It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Dangerous Toxins From Genetically Modified Plants Found in Women and Fetuses

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 11:32 PM

Originally posted by jssaylor2007
reply to post by Mystery_Lady

Also for clarification the land here is incredibly fertile, but the region is prone to drought. The Arizona valley is one of the most fertile places in the country, but it is also prone to periods of drought.
edit on 1-8-2011 by jssaylor2007 because: phone spelling

Thanks for the clarification. I still and always believe that GMO is not the answer. You knew the area was prone to drought. I'm surprised you can not find natural crops that can survive in drought prone areas, instead of having to resort to GMO crops.

Mind if I ask what crop/crops and label you sell under?

posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 11:40 PM

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by ThePublicEnemyNo1

That's very condescending of you - but I had little trouble reading the 3 papers you posted links to - the conclusions were fairly straightforward and there was noting at all, in any of them, saying that there was a problem with fertility from the Bt bacteria.

Only 1 of them has a specific section on reproductive defects - the one here - - and the section says that no tests are required so none have been carried out.

If it is somethign in them perhaps you could point out exactly the passage that mentions it, rather than being condescending and obtuse?

I wasn't being condescending or obtuse. The very article you refer to, said it. BTW, just because it said no further studies or tests are required, that's a red flag IMHO to test/research and doesn't mean for one second that researching should not be conducted.

If I offended you, that was not my intention and I apologize. But this "discussion" between us seems to be going nowhere. If the information I provided you doesn't lead you to research this on your own terms, then I don't know what else to say well!

posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 11:43 PM

Bt crops linked to sterility, disease, and death

Thousands of sheep, buffalo, and goats in India died after grazing on Bt cotton plants after harvest. Others suffered poor health and reproductive problems.[34]
Farmers in Europe and Asia say that cows, water buffaloes, chickens, and horses died from eating Bt corn varieties.[35]
About two dozen US farmers report that Bt corn varieties caused widespread sterility in pigs or cows.[36]

posted on Aug, 1 2011 @ 11:51 PM
I love how we still call it Genetically Modified Foods.
I guess calling in Genetically" MUTATED" wouldn't have sold as well.

But seriously, only a boof head wouldn't have seen that Genetically MUTATING food could and WOULD have unforeseen side effects on people and the enviroment. Even blind Freddy saw this one coming.

We humans are Stupid

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 12:21 AM
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

If seedless watermelon are so "natural", then why didn't they appear until scientists have started to genetically modify our food? If there were seedless watermelon when I was a kid, my parents and relatives would have loved it. No seeds to worry about. I never seen or heard of them until recently. Recently meaning within the past few years. No one spoke, wished, or stated they seen seedless watermelon.

Not everyone agrees that they are just hybrids.

Certified Organtic Seedless Watermelon

If you research carefully, you will learn that, technically, there cannot be such a thing as a certified organic seedless watermelon. Why? A certified organic seedless watermelon is a genetically altered watermelon. The genetic alteration is done chemically. To create a seedless watermelon, seed producers treat natural watermelon seed with Colchicines, a chromosome-altering chemical. Colchicines changes the chromosome number in the seeds from 2 to 4. Once this is done, the seeds are pollinated with the natural 2 chromosome watermelon. The result is an un-natural, genetically modified watermelon with 3 chromosomes.

Even if you insist on them being just a hybird:

Seedless Fruit is Genetically Modified

They have lost the originators original flavor and purpose. (Eat to Heal...they can't or reproduce) Their seeds started from grown better whole grapes with seeds but now are sold separately for antioxidants powers to the health food markets. The rest have been raped and turn to hybrid's or GMO plants thanks to ignorant, evil designing men in the last days to control the food markets.

Most of the plants anti fungal properties are concentrated in the seeds as it bares for the next generation. What will happen when we have no anti fungal produced by plants to keep viruses out of the plant, animals and our body’s? Remember each healthy plant has its own predators in nature that try to destroy it. But built in its design is a defense against its diseases. This defense, or anti-fungal properties, is passed on to humans who by ingesting it will fight our diseases also, more especially concentrated in certain HERBS i.e. G.M O foods destroy most of this process. The healthier the plant ingest the more anti fungal or cure properties. If "mutated," not in its whole form or deviated to a "chemical" or drug not found in nature... (extractions) you have nothing in natural nature science (laws within nature) form to cure anything.

