Jon Rappoport ~ Even The NY Times Is Now Rejecting Monsanto GMO Science

Jon Rappoport April 9 2013

This isn’t a leak. It isn’t a timid flow. It’s a flood.

I’m talking about about the criticism of Monsanto’s so-called science of genetically-engineered food.

For the past 20 years, independent researchers have been attacking Monsanto science in various ways, and finally the NY Times has joined the crowd.

But it’s the way Mark Bittman, lead food columnist for the Times magazine, does it that really the crashes the whole GMO delusion. Writing in his April 2 column, “Why Do G.M.O.’s Need Protection?”, Bittman leads with this:

“Genetic engineering in agriculture has disappointed many people who once had hopes for it.”

As in: the party’s over, turn out the lights.

Bittman explains: “…genetic engineering, or, more properly, transgenic engineering – in which a gene, usually from another species of plant, bacterium or animal, is inserted into a plant in the hope of positively changing its nature – has been disappointing.”

As if this weren’t enough, Bittman spells it out more specifically: “In the nearly 20 years of applied use of G.E. in agriculture there have been two notable ‘successes,’ along with a few less notable ones. These are crops resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide (Monsanto develops both the seeds and the herbicide to which they’re resistant) and crops that contain their own insecticide. The first have already failed, as so-called superweeds have developed resistance to Roundup, and the second are showing signs of failing, as insects are able to develop resistance to the inserted Bt toxin — originally a bacterial toxin — faster than new crop variations can be generated.”

Bittman goes on to write that superweed resistance was a foregone conclusion; scientists understood, from the earliest days of GMOs, that spraying generations of these weeds with Roundup would give us exactly what we have today: failure of the technology to prevent what it was designed to prevent. The weeds wouldn’t die out. They would retool and thrive.

“The result is that the biggest crisis in monocrop agriculture – something like 90 percent of all soybeans and 70 percent of corn is grown using Roundup Ready seed – lies in glyphosate’s inability to any longer provide total or even predictable control, because around a dozen weed species have developed resistance to it.” Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup.

Continue reading

Paul Craig Roberts ~ Polluted America

Paul Craig Roberts February 24 2013

In the United States everything is polluted.

Democracy is polluted with special interests and corrupt politicians.

Accountability is polluted with executive branch exemptions from law and the Constitution and with special legal privileges for corporations, such as the Supreme Court given right to corporations to purchase American elections.

The Constitution is polluted with corrupt legal interpretations from the Bush and Obama regimes that have turned constitutional prohibitions into executive branch rights, transforming law from a shield of the people into a weapon in the hands of government.

Waters are polluted with toxic waste spills, oil spills, chemical fertilizer run-off with resulting red tides and dead zones, acid discharges from mining with resulting destructive algae such as prymnesium parvum, from toxic chemicals used in fracking and with methane that fracking releases into wells and aquifers, resulting in warnings to homeowners near to fracking operations to open their windows when showering.

The soil’s fertility is damaged, and crops require large quantities of chemical fertilizers. The soil is polluted with an endless array of toxic substances and now with glyphosate, the main element in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide with which GMO crops are sprayed. Glyphosate now shows up in wells, streams and in rain.

Air is polluted with a variety of substances, and there are many large cities in which there are days when the young, the elderly, and those suffering with asthma are warned to remain indoors.

All of these costs are costs imposed on society and ordinary people by corporations that banked profits by not having to take the costs into account. This is the way in which unregulated capitalism works.

Our food itself is polluted with antibiotics, growth hormones, pesticides, and glyphosate.

Continue reading

Jon Rappoport ~ US Farmers Flood Fields With Dangerous Poison To Fight Monsanto Superweeds

Jon Rappoport’s blog  February 25 2013

Herbicide-Resistant ‘Super Weeds’

You’re a farmer. Season after season, you watch your fields being taken over by Monsanto superweeds, which are resistant to the herbicide Roundup.

What are you going to do? You’re locked in. You’re buying your GMO seeds from Monsanto, and the food crops that grow from those seeds are supposed to be resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup, so that’s what you spray on your crops.

