Wednesday, April 8, 2020

Developer of GMO potatoes renounces own work: Warns against consuming GMO potatoes

0

by Erin Elizabeth, Health Nut News:

Dr. Caius Rommens developed GMO potatoes but subsequently renounced his work. He explains why we should be wary of the products he created. Read the excerpt provided by Health Impact News, below.

By: GMWatch.org

Dr Caius Rommens developed GMO potatoes for the Idaho-based agbiotech company Simplot. The chief genetic modification he introduced was to silence the potatoes’ melanin (PPO) gene.

GENETICALLY MODIFIED CHILDREN – NEW FILM UNVEILS THE ‘MONSTROUS’ CHILD DEFORMITIES CAUSED BY AGROCHEMICALS IN ARGENTINA

by Dr. Mercola, Waking Times:

The shocking film “Genetically Modified Children” unveils the horrors of decades of chemical-intensive agricultural practices in Argentina, where the majority of crops are genetically modified (GM) and routinely doused in dangerous agrochemicals, and the chokehold big tobacco companies such as Philip Morris and chemical and seed giants have on poverty-stricken farmers desperate to earn a living.

The film, produced by Juliette Igier and Stephanie Lebrun, shows the devastating health effects the region’s agricultural sector is having on children,1 an increasing number of whom are being born with monstrous physical deformities. Some of the children’s cases are so severe that, without a medical intervention, will result in death before the age of 5.

Bayer and Monsanto are facing the music

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News:

As most of you know, Bayer now owns Monsanto. To make it happen, it forked out $66 billion in 2018. Among the new parent’s problems? Lawsuits against Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide, Roundup.

Catch this, from fiercepharma.com: “Recently, in a key bellwether trial, a U.S. federal jury in San Francisco found Bayer liable for plaintiff Edwin Hardeman’s non-Hodgkin lymphoma [caused by Monsanto’s Roundup] and awarded him $80 million in damages. Bayer said it plans to appeal, as it is doing with a [similar] California state suit that awarded the plaintiff $78 million. Still, there are more than 11,200 other similar suits [against Roundup], according to Bayer’s last tally.”

Farmer Conducts Experiment Using GMO and Non-GMO Corn, Discovers Sobering Truth That Animals Know and Humans Don’t

from Government Slaves:

The genetically engineered food experiment began in the mid-1990s and continues unabated to this day, with Bayer recently taking over Monsanto and pumping billions of dollars into its new American GMO division.

But while the GMO food experiment has been highly profitable for the lab technicians who created it, as well as the toxic, synthetic pesticide industry, the question of what it’s doing to our bodies, specifically our internal organs, remains etched in the minds of independent researchers who have studied the crops extensively (GMOs do not undergo safety testing past 90 days and many studies are funded by the industry).

THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: SYRIA, IRAQ, AND SEED BANKS

0

by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star:

Here’s a bit of intriguing dot-connecting about GMOS to put in your GMO scrapbook:

One of the very interesting things about a “community-driven” blogsite such as this is that I am constantly amazed at people’s ability to connect dots, and that’s the case today with some very interesting dots connected by Mr. M.A., who took the time to share his labors, and whose dot-connecting I hope to do some justice to today.

First, a little context. Many readers here who have been following my various interviews and blogs over the years are probably already aware that I view the US “intervention” as being an operation with a multitude of objectives, among them obvious ones like “securing the oil supply”(Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria) to much less obvious ones such as “securing the drug supply”(Afghanistan) to securing access to potential ancient archaeological sites, ancient knowledge and its potential awareness of technologies and weapons of mass destruction (Iraq, Syria), and so on. Another way of putting that is that the so-called intelligence briefing about Saddam Hussein developing weapons of mass destruction, which turned out to be a complete fabrication (that is, if one were only looking for a-bombs and chemical and biological weapons) may not have been so, if one considers the angle of potential “ancient technology.”

Which brings us to Mr. M.A.’s high octane speculation, which I am going to try to do my best to summarize, for there may be yet another motivation in addition to the above: seeds, and food, and more specifically, non-GMO seeds.