Yes, I agree with this article that the taste of the fruit is destroyed, and the healing power of the fruit, herb, and etc is and/or can be destroyed. Most believe in evolution. I believe in mutation within a species. I will not argue that. We are just helping it along here. The plant could very well mutate over time, not only loosing any vitamins, antioxidants, and healing properties, and change those to properties that harm us instead.

From what ThePublicEnemyNo1 and OP stated with links given, that has already started to happen.
edit on 2-8-2011 by Mystery_Lady because: adding info.

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 12:24 AM
the response from the agriculture biotechnology council to op's source and test

Aziz Aris and Samuel Leblanc at Canada’s University of Sherbrooke, Quebec have published the study, “Maternal and fetal exposure to pesticides associated to genetically modified foods in Eastern Townships of Quebec, Canada,” in Reproductive Technology Journal. In response to the publication of this report abc Chairman, Dr Julian Little, said: ‘The study is based on analysis that has been used in previous feeding studies and has been found to be unreliable. The study also looks at CRY1Ab which is used not only in plant biotechnology but also in organic farming and gardening, with no harm to human health. Furthermore, this report does not identify any health or safety concerns related to consuming biotech foods. Indeed, biotech crops are rigorously tested for safety prior to their use and over 2 trillion meals made with GM ingredients have been safely consumed around the world over the past 15 years without a single substantiated health issue.
there's more

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 12:24 AM

edit on 2-8-2011 by vjr1113 because: fisrts time lol. mods?

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 01:10 AM

Originally posted by korathin

No one cares+ it is illegal for the Federal Government(since femnazi Bill Clinton) to investigate anything "male". Hence why there have been no studies on male health, suicide rates, DV and other things in well over 20 years.

There have been hundreds of studies on these topics since Clinton was elected.

Why do you have to make things up? Why can't you just argue with facts?

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 02:35 AM
monsanto that name just makes me mad
,i dont know how many times i have read articles warning people of the dangers,and yet here we are...(was it here i read something about history repeating itself
must be time time for everybody to invest self contained greenhouses,keep out those pesky gmo cross pollinating spores....
im a horticulturist and have lots of ideas on growing organic,one of these days i will start on thread on how to grow organic veggie gardens,recycling and re-using the organic materails as pesticides and feed,and now thx to monsanto we need to grow them on their own microclimates to ensure success........

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 03:38 AM
reply to post by haarvik

I try to look out for GMO stuff and not buy it but i think it's almost impossible to avoid.

There's GMO fruit too (like grapes and oranges that don't produce seeds inside the fruit) but no labels saying that it is, u'll only find that out by eating it. Like these women

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 04:40 AM
reply to post by jssaylor2007

So spend the capital to develop other methods of producing agriculture in those reasons, that do not involve poisoning the population.

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 06:03 AM

Originally posted by haarvik
I am going to talk to my doctor about having blood tests done for evidence of BT-toxin. I would think that if it is in fact in my blood stream, I should have a case for a class action suit! If it's in my blood, then I bet it is in my childs blood, and that would constitute child endangerment charges as well.

You really should. This is one of the hidden dangers of the world right now and Monsant should be exposed before the whole thing turns into a mess worse than DDT.
Please report back here and if possible, scan results and help others to get themselves and their kids tested - as far as I know, some doctors can be obstructionists and will not help.
It is in the US where it should start - that is where you can do class action lawsuits.
This corporation is clearly criminal.

Fighting Bt corn is happening in Hungary now - thousands of hectares are scheduled to burn because the government alleges that it is GMO. They staunchly maintain their opposition citing lab results that corn was infected with GMO seeds - despite Monsanto spokesmen saying the opposite. (Obviously they cannot be trusted.) We should all be acquaintained with checking lab results - if I lived in Japan now I would learn to use a GHeiger counter. This is quite similar.

It is not out of the question that many "new diseases" are feeding on the platform of GMO crops being digested and leaving remainders of odd protein chains in the gut. Moreover, as far as I know, in some places GMO is allowed in animal feed without marking - even though it is banned in human food

Bt is one of the worst inventions Monsanto ever did.

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 06:19 AM

Originally posted by vjr1113
so where's the lawsuits?

if monsanto is so evil, why aren't they shut down?

