPSPS CP4 Leads to Anxiety and Aggression in Rats," 14th European Congress of Psychiatry. Nice, France, March 4-8, 2006; "Genetically modified soy affects posterity: Results of Russian scientists' studies," REGNUM, October 12, 2005; http://www.regnum.ru/english/526651.html; Irina Ermakova, "Genetically modified soy leads to the decrease of weight and high mortality of rat pups of the first generation. Preliminary studies," Ecosinform 1 (2006): 4–9.

[34] "Mortality in Sheep Flocks after Grazing on Bt Cotton Fields—Warangal District, Andhra Pradesh" Report of the Preliminary Assessment, April 2006, http://gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/6416-mortality-in-sheep-flocks-after-grazing-on-bt-cotton-fields-warangal-district-andhra-pradesh-2942006

[35] Mae-Wan Ho, "GM Ban Long Overdue, Dozens Ill & Five Deaths in the Philippines," ISIS Press Release, June 2, 2006; and Mae-Wan Ho and Sam Burcher, "Cows Ate GM Maize & Died," ISIS Press Release, January 13, 2004, http://www.isis.org.uk/CAGMMAD.php

[36] Personal communication with Jerry Rosman and other farmers, 2006; also reported widely in the farm press.

[37] See for example Mae-Wan Ho, "GM Ban Long Overdue, Dozens Ill & Five Deaths in the Philippines," ISIS Press Release, June 2, 2006; "Study Result Not Final, Proof Bt Corn Harmful to Farmers," BusinessWorld, 02 Mar 2004; and "Genetically Modified Crops and Illness Linked," Manila Bulletin, 04 Mar 2004.

[38] Arpad Pusztai, "Can science give us the tools for recognizing possible health risks of GM food," Nutrition and Health, 2002, Vol 16 Pp 73-84; Stanley W. B. Ewen and Arpad Pusztai, "Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine," Lancet, 1999 Oct 16; 354 (9187): 1353-4; and Arpad Pusztai, "Facts Behind the GM Pea Controversy: Epigenetics, Transgenic Plants & Risk Assessment," Proceedings of the Conference, December 1st 2005 (Frankfurtam Main, Germany: Literaturhaus, 2005)

[39] Netherwood et al, "Assessing the survival of transgenic plant DNA in the human gastrointestinal tract," Nature Biotechnology 22 (2004): 2.

[40] Ricarda A. Steinbrecher and Jonathan R. Latham, "Horizontal gene transfer from GM crops to unrelated organisms," GM Science Review Meeting of the Royal Society of Edinburgh on "GM Gene Flow: Scale and Consequences for Agriculture and the Environment," January 27, 2003; Traavik and Heinemann, Genetic Engineering and Omitted Health Research; citing Schubbert, et al, "Ingested foreign (phage M13) DNA survives transiently in the gastrointestinal tract and enters the bloodstream of mice," Mol Gen Genet. 242, no. 5 (1994): 495–504; Schubbert et al, "Foreign (M13) DNA ingested by mice reaches peripheral leukocytes, spleen, and liver via the intestinal wall mucosa and can be covalently linked to mouse DNA," Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94, no. 3 (1997): 961–6; Schubbert et al, "On the fate of orally ingested foreign DNA in mice: chromosomal association and placental transmission to the fetus," Mol Gen Genet. 259, no. 6 (1998): 569–76; Hohlweg and Doerfler, "On the fate of plants or other foreign genes upon the uptake in food or after intramuscular injection in mice," Mol Genet Genomics 265 (2001): 225–233; Palka-Santani, et al., "The gastrointestinal tract as the portal of entry for foreign macromolecules: fate of DNA and proteins," Mol Gen Genomics 270 (2003): 201–215; Einspanier, et al, "The fate of forage plant DNA in farm animals; a collaborative case-study investigating cattle and chicken fed recombinant plant material," Eur Food Res Technol 212 (2001): 129–134; Klotz, et al, "Degradation and possible carry over of feed DNA monitored in pigs and poultry," Eur Food Res Technol 214 (2002): 271–275; Forsman, et al, "Uptake of amplifiable fragments of retrotransposon DNA from the human alimentary tract," Mol Gen Genomics 270 (2003): 362–368; Chen, et al, "Transfection of mEpo gene to intestinal epithelium in vivo mediated by oral delivery of chitosan-DNA nanoparticles," World Journal of Gastroenterology 10, no 1(2004): 112–116; Phipps, et al, "Detection of transgenic and endogenous plant DNA in rumen fluid, duodenal digesta, milk, blood, and feces of lactating dairy cows," J Dairy Sci. 86, no. 12(2003): 4070–8