He begins by pointing out this old article from Zero Hedge, and specifically, one sentence within it:

The Arctic Doomsday Seed-Vault Is Getting Some Major Upgrades

Toward the end of this article, Mr. M.A. drew attention to this statement:

According to the Norwegian government, the seed vault has been used one time.Back in 2015, ICARDA International Research Center, which operated a location out of Aleppo, Syria, was blown up. The organization requested seeds from its deposits at Svalbard Global Seed Vault, which demonstrates the importance of the backup vault in the Arctic. (Emphasis added)

In other words, Syria had a natural seeds vault in Aleppo (see this article, says Mr. M.A.: In the midst of war, this Syrian seed bank is still going) which, gee whiz, turned out to be a hotbed of terrorist activity and a constant thorn in the government of Mr. Assad, until Mr. Putin decided to intervene and stop the Turkish-Israeli-Saudi-US-sponsored nonsense.

Funny how that worked out.

But wait, there’s more: for in the second article linked above, one reads this:

The destruction of Iraq’s seed bank in Abu Ghraib in 2003, and the subsequent domination of Iraqi agricultural reconstruction by U.S. agribusiness interests, provides a cautionary tale. Here, destruction and reconstruction occurred over a decade rather than a millennium, transforming rural economies. When war ravages a country, the continuity of its agricultural systems is also destroyed. Farmers might keep their lives but lose land and seed stocks carefully stewarded for generations because they lack the resources for reconstruction. (Emphasis added)

Abu Ghraib… a seed vault! You don’t say! Was this the real reason that the “powers that be” were in such a snit to shut down media attention on American crimes against Iraqi prisoners there?

But wait, there’s yet more: in that same second article, one reads that, lo and behold, there was yet another seed bank in – you guessed it – Kabul, Afghanistan (where presumably I.G. Farbensanto may have been concerned about the non-GMO opium poppy seeds):

ICARDA’s effort is itself a result of previous conflicts. In 2002, the American war in Afghanistan destroyed the national seed bank in Kabul, and looters completed the destruction unfinished by combat. ICARDA’s collection holds seeds salvaged from Iraq’s national seed bank in Abu Ghraib. These are among the collections duplicated in Svalbard. (Emphasis added)

And there’s this, too, which conjures images of Mr. Putin, who, let it be noted, hails from St. Peterburg (the former Leningrad); the staff of the Syrian seed bank stayed on site to maintain it at the risk of their lives, for a very simple reason:

Employees without the means to flee crisis have preserved the facility, at considerable risk to themselves. In this, they are like the staff of the Vavilov Research Institute in Russia who would rather starve during the Siege of Leningrad than consume or surrender the seeds they guarded.

Read More @ GizaDeathStar.com

The Truth About Soy Boys

0

from Paul Joseph Watson:

GENETICALLY ENGINEERED FOOD – THE LIE THAT WON’T DIE

0

by Dr. Mercola, The Waking Times:

Promises, promises, promises. The toxic world of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and industrial agriculture is built on false promises. For nearly 30 years we have been listening to the propaganda of the big biotech companies like Monsanto/Bayer, Syngenta, DuPont/Pioneer, BASF and others about how genetic engineering will transform farming and food production.

We’ve heard how it will reduce the environmental impact of farming by lowering pesticide use. We’ve been promised that it will increase the nutritional content of food. We’ve been told how it will boost farmers’ profits by increasing yields, and that those increased yields will help “feed the world.”

BOMBSHELL: Proof GMOs cannot be contained — GM mosquitoes have successfully mated with wild mosquitoes, spreading GM traits

0

by Tracey Watson, Natural News:

The scientific modification of plants and animals – and even humans – is often justified as being for the greater good. The long-term effects of such tinkering are often overlooked, however, and quite possibly pose serious and unexpected risks for humankind in the future. The most recent proof that the future effects of genetic modification can never really be fully understood in advance is an experiment on mosquitoes undertaken by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

Science Daily recently reported that there has been a lot of interest in recent years in genetically modifying mosquitoes to “reduce or prevent the spread of disease.” One of the challenges faced by scientists interested in pursuing this field of study is getting GM mosquitoes to mate with regular, wild bugs. However, when a research team from the NIAID recently altered the microbiota of GM mosquitoes to suppress the parasites which cause malaria in humans, they found that the GM mosquitoes actually preferred to mate with wild mosquitoes rather than their GM counterparts.