Originally posted by vjr1113
the response from the agriculture biotechnology council to op's source and test

Aziz Aris and Samuel Leblanc at Canada’s University of Sherbrooke, Quebec have published the study, “Maternal and fetal exposure to pesticides associated to genetically modified foods in Eastern Townships of Quebec, Canada,” in Reproductive Technology Journal. In response to the publication of this report abc Chairman, Dr Julian Little, said: ‘The study is based on analysis that has been used in previous feeding studies and has been found to be unreliable. The study also looks at CRY1Ab which is used not only in plant biotechnology but also in organic farming and gardening, with no harm to human health. Furthermore, this report does not identify any health or safety concerns related to consuming biotech foods. Indeed, biotech crops are rigorously tested for safety prior to their use and over 2 trillion meals made with GM ingredients have been safely consumed around the world over the past 15 years without a single substantiated health issue.
there's more

You answered your own question.

The "agriculture biotechnology council" sounds trustworthy right?

Sure, we can trust them...everything is okay.

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 06:39 AM
what will come of this absolutely nothing why . they buy up all the inspectors and regulators and politicians. if you tried suing them case would get thrown right out as a frivolous lawsuit. dont believe me try it.

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 06:51 AM
reply to post by Mystery_Lady

Most of what is grown here is cotton, but there is a bit of corn, potatoes, peanuts, and wheat.


posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 07:02 AM
Here is a list of the types of food that contain GMO ingredients:

Salad Dressings
Infant Formula
Bread, Rolls, Pastry
Baby Cereal
Canned rolls and breads
Hamburgers and Hotdogs
Processed Meats
Fried Foods
Frozen Foods
Veggie Burgers
Soy Burgers
Meat Substitutes
Ice Cream
Frozen Yogurt
Soy Sauce
Soy Cheese
Soy Nuts and Products
Processed Cheese
Pasteurized Cheese
Tomato Sauce
Barbeque Sauce
Canned Stews
Dried and Dehydrated Soups/Sauces
Protein Powder
Baking Powder
Peanut Butter
Enriched Flour
Powdered Sugar
Children’s snacks
Cake and Baking Mixes
Frozen pie and pastry shells

Here are some of the ingredients to watch for as they are GMO:

Aspartame, also called NutraSweet®, Equal Spoonful®, Canderel®, BeneVia®, E951 AminoSweet® baking soda canola oil (rapeseed) caramel color cellulose citric acid cobalamin (Vit. B12) colorose condensed milk confectioners sugar corn flour corn gluten corn masa corn meal corn oil corn sugar corn syrup cornstarch cyclodextrin cystein dextrin dextrose diacetyl diglyceride erythritol Equal food starch fructose (any form) glucose glutamate glutamic acid gluten glycerides glycerin glycerol glycerol monooleate glycine hemicellulose high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) hydrogenated starch hydrolyzed vegetable protein inositol inverse syrup invert sugar inversol isoflavones lactic acid lecithin leucine lysine malitol malt malt syrup malt extract maltodextrin maltose mannitol methylcellulose milk powder milo starch modified food starch modified starch mono and diglyceride monosodium glutamate (MSG) oleic acid Phenylalanine phytic acid protein isolate shoyu sorbitol soy flour soy isolates soy lecithin soy milk soy oil soy protein soy protein isolate soy sauce starch stearic acid sugar (unless cane) tamari tempeh teriyaki marinade textured vegetable protein threonine tocopherols (Vit E) tofu trehalose triglyceride vegetable fat vegetable oil Vitamin B12 Vitamin E whey whey powder xanthan gum

So, now you have some ammunition when shopping to know what to look for. I don't care what Monsanto says, these are not natural products, and just because THEIR scientists say they are safe does not mean they are. Ever since GMO foods have been allowed into our food supply (early 90's) health issues have steadily increased. Diabetes is now at epidemic proportions, and prior to the early 90's was not very prevalent. How many new diseases or disorders have gained in popularity over the last 15 years or so? Coincidence? I think not. nature has a way of making adaptions, man does not need to be playing creator with this. Just because you can do something, does not mean you should!

