I laid it out in my former post. Go back and READ it. There is a point-by-point rebuttal of that study, some quoted from the link and an active link where you can go to get educated.
You realize almost everything you eat was genetically modified somewhere along the line, don't you? There is no such thing as wild wheat. Cattle and domestic turkeys and chickens didn't exist in their current form before man genetically modified them. What we eat is the result of thousands of hybridizations. You knotheads will fill my house up with labels.
Oops...my bad...It was in another thread...here #68 http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...18-gmo-opponents-climate-skeptics-left-7.html
They tell you how much saturated fat, how much trans fat, cholesterol, sodium,carbs, sugar, protien...so why not GMOs ? Where it says CONTAINS: why not GMO corn or soybeans?...or they could just list it in INGREDIENTS. People should know what is in their food.
They 100% should. Jews do. There are all manner of Kosher symbols, on labels of foods, which basically, to cut a long story short, show that the food is free from toxins. It's just your food they poison..
. I have waited patiently for you to play that card Your rebuttal has been Exposed as a clumsy & ridiculous Corporatly Funded FAIL The only thing wrong with the study is that Monsanto does not like its findings. & its Awkward multi milllion$dollar attempt to LIE a fix Fails miserably ---------------------------------------------- Monsanto Launches Damage Control Over GMO/Cancer Study Biotech Giant Fails in its Attempts to Discredit Shocking Findings Biotech giant Monsanto has launched a desperate damage control effort in the aftermath of a French study which found that rats fed on Monsantos genetically-engineered corn were far more likely to suffer tumors, organ failure and premature death. Aside from the details of the study, a wider question remains. If Monsanto and other GMO giants are so confident in the safety of their products and have no qualms about them being in the food supply, why have they spent a combined total of over $19 million dollars in an attempt to prevent Americans from knowing that their food is genetically modified? Monsanto has bankrolled a huge campaign fronted by lobbyists in an effort to sink Californias Proposition 37, a bill that would simply mandate genetically modified food and ingredients be labeled at the retail level . If genetically-modified food is safe and the studies have proven it is safe, why is Monsanto so desperate to keep its presence in our food hidden? The recent study, conducted by scientists at the University of Caen and published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, found that 50 percent of male and 70 percent of female rats fed on a diet containing NK603 a genetically modified corn produced by Monsanto or those exposed to Monsantos Roundup weedkiller suffered tumors and multiple organ damage, causing them to die prematurely. Monsanto immediately went into spin mode, issuing a press release over the weekend claiming that toxicologists and public health experts had found fundamental problems with the study design, without specifically explaining what those problems were. Given the fact that Monsanto-funded scientists are routinely wheeled out in public to attack the abundance of evidence confirming the link between GMO and cancer, the reaction to the French study was unsurprising . As Sayer Ji explains, the two previous studies before the French inquiry, the results of which claimed that there was no link between Monsantos Roundup Ready herbicide and cancer, were both funded by Monsanto itself. A study published in the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology which exonerated Monsanto contained this glaring admission of a conflict of interest; The authors have disclosed the funding source for this research. JSM [study author] has served has a paid consultant to Monsanto Company .This research was supported by the Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri. Is it really just a coincidence that the first study in recent years not to be funded by Monsanto produces completely different results? There is no plausible mechanism for the results reported with genetically modified maize and the results are inconsistent with an extensive body of experience and scientific study, Monsanto claimed in response to the French study. However, the results are only inconsistent with previous (Monsanto-funded) studies because the French study went beyond the 90-day period which Monsanto had previously been able to hide behind in claiming their GMO products were safe. As The Grocer highlights, the French investigation Was the first study to look at the long-term effects of Roundup and NK603, which has been approved for human consumption based on 90-day feeding trials. Scientists found that rats developed mammary tumours and severe liver and kidney damages as early as four months in males and seven in females, compared with 23 months and 14 months respectively in a control group. Since tumors and other ailments were only discovered after a four month period, this throws into serious doubt previous (Monsanto-funded) studies the biotech giant pointed to as proving the safety of GMO because they failed to extend beyond a 90 day period, whereas the French study looked at the effects of GMO throughout the whole life span of the rats. This again illustrates the fact that far from being inadequate or badly modeled, the French study was more extensive and more complete than any previous study with the added bonus that it was not funded by Monsanto it was completely impartial. As we reported last week, apologists for Monsanto have jumped on the bandwagon in an effort to discredit the findings of the French study, lying by omission in an attempt to cast doubt on its findings. David Spiegelhalter of the University of Cambridge tried to question the accuracy of the study by highlighting that The studys untreated control arm comprised only 10 rats of each sex, most of which also got tumors. However, Spiegelhalter failed to acknowledge that it took these rats anything up to 19 months longer to develop tumors compared to those fed on Monsantos GM corn. Having had its nose bloodied in various European countries and facing being kicked out of the European marketplace altogether, Monsanto is in panic mode right now. Californias Right to Know Act - otherwise known as Prop 37 - could spell the beginning of the end not only for Monsantos business model but for the whole GMO agenda across the globe .