[41] William E. Crist,Toxic L-tryptophan: Shedding Light on a Mysterious Epidemic; and Jeffrey M. Smith, Seeds of Deception, Yes! Books, Fairfield, IA 2003, chapter 4, Deadly Epidemic

Edited April 18, 2013 by Steven Gaal

[Len Colby]

if farmers were feeding it to their livestock they presumably would notice the animals were becoming emaciated rather than put on weight // COLBY

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

cows dying from gmo corn I put that in GOOGLE .....got some returns !! (DID YOU THINK OF DOING THAT ??)

All the hits were to obscure sites, none alleged the cows died from malnutrition.

###################

COWS HAVE DIFFERENT DIGESTION ,THAT MAY LESSEN TOXIC EFFECTS

BUT STILL HEALTH PROBLEMS GMO FOODS SEE

http://www.academia....on_Human_Health

You mean they can survive with zero calorie intake? Amazing!

Bentham Open Journals are joke vanity journals that do not follow accepted rules of peer-review and will publish just about anything if they get paid.

Health Risks

Download the PDF of the Health Risks brochure

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

From Wikipedia:

Criticism of legitimacy

Quackwatch

lists the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) as a questionable organization, and its certifying board, the American Board of Environmental Medicine as a dubious certifying board.

^[4]

They are not recognized by the

American Board of Medical Specialties

.

^[8]

[

edit

]Accreditation

The academy is accredited by the

Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education

to provide continuing medical education.

^[9]

See also: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/environmental-medicine/

But as above you have yet to “explain why this points to a "depopulation" plot rather than simple corporate greed.”

[Steven Gaal]

OPENYOURMIND WHITEWITCH BLOGGER

I'm sure anyone who has tried to explain that Natural healthcare makes more sense than Pharmaceutical Healthcare has been faced with this bullcrap, I know I have..

QuackWatch

This guy is something else.. I sent him an email about 2 years ago but I never got a response.. Guess he couldn't answer when the facts were handed to him on a plate..

Well, here's the thing.. That MD after his name, well.. He's not really entitled to have that there. He's one of the unqualified Doctors who signs off on fraudulent research papers (as described in the thread about how unsafe drugs pass the FDA), he says he testifies as an expert, but this guy never even fully qualified as a doctor, and he also had to give up his medical license..

Read more about the head Quack himself here

The next time someone tries to say, "Oh but Quackwatch says...", politely remind them that the guy who runs Quackwatch is himself a Quack, a failed MD who tried and failed to take some Chiropractors to court, was told to cease and desist, but couldn't leave it alone.. He is not a reliable source of information if he is willing to misrepresent himself to those who use his site for reference. He is unable to answer simple questions when they are put to him, because the evidence shows that the majority of pharmaceutical drugs are useless, while the evidence is mounting that natural and preventative healthcare is better.. And he even engages in fraud by taking exorbitant fees for his "expert testimony" in court.

This is a man who was Officially Declared by the US Court System, in a PUBLISHED Appeals Court Decision (NCAHF v King Bio), to be "Biased, and unworthy of credibility." Would you trust him??

I rest my case

[Len Colby]

OPENYOURMIND WHITEWITCH BLOGGER

I'm sure anyone who has tried to explain that Natural healthcare makes more sense than Pharmaceutical Healthcare has been faced with this bullcrap, I know I have..

QuackWatch

[...]

This is a man who was Officially Declared by the US Court System, in a PUBLISHED Appeals Court Decision (NCAHF v King Bio), to be "Biased, and unworthy of credibility." Would you trust him??

I rest my case

This is a lie the actual quote was:

“Furthermore, the Court finds that both Dr. Sampson and Dr. Barrett are biased heavily in favor of the Plaintiff and thus the weight to be accorded their testimony is slight in any event. Both are long-time board members of the Plaintiff; Dr. Barrett has served as its Chairman.”

