Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops

page: 4
175
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


if something is genetically made, is it really hidden? or just kept secret. heh

im sure there are plenty of complex "secret" things mixed in, then 15-25 years from now we find out you cant survive without eating one of their products or that half the population is sterile.




posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by manicminxx

I can't say it enough to anyone who reads these threads, along with corn and soy, canola is always GMO. This doesn't get enough attention ANYWHERE.

Canola is the cheapest and most widely used oil in the post-trans-fat revolution.

ANY restaurant you visit will serve canola. Any deli. Any business that serves food.

If you ever see the words "healthy oils" or "no trans fats" on a restaurant menu, run like hell or ask for olive oil. It means a big box of canola is lurking somewhere in the kitchen...


Yes, so very true and thanks for reminding everyone!

Canola, yes yes its in everything too! Just as much as soy, and corn, maybe even more!



Run like H e double L!



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~widowmaker~
reply to post by burntheships
 


im sure there are plenty of complex "secret" things mixed in, then 15-25 years from now we find out you cant survive without eating one of their products


If you can think of that then I absolutely certain they are already working on it!!



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~widowmaker~
half the population is sterile.


That is one of the effects, around the third generation it does
sterilize humans and animals too! Research is suppressed...




www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


I can't afford to really eat what I should be eating.. The poor "useless" people are the ones that will be targeted by this.. If you are someone in power this is the best poison to create, because you can always know how to not get infected.. Whereas reducing the populations through outright toxins or diseases could find it's way back to you..

I'm thinking Bio Diesel/ethanol is making a lot more sense right about now.. Let's burn the corn..

Another thought I am having is that on top of avoiding these foods, we should also be more focused on getting our immune systems in better shape.. Maybe some of the effect would be blocked or slowed down in this way..

Some viruses like herpes are very sneaky, and you don't ever really get rid of them.. They change the DNA of your cells.. You are now permanently infected.. Every so often cell commands are turned on, and the viruses rupture cell walls as they are berthed within your body (redness, pain)...

This Gene carrying Virus could act in much the same way as the herpes virus.

Genetically Modified Humans.. Resistant to life.. Resistant to health.. Resistant to Freedom..
edit on 1/21/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


your stomach may destroy any dna, but while you're chewing your food you are potentially releasing the dormant virus in your mouth where it can find other avenues into your blood stream.

what if this dormant virus is activated by certain proteins and genetic markers in your saliva.

the only way to be safe is to grow your own food safely is from seeds that are not from genetically altered plants.

edit on 21-1-2013 by randomname because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:22 PM
link   
I'd have to learn more about this -- but this virus might not be "hidden" so much as PART OF the genetic transcoding process. Instead of injecting a command to "reproduce more of the virus" the virus injects the new DNA sequence.

This case could be more about mistaking what is already there and benign.
However, the process of genetic alteration doesn't simply "add a new gene" it does effect more of the DNA than the target (or so I've read).

The one thing we DO KNOW for certain about some GMO crops; namely Corn, Wheat, and Soy -- is that they cause the stomach lining to get thicker, reducing absorption. I forget the direct mechanism that forces the thickening, but it's similar to what happens with some artificial sweeteners. As many cancers are related to chronic inflammation.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:23 PM
link   


This means the viral genes are working, they have disabled the host.
Its tragic, I guess this means soft kill. They dont kill us outright, just slowly.



Have to make sure that they get all the money out of us they can.....



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dustytoad

I'm thinking Bio Diesel/ethanol is making a lot more sense right about now.. Let's burn the corn..



Since they are already doing that, they cant blame us for saying it.
What ever you do, dont eat that corn.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
I'd have to learn more about this -- but this virus might not be "hidden" so much as PART OF the genetic transcoding process. Instead of injecting a command to "reproduce more of the virus" the virus injects the new DNA sequence.



Research "Gene Expressions GMO".
"Its in the Genes"



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:37 PM
link   


The process that appears to be going on here is that the OP article has falsely claimed that there is a new viral gene "discovered", whereas in fact that gene has been known about for years.


In point of fact the originally quoted article doesn't say anything about a newly 'discovered' gene at all (taking the time to read and conprehend the article would help the discussion along). It says and I quote:




In the course of analysis to identify potential allergens in GMO crops, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has belatedly discovered that the most common genetic regulatory sequence in commercial GMOs also encodes a significant fragment of a viral gene (Podevin and du Jardin 2012)


This is solid article and source. Read the article - it's about the options the regulatory agencies had to address this problem and they took the easiest and cheapest not the safest or soundest.

Please read to the end of the article.

Thank for posting the article OP and starting the discussion.
edit on 21-1-2013 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:39 PM
link   
The GMO proponents will say that there's no proof, or even evidence that GMOs are dangerous &/or bad for the human body. By the time there's "proof" most people will have already had their health compromised; death, widespread cancer, auto-immune disorders & other anomalies that the proponents will still assert are not related....

Denial is a powerful thing.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


Kudos to you, thanks for taking the time to read the article.
I found it quite enlightening, especially as to the agenices end.

I encourage everyone to read it and ponder the implications!
If ever you were looking for irony, this is it.




posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:45 PM
link   
I knew for a long time that GMO food could be manipulated to host a super virus for an full scale terrorist attack. This might finally show them that GMO is bad for people or it could just be subsided like everything else that we ignore. America is based on corn. Make a virus for all types of corn and there you go, a time bomb that would destroy the entire economy. I hope they fix this soon. Seriously.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Just to let everyone know what else Monsanto is up to......Genetically modified bees.... If these mutants get out there and things go wrong the balance of our whole food system good be in jeopardy. I also don't want my bees contaminated with GMO bees. Think of how many beekeepers monsanto could ruin by suing for patent infringement...not to mention all the other problems with GMO honey.
dreamingabeautifulworld.blogspot.com...