Okay, here is a fair measure. How about your pharm corps. They are the experts, right? You obviously trust them to get it right, yes? And there is no way that they would market a drug, with profit in mind first, would they? And there is no cases at all, of them even marketing drugs that caused terrible harm, is there?
. Experts Discuss the Findings of the Roundup/GM Cancer Trial [video=youtube;3SzXvBwvhd4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SzXvBwvhd4[/video] .
. . I doubt the words appended to present labels: "This product contains Geneticly Modified Components" will fill your house up with unwanted Labels You seem to be still Ignorant of the very Basic & Fundamental difference between, Animal & Plant Husbandry & Genetically Engineered Organisms I recommend a Review of this and the previous thread on this topic to bring ............................................................................... you up to speed - Wiki might help A genetically modified organism (GMO) or engineered organism (GEO) is an organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques. Such modifications are impossible to occur in Nature as they force the combining of the Genes in unrelated species. (Cows dont breed with fish) Yet a fish gene can be inserted into the Cow These techniques, generally known as recombinant DNA technology, use DNA molecules from different sources, which are combined into one molecule to create a new set of genes. This DNA is then transferred into an organism, giving it modified or novel genes. Transgenic organisms, a subset of GMOs, are organisms that have inserted DNA from a different species. GMOs are the constituents of genetically modified foods. Be Informed Review the Issue .
. Wake UP Sheeple - After the Shear comes the Knife ! Epicyte Contraceptive Corn [video=youtube;mA5yQ4_De_M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA5yQ4_De_M[/video] Genocidal Cereal Killer Released http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2012/07/genocidal-cereal-killer-released-2390133.html A LONG-STANDING project of the US Government has been to perfect a genetically-modified variety of corn, the diet staple in Mexico and many other Latin American countries. The field-testing of the corn has been financed by the US Department of Agriculture along with a small California bio-tech company named Epicyte. The Epicyte scientists went one step further and created the ultimate GM crop contraceptive cornafter researchers discovered a rare class of human antibodies that attack sperm. By isolating the genes that regulate the manufacture of these antibodies, and by putting them in corn plants, the company has created tiny horticultural factories that make contraceptives. Spermicides in your food! Whats the worst that could happen..? Announcing his success at a 2001 press conference, the president of Epicyte, Mitch Hein, pointing to his GMO corn plants and announced, We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies. HEIN EXPLAINED that they had taken antibodies from women with a rare condition known as immune infertility, isolated the genes that regulated the manufacture of those infertility antibodies, and, using genetic engineering techniques, had inserted the genes into ordinary corn seeds. In this manner they have produced a hidden contraceptive embedded in corn meant for human consumption. If the men eat the epicyte gene they produce antibodies to their own sperm, rendering them irreversibly sterile. Essentially, the antibodies are attracted to surface receptors on the sperm, said Hein. They latch on and make each sperm so heavy it cannot move forward. It just shakes about as if it was doing the lambada. Hein claimed it was a possible solution to world over-population. The moral and ethical issues of feeding it to humans in poor Third World countries without their knowledge or consent, he left out of his remarks. Spermicides hidden in GMO corn provided to starving Third World populations through the generosity of the Gates Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Kofi Annans AGRA or vaccines that contain undisclosed sterilization agents are just two documented cases of using vaccines or GMO seeds to reduce population. MORE HERE http://www.exohuman.com/wordpress/2012/07/genocidal-cereal-killer-released/ Announcing his success at a press conference, the president of Epicyte, Mitch Hein, pointing to his GMO corn plants and announced, "We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies." Shortly after the 2001 Epicyte press release, all discussion of the breakthrough vanished. The company itself was taken over in 2004 by Biolex and nothing more was heard in any media about the development of spermicidal corn. Did it to go underground? Are your taco shells safe? What of your cornmeal or cornflakes? Is this killer cereal already turning up on our breakfast tables..? .
