Latest Updates :
    Showing posts with label GMOs. Show all posts
    Showing posts with label GMOs. Show all posts

    GMO challenges: Ministry asked to call crucial meeting

    The Federal Law Ministry has finally given a ruling, asking Climate Change Ministry to convene a meeting of National Bio-Safety Committee for granting approval to the long-awaited 15 Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) of cotton varieties for commercialisation, sources revealed. GMO challenges Ministry asked to call crucial meeting 300x300 GMO challenges: Ministry asked to call crucial meeting

    Well-placed sources revealed to Business Recorder that Textile division had approached Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif after the reportedly delaying tactics by the Climate Change Ministry for convening a meeting of NBC.

    Prime Minister on January 16, 2014 constituted a committee comprising Secretary Textile division, Secretary Law and Secretary Climate Change and directed them to hold a meeting within 10 days for resolving the issue. The committee met last week and Law division gave a ruling asking for convening a meeting of NBC to grant approval for commercialisation of cotton seeds, sources maintained.

    Certified cotton seed was becoming a serious issue as no BT certified cotton seed would be available for cultivation for the upcoming crop season due to non-approval of GMO cotton varieties by NBC which might encourage the seed-mafia, besides negatively impacting commodity production, official maintained.

    Official sources revealed that Pakistan being a signatory to the international Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety had to regulate GMO through establishing a Bio-safety system in the country. NBC and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency (PEPA) have responsibility to evaluate, regulate and monitor GMO for lab or field research and their commercial scale production or marketing in the country.

    The NBC had not held its meeting since February 2011, which had delayed the regulatory process required to test and approve GMOs crops, said sources, adding that applications submitted by various public and private sectors organisations seeking approval of different GMO crops were yet to be reviewed by the NBC.

    Currently only transgenic crop commercially cultivated in Pakistan is cotton and eight BT varieties and one cotton Hybrid were approved by Punjab Seed Council (PSC) in April 2010 and commercialisation certificate was granted by NBC. In February 2012, PSC provisionally approved eight BT varieties (Tarzen-1, MNH-886, NS-141, FH-114, IR-NIBGE-3, CIM-598, Sitara-009, A-One) subject to the grant of commercialisation certificate from the NBC and TAC had to clear cases before consideration in NBC, sources maintained.

    BT cotton varieties in Pakistan, which were granted certificate for three years (now expired) included IR-3701, Neelum-121, FH-113, Sitara-008, MG-6, Ali Akbar-703, Ali Akbar 802, IR-1524 and GN Hybrid-2085. BT cotton varieties waiting for commercialisation certificate included Tarzen-1, VH-259, MNH-886, BH-178, NS-141, CIM-599, FH-114, CIM-602, IR-NIBGE-3, FH-118, CIM-598, FH-142, Sitara 009, IR-NIBGE-824, A-One IUB-222, Sayaban-201, Sitara-11M, A-555, KZ-181, Tarzan-2 and CA-12.

    Source: Business Recorder

    GMOs and pesticides create super-pests

    One of the expected advantages to genetically modified crops is their proposed ability to withstand onslaughts from weeds and other pests that could damage or destroy crops. Unfortunately, that’s not the way mother nature works. Yes, these crops may be resistant to the original stains of weeds and pests they were engineered for, but they are not resistant to the new super-weeds that have come in their place.

    Mutations and resistance

    GMOs and pesticides create super pests 300x300 GMOs and pesticides create super pestsSimilar to bacterial infections in humans, once a host becomes resistant to a strain, that strain simply mutates so that it can stay one step ahead. The cycle then continues and new pesticides and GMOs must be formulated to withstand the new threats. These new threats; however, become more and more difficult to kill which is why stronger and more dangerously toxic pesticides must continue to be developed. This unnatural cycle cannot last forever though and the day will come when these super-weeds and super-pests will prevail.

    Things are getting worse, fast

    According to research professor Charles Benbrook at the Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources at WSU, genetically engineered crops have led to an increase in total pesticide use, by 404 million pounds in the last 14 years. “Resistant weeds have become a major problem for many farmers reliant on GE crops, and are now driving up the volume of herbicide needed each year by about 25 percent,” Benbrook said. In recent years, more than two dozen weed species have become immune to Roundup’s principal ingredient, glyphosate. “Things are getting worse, fast,” says Benbrook “In order to deal with rapidly spreading resistant weeds, farmers are being forced to expand use of older, higher-risk herbicides.”

    To illustrate the problem…

    The use of Bt corn is a great way to illustrate the resistance problem. Bt corn is genetically changed to express the Bacillus thuringiensis toxin, which is toxic to insect pests. By law, farmers in the U.S. who plant Bt corn are required to plant non-Bt corn nearby. These non-GMO fields are to provide a location to harbor pests. The concept behind this technique is to slow the evolution of the pests’ resistance to the Bt pesticide. Clearly the problem has gotten way out of hand when there is a law that exists specifically to slow the progression of resistance in pests. Instead of recognizing that the current system is broken, big agriculture companies like Monsanto turn a blind eye and force farmers to increase the use of pesticides.

    Mother Nature’s design

    Mother Nature has a very special system that does not involve man-made chemicals or genetically modified crops. If fact, this is one of the very reasons mid-sized organic farming is the most efficient kind. “And how do crops survive the pests without GMOs, chemical fertilizers or pesticides?” you might ask. The answer is simple; centuries old techniques such as crop rotation, inter-cropping, residue management, roguing, regulating seed quality and applying natural insecticides are used. These sometimes labor intensive techniques have no place in the industrial agriculture system who’s goal is to automate and standardize as much of the process as possible in an attempt to turn out the largest yield and the most profits.