But the weeds aren’t resistant. They spread and they grow taller. They’re taking over.

So you, along with many, many other US farmers, go to a strategy called “burndown,” which is just as bad as it sounds. You use something a lot stronger than Roundup to kill those weeds: Paraquat, for example, which has been banned in 32 countries.

You drench your fields with it in the fall. You kill anything growing. And you drench the fields again in the spring, before you plant. Then, just as you’re going to plant, you hit the fields a third time with the poison.

This is in addition to all the sprayings with Roundup, which is toxic, too.

Then you harvest the crops and you sell them. And consumers eat the food along with all the poison.

Tom Philpot, writing in Mother Jones (Feb.6), reports the alarming stats on the superweed takeover of US farmland. As of 2012, almost 50% of US farms had superweeds. In 2011, it was 34%. In Georgia, it’s now 92%.

The total acreage of US farmland with resistant superweeds jumped by 51% in 2012. In 2011, it was a 25% increase. That upward- percentage escalation is called a nightmare.

Well, so farmers are poisoning the hell out of their food and their fields. But with Monsanto’s super-duper GMO technology, the crop yields are still much bigger than they would be without the GMO seeds, right?

The Institute for Responsible Technology cites and quotes three reports on that score.

Continue reading

Heather Callaghan ~ USDA Got Brand New Pathogen Warning Before Deregulating GM Alfalfa

Activist Post February 20 2013 

Unidentified viral-fungal-like pathogen crosses into multiple kingdoms: Plant & Animal/Human. Rarely, if ever, seen in nature before.

Following a 6 year approval battle, the USDA fully deregulated Monsanto’s Roundup Ready alfalfa in January 2011. A week later, they partially deregulated GM sugar beets. This occurred despite Secretary of Agriculture’s Tom Vilsack’s knowledge of a stark warning letter by Dr. Don M. Huber, Emeritus Professor of Plant Pathology, Purdue University two weeks prior, who found a link between the modified organisms and the proliferation of the new pathogen. Huber knew about its presence in Roundup Ready soy and corn and sought to hold off the GE alfalfa calling the situation an “emergency.”

Dr. Huber said (video link below) “we don’t know what it is” – it’s a new entity first noticed by veterinarians in the late ’90s, new to science. It’s not a virus, although similar, actually smaller in size and like a fungus that spreads like a virus. It’s contained in Roundup Ready (RR) and Roundup sprayed plants and feed and bizarrely affects all farmland animals often with infertility and spontaneous abortions – an inter-species syndrome that could be the first of its kind.

So it’s not just a side-effect of endocrine-disrupting pesticides or transmission of genetic material – it’s a new pathogen the USDA ignored. There is increasing evidence it’s already affecting humans with infertility and reproductive problems, but the USDA filed the warning in the garbage.

An excerpt from Huber’s letter:

We are informing the USDA of our findings at this early stage, specifically due to your pending decision regarding approval of alfalfa. Naturally, if either the Roundup Ready gene or Roundup itself is a promoter or co-factor of this pathogen, then such approval could be a calamity.For the past 40 years, I have been a scientist in the professional and military agencies that evaluate and prepare for natural and manmade biological threats, including germ warfare and disease outbreaks. Based on this experience, I believe the threat we are facing from this pathogen is unique and of a high risk status. In layman’s terms, it should be treated as an emergency.

Please read more about Huber’s discovery and the fallout from Mike Ludwig of Occupy Monsanto.

Continue reading

Lisa Garber ~ Scientist: Top Selling Weed Killer – Monsanto’s Roundup – Linked To Infertility

Natural Society | January 9 2013

Monsanto has made a pretty penny over the last several decades thanks to its top-selling herbicide, Roundup, and cash crops genetically modified to withstand heavy doses of the chemical, such as Roundup Ready corn, soy, and cotton. Meanwhile, Roundup’s key ingredient glyphosate has ravaged the earth, our food chain, and our bodies, and is even causing infertility among the masses. Its effects haven’t gone unnoticed.

