It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

New Study Links GMO to Leukemia

page: 2
19
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by JustXeno
 


Obama signs 'Monsanto Protection Act' written by Monsanto-sponsored senator


On Tuesday, Pres. Obama inked his name to H.R. 933, a continuing resolution spending bill approved in Congress days earlier. Buried 78 pages within the bill exists a provision that grossly protects biotech corporations such as the Missouri-based Monsanto Company from litigation.


I guess you were right
edit on 23-7-2013 by intergalactic fire because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by intergalactic fire
 


little info for anyone not in the know on monsanto's govt. protection scam.

Obama signs 'Monsanto Protection Act' written by Monsanto-sponsored senator




“But Obama ignored [the petition],” IB Times’ Connor Sheets writes, “instead choosing to sign a bill that effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of GMO or GE crops and seeds, no matter what health consequences from the consumption of these products may come to light in the future.”


rt.com...

yeah, they're dirty as it gets.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by JustXeno
 




Wasn't there a sneaky law passed not so long ago making it impossible to sue Monsanto ?

No. There wasn't. You can sue Monsanto all you want.
There was a law passed which directs the USDA to grant temporary permits to growers of plants which were not, but may become regulated.

Provided, That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary's authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act.

beta.congress.gov...

The law sunsets in September.
edit on 7/23/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


“instead choosing to sign a bill that effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of GMO or GE crops and seeds, no matter what health consequences from the consumption of these products may come to light in the future.”


Conner Sheets doesn't know what he is talking about. The bill calls for the granting of temporary permits while the regulated status of a plant is reexamined. The bill has nothing to do with "health consequences" or food safety. It directly addresses the Plant Protection Act, a law which regulates plants which may be harmful to agriculture and the environment.
beta.congress.gov...
edit on 7/23/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


“instead choosing to sign a bill that effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of GMO or GE crops and seeds, no matter what health consequences from the consumption of these products may come to light in the future.”


Conner Sheets doesn't know what he is talking about. The bill calls for the granting of temporary permits while the regulated status of a plant is reexamined. The bill has nothing to do with "health consequences" or food safety. It directly addresses the Plant Protection Act, a law which regulates plants which may be harmful to agriculture and the environment.
beta.congress.gov...
edit on 7/23/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


and you find that morally or in any other way acceptable how?

granting such a permit puts the safety of health and well being below the importance of profit and that gives me indigestion to say the least.

these seeds and crops were never tested before being strewn upon our world and now that people are finding real dangers with them and monsanto expects us to allow the "potentially" dangerous crops to continue to grow as to not inconvenience the farmers or monsanto while monsanto or the USDA tests or inspects these crops?

how immorally cowardice and borderline psychotic that sounds and you support this practice? as someone who works in the scientific community occasionally, i find this practice utterly disgusting and a complete mockery of true scientific protocol.

you don't test the mix on the people first Phage, you know?



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


That's what they've always did, right.
Those mice and guinea pigs, they were actually refering to us.

No matter what the outcome in September will be. The job is done, most of the ''seeds are spread'', our soils and markets are infested.
Even if the company would ever to be shut down, their deals with big pharma will keep them surviving.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 




and you find that morally or in any other way acceptable how?
I didn't say I find it acceptable, did I? I was pointing out the actual purpose of the law. I was also pointing out how erroneous the claims about it have been.

The law has nothing to do with food safety. If a GMO food product were found to be harmful there is nothing in the law which would prevent it from being removed from the market by the FDA or the USDA.

The law has nothing to do with giving Monsanto (or anyone else) immunity from lawsuits.

Do I need to point out again that the toxins tested in the experiment in the OP are widely used by organic farmers?

Do you find that spreading disinformation is acceptable? Why is it the anti-GMO crowd continually resorts to doing so? Is spreading ignorance and fear acceptable?

 



these seeds and crops were never tested before being strewn upon our world and now that people are finding real dangers with them and monsanto expects us to allow the "potentially" dangerous crops to continue to grow as to not inconvenience the farmers or monsanto while monsanto or the USDA tests or inspects these crops?


Never tested? Are you sure about that? But what sort of testing would you propose? What is it about GMOs which makes you think there is something inherently dangerous about them?

The people "finding real dangers" are not very good at science. Their experimental methods are poor and their interpretations of their results biased.

edit on 7/23/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


www.enveurope.com...

I must say i didn't read the whole article yet, it's getting late here.
I will get back to it later.
Feel free to quote and comment.

This is from the last paragraph

We can conclude, from the regulatory tests performed today, that it is unacceptable to submit 500 million Europeans and several billions of consumers worldwide to the new pesticide GM-derived foods or feed, this being done without more controls (if any) than the only 3-month-long toxicological tests and using only one mammalian species, especially since there is growing evidence of concern



1 Laboratory of Biochemistry - IBFA, University of Caen, Esplanade de la Paix, 14032 Caen, Cedex, France

2 CRIIGEN, Paris, France

3 University of Rouen LITIS EA 4108, 76821 Mont-Saint-Aignan, France

I guess those people are not very good at science.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by intergalactic fire
 

reply to post by intergalactic fire
 


That's right. Seralini is not very good at designing a proper experiment or avoiding his own biases. He is not a good scientist.
www.efsa.europa.eu...


You didn't answer my question. Why does the anti-GMO crowd have to spread disinformation?



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by snarky412
 



Originally posted by snarky412What's hell is the FDA keeps giving them a free pass.:shk:


They pay the FDA off.



Originally posted by snarky412Seems like our country is the only one that is NOT looking out for the best interests of it's citizens.


You think?

The 'last' thing the Gov wants is people who believe that the Bill of Rights applies to them.
They 'hate' the citizens they just want you to shut up and pay your taxes and not bitch when the Gov confiscates your property.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by VforVendettea
reply to post by snarky412
 



Originally posted by snarky412What's hell is the FDA keeps giving them a free pass.:shk:


They pay the FDA off.



Originally posted by snarky412Seems like our country is the only one that is NOT looking out for the best interests of it's citizens.


You think?

The 'last' thing the Gov wants is people who believe that the Bill of Rights applies to them.
They 'hate' the citizens they just want you to shut up and pay your taxes and not bitch when the Gov confiscates your property.



You got no argument from me.....
It just irks the hell out of me as well as others here.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


That's not really the question, why do you believe it to be disinformation and believe the information given by your sources to be good information?
Either way, they can do tests and experiments and write it all on paper, but does that mean this is proof(wether it's good or bad).
And not only in this case, do you have proof about our history on any subject that it's the way it went? Or do you have proof that there are really robots driving around on Mars? The only way to proof something is real is to experience it for yourself and even then you'll have to question it.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1   >>

log in

join