Engineered food and your health: the nutritional status of GMOs

A contribution for #MarchOnMansantoDay. Check out Neil Young’s preview song, Rock Starbucks, from his concept record called The Monsanto Years here:

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/5/22/neil_young_premieres_new_anti_gmo

Background info here: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/videos/neil-young-previews-cheeky-rock-starbucks-video-20150522

“While the debate on the safety of GMOs remains important, it should not distract from remediating the serious health risks of glyphosate sprayed on both RoundUp Ready and non-engineered crops. After viewing this presentation many GMO videos may appear, but note that most avoid mentioning the herbicide, glyphosate, when more than 90% of all GMO crops in North America are sprayed with this herbicide that should have remained a pipe and boiler cleaner.”

US Military and Monsanto Now Actively Engaged In Tracking Anti-GMO Websites, Activists, Campaigners and Independent Scientists

WIKI-Sniper

The word is out and the scientific bodies of manipulation can no longer contain the growing resistance against GMO. The more corrupt studies that attempt to find no harm in the consumption of genetically modified foods, the more an increasingly aware public is growing skeptical. The largest German daily newspaper Suddeutsche Zeitung recently published a shocking article that reveals how Monsanto, the US Military and the US government are tracking anti-GMO campaigners, websites, and independent scientists who study the dangers of GMOs.

Does this mean your favortie anti-GMO websites are in danger? Absolutely not, but it does mean controlled opposition and fictitious medical specialists will be scouring the internet to plant fabricated statistics and data with the help of reputable medical journals to sway opinion.

Many politicians and public health officials will then unknowingly use the fabricated information to validate the GMO mandate. For each new GMO, a study will be falsified to justify its effectiveness and requisite belief thereof. It’s one of the reasons prestigious science journals are rapidly declining in influence. This junk science has allowed government agencies to approve untold numbers of GMOs and drugs, or rubber stamp thousands of chemicals as safe.

Since the public is catching on, Universities and prestigious scientists are losing their credbility. The world is now savvy to the flawed process at the heart of science and it no amount of science coming from these fraudulent sources will satisfy the public. As for the independent scientists studying the dangers of GMO, they are being aggressively targeted.

Attacks on Anti-GMO Camps Everywhere

The largest German daily newspaper Suddeutsche Zeitung has recently published a shocking article that reveals how Monsanto, the US Military and the US government track both anti-GMO campaigners, websites and independent scientists who study the dangers of GMOs.

The US do not only spy on governments, authorities and private individuals across the world with the help of their secret services; they also understand how to push forward the global interests of their companies with full force.

A glimpse into the world of Monsanto shows that the company which delivered the pesticide ‘Agent Orange’ to the US military in the Vietnam war had close connections with the central power in Washington, with tough people from the field of the US secret services and with private insurance companies. If you really want to learn about the dark history of Monsanto, review this website. When you take a moment to reflect on the history of product development at Monsanto, what do you find? See if you can spot the pattern

Monsanto is a giant in biotechnology: and number one in the controversial field of genetic engineering. For its opponents, many of whom live in Europe, Monsanto is a sinister enemy. Time and again mysterious things happen, which make the enemy seem yet more sinister.

In the previous month, European environmental organization ‘Friends of the Earth’ and the German Environmental and Nature Protection Association (BUND) wanted to present a study on the pesticide glyphosate in the human body. Weed killers containing glyphosate are the big seller for Monsanto. The company aims for more than two billion dollars turnover for the Roundup product alone. ‘Roundup herbicide’ has a “long history of safe use in more than 100 countries”, Monsanto emphasizes.

Counter-Intuitive Findings Contradict Monsanto’s Claims

The promise by Monsanto and producers of genetically modified crops was that farmers could use less chemicals and produce a greater yield. That’s about as true as honesty in politics. A study published by Washington State University research professor Charles Benbrook finds that the use of herbicides in the production of three genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops — cotton, soybeans and corn – has actually increased.

This counterintuitive finding is based on an exhaustive analysis of publicly available data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agriculture Statistics Service. Benbrook’s analysis is the first peer-reviewed, published estimate of the impacts of genetically engineered (GE) herbicide-resistant (HT) crops on pesticide use.