Purdue University professor emeritus Dr. Don Huber addressed the dangers of glyphosate to American and European officials in 2011. His concerns centered on an electron microscopic pathogen which “appears to significantly impact the health of plants, animals, and probably human beings.” In a letter to US Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Huber added that preliminary experiments have reproduced the pathogen’s link to miscarriages.

Vilsack purportedly received Huber’s letter and, despite the available mountain of evidence just one click away, encouraged of Huber “submission of any data or studies in support of his concerns.”

Apparently, none of the scientific, published evidence of glyphosate-induced infertility, sterility, birth defects, Parkinson’s, obesity, superweeds, and water pollution were convincing enough to keep the USDA from snuggling down next to Monsanto on a bed of dirty money just 11 days later. Despite Huber’s explicit pleas to delay deregulation of Roundup Ready crops—which would be, in his words, “a calamity”—the USDA went through with deregulation.

Continue reading

Elizabeth Renter ~ 5 Steps For Avoiding And Detoxing The Bt-Toxin Found In GMO Crops

theintelhub.com | January 7, 2013

“It will make agriculture more efficient,” they claim. “It won’t hurt anyone but the bugs,”they say. But despite all of their promises, Big Agriculture has a vested interest in “selling” us the benefits of their frankenfoods. After all, this is how they make their millions and billions. Regardless of what they tell us, however, the vast majority of people are waking up to the game and recognizing the current big agricultural system for what it is: a capitalistic machine devoid of moral concerns.

Just one example of their disregard for human health is in the use of Bacillus thuringiensis, also known as the Bt-toxin. This bacterial toxin has been used for decades as an insecticide, sprayed directly on crops to kill off problem bugs. The toxin works by literally exploding the stomachs of the bugs who ingest it. Nice, huh?

Well, Big Ag had the evil-genius idea of actually splicing the Bt gene with that of crops, creating corn, soybeans and cotton that already had the Bt built in. They said it would increase crop yields. They said it would decrease pesticide use. But, on both accounts, they were wrong. In addition to failing on both of these fronts, Bt crops have been found to cause both known and unknown damage to human health.

In example, some research has shown that Monsanto’s ‘biopesticide’ known as Bt is killing human kidney cellsScientists found that the Bt pesticide, in addition to Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Roundup, exhibit direct toxicity to human cells even in low doses.

Continue reading

F. William Engdahl ~ Cancer Of Corruption, Seeds Of Destruction: The Monsanto GMO Whitewash

The Intel Hub | December 21 2012

Because of the power vested in the EU Commission in Brussels, Belgium, with command over a space encompassing 27 nations with more than 500 million citizens and the largest nominal world gross domestic product (GDP) of 18 trillion US dollars, it’s perhaps no surprise in this era of moral promiscuity that powerful private lobby groups such as the tobacco industry, the drug lobby, the agribusiness lobby and countless others spend enormous sums of money and other favors—legal and sometimes illegal—to influence policy decisions of the EU Commission.

This revolving door of corrupt ties between powerful private industry lobby groups and the EU Commission was in full view recently with the ruling of the European Food Safety Administration (EFSA) trying to discredit serious scientific tests about the deadly effects of a variety of Monsanto GMO corn.

cartoon_gmo_cornCancer of Corruption

In September 2012, Food and Chemical Toxicology, a serious international scientific journal, released a study by a team of scientists at France’s Caen University led by Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini.

Before publication the Seralini study had been reviewed over a four-month period by a qualified group of scientific peers for its methodology and was deemed publishable.

It was no amateur undertaking. The scientists at Caen made carefully-documented results of tests on a group of 200 rats over a two-year life span, basically with one group of non-GMO fed rats, a so-called control group, and the other a group of GMO-fed rats.

Significantly, following a long but finally successful legal battle to force Monsanto to release the details of its own study of the safety of its own NK603 maize (corn), Seralini and colleagues reproduced a 2004 Monsanto study published in the same journal and used by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) for its 2009 positive evaluation of NK603.