"After being blamed by massive amounts of bee keepers for the Honey Bee collapse, Monsanto purchased the largest bee research firm called Beeologics back in September of 2011."

www.beeologics.com...
edit on 21-1-2013 by peepsfromearth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Interesting thread and perspectives. Pardon the semi off-topic angle here, but what came to my mind is today's "scientific studies" and how, for example early climate studies, were tweeked for a favorable result to a particular industry or political affiliation. How the hell can we find the objective truth any more? Now, part of determining truth from a scientific(supposedly unbiased) report is seeing who financed it. Has it always been like this? It does make sense , like one of the vids linked, that industry will take action to either withhold evidence from a report, or misrepresent the findings to a more favorable result for them. Science is becoming more business than truth,imo, and the old adage 'follow da money' seems apropos here as well.

Some interesting reads on scientific studies/journals.

But a bill introduced in the House of Representatives last month threatens to cripple this site. The Research Works Act would forbid the N.I.H. to require, as it now does, that its grantees provide copies of the papers they publish in peer-reviewed journals to the library. If the bill passes, to read the results of federally funded research, most Americans would have to buy access to individual articles at a cost of $15 or $30 apiece. In other words, taxpayers who already paid for the research would have to pay again to read the results.


www.nytimes.com...
See Bil H.R.3699.IH

Science Is Little More Than A Business

The most distressing aspect of this study is that it's not unusual. The same sort of thing happens in any arena where there's money to be made. This particular instance is exceptionally sloppy—but far from unique. Big Tobacco became infamous for it. They bought the research they liked, covered up what they didn't like, and purchased doctors who praised their products.

Big Pharma has been paying for drug research with obvious and disastrous results. Thousands, perhaps millions, have died and are dying because of flawed paid-for research. Rather than directly paying for a study, they give money to a school's department or foundation, as in this article's example. They provide the majority of so-called post-graduate education. The entire business of science has become little more than that—a business in which money speaks and coerces.

Following the money trail is becoming more and more difficult as the industry grows more and more clever. They've been caught ghost writing the reports officially written by the so-called researchers. Studies that purportedly claim to prove no connection between autism and mercury systematically eliminate results that would prove the case.

Close examination of many of pseudo-science studies shows that either information is missing or the results do not support the conclusions. Yet, the lick spittle media simply takes the Big Pharma-written press releases and publishes them as news.

www.gaia-health.com...

Funding for science has changed with the times. Historically, science has been largely supported through private patronage (the backing of a prominent person or family), church sponsorship, or simply paying for the research yourself. Galileo's work in the 16th and 17th centuries, for example, was supported mainly by wealthy individuals, including the Pope. Darwin's Beagle voyage in the 19th century was, on the other hand, funded by the British government — the vessel was testing clocks and drawing maps for the navy — and his family's private assets financed the rest of his scientific work. Today, researchers are likely to be funded by a mix of grants from various government agencies, institutions, and foundations. For example, a 2007 study of the movement of carbon in the ocean was funded by the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the Australian Cooperative Research Centre, and the Australian Antarctic Division.1 Other research is funded by private companies — such as the pharmaceutical company that financed a recent study comparing different drugs administered after heart failure.2 Such corporate sponsorship is widespread in some fields. Almost 75% of U.S. clinical trials in medicine are paid for by private companies.3 And, of course, some researchers today still fund small-scale studies out of their own pockets. Most of us can't afford to do cyclotron research as a private hobby, but birdwatchers, scuba divers, rockhounds, and others can do real research on a limited budget.

undsci.berkeley.edu...

It seems peer reviewed studies are still mostly legit, but are they really, as far as what conclusions get released to the public? Trust gone


As far as gmo's, I still think it is a crime for the US to at not provide labeling and we can thank the lobbyists for this. Is a label really asking too much? Hell it's our money that keeps these industries thriving



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 10:25 PM
link   
They are trying to get rid of the "useless eaters"

It's called eugenics, and did not begin or end in Nazi Germany.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   
I think Gene VI causes transactivation of other transcripts meaning that it can lead to activation or overactivation of other genes.

In GM, I believe this can be a valuable "tool" to promote the expression of good genes so the plants can grow better.


Don't think it's anything controversial.

I mean, in the research field we use all sorts of viruses to deliver genes or use their genome to create sequences for expression of genes of interest.
edit on 1/21/2013 by die_another_day because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by speculativeoptimist
 



As far as gmo's, I still think it is a crime for the US to at not provide labeling and we can thank the lobbyists for this. Is a label really asking too much? Hell it's our money that keeps these industries thriving





It is the majority of people that have petitioned for labeling, we have asked, and they
have denied us. Why? I guess we know why.....

Yes, its our money, but as it has been said,

"If you put a label on genetically engineered food you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it." - Norman Braksick, president of Asgrow Seed Co., a subsidiary of Monsanto, quoted in the Kansas City Star, March 7, 1994


They will stop the labeling at nearly any cost...
edit on 21-1-2013 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze
It's called eugenics, and did not begin or end in Nazi Germany.


Piano,

I was looking for the pre Nazi connection,
can you jog my memory? Thanks in advance.





new topics
top topics
 
175
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join