It is confirming earlier US government data showing that in the US, GM crops have produced an overall increase, not decrease, in pesticide use compared to conventional crops. Not only that promises of greater yields are also unfounded.

A report that analyzed nearly two decades worth of peer reviewed research on the yield of the primary GM food/feed crops, soybeans and corn (maize), reveals that despite 20 years of research and 13 years of commercialization, genetic engineering has failed to significantly increase US crop yields. The author, former US EPA and US FDA biotech specialist Dr Gurian-Sherman, concludes that when it comes to yield, “Traditional breeding outperforms genetic engineering hands down.”

Virus Disabling The Computers of Activists 

Two days before the BUND study was set to be published across 18 countries, a virus disabled the computer of the main organizer, Adrian Bepp. There was a threat that press conferences in Vienna, Brussels and Berlin would be cancelled. “We panicked”, remembers Heike Moldenhauer from BUND. The environmental activists were under extreme time pressure.

Moldenhauer and her colleagues have widely speculated about the motives and identity of the mysterious attacker. The genetic engineering expert at BUND believes the unknown virus suppliers wanted in particular to “generate confusion”. Nothing is worse for a study than a cancelled press conference: “we did ask ourselves at the time if we were seeing ghosts”, said Moldenhauer.

There is no evidence that Monsanto was the ghost or had anything to do with the virus. The company does not do things like that. It takes pride in operating “responsibly”: “Today, it is very easy to make and spread all kinds of allegations,” Monsanto claims. They say that “over and over there are also dubious and popular allegations spread, which disparage our work and products and are in no way based on science.”

Critics of the group see things differently. This is due to the wide network Monsanto has developed across the world. There are ties with the US secret services, the US military, with very hard operating private security companies and of course, with the US government.

A conspicuously large number of Monsanto critics report regular attacks by professional hackers. The secret services and military also like to employ hackers and programmers. These specialize in developing Trojans and viruses in order to penetrate foreign computer networks. Whistle-blower Edward Snowden has indicated the connection between intelligence services actions and economic drive. However, this sinister connection has been overshadowed by other monstrosities.

Some powerful Monsanto supporters know a lot about how to carry out a cyber war. “Imagine the internet as a weapon, sitting on the table. Either you use it or your opponent does, but somebody’s going to get killed” said Jay Byrne, the former head of public relations at Monsanto, back in 2001.

Companies regularly fight with dubious methods to uphold what they see as their right: but friend or foe, him or me – that is fighting talk and in a war, you need allies. Preferably professionals. Such as those from the secret service milieu, for example.

Monsanto Closely Connected To Central Governments

Monsanto contacts are known to the notorious former secret service agent Joseph Cofer Black, who helped formulate the law of the jungle in the fight against terrorists and other enemies. He is a specialist on dirty work, a total hardliner. He worked for the CIA for almost three decades, among other things as the head of anti-terroism. He later became vice president of the private security company Blackwater, which sent tens of thousands of soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan under US government orders.

Investigations show how closely connected the management and the central government in Washington are, as well as with diplomatic representatives of the USA across the world. In many instances, Monsanto has operationally powerful assistants. Former Monsanto employees occupy high offices in the USA in government authorities and ministries, industrial associations and in universities; sometimes in almost symbiotic relationships. According to information from the American Anti-Lobby-Organisation, Open Secrets Org, in the past year, 16 Monsanto lobbyists have taken up sometimes high ranking posts in the US administration and even in regulatory authorities.

For the company, it is all about new markets and feeding a rapidly growing world population. Genetic engineering and patents on plants play a big role here. Over 90 % of corn and soya in the USA is genetically modified. In some parts of the rest of the world the percentage is also growing constantly.

Monsanto led the fight to allow the famous genetically engineered corn plant MON810 in Europe with lots of lobbying – the group completely lost the fight. It was even beaten out of the prestigious French and German markets. An alliance of politicians, farmers and clergy rejected genetic engineering in the fields and the consumers do not want it on their plates. But the battle is not over. The USA is hoping that negotiations started this week for a free-trade agreement between the USA and the EU will also open the markets for genetic engineering.