Seralini’s group based their experiment on the same protocol as the Monsanto study but, critically, were testing more parameters more frequently. And the rats were studied for much longer—their full two year average life-time instead of just 90 days in the Monsanto study.

The long time span proved critical. The first tumors only appeared 4 to7 months into the study. In industry’s earlier 90-day study on the same GMO maize Monsanto NK603, signs of toxicity were seen but were dismissed as “not biologically meaningful” by industry and EFSA alike. It seems they were indeed very biologically meaningful.

The study was also done with the highest number of rats ever measured in a standard GMO diet study. They tested also “for the first time 3 doses (rather than two in the usual 90 day long protocols) of the Roundup-tolerant NK603 GMO maize alone, the GMO maize treated with Roundup, and Roundup alone at very low environmentally relevant doses starting below the range of levels permitted by regulatory authorities in drinking water and in GM feed.” [1]

Continue reading

Lisa Garber ~ Monsanto’s Roundup Devastating Gut Health, Contributing To Overgrowth Of Deadly Bacteria

Natural Society | December 19 2012

Much of the public forgets the gut when it comes to warding off the flu and other more threatening diseases, but the gut—and its army of beneficial bacteria—are essential in protecting us from harm. That’s why eating genetically modified and/or conventionally farmed food could be a direct assault on your own health. Most recently, research has shown that Monsanto’s herbicide, known as Roundup, is destroying gut health, threatening overall health of animals, people, and the planet significantly.

The journal Current Microbiology recently published a study that caught Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide’s active ingredient, glyphosate, suppressing beneficial bacteria in poultry specimens. Given that gut health is directly linked to chronic illnesses and overall health, this isn’t exactly welcome news for people who can’t always afford or who lack access to organic, locally grown food.

But it gets worse. While good bacteria died, highly pathogenic bacteria were unaffected by glyphosate. These pathogens include several strains of Salmonella and the class Colstridia, anaerobic bacteria known to be some of the deadliest known to us, including C. tetani (tetanus) and C. botulinum (botulin). Although botulin is used to ease overactive muscles and in Botox, America’s most popular cosmetic procedure, it takes but 75 billionths of a gram to kill someone weighing 75 kg (165 lbs).

“A reduction of beneficial bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract microiota by ingestion of glyphosate could disturb the normal gut bacterial community,” the authors of the study wrote. Glyphosate, they added, “could be a significant predisposing factor that is associated with the increase in Clostridia botulinum-mediated diseases by suppressing the antagonistic effect of these [good] bacteria on clostridia.”

Dangers of Pesticides

Continue reading

Anthony Gucciardi ~ Scientist: Many Pro-GMO Corporate Biologists Own GMO Patents, in Bed with Monsanto

Natural Society | November 25 2012

The lead researcher behind the monumental study that linked Monsanto’s GMOs and best-selling herbicide Roundup to tumor development and early death is now blowing the whistle on many corporate scientists who are not just close to Monsanto and profit-harvesting GMO crops — many of them actually have or are seeking their own GMO patents. These patents, of course, enable them to make bountiful amounts of cash. Other corporate scientists are on (or ‘were’ at one point) Monsanto’s pay roll, including former Monsanto executive turned Deputy Commissioner for Foods at the FDA Michael R. Taylor.

Dr. Gilles-Eric Séralini, a French scientists who has been under assault from Monsanto and pro-GMO scientists, was responsible for perhaps the largest awakening over the dangers of Monsanto’s GMO foods that we have ever seen. Not only did the public begin to further recognize the existence and threat of GMOs thanks to his research, but numerous countries like Russia and others actually enacted a suspension on the import of genetically modified maize due to public health concerns.

This, of course, upset the Monsanto-funded corporate scientists who proverbially ‘unleashed the dogs’ on Dr. Séralini. Even Monsanto released a comment, stating that the lifelong rat study wasn’t sufficient to substantiate any real health concerns. The company itself, amazingly, only conducted a 90 day trial period for its GMOs before unleashing them on the public.