I love this thread. Propagandists thoroughly destroyed with sourced information. Monsanto needs to be broken up just like the banks!
Corn needs a lot of water. Libya would probably be better off planting traditional crops that take a lot less water...and windbreaks to keep the blowing sand out of the fields.
Of course that is correct. But the super-rich for whom America destroyed Libya do not care about the Earth; Neither do the insane Christians with their end of the world Armageddon delusions.
I am convinced that Monsanto wants to control the worlds food supply. They want the world to buy from them or starve. I am also convinced that there would be much less strife in this world if people had enough to eat and lived prosperous lives. I love farming..and I spend most of my free time either working my little plot or doing research on it.
. Let us be Informed of the Dangers Inherant in GMO's GMO Ticking Time Bomb Part 1 [video=youtube;rAL_AMdMXqY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAL_AMdMXqY[/video] GMO Ticking Time Bomb Part 2 [video=youtube;sx4Dud0othY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx4Dud0othY&feature=related[/video] GMO Ticking Time Bomb Part 3 [video=youtube;Ppumc3iavzI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ppumc3iavzI[/video] .
Why not look at the emergence of Super Farms worldwide and look at the goals for feeding huge populations with better, more disease resistant plants? After all, cross breeding for improved strains has always been done by farmers.
Such a statement simply exposes an Ignorance of the issues involved First off: - Genetic Modification has absolutely nothing to do with Cross Breeding ...............& the destruction of Biodiversity by so called Super Farm Monoculture .................................... is a serious & growing threat to World Food Production -------------------------------------- Then For Further Information full articles recommended Loss of Biodiversity and Genetically Modified Crops It is a statistic that is hard to deny: industrial forms of agriculture, with emphasis on large-scale monoculture crop production, have a negative impact on biodiversity. The Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, referring to the scale of the loss as extensive, found that some 75 percent of plant genetic diversity has been lost since 1900 as farmers turn to genetically uniform, mass-produced crop varieties. http://gmo-journal.com/index.php/2011/06/17/loss-of-biodiversity-and-genetically-modified-crops/ Failure to Yield Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Modified Crops For years the biotechnology industry has trumpeted that it will feed the world, promising that its genetically engineered crops will produce higher yields. That promise has proven to be empty, http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agri...tem/genetic-engineering/failure-to-yield.html Can Genetically Modified Crops Feed the World? A study from the Union of Concerned Scientists shows that genetically engineered crops do not produce larger harvests. Crop yield increases in recent years have almost entirely been due to improved farming or traditional plant breeding, despite more than 3,000 field trials of GM crops http://www.scientificamerican.com/p...=can-genetically-modified-crops-feed-09-04-16 GM Crops Promote Superweeds, Food Insecurity and Pesticides Use Genetic engineering has failed to increase the yield of any food crop but has vastly increased the use of chemicals and the growth of "superweeds", http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/19/gm-crops-insecurity-superweeds-pesticides Superweed Explosion Threatens Monsanto Heartlands Superweeds are plaguing high-tech Monsanto crops in southern US states, driving farmers to use more herbicides, return to conventional crops or even abandon their farms. http://agriculturedefensecoalition....Toxicity_News_April_19_2009_U.S._Problems.pdf Corn Monoculture No Friend of Biodiversity http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015&context=journalismstudent Why We need Biodiversity, Not Monoculture http://www.erikarathje.ca/blog/2010/11/why-we-need-biodiversity-not-monoculture/ Can Geneticly Modified Crops Feed the World A study from the Union of Concerned Scientists shows that genetically engineered crops do not produce larger harvests http://www.scientificamerican.com/p...=can-genetically-modified-crops-feed-09-04-16 GM Crops Promote Superweeds, Food Insecurity and Pesticides Report finds genetically modified crops fail to increase yields let alone solve hunger, soil erosion and chemical-use issues http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/19/gm-crops-insecurity-superweeds-pesticides ...................... .
GMOs are NOT cross breading.. it is the addition of genes from different species. GM crops are considered safe with less research than simple food additives such as dies and sweeteners. Monsanto is not very popular here in Bama after they dumped PCBs in a creek and buried them in a field in Anniston. They killed people. The inside memos from Monsanto said it killed ALL the fish in the creek within 2 1/2 to 3 min. Monsanto also had to take the term biodegradable off of their lables from Roundup simply because it was not true. link television ran a program last saturday on Monsanto and exposed a lot of their outright lies and false claims. GMOs are considered safe...with less research than simple food additives....We simply do not know the long term effects of GM crops...and roundup is not lookin good so far.