Lobbying for your own company is a civic duty in the USA. Even the important of the 16 US intelligence services have always understood their work as being a support for American economic interests on the world markets. They spy on not only governments, authorities and citizens in other countries under the name of the fight against terror, they also support American economic interests, in their own special way.

Independent Scientists Targeted

It is already obvious that somebody makes life difficult for Monsanto critics and an invisible hand ends careers. However, who is this somebody? The targets of these attacks are scientists, such as the Australian Judy Carman. Among other things, she has made a name for herself with studies of genetically modified plants. Her publications were questioned by the same professors which also attacked the the studies of other Monsanto critics.

It does not stop at skirmishes in the scientific community. Hackers regularly target various web pages where Carman publishes her studies and the sites are also systematically observed, at least that is the impression Carman has. Evaluations of IP log files show that not only Monsanto visits the pages regularly, but also various organizations of the U.S. government, including the military. These include the Navy Network Information Center, the Federal Aviation Administration and the United States Army Intelligence Center, an institution of the US Army, which trains soldiers with information gathering. Monsanto’s interest in the studies is understandable, even for Carman. “But I do not understand why the U.S. government and the military are having me observed,” she says.

Ever wonder why those same obnoxious, arrogant and infrequent users just happen to appear on the heels of very controversial posts like clock-work? They monitor, wait and then pounce of the same topics to emotionalize and antagonize legitimate users on social networking and thousands of other websites. Surging disinformation analysts are commenting on controversial topics such as GMO on your favorite websites to emotionalize and antagonize.

The organization GM Watch, known to be critical of gene technology, also experiences strange events. Editor Claire Robinson reports continued hacker attacks on the homepage since 2007. “Every time we increase the page security just a bit, the opposite side increases their tenacity and following are new, worse attacks”, she says. She also cannot believe the coincidences that occur. When the French scientist Gilles Eric Seralini published a controversial study on the health risks of genetically modified maize and glyphosate in 2012, the web site of GM Watch was hacked and blocked. The same repeats when the opinion of the European food inspectorate (EFSA) is added to the site. The timing was skilfully selected in both cases. The attacks took place exactly when the editors wanted to publish their opinion.

About the Author

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy. 

Sources: 
gmo-awareness.com

preventdisease.com
sustainablepulse.com
bestmeal.info

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

False Science – How Bought And Paid For Propaganda Masquerades As Scientific Progress

The pursuit of truth in modern scientific query is marred by greed, profit and only a concept of truth built on the assumption of an unexamined good. While pharmaceutical drug approvals, genetically modified foods and various other controversial technologies may appear to be based on “science”, corporate interests and profits often interfere with the true meaning of what science represents to both academics and the public.

ffalse_science428
Science Is No Longer Science

Science is built on skepticism. The results of any particular study mean nothing unless proven through continual repetition of the study’s methodology. The importance of being able to replicate results is something instilled in every elementary school science student and yet as we enter adulthood we often tend to take with a great deal of faith any professions of scientific knowledge.

The primary methodology of science is to prise apart reality into its component parts in order to better understand how the whole functions. Cartesian logic began with the separation of mind and matter and the scientific method depends upon the separation of the observer from the observed. The absolute separation between mind and matter has now been shown to be entirely fictitious the importance of objectivity within the scientific method remains undiminished.

The 20th century made it clear to everyone that science is in a very dangerous state. Corporations who have sought the scientific method to establish credibility for their products and services have prostituted science and segregated its capacity as a whole. This is largely because of the splitting up of the disciplines and their disconnection from the ethical demands of a growing population and an ever more complex, relational society.

The threat to all of us lies in corporate greed forcing both the internal divisions of science and the related inability of scientists to respond to the needs of worldwide human relationships. This inability includes inadequate responses to the needs of those individuals and groups who govern us.