In other words the judge determined he was “biased” in favor of the group he was a board member of and former chairman, not much of a surprise. The judge also determined he was not “an expert on FDA regulation of homeopathic drugs” he made no other determinations regarding Barrett's credibility or expertise

http://www.quackpotwatch.org/quackpots/california_superior_court_judge_.htm

Barrett it should be noted got his medical training at Columbia, “received an FDA Commissioner's Special Citation Award for Public Service in fighting nutrition quackery...was awarded honorary membership in the American Dietetic Association [in 1986] taught health education at The Pennsylvania State University [1987-9]...is listed in Marquis Who's Who in America and received the 2001 Distinguished Service to Health Education Award from the American Association for Health Education...is medical editor of Prometheus Books; and has been a peer-review panelist for several top medical journals” including the Journal of the American Medical Association and the Annals of Internal Medicine. He let his medical license expire when retired when he was 60, he had no disciplinary action taken against him To make a long story short he is not “a failed MD” and is far more qualified than his critics

http://www.quackwatch.com/10Bio/bio.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Barrett

[Steven Gaal]

The World Health Organization (WHO) and UNICEF Tetanus Vaccination Campaign is a “Well-Coordinated Forceful Population Control Mass Sterilization Exercise” (click link )

“Let me authoritatively clarify the concerns raised by the Catholic Bishops on the just concluded tetanus vaccination by sharing extracts from the official position of the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association as below; feel free to share the article:

Tetanus is an incurable disease that infects the body through broken skin or wounds. The umbilical cord stamp of newborn babies is a possible entry point and makes them especially susceptible. It is best prevented through immunization with the tetanus toxoid (TT) vaccine.

Edited November 11, 2014 by Steven Gaal

[Evan Burton]

Serious question for Steven: is there any conspiracy you do not think is valid? Serious: you have indicated support / belief in anti-vaccine, anti-GM, MH-17, etc. Out of interest, is there a mainstream conspiracy theory that you think is not true? I think it would be worthwhile exploring what beliefs we have in common rather than what we do not.

[Steven Gaal]

Serious question for Steven: is there any conspiracy you do not think is valid? Serious: you have indicated support / belief in anti-vaccine, anti-GM, MH-17, etc. Out of interest, is there a mainstream conspiracy theory that you think is not true? I think it would be worthwhile exploring what beliefs we have in common rather than what we do not.

Very simple if I dont comment on it ,it isnt true. EXAMPLE :NO UFO's. I do think governments could use the UFO story for is own purposes.

Like in 1950s the Airforce used UFOs to hide sighting of advanced convential air craft.

Now Evan try this: you need a strong immune system to make antibodies. Said antibodies are the reason you get vaccine

OK But Evan if you have a strong immune system you dont need vaccine to get antibodies.

THUS FLU vaccine only helps 9 % of the people who get it and side effects with additives harm more than 9 %.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We give lots of vaccines below 2 yrs of age kids.

Japan almost ZERO under age two.....Evan is Japan stupid ??...or BIG PHARMA can trick a lot of people...comm on now come to the CT SIDE COME TO THE CT SIDE your eyes are getting sleepy sleepy the CT side Evan ....CT SIDE !!! sleepy sleepy the CT side CT side...........

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Millions of Kenyan Women Given Vaccines Laced with a Sterilant (CLICK LINK)

===========================================================

Is The UN Using Vaccines To Secretly Sterilize Women All Over The Globe? (CLICK LINK)

In some areas of the world, purposely cutting off someone’s family line is considered to be one of the most wicked things that you can possibly do. But that appears to be precisely what the United Nations is doing.

Edited November 12, 2014 by Steven Gaal

[John Dolva]

I N T E R N A T I O N A L

Havana. November 7, 2014

Ebola and hunger on the

African continent

The Ebola epidemic in West Africa has aggravated the food situation in the region, principally in Guinea-Conakry, Liberia and Sierra Leona, according to the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

The Institute emphasized that the shortage of food will lead to thousands of more deaths among those infected with Ebola, and called on the international community to join forces to assure adequate nutrition for the ill, as well as others who have limited access to food.

The three countries most impacted by the epidemic are among the world’s poorest, and prices of agricultural products have sky-rocketed, since farmers and agricultural workers are abandoning the area.

The World Bank has estimated that, if the Ebola virus continues to spread, the epidemic could cost West Africa more than 32 billion dollars, by the end of 2015.

The IFPRI is insisting that, in order to prevent future suffering when the epidemic is controlled, essential social measures and policies to support agriculture must be implemented.

"Investing in the vulnerable population’s nutrition and health could reduce the mortality rate of illnesses such as Ebola, since the level of nutrition and infection are closely related," the Institute emphasizes.*

The United Nations’ World Food Programme, and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), have stepped up and ensured access to basic foods for some 1.3 million people and 90,000 rural families in the three affected countries.

