It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
2. GMOs contaminate―forever.
GMOs cross pollinate and their seeds can travel. It is impossible to fully clean up our contaminated gene pool. Self-propagating GMO pollution will outlast the effects of global warming and nuclear waste. The potential impact is huge, threatening the health of future generations. GMO contamination has also caused economic losses for organic and non-GMO farmers who often struggle to keep their crops pure.
3. GMOs increase herbicide use.
Most GM crops are engineered to be “herbicide tolerant”―they defy deadly weed killer. Monsanto, for example, sells Roundup Ready crops, designed to survive applications of their Roundup herbicide.
Between 1996 and 2008, US farmers sprayed an extra 383 million pounds of herbicide on GMOs. Overuse of Roundup results in “superweeds,” resistant to the herbicide. This is causing farmers to use even more toxic herbicides every year. Not only does this create environmental harm, GM foods contain higher residues of toxic herbicides. Roundup, for example, is linked with sterility, hormone disruption, birth defects, and cancer.
4. Genetic engineering creates dangerous side effects.
By mixing genes from totally unrelated species, genetic engineering unleashes a host of unpredictable side effects. Moreover, irrespective of the type of genes that are inserted, the very process of creating a GM plant can result in massive collateral damage that produces new toxins, allergens, carcinogens, and nutritional deficiencies.
6. The biotech industry uses “tobacco science” to claim product safety.
Biotech companies like Monsanto told us that Agent Orange, PCBs, and DDT were safe. They are now using the same type of superficial, rigged research to try and convince us that GMOs are safe. Independent scientists, however, have caught the spin-masters red-handed, demonstrating without doubt how industry-funded research is designed to avoid finding problems, and how adverse findings are distorted or denied.
7. Independent research and reporting is attacked and suppressed.
Scientists who discover problems with GMOs have been attacked, gagged, fired, threatened, and denied funding. The journal Nature acknowledged that a “large block of scientists . . . denigrate research by other legitimate scientists in a knee-jerk, partisan, emotional way that is not helpful in advancing knowledge.” Attempts by media to expose problems are also often censored.
8. GMOs harm the environment.
GM crops and their associated herbicides can harm birds, insects, amphibians, marine ecosystems, and soil organisms. They reduce bio-diversity, pollute water resources, and are unsustainable. For example, GM crops are eliminating habitat for monarch butterflies, whose populations are down 50% in the US. Roundup herbicide has been shown to cause birth defects in amphibians, embryonic deaths and endocrine disruptions, and organ damage in animals even at very low doses. GM canola has been found growing wild in North Dakota and California, threatening to pass on its herbicide tolerant genes on to weeds.
9. GMOs do not increase yields, and work against feeding a hungry world.
Whereas sustainable non-GMO agricultural methods used in developing countries have conclusively resulted in yield increases of 79% and higher, GMOs do not, on average, increase yields at all. This was evident in the Union of Concerned Scientists’ 2009 report Failure to Yield―the definitive study to date on GM crops and yield.
The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) report, authored by more than 400 scientists and backed by 58 governments, stated that GM crop yields were “highly variable” and in some cases, “yields declined.” The report noted, “Assessment of the technology lags behind its development, information is anecdotal and contradictory, and uncertainty about possible benefits and damage is unavoidable.” They determined that the current GMOs have nothing to offer the goals of reducing hunger and poverty, improving nutrition, health and rural livelihoods, and facilitating social and environmental sustainability.
On the contrary, GMOs divert money and resources that would otherwise be spent on more safe, reliable, and appropriate technologies.
Originally posted by Badgered1
I once saw an episode of Alton Brown's 'Good Eats' where the recipe was for a brined turkey. Google it. Try it. Wonderful.
However, one part of the recipe was for a red apple cut up and used as an aromatic (no stuffing, but some stuff in the cavity for flavour - apple, cinnamon, allspice). I'd bought two apples, and used one. Lovely looking, shiny red apples.
The one I didn't use went into the fruit bowl. I'm not really an apple eater, so it just sat there.
And sat there.
And sat there.
It didn't even begin to rot.
Over a month went by before I just threw it away.
It looked exactly like it did the day I bought it.
There's something wrong with that. Fruit shouldn't stay like that. If they did so naturally, we'd have never invented preserves (jam, jelly, marmalade etc.).