The most glaring problem is the seemingly unbridgeable gap between the needs for ethically based knowledge by politicians and the piecemeal and mostly inadequate assistance that divided scientific corporations are able to put on the table. Some of the scientific disciplines are overused while others are grossly underused, ignored, or even rejected as irrelevant.

Mainstream Medicine Uses Fraudulent Data To Sell The Medical Model

For example there is little real science to be found in the common practice of mainstream medicine. Rather, what passes for “science” today is a collection of myths, half-truths, dishonest data, fraudulent reporting and inappropriate correlations passed off as causation. Correlational studies can NOT prove causation, yet the end result of most scientific studies in mainstream medicine make a causal claim without any proof and then pass those suggestions to the public to sell the medical model to the public.

Advertisers and product manufacturers have certainly used this inherent cognitive bias towards trusting “scientific facts” in order to market products which they claim have a scientific basis in their effectiveness. The same is of course true within ideologies and politics. While many choose to focus on the large scandals such as the drug research fraud, countless fraudulent scientific claims are made every day in advertising, often with no repercussions.

A survey of 2700 doctors and scientists found one in seven (13%) had, “witnessed colleagues intentionally altering or fabricating data during their research or for the purposes of publication”. Those are only the doctors that admitted the findings. Critics suggest the actual percentage may be higher than 30%. That manipulation included, “inappropriately adjusting, excluding, altering, or fabricating data”.

More and more evidence is suggesting that medical journals are increasingly having to retract reports due to fabricated, erroneous or misleading data from Doctors and Scientists. Fraud has clearly been on the rise in Drug studies for decades and is now the norm in the pharmaceutical industry.

Donald M. Epstein, author of Healing Myths, says that even if the dangers of a drug or medical procedure were to be included in a respected medical journal, often the “religious” belief that doctors, and even patients, have in conventional medicine overrides their decision-making process.

People believe that if a drug is FDA-approved and on the market, it must be okay. If a drug proves fatal to 10 or even 10,000 patients, doctors will still staunchly defend it, claiming the benefits outweigh the risks. Epstein’s feelings are that anyone with a little common sense should be enraged by the fact that the entire industry is operating with self-imposed blinders — from the pharmaceutical companies that hawk unsafe drugs to the medical journals that publish doctored clinical studies and misleading ads.

The editors of the New England Journal of Medicine added another chapter to this story when disgraced Norwegian researcher Dr. Jon Sudbo, was made to formally retract reports on oral cancer his team published in the journal in 2001 and 2004.

By his own admission, much of Sudbo’s published data was fabricated. A report from an investigative commission formed by Sudbo’s former employers, the Rikshospitalet-Radiumhospitalet Medical Center and the University of Oslo, confirmed the fraud. The NEJM editors based their retraction largely on the report’s findings.

On average, one out of every three highly cited studies published in influential medical journals is either refuted or seriously weakened by subsequent research.

A common theme in most journals is their tendency to publish “positive” findings (where a therapy was proven to be effective) over “negative” ones (where a therapy’s effectiveness was cast in doubt).

A vaccine industry watchdog recently obtained hidden CDC documents that show statistically significant risks of autism associated with the vaccine preservative, something the CDC denied even when confronted with their own data. This has allowed the CDC to continue promoting drug therapy and vaccination programs programs promoted by Physicians, many of who rely on the information from the CDC to inform the public on risks and benefits.

The vaccine industry has always known that governments and public health would never be convinced of the effectiveness of vaccinations without some statistical evidence from academia. Without some proof on how vaccines and antivirals could benefit a population, how could they ever be marketed on a global scale? They couldn’t!

That’s where the biostatisticians come in. Under the guise of disease prevention and pandemic preparedness, these so-called “experts” have carefully concocted a wide range of simulated statistical analyses in a systematic effort to promote global pandemic models and their counter measure — mass vaccination and antiviral programs.

A summary review of data on neurological adverse events and the historical role of vaccination in the natural course of infectious disease in Switzerland and Germany, supports data from other regions with evidence that vaccines had no impact on disease prevention efforts from the early-mid to late 20th century. The data contradicts widespread misinformation campaigns by mainstream medicine which claim that vaccination led to immunization and a subsequent decline in infectious disease.