Nevertheless, the IFPRI describes prospects for the coming harvest season as alarming, given the limited workforce available, warning that the food security of thousands of people is at risk.

Other international organizations have noted the severity of measures implemented to contain the epidemic, which have made access to food difficult for a large part of the population, while the closing of schools in Sierra Leone has kept children away from nutritional support programs upon which many depend.

Likewise, restrictions on the consumption of wild game - the presumed initial source of Ebola - has eliminated a traditional source of protein in the local diet.

While it is now necessary to direct international funds toward controlling and eradicating Ebola in West Africa, thought must be given to solving long-standing problems in the most affected countries.

To date, Ebola has caused 5,000 deaths among the approximately 10,000 infected, according to recent reports from the World Health Organization, which has had a serious impact on the production and distribution of food in the worst-hit countries.

Currently, five new cases of Ebola are identified every hour, according to the non governmental organization Save the Children. The rate at which the virus is spreading has been called "terrifying" and endangers all sectors of the economy in these nations. (PL)

* as with most of these 'conspiracies' there is an underlying reality guided by economics. Whether its superbugs, foodcrops (which with GMO lead to superbugs which leads to increaed toxins and reduction in diversity) to sensational events, economic considerations rather than what is rational and best for the people caught up in whatever will always be a decider.

[Evan Burton]

Serious question for Steven: is there any conspiracy you do not think is valid? Serious: you have indicated support / belief in anti-vaccine, anti-GM, MH-17, etc. Out of interest, is there a mainstream conspiracy theory that you think is not true? I think it would be worthwhile exploring what beliefs we have in common rather than what we do not.

Very simple if I dont comment on it ,it isnt true. EXAMPLE :NO UFO's. I do think governments could use the UFO story for is own purposes.

Like in 1950s the Airforce used UFOs to hide sighting of advanced convential air craft.

Now Evan try this: you need a strong immune system to make antibodies. Said antibodies are the reason you get vaccine

OK But Evan if you have a strong immune system you dont need vaccine to get antibodies.

THUS FLU vaccine only helps 9 % of the people who get it and side effects with additives harm more than 9 %.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We give lots of vaccines below 2 yrs of age kids.

Japan almost ZERO under age two.....Evan is Japan stupid ??...or BIG PHARMA can trick a lot of people...

Sooo much wrong there. Let's start with Japan. Japan banned the MMR vaccine, not vaccination in general. It decided to go with individual vaccinations rather than a combined vaccine because of unfounded fears of the MMR vaccine. The result?

"The increase in autism and autistic spectrum disorders in this part of Yokohama displays the same increase over time seen in other parts of the world. Here, though, the increase occurred even when the MMR vaccine was withdrawn. This destroys any possible causative link between use of the vaccine and autism. Perhaps the most important features of the study were that it comprehensively covered a population, and that the population was served by a special service testing children for developmental; disorders and using standard methods over the whole period. The quality and validity of the study is superlative, and the size good. Whatever causes autism, it is not the MMR vaccine."

http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/vaccines/nommr.html

" Although anti-vaccine proponents will likely applaud Japan's immunization schedule, it is important to note that vaccine-preventable infections are still a big problem in Japan. In early 2000, there were 20 to 30,000 reported cases of measles a year in Japan, with actual numbers of cases 5 to 10 times higher due to under reporting. Although rates are trending down, as recently as 2008, Japan had 11,015 reported cases of measles, compared to 140 in the US."

http://pediatrics.about.com/b/2011/03/08/japans-vaccine-problem.htm

Next, vaccinations help the body build defences against disease. A strong immune system does not mean you won't get a disease. The immune system needs to be exposed to a weakened version of the disease so that it can mount defences, successfully overcome the disease and 'remember' it. Next time the immune system encounters the disease, it can mount a rapid and effective response against the full strength disease.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccination

http://www.mydr.com.au/travel-health/vaccination-and-antibodies

http://www.immunizationinfo.org/parents/why-immunize/how-vaccines-work

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/vaccines/understanding/pages/howwork.aspx

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/im/vs-sv/vs-faq01-eng.php

http://www.healthychildren.org/English/safety-prevention/immunizations/Pages/How-do-Vaccines-Work.aspx

It is a little worrying that say your interests include medicine yet you don't know these basic facts.