In addition, Smith has documented at least 65 serious health risks from GM products of all kinds. Among them:
•Offspring of rats fed GM soy showed a five-fold increase in mortality, lower birth weights, and the inability to reproduce
•Male mice fed GM soy had damaged young sperm cells
•The embryo offspring of GM soy-fed mice had altered DNA functioning
•Several US farmers reported sterility or fertility problems among pigs and cows fed on GM corn varieties
•Investigators in India have documented fertility problems, abortions, premature births, and other serious health issues, including deaths, among buffaloes fed GM cottonseed products
Patho-physiological profiles are unique for each GM crop/food, underlining the necessity for a case-by-case evaluation of their safety, as is largely admitted and agreed by regulators. It is not possible to make comments concerning any general, similar subchronic toxic effect for all GM foods. However, in the three GM maize varieties that formed the basis of this investigation, new side effects linked to the consumption of these cereals were revealed, which were sex- and often dose-dependent. Effects were mostly concentrated in kidney and liver function, the two major diet detoxification organs, but in detail differed with each GM type. In addition, some effects on heart, adrenal, spleen and blood cells were also frequently noted.
We have previously reported indications of toxicity in rats fed with MON 863 GM maize for 90 days . However, these signs of toxicity alone do not constitute proof of adverse health effects. ...
Firstly, the feeding trials in each case have been conducted only once, and with only one mammalian species. The experiments clearly need to be repeated preferably with more than one species of animal....
Growing opposition to animal testing
In addition to animal rights groups, which are marginalized by the mainstream media and Big Pharma, there are medical professionals who are realizing that animal testing and vivisection do not prove efficacy or safety.
Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...
So your defense, is that since GMO food studies in animals, which show a bunch of problems, aren't valid, because we haven't tested humans?
Do you know how research is carried out for everything? In testing phases.
But anyway, you duck your head in the sand and believe what you want. What's next, you gonna defend Fluoride in the water? Bovine Grown Hormore in milk?
Agent Orange pesticide?
Originally posted by DavidWillts
Flouride is found naturally in our water
And they stopped using agent orange some time ago...
If you do not know who Monsanto is then here is a brief introduction. They are the makers of Round up, the world's deadliest herbicide. They also have their hand in the creation of 2-D-4, which is the chemical make up of what we know as Agent Orange.
According to the Organic Consumers Association, there is a large body of evidence indicating major health problems resulting from exposure to 2,4-D, from cancer to immune-suppression, reproductive problems to neuro-toxicity.
In mammals, 2,4-D disrupts energy production, depleting the body of its primary energy molecule, ATP. 2,4-D contains dioxins, environmental pollutants belonging to the "dirty dozen," a group of extremely toxic chemicals known as persistent organic pollutants. 2,4-D was banned in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Quebec and scores of Canadian municipalities after numerous epidemiological studies linked 2,4-D to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma among farmers and members of the general public.
FDA (US Food & Drug Administration): Many people rely on the FDA to determine the safety of food or a product. The FDA is corrupt, particularly within the realm of GMOs. The only “testing” for safety that is required is for the GMO producer to submit a self authored report on the new GMO’s safety. This fraud was accomplished by Michael Taylor, a lawyer who went to work for the FDA and established the “no testing” policy by reasoning that GMOs are “SUBSTANTIALLY EQUIVALENT” to food, and food has already been determined to be safe. However, this is an oxymoron because in order to receive a patent, the new product must be different. Michael Taylor (second cousin to Tipper Gore) is notorious for his “revolving door” employment within the US government and Monsanto- he was recently chosen by Obama as the Deputy Commissioner for foods in the FDA.(6)
GMO seed companies prohibit any testing of their products, by contract, to their buyers.