GMOs – Absolutely No Safety Testing To Promote Profits

Many consumers in the US mistakenly believe that the FDA approves genetically modified organisms in foods through rigorous, in-depth, long-term studies. In reality, the agency has absolutely no safety testing requirements. Instead the agency relies on research from companies like Monsanto, research that is meticulously designed to avoid finding problems.

Former pro-GMO scientists are now speaking out on the real dangers of genetically engineered food. A growing body of scientific research – done mostly in Europe, Russia, and other countries – showing that diets containing engineered corn or soya cause serious health problems in laboratory mice and rats.

The FDA and food industry claims that GMO foods are safe, properly tested, and necessary to feed a hungry world, claims that are now being found unsubstantiated by hundreds of experts. GMOs are one of the most dangerous and radical changes to our food supply. These largely unregulated ingredients found in 60-70% of the foods, are now being exposed and well worth the effort to avoid.

Several nations such as Mexico, Italy, Russia, Poland and several others are banning GMOs after conducting their own research while refuting the biased conclusions by Monsanto.

Democratize Science – It’s For Everyone

The best defence against scientific frauds is a simple realization, science is something for everyone, not just “scientists”. We all have a duty to think for ourselves, to utilise our own minds and separate fact from fiction. Use the scientific mindset to rationally analyse the evidence before you. The more we research and share this information with our communities the more enlightened we will become as a whole. In such a society companies will be unable to use cheap slogans like “scientifically proven” to take your money and risk your health.

The most prestigious peer-reviewed journals in the world are having less influence amongst scientists due to the shift in the ways we deal with scientific query. Medical journals can no longer be trusted to provide accurate, unbiased information and are no longer impartial and “true” source of information.

A new age is upon us and we must think for ourselves if we are ever to advance the changing paradigm in scientific progress, from one that has worked against the people, to one that will work with the people and free from corruption and greed.  

Sources:
sciencedaily.com
preventdisease.com
books.google.ca
healthday.com

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.

via False Science – How Bought And Paid For Propaganda Masquerades As Scientific Progress.

Former Monsanto Appointees to the FDA, USDA, and EPA

inbedFDA

Monsanto Position
Individual
Federal Position
Senior Vice President for Clinical Affairs at G.D. Searle and Co. (merged with Monsanto)
Michael A. Friedman
Acting Commissioner of the FDA
Consultant to Searle’s Public Relation Firm (merged with Monsanto)
Arthur Hull Hayes
Previously FDA Commissioner
Top Monsanto Scientist, oversaw approval of rBGH
Margaret Miller
Appointed Deputy Director of FDA, 1991
Worked on Monsanto-funded rBGH in connection with Cornell University
Suzanne Sechen
FDA Reviewer on Scientific Data
Attorney for Monsanto for 7 years, previous Head of Monsanto Washington D.C. Office
Michael Taylor
Former FDA Deputy Commision for Policy. In 2010 appointed Senior Advisor to FDA Commissioner
Former Monsanto Lawyer
Clarence Thomas
Appointed to U.S. Supreme Court in 1991
Served on Board of Directors at Calgene, a Monsanto Biotech Subsidiary
Anne Veneman
Appointed head of USDA in 2001
Retired Senior Vice President for Public Policy at Monsanto
Dr. Virginia Weldon
Previously, member of FDA’s Metabolism and Endocrine Advisory Committee
Vice President, Public and Government Affairs
Linda Fisher
Deputy Administration EPA
Manager, New Technologies
Linda Watrud
USDA, EPA
Director, Monsanto Danforth Center
Roger Beachy
Director USDA, NIFA

The Four Steps Required to Keep Monsanto OUT of Your Garden

6newgmocrops83012

Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist

Seed catalogs are starting to arrive in mailboxes across the Northern Hemisphere with home gardeners everywhere starting to plan which seeds they will sow in their spring gardens.

A positive trend in recent years is the growing number of gardening enthusiasts choosing to plant gardens using organic and/or heirloom seeds.

