posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:00 AM
a reply to: Agartha
GMO's may or may not be good or bad statically speaking .Life will eventually kill you :>) ..Its just the nature of the beast . what I noticed about
this piece was the industries response to the paper .Not only in this case but there is a trend where they (GMO's) will lobby to not have to label
them as such . There is a number of countries that will not except them and that number is growing . More and more people are wanting them to be
labelled so they can choose .
Imagine for a sec . If your family has a higher chance of developing cancer like the strain of rats chosen for the study , you might like to not eat
the GMO . Why would the industry want to take away that choice by hiding the fact that the product is in what they might be buying . We know that
labelling is very important for health concerns (peanuts etc.) We know that the public wants or doesn't want to do with GMO's . We know of a history
of the industry dragging farmers through the court systems .
We see the industry getting laws passed despite what most of the public wants . The industry has revolving doors open to the puppet politicians
willing to do their bidding . We also see that big cover-ups are possible despite what studies may suggest they are set up to look into .ie.911
commission and others .
This story may be stemming from some week science , but it has taken on a nature that has moved from the labs to the laws .If what the Emails prove to
suggest then one has to wonder why if the industry had such great science on their side why would they need to go about shutting it down in such a
covert manner instead of the normal peer review process .
This is a kind of mini climate gate issue with big big bucks involved .The industry controls the MSM and most of the research money associated with it
.Integrity will win every time when it comes to the truth .Oh and statistics as well because figures don't lie and liers get caught figuring all the
time .Its just not always reported in the MSM
Its all about watching the pea .We have seen his PHD questioned and parts of the study .That is one thing but if we go to this point in the piece we
can follow the real pea and not be distracted with the studies conclusions weather statically significant or not
Monsanto ‘edits’ Food and Chemical Toxicology In a July 12, 2016 article in the French newspaper Le Monde by award-winning investigative
science journalist, Stéphane Foucart, content of sensational and damning email exchanges between Monsanto officials in St. Louis headquarters and
Food and Chemical Technology editor-in-chief, A. Wallace Hayes, obtained by US Right to Know (USRTK), reveal that Hayes was secretly in correspondence
with Monsanto over the Seralini study his journal had published. journal-neo.org...
edit on 8-9-2016 by the2ofusr1 because: (no reason given)