Previous Peer-Reviewed Evidence Highlighting GMO Danger Ignored by ‘Scientists’

Continue reading

John Moffett ~ Can Corporations Convince California Voters That They Don’t Want To Know What’s In Their Food?

OpEd News | November 5 2012

J. Moffett

California’s Proposition 37, also known as the “California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act”, will be on the ballot this Tuesday for Californians to decide if they want to know what is in the foods they eat. Proposition 37 would require that many food products that contain genetically modified plants such as GMO corn be labeled so that consumers know what they and their families are eating. The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), a Washington DC based trade association of major food manufacturers, has made it their top priority to defeat Proposition 37 this November. As a result, many agribusiness, chemical and food industry corporations are donating large sums of money to defeat proposition 37, including companies like Monsanto (over 8 million dollars), Dupont companies (over 5 million dollars), PepsiCo (over 2 million dollars), Kraft (over 1.6 million dollars) and even Smucker’s ($485,000). The big question for these companies is — can they spend enough money on negative advertising to get 51% of California voters to say they would much rather not know what is in their food?

Genetically modified organisms (GMO) are technically known as transgenic organisms because a gene from one organism has been artificially inserted into the genome of another. It’s a big deal for agribusiness because they have become dependent upon companies like Monsanto to ostensibly reduce their costs by making crops temporarily resistant to insects and weeds. Setting aside discussions on any actual cost savings or increased crop yields for farmers, it is a documented fact that insect and weed species adapt to the new crop and field conditions within several generations. As soon as the new, modified plant is grown in large monoculture conditions the insects and weeds immediately begin the process of mutation and selection to generate naturally resistant versions. At best you can expect perhaps 10 years before substantial resistance becomes widespread in some insect and weed species populations. Then the process must be repeated with the development of a new transgenic plant variety. It should be noted that as in the case of overuse of antibiotics and the development of antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria that it is the overuse of Roundup that leads to the development of resistant insect and weed varieties. However, the use of Roundup resistant crop varieties by large agribusiness strongly encourages repeated heavy application of glyphosate substantially increasing the glyphosate levels in the resultant food products, and accelerating the development of resistant weeds.

Continue reading

Jonathan Benson ~ Study: Roundup And Other Pesticides Directly Linked To Parkinson’s, Neurodegenerative Disorders

Natural News | November 1 2012

The dangers associated with pesticide exposure are much more far-reaching than previously thought, as illustrated by a shocking study recently published in the journal Neurotoxicology and Teratology. It turns out that chronic exposure to Monsanto’s Roundup formula, the active ingredient of which is glyphosate, as well as too many other common pesticides and herbicides is one of the primary environmental factors responsible for causing neurodegenerative disorders in humans.

As originally reported by Sayer Ji over at GreenMedInfo.com, the study brings to light the intricacies of how pesticide and herbicide chemicals induce cell death, which can eventually cascade into a host of chronic neurological illnesses such as Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s. Even at levels significantly lower than the government-established safety thresholds, these persistent chemicals, which are routinely sprayed on conventional food crops and produce throughout the U.S., can cause permanent brain damage.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Parkinson’s disease alone is the 14th leading cause of death in America. Figures from 2010, which are the latest available, illustrate a 4.6 percent increase in the number of deaths from Parkinson’s compared to the year prior. And a 2007 report put out by the Parkinson’s Disease Foundation(PDF) estimates that by 2030, the number of people worldwide with Parkinson’s will more than double

Continue reading

S. D. Wells ~ Side Effects Of GMOs – Ask Your Doctor If Cancer Is Right For You

Natural News | October 21 2012

If I sprayed your salad with some “RAID” roach killer right now, just a little bit right on the lettuce and maybe a little more on the tomatoes, would you still eat it all, and just assume your body will simply filter out those “small amounts” of toxins? Better yet, what if I paid for it, a nice big, tasty, “bug killer” salad that you could even take outside and no bugs would bother you at all, would you eat it? How about this: If I sprayed a quick shot of some Raid ant killer into your orange juice or your apple juice right in front of you, would you drink it, especially if you’d save 25 cents on every drink you drank from now on? What if most vegetables, fruits, and fruit juice drinks were sold that way, and cheaper than the “Non-Raid” food, would you still buy them? Wouldn’t that pay off for you in the long run? I guess not, because you’re not stupid, are you?