What most of these home gardeners don’t realize is that corporate behemoth and GMO titan Monsanto has been gobbling up the seed market faster than a caterpillar can munch a tomato plant! With one fell swoop in 2005, Monsanto grabbed approximately 40% of the US vegetable seed market with its acquisition of Seminis.

This means that a home gardener could unknowingly be supporting the development and proliferation of genetically modified crops if the seeds used are from Seminis.  In addition, Monsanto now apparently owns many of the names of the seed varieties themselves!

Planting a sustainable home garden is much more than just choosing certified organic seeds and seedlings because Monsanto has cleverly positioned itself to make money off the home gardening trend.

Does this mean that even if you buy organic or heirloom seeds from a completely independent company some of your purchase might be supporting the bad guys?

Yes, it does.

Surprise!

Home gardeners would do well to bone up on where to purchase their seeds so they aren’t inadvertently doing business with companies that maintain a working relationship with Monsanto-Seminis or were acquired by them.

My friend Beth in Minnesota, an avid food researcher, has been digging around to figure out the best ways to buy seeds and seedlings for your home garden without one red cent going to Monsanto.

Buying Organic or Heirloom Seeds Without Supporting Monsanto

Beth has done her very best to make sure the information she has uncovered is current and pertinent with updated listings for the 2013 growing season.  Here are the steps she recommends for those who want to truly strike a blow for sustainability in every way with their home gardens:

  1. Avoid buying from the seed companies affiliated with Monsanto. Here’s a list of these seed companies: http://www.seminis.com/global/us/products/Pages/Home-Garden.aspx
  2. Buy from this list of companies Monsanto HASN’T bought and are not affiliated or do business with Seminishttp://occupymonsanto360.org/blog/monsanto-free-seed-companies/
  3. Avoid certain heirloom varieties because Monsanto now apparently owns the names. This article lists the seed varieties to avoid: http://www.occupymonsanto360.org/2012/03/17/monsanto-owned-seednames/
  4. Ask seed companies if they have taken the Safe Seed Pledge.  Here’s a list of companies that have done so:  http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/ViewPage.aspx?pageId=261

More Background on Monsanto’s Quest for World Seed Domination

Monsanto’s corporate quest is clearly to make money on each and every one of us whether we choose to eat supermarket frankenfoods produced with abominable, patented GM crops or carefully plant and tend an organic garden at home.  Here’s some background information on the subject you may find interesting as well as enlightening:

http://www.agardenforthehouse.com/2012/02/forewarned-is-forearmed-veggie-varieties-owned-by-monsanto/
http://www.agardenforthehouse.com/2012/02/keep-monsanto-out-of-your-veggie-patch/
http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/keep-monsanto-out-of-your-garden-this-spring.html

If you are a home gardener and have information to contribute regarding these steps, please add to the discussion in the comments section.  Also, please spread the word via gardening forums you may participate in that folks need to be very careful when seed sourcing for their spring gardens this year else they might be unknowingly supporting Monsanto.

Let’s make this the year when Monsanto’s grip on the worldwide seed market loosens and the movement to seed sustainability gains momentum!

**Update:  The day after this article was published, the CEO of a large soybean seed company in the Midwest emailed me complaining that the article was short sighted and insisting that Monsanto is helping feed the starving people of the world.  He even went so far as to say that GMO crops are “proven safe”.  Click here for the text of this CEO’s entire email plus my written reply.

I have also received email complaints from two other seed companies, one in Canada and one in Arkansas, that do business with Monsanto-Seminis and were offended by what they viewed as inaccuracies in the post.  In response, I have adjusted the text slightly and moved linked sources to within the text rather than only listed at the end to make the message of the post as clear and precise as possible so as to not result in any consumer confusion over the information.

I have received no complaints about this article from seed companies completely independent of any affiliation or ties to Monsanto-Seminis.

This article was originally published at: http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/the-four-steps-required-to-keep-monsanto-out-of-your-garden/ CC

About the Author

Sarah is a 40-something, Wife and Mother of three. In 2011, she became a board member of the Weston A. Price Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to getting the truth about nutrition out to the masses, and has also served as a Nutrition Educator and Chapter Leader for the foundation.