Science Daily explains:

The researchers genetically modified Anopheles mosquitoes, which in nature spread the malaria-causing parasite Plasmodium. The team caged equal numbers of wild and GM mosquitoes and monitored their breeding over 10 generations. Ninety percent of the offspring in each generation passed along the GM trait. Even when combining 10 percent GM with 90 percent wild mosquitoes, the Plasmodium-resistance trait dominated after a few generations. Importantly, the GM mosquitoes maintained their resistance to the malaria parasite for 7 years.

The group also showed that the change in the microbiota resulted in a mating preference among the GM and wild mosquitoes. GM males showed a preference for wild females and wild males preferred GM females; these preferences contributed to the spread of the desired protective trait within the mosquito population.

Of course, the scientists were delighted with the unexpected result of their experiment. Nonetheless, it is sobering to realize that should these genetically modified mosquitoes get out into the wild they would very quickly completely overwhelm natural wild species. While this might sound like a good idea, we have no real idea what the ramifications of having genetically modified creatures overtaking natural species of any plant, animal or insect might be in the long-term.

And this is just one example of the dominance of genetically modified species. (Related: Has your DNA been altered by GMOs?)

Genetically modified canola plants spreading out of control

Back in 2010, Scientific American reported that canola plants with several transgenic traits were growing wild all over North Dakota. Canola – a plant modified in Canada to produce vegetable oil from its seeds – is farmed extensively in the state, and can now be found growing wild all over the place.

“We found transgenic plants growing in the middle of nowhere, far from fields,” said ecologist Cindy Sagers of the University of Arkansas (U.A.) in Fayetteville. “One of the ones with multiple traits was [in the middle of] nowhere, and believe me, there’s a lot of nowhere in North Dakota — nowhere near a canola field.” (Related: Learn more about the dangers of GMOs at GMO.news.)

This is an indicator that GM canola plants are cross-pollinating and taking over the naturally occurring traits of natural plants. As weed scientist Carol Mallory-Smith of Oregon State University noted, the danger is that such traits could increase the “invasiveness or weediness” of plants which could invade and overtake farmers’ crops.

Read More @ NaturalNews;com

GMO GEOPOLITICS: PUTIN CONFIRMS IT

0

by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star:

For years I’ve been arguing that there is a GMO geopolitics going on in the world, as European and American agribusiness cartels – think only of IG Farbensanto, my nickname for the whole GMO-food control project, recently made a reality by German giant Bayer buying out American Monsanto (in cash!) – try to gain control of the world’s food supply through patented seeds, and while other countries, Russia and India, have resisted. I’ve been arguing that Russia’s growing stance against GMOs would position it as the world’s biggest non-GMO food supplier. This article, shared by Mr. B., makes it abundantly clear that this is exactly what is in Mr. Putin’s mind:

GMO Lobby Plots to Corrupt EU Court Ruling on Gene Editing

by F. William Engdahl, New Eastern Outlook:

The GMO lobby, led by Bayer/Monsanto, Syngenta and others have begun to develop a counter-attack to try to neutralize the unexpected and, for them, devastating EU European Court of Justice ruling in July requiring that plants modified through so-called gene-editing DNA techniques must submit to the same licensing risk-assessment procedures as all other GMO plants. The ruling caught the GMO industry off-guard. Now they prepare a counter-attack as we might expect from the developers of Agent Orange, neonicotinoids or similar toxins.

New Law Could Exempt Thousands of Genetically Engineered Foods From Labeling

by Derrick Broze, Activist Post:

As the U.S. Department of Agriculture works to establish a uniform national standard for labeling foods that may be genetically engineered, critics continue to call out the dangers of putting the federal government in charge of the situation. The federal government was first granted this authority in July 2016 when former President Obama signed into law a bill which amended the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to require the Secretary of Agriculture to establish the national standard for labeling GE foods. The bill was hailed as a victory for activists, and a boost for the economy as it would help keep food costs down for low income families. Unfortunately, the bill was neither.

