from TheHealthRanger :
from Collective Evolution:
(Posted with permission from the Children’s Health Defence team). In August, news broke that Cheerios, Quaker Oats, and other breakfast cereals were contaminated with glyphosate weed killer. Just this week, more news of glyphosate in snack bars. Parents across the nation became concerned about their family’s breakfast foods and snacks. Now we learn we must also be looking at the most popular breakfast beverage, orange juice, as well.
by Erin Elizabeth, Health Nut News:
USDA Undersecretary of Agriculture Greg Ibach testified before the House Agriculture Subcommittee last month that plants grown with the help of genetically modified organisms and gene editing could be allowed to be certified organic in the future.
Despite the growing demand for organic food (record sales were reported in 2018), it appears the genetically engineered food and pesticides industry has continued to be remarkably busy behind the scenes.
by Alex Pietrowski, Waking Times:
“I somehow managed to ignore the almost daily experience that GM potatoes were not as healthy as normal potatoes.” ~Caius Rommens, author of Pandora’s Potatoes: The Worst GMO’s
Activist and concerned citizens have for years been ringing the alarm bells over genetically modified (GM) foods taking over our food supply.
There are several critical concerns surrounding this issue. We do not yet know what the long-term health effects will be of mass consumption of GM products. We know that they have in some cases been linked to the development of cancer. Production of GM crops requires massive amounts of patented chemical fertilizers, herbicides and seed activators. GM crops contribute to monoculture. GM seeds are patented by seed companies and GM crops are known to migrate between fields, leaving non-GM farmers liable for patent infringements. GM crops represent the corporate takeover of the food supply and will make the entire world dependent on for-profit for survival.
by Julie Fidler, Natural Society:
As of July 7, 2017, glyphosate, a chemical found in Monsanto’s RoundUp herbicide, has officially been listed as a carcinogen in California under the state’s Proposition 65 law. 
Under the law, RoundUp, the most widely-used herbicide in the world, must carry a warning about its potential to cause cancer in humans. It is the first time that any governmental authority has created such legislation based on glyphosate’s possible carcinogenicity.
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) must still complete the task of setting a limit for acceptable daily exposure to the weedkiller. Agency scientists have proposed a limit of 1.1 mg a day, which is 127 times less than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) legal allowance for the average-sized adult.
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.
by Jhoanna Robinson , Natural News:
A study that was led by the Auckland University of Technology in New Zealand found that schoolgirls in the United States and the United Kingdom are the worst in the world for having stomach fat, with half of American and British girls in both countries’ total population classified as “overfat”, making them at risk of incurring diabetes and cancer during their later years.
The new study, which was published in the journal American Cancer Society and Frontiers in Public Health, mapped the countries who had the fattest citizens in the world – more than half of the girls in these countries have too much body fat and their waist measurement is more than half their height, while under half of the boys in these countries are considered overfat.
The study analyzed data from the United Nation’s Development Programme’s Human Development Report for 2014.
from Sputnik News:
The approval of genetically modified Huahui No.1 rice by the US Food and Drug Administration paves the way for the Chinese GMO product to the international market. Speaking to Sputnik, Na Zhongyuan, the director of the Yunnan Institute for Ecological Agriculture, expressed his concerns about the use of genetically modified food.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officially gave safety approval to China’s genetically modified Huahui No.1 rice grain; however, in China the large-scale cultivation of GMO cereals is still officially prohibited.
“The creation of genetically modified crops is one of new breed of scientific methods,” Na Zhongyuan, the director of the Yunnan Institute for Ecological Agriculture, told Sputnik China. “I do not exclude that if the research continues, the problems that cannot be solved right now could be eliminated in the future. However, currently studies indicate that [GMO] products are unsafe, and therefore cannot be used.”
According to the scientist, mass cultivation of genetically modified crops may damage biodiversity: “The risk here is much greater than that of widespread hybrid crops,” Na warned, adding that the use of GM products is a “forced measure.”
Professor Na Zhongyuan, who has been studying the problems of organic farming for many years, expressed confidence that GMO products will never conquer the market completely.
“This is absolutely impossible,” the scientist believes. “If it was not for our institute, the GMOs would quickly come out on top in China. The state is required to make a fair and open choice and in this case genetically modified products will completely lose their market. The technologies that we develop at the Institute of Ecological Agriculture surpass the methods of genetic engineering in almost every respect.”
Polls show that there is a strong belief among the Chinese about the potential danger of GMO products to human health. In 2016, in the northeastern province of Heilongjiang, the cultivation of genetically modified grain, including soy, was banned. In the survey, almost 91.5 percent of respondents expressed their disapproval of GMOs.
The rice, known as Huahui No.1 has been developed by a group of scientists since 1998 at Huazhong Agricultural University. The rice is resistant to many pests and thus does not require the excessive use of pesticides. In 2009 the product received a bio-safety certificate from the Ministry of Agriculture of the People’s Republic of China after 10 years of safety tests.
However, the product has never been released on the country’s commercial market and was banned for mass cultivation in China. Given the fact that the commercialization of GMO rice in China was prohibited Huazhong Agricultural University decided to enter the international market and has been trying to obtain approval and safety certification in other countries, including the US.
On January 11, 2017, the FDA confirmed that “human and animal foods from Huahui No.1 rice grain are not materially different in composition, safety, and other relevant parameters from rice-derived human and animal food currently on the market, and that genetically engineered Huahui No.1 rice grain does not raise issues that would require premarket review or approval by the FDA.”
According to the university’s statement the product previously passed a review on pesticide residue by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Read More @ SputnikNews.com
by Rory Hall, The Daily Coin:
Russian Food: NonGMO / Organic vs Western Food: Poison as Food by Rory – The Daily Coin
We are not surprised at this truth. We actually thought this had already become a reality. Back in 2016 when Russia ban the import of GMO crops, food and, most importantly, seeds, the western pushers of poison as food went into a frenzy. Not only did Russia ban GMO’s, China made strides to follow suit, although limited in scope and ultimately the Chinese efforts failed.
by Julie Fidler, Natural Society:
Do you know which foods are “healthy?” If you said no, or you only have a vague idea, then you have something in common with the majority of people who responded to a recent survey by the International Food Information Council Foundation (IFIC). 
Approximately 8 in 10 respondents to the IFIC’s annual Food and Health Survey said they have conflicting information when it comes to foods that are healthy to eat and those that should be avoided. More than half of those surveyed said the lack of clear information makes them second-guess their food choices.
Some foods are obviously unhealthy, such as fast food and junk food. But beyond that, things get a little fuzzy.
by Joseph Mercola, D.O., Ph.D, Health Nut News:
Everyone loves a fresh garden salad, but are you sure the ingredients you’re using — the vegetables and fruits — are as healthy as they appear to be?
You may need to take a closer look: According to an analysis conducted by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) based on U.S. Department of Agriculture data, pesticide residues have been found in up to 70% of fruits and vegetable sold in the U.S.
This shouldn’t be surprising, considering that at least one BILLION pounds of conventional pesticides are used in the country per year — and it highlights the disturbing reality of just how ubiquitous pesticides have become in our food supply.
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.”
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.
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
from Waking Times:
If you have ever been to Berlin, Germany in the late Fall, you know how miserably wet, cold, and windy it can be. The only real refuge from those elements is to be found indoors. But even then there can be events that drive you right back outdoors and into the elements. Such was the case with the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU), which was holding its 40th session during the week of November 26-30, 2018, in that city.