As I have posted in another thread, just because you have no issue with GMO does not mean that I don't either. I am free to choose what I wish to put into my body, and yes, Non-GMO labeling should be allowed! I have the right to know what is in the food I choose for myself and my family. Anyone who does not want me to know is hiding something. Otherwise it would be a non-issue. This is America, and I should be able to make my own choices, and I should also be told what is in something I am going to ingest. You people who say GMO is fine, nothing wrong with it are probably the same people who believe anything big pharma tells you instead of researching it first. I am ashamed that my fellow citizens, and most importantly my government has made it illegal for me to know what is in the food I consume! The FDA should be sued for willful negligence!
edit on 2-8-2011 by haarvik because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 08:07 AM
This article is an example of what is wrong with so called "science" journalism and how it attempts to short circuit the scientific process. They key sentence everybody should be taking note of is this:

"The study has been accepted for publication in the peer reviewed journal Reproductive Toxicology"

Being accepted for publication is the first step of the process. It means the paper looks suitable for publication, but it has yet to be reviewed by peers. Until it has been looked at by independent experts it is quite possible that the study is flawed in some way. Yet this important fact is seemingly not important to the journalist who wrote the story and the fact that the paper has been created is for them enough evidence to raise fear in the public domain.

There may be real dangers there or there may not. If there are no real dangers then it is reckless and irresponsible for the journalist to be fear-mongering.

This is the same style of journalism that published non peer reviewed papers suggesting a link between vaccines and autism. Those studies were found to be extremely flawed but the damage was done and now the measles, mumps and rubella diseases are on the increase again.

It seems journalists cannot learn from their past mistakes.

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 09:26 AM
Here's my take on GMOs...

Research? Fine. There's always something science could learn.

But how it's being handled? Big problem!

1. It should not be done with food sources or anything that could compromise food sources. Having stuff put on plants is one thing (it can be washed off), but having poisons or other compounds in plants is another. Useful compounds could be produced in modified non-food-source plants and then extracted for use. It's unlikely that chance of DNA spread from daffodils or daylillies would affect food source crops. Yet plants like those could be easily grown and harvested with fewer problems than typical food plants.

2. It should be isolated from the environment when possible. You know those level-4 biolabs that contain smallpox and ebola? Negatively pressurized buildings, with controls on the ventilation and all that stuff? If you're testing anything modified that can produce pollen or spores, it should be in labs or greenhouses kept under similar conditions. Research studies should be a lot longer and by impartial organizations before they're determined safe enough to let out. (Some things may be considered harmless, but a mutation here or there may still make toxins or severely degrade good traits elsewhere. Think of how much work is done in debugging software after even trivial changes are made - DNA is natures software and screwing with it is liable to break things even if not obvious at first.)

3. A big enough screw-up with something like this could technically be considered an act of war. What?! Hear this out... If a nation has a legitimate complaint about compromising or tampering of their food supply, is pollen contamination from a GMO any better than flying aircraft over a country with herbicides or toxins and destroying those same food sources or making them unfit for consumption? I think that would be grounds for declaring war due to a hostile action when considered. Right now many places have stayed mum on the subject, but keeping in mind how Monsanto hired Xe and such - it's not that far fetched. Failed crops in a non-western nuclear state could potentially lead to WWIII if blame is placed on genetic tampering. I also have a feeling that some countries may already be covertly involved in destruction of some GM crops. (Particularly if weather patterns would allow pollen spread to enter their borders. It would not surprise me if Hungary which bans GMOs would be engaging in operations or supporting anti-GM crop actions in Europe. And I don't blame them either - particularly if that's what it takes to keep the stuff from entering the country.)

Profit is one thing and so is scientific research, but to engage in malfeasance and recklessness in pursuit of such could have disastrous consequences. It's a shame that the legal system has also been compromised for profit such that it no longer serves to protect the people from such things.

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 02:13 PM
Are there any other sources that this could come from?

I hate such companies as much as most ATSers, but I am really just curious if this is the only source of the toxin.

posted on Aug, 2 2011 @ 02:17 PM
reply to post by xxcatlolxx

It can come from meat where the animal has been fed the GMO grain. So not only will you get it from processed foods like Coke, and Doritos but also from the ground hamburger, pork and even chicken and turkey. You will be especially susceptible if you by pre-fried foods such as fish or chicken. I have started to move to organic, but it can be expensive. Most items (not all) are 30% to 50% higher in cost than the processed versions. Quite disheartening for anyone looking to have better health.

I was visiting Lancaster County, PA a couple weeks ago and went on a farm tour with an Amish farmer. He was telling us that his tobacco crops were getting yellow spots on them and they couldn't figure out why. Come to find out, a neighboring farm had sprayed Roundup Ready on their crops. The wind carried some of it over to their alfalfa, and the cows were eating it. The yellow spots came from the cow manure. So there is one direct link of contamination that was a direct result of cattle eating the pesticide. If you think these things can't be passed along, you are sorely mistaken.
edit on 2-8-2011 by haarvik because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in