Monsanto’s latest marketing ploy: Labeling GMOs as “biofortified”

0

by Isabelle Z., Natural News:

GMOs have been getting a bad name for quite some time now, and it’s hardly surprising given the near-constant stream of evidence showing the harms caused by genetically engineered crops and the pesticides used on them. As people increasingly make an effort to avoid buying these products, Monsanto has come up with a new idea to trick people into forking over their hard-earned money for its health-destroying products.

The Waking Times reports that Monsanto is trying to manipulate the definitions used on food labels in such a way that GMOs could be labeled as “biofortified foods.”

Codex Alimentarius is a collection of codes and guidelines created by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization to standardize world food trade and its production and safety. Codex was mulling a proposal to allow a company to use the term “biofortified” on vegetables that use conventional cross-breeding to increase the content of certain nutrients to help give malnourished populations a nutrition boost.

Monsanto sensed an opportunity here and set out to exploit it. They used their influence to try to convince delegates to have the definition of “biofortified” broadened to include foods that have been genetically modified. The National Health Federation (NHF), which is the only natural health advocate with a seat at Codex, reports that many of the delegates saw right through Monsanto’s attempt to pull the wool over consumers’ eyes, and the move was even denounced during the meeting. Nevertheless, the topic will be debated when the group convenes in Berlin this November under a new chairperson.

NHF President Scott Tips said: “It is a very sad state of affairs where we have come to the point where we must manipulate our natural foods to provide better nutrition all because we have engaged in very poor agricultural practices that have seen a 50% decline in the vitamins and minerals in our foods over the last 50 years. We will not remedy poor nutrition by engaging in deceptive marketing practices and sleight of hand with this definition.”

Monsanto wants to trick people into buying GMO foods

It’s easy to see why Monsanto would be so eager to use this term. The term “bio” is used to denote organic foods in many European countries, and consumers who look out for the “bio” label at the grocery store could easily confuse “biofortified” foods as being the complete opposite of what they truly are and end up buying the very thing they were trying to avoid in the first place. Indeed, the EU has raised an objection on the grounds that the term would confuse Europeans, and several EU counties have been vocal in supporting a more restrictive use of the term.

Even in the U.S., where the term “organic” is used instead, many people would construe this label as something positive, especially given its implication that a food has additional nutrients.

Creative labeling nothing new when it comes to unhealthy food

If Monsanto is successful, it will hardly be the first time that something undesirable masqueraded as something far more appealing. For example, consider the term “biosolids,” which are used to grow non-organic crops. On the surface, it sounds like something relatively innocuous, but it’s actually a euphemism for “human sewage sludge” – a nicer way of saying that the food is grown with feces and other disgusting things we flush down the toilet.

Read More @ NaturalNews.com

US FDA Lifts Ban on GMO ‘Frankensalmon’

by F. William Engdahl, New Eastern Outlook:

Frankenfoods is a term developed by consumer groups questioning the health and safety of genetically modified plants or GMO. The US Food and Drug Administration has just lifted an earlier ban on commercialization of the first genetically modified food, Salmon. This is the first time ever permission to sell GMO animals for human consumption in the US has been allowed. It should raise alarm bells not only in the USA.

On March 8, the FDA, responsible for food safety, lifted an earlier ban on sale of GMO salmon by the Massachusetts biotech company, AquaBounty. Until now the company had been prevented from importing its GMO eggs to its salmon tanks in Indiana.

Adverse Effects from Personal Care Products Climb 300{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} in 2016

0

by Seth Pollard, Natural Society:
Reports of side effects caused by cosmetics and personal care products sold in the U.S. more than doubled in 2016, and that’s partly due to complaints about WEN by Chaz Dean Cleansing conditioners, according to recent study. [1]

Researchers looked at data on side effects reported to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 2004-2016 for products including makeup, sunscreen, tattoos, hair color, perfume, shaving creams, and baby care items. A total of 5,144 adverse events were reported to the agency during that time, with an average of 396 a year, the team writes in JAMA Internal Medicine.