What if the NUMBER ONE SIDE EFFECT of your medication was CANCER, would you still take it, just to temporarily make that headache go away, or maybe to make a little muscle ache disappear for a few hours? GMO means food and medicine are genetically modified, with bacteria and sometimes with viruses, or with weed killer, worm killer, bug killer and people killer. “Pesticide food” is well planned out and has been for decades. Let’s look at history for proof.

Pesticide food timeline

1920 – German chemical companies are hired . . . to create mustard gas, pesticides, and insecticides to be used to gas enemy soldiers at the front lines and in the trenches of WWI.

1940 – Hitler uses odorless gas created by the pharmaceutical conglomerate I.G. Farben (Monsanto, Hoescht, BASF and Bayer) to gas to death millions of Jews in WWII atrocity at Auschwitz and other concentration camps. (http://www.naturalnews.com)

1950s – Hitler’s scientists and “deadly gas” creators are sentenced for their war crimes of enslavement and murder. The scientists somehow only get put in prison for four to seven years for mass murder, and when they get out of jail, the U.S. government and major pharmaceutical firms hire them to work on food chemicals and pesticides for American farmlands (The “birth” of GMO). (http://frank.mtsu.edu/~baustin/trials3.html)

1960s – United States uses Agent Orange (created by Monsanto and Dow Chemical) to burn down the thick forestry of Vietnam, but millions of Vietnamese families get cancer from it, and tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers come home with cancer, most to die from it in less than a decade. (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Monsanto)

1980 – Aspartame, a genetically modified sugar substitute, banned for decades, was pushed through the system/legislation by Donald Rumsfeld and Ronald Reagan, who fired the head of the FDA and put in place their own partner in crime, right from the first day Reagan took office (http://rense.com/general33/legal.htm). This toxification of millions of innocent Americans auspiciously timed for the “weight loss” craze phase of the 1980s. Rumsfeld just happened to be the CEO of Searle Pharmaceutical, and Searle profited in the billions. So much for “insider trading” laws and “conflicts of interest.” The U.S. government was blatantly breeding cancer and selling it as food.

Continue reading

Marcia Ishii-Eiteman ~ Genetically Modified Food Industry’s Dirty Little Secret

Reader Supported News | October 9 2012

As a scientist at Pesticide Action Network, I am frequently asked these days to explain what genetically engineered (GE) crops have to do with pesticides. When I answer that GE crops both contain and drive up pesticide use, I am often met with earnest incredulity. We seem to need to believe that GE technology is the best thing since sliced bread.

On a radio program just last week, a caller voiced his genuine hopes to me that GE crops would provide a green solution to the woes of the world since he’d heard that these crops increase yield, cure blindness and reduce pesticide use. I was sorry to have to disappoint him on all counts, since GE crops have consistently failed to improve yield, have done nothing to date for Vitamin A deficiency-related blindness and have driven increases in pesticide use since their introduction some sixteen years ago.

On this last point, a new study on GE crops out last week added yet more weight to the body of evidence contradicting the GE crop industry’s long-standing myth. Published Friday in the journal Environmental Sciences Europe, the Washington State University (WSU) study offers a simple but devastating finding: GE seeds dramatically increase pesticide use, and that use will grow unless we change the course of our food and farming system.

So here it is, the pesticide industry’s dirty little secret: GE seeds are no green solution to the world’s food needs, but are rather the growth engine of the world’s biggest pesticide companies. In point of fact, the latest wave of GE crops is expected to drive a 25-fold increase in the use of one particularly nasty pesticide (2,4-D) in corn over the next seven years.

Continue reading