Outrageously, the USDA co-owns the patent on the “Terminator Gene”, which means that the seeds have been modified to “commit suicide” after one season, and will not germinate if they are planted in a subsequent season. This technology could potentially wipe out food on the planet in one season. The US government has been funding GMO research since 1983; William Engdahl has said that this will give the owners control of the food seeds over entire regions and nations, when commercialized. The USDA and the co-owner of the “terminator” patent promised not to commercialize it in 1999, however, in 2001, they signed a commercialization agreement. Seven years later, Monsanto bought out the co-owner and is now partnered with the USDA for the “Terminator” patent. Food can be used as a weapon
Monsanto was created in 1901. The company's first product was the artificial sweetener saccharin. In the 1920s Monsanto expanded into basic industrial chemicals. During the Second World War Monsanto contributed to research on uranium for the Manhattan Project, which lead to the atomic bomb. Monsanto continued to operate a nuclear facility for the U.S. government until the late 1980s. During the 1940s Monsanto also become a leading manufacturer of synthetic fibres and plastics, including polystyrene - ranked fifth in the EPA’s list of chemicals whose production generates the most total hazardous waste. From the 1940s onwards Monsanto was one of the top 10 US chemical companies.
ummm... you are referring to Fluorine
Fluoride is NOT natural at all
Fluoride is usually found naturally in low concentration in drinking water and foods. The concentration in seawater averages 1.3 parts per million (ppm). Fresh water supplies generally contain between 0.01–0.3 ppm, whereas the ocean contains between 1.2 and 1.5 ppm. In some locations, the fresh water contains dangerously high levels of fluoride, leading to serious health problems.
Water fluoridation is the controlled addition of fluoride to a public water supply to reduce tooth decay. Fluoridated water has fluoride at a level that is effective for preventing cavities; this can occur naturally or by adding fluoride
azards Scientists Sound Warning on High Natural Fluoride Levels
A national panel of scientists reported Wednesday that high levels of naturally occurring fluoride in drinking water are leaving children in some communities at risk of tooth enamel damage and adults prone to weakened bones that could lead to fractures.
The scientists unanimously recommended that the federal limit on fluoride in drinking water be lowered to protect people in communities where high levels leach into the water from natural sources, such as rocks or soil.
Can fluoride occur naturally in the water supplies?
Yes. Fluoride is a minor constituent of the earth’s crust. Generally speaking, the naturally-occurring fluoride levels in the ground water supplies in New Jersey range from non-detect to approximately 0.2 mg/l. The occurrence of fluoride in surface water supplies is likely non-detect, but trace levels can exist.
Still America grows sicker and cancer is in the raise along with diabetes but hell don't let me start of when US started to get this way, because it does match the raise of big pharma and manufactured crap also
Then again we have to rely on studies from other countries because Mospanto and Conman Agra do to loopholes in patents will not allow their crap to be tested in the US by independent labs
Interesting enough the entities that are to protect us the consumer sleep in bed for money with Monspanto and good deals on investing in the company.
- The U.S. FDA classifies ingested fluoride for purposes of reducing tooth decay as an “unapproved” drug. Drugs shouldn’t be in our drinking water,
Following the Second World War, Monsanto championed the use of chemical pesticides in agriculture. Its major agrochemical products have included the herbicides 2,4,5-T, DDT, Lasso and Agent Orange, which was widely used as a defoliant by the U.S. Government during the Vietnam War and which was later shown to be highly carcinogenic. The Agent Orange produced by Monsanto had dioxin levels many times higher than that produced by Dow Chemicals, the other major supplier of Agent Orange to Vietnam. This made Monsanto the key defendant in the lawsuit brought by Vietnam War veterans in the United States, who faced an array of debilitating symptoms attributable to Agent Orange exposure. Internal Monsanto memos show that Monsanto knew of the problems of dioxin contamination of Agent Orange when it sold it to the U.S. government for use in Vietnam.
Agent Orange contaminated more than 3 million civilians and servicemen, and an estimated 500,000 Vietnamese children have been born with deformities attributed to Agent Orange, leading to calls for Monsanto to be prosecuted for war crimes. No compensation has been paid to Vietnamese civilians and though some compensation was paid to U.S. veterans, according to William Sanjour, who led the Toxic Waste Division of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "thousands of veterans were disallowed benefits" because "Monsanto studies showed that dioxin [as found in Agent Orange] was not a human carcinogen." An EPA colleague discovered that Monsanto had apparently falsified the data in their studies. Sanjour says, "If [the studies] were done correctly, they would have reached just the opposite result."
Originally posted by DavidWillts
Pretty much, animal models do not really translate to human.
Originally posted by marg6043
Still the so call fallacy of living longer in America is an oxymoron giving the raise of diseases in the nation
Originally posted by ErroneousDylan
Originally posted by DavidWillts
Pretty much, animal models do not really translate to human.
You were going pretty strong in your argument earlier. But I'd have to say that it all just lost validity after making that statement.