    Sources for this article include:

    http://www.gov.mb.ca/agriculture/crops/insects/fad64s00.html

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_maize#Bt_corn

    By: John McKiernan

    Source: Natural News

    Consumer alert: Most common vitamins found to contain GMOs

    Tuesday, July 30, 2013
    by
    Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
    Editor of NaturalNews.com
    A Natural News investigation reveals that an alarmingly large number of multivitamins and individual nutrient vitamins are formulated with ingredients derived from genetically modified corn.
    This is the "dirty little secret" of the vitamin industry, but it's not one the mainstream media will touch because they refuse to admit GMOs are a problem to begin with. Those in the know, however, realize that eating any ingredients derived from GMOs may expose them to the BT insecticide chemicals found in GM corn.
    GMOs are truly "hidden" in vitamins because the GM-derived ingredients are so heavily processed that all DNA is destroyed in the process, thereby destroying any footprint of genetic modification. Genetic ID tests, in other words, require particles of the food to remain relatively intact so that PCR lab equipment can replicate genetic sequences. Heavily processed ingredients such as high-fructose corn syrup, maltodextrin and ascorbic acid have no genetic material remaining, thereby sweeping their origins under the rug.
    This is one reason who so many vitamins sold today are formulated with GMOs. This includes virtually ALL the popular multivitamin brands sold at grocery stores and pharmacies, by the way.

    List of ingredients that are usually GMO

    The Non-GMO Project Verified website lists these ingredients as commonly harboring GMOs:
    Amino Acids
    Aspartame
    Ascorbic Acid
    Sodium Ascorbate
    Vitamin C
    Citric Acid
    Sodium Citrate
    Flavorings ("natural" and "artificial")
    High Fructose Corn Syrup
    Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein
    Lactic Acid
    Maltodextrins
    Molasses
    Monosodium Glutamate
    Sucrose
    Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP)
    Xanthan Gum
    Vitamins
    Yeast Products (such as yeast extract)

    From this list, you can hopefully realize that:
    • Nearly all "vegetarian" foods are GMO (loaded with yeast extract and soy).
    • Nearly all sodas and soft drinks are GMO (HFCS, aspartame).
    • Nearly all storable "emergency" food sold on the market today is GMO. (TVP, soy, MSG, yeast extract)
    • Nearly all canned soups are GMO. (MSG, yeast extract)
    • Nearly all children's meals and snacks are GMO. (HFCS, MSG, soy, corn)
    In other words, just about everything the consuming masses are eating is contaminated with GMOs.
    Here's a closer look at some of the more common GMO ingredients in vitamins and health products:

    GMO ingredient #1 - Maltodextrin

    Maltodextrin is a powdery, starch derivative of corn. It is used everywhere in the nutritional supplements industry, as a "filler" for fruit powders and drink mixes, as a "sweetener" for low-sugar health foods, and as a flow agent for vitamin capsules.
    Unless it is certified as non-GMO, all maltodextrin should be assumed to come from GMO sources. The maltodextrin manufacturing supply chain isn't even geared up to provide non-GMO maltodextrin, as the large-scale factories that produce the material run so much GM corn that there would be significant cross-contamination even if they tried to pull off a non-GMO run.

    The few companies that offer non-GMO starches and sweeteners are increasingly gaining attention across the industry. I'm aware of one company called Austrade, Inc. that offers a full line of non-GMO corn-based starches and sweeteners, including non-GMO maltodextrin.
    According to the company, they were the first producer to receive "Non-GMO Project Verified" approval for non-GMO maltodextrin.
    Non-GMO maltodextrin is also making its way into health products such as "Ultima Replenisher," a healthy replacement for those junk sports drinks made with GMO corn syrup, salt and low-grade minerals. Ultima Replenisher is completely GMO-free, relying on a non-GMO maltodextrin from certified sources.
    A small company named Allergaroo.com also makes non-GMO microwaveable foods that are designed to be free of common allergens such as casein, soy, wheat, peanuts, dairy, GMOs, etc. (Although I have to wonder about the whole microwave concept...)

    GMO ingredient #2 - Ascorbic acid

    In the delusional world of western thinking on nutrients, ascorbic acid is called "vitamin C."
    It isn't vitamin C, of course. Real vitamin C is a broad spectrum of synergistic compounds, never just an isolated, homogeneous molecule. But don't tell that to doctors, scientists or journalists, because they've all bought into the "ascorbic acid is vitamin C" delusion.
    So nearly all the common "vitamin C" pills are nothing more than heavily refined ascorbic acid derived from GM corn. That's why those pills don't work, by the way. So when the mainstream media declares, "Vitamin C shows no benefit..." in clinical trials, what they are really saying is that heavily processed ascorbic acid isolated from genetically modified corn doesn't improve your health, and that's no surprise.
    Look on the labels of your cheap, low-grade vitamins and multivitamins... you'll see "ascorbic acid" listed there, meaning you are eating GMOs. Throw those away. They're crap.

    If you want real vitamin C, your best bet is to eat camu camu, which is the planet's highest source of natural, full-spectrum, food-based vitamin C. (The full synergy of nutrients, not just isolated chemicals.)
    (By the way, as a side note, the FDA came to our warehouse and took a large number of samples of our camu camu to run lab tests in their Arkansas lab headquarters. They were obviously looking for heavy metals and pesticide residues. The lab tests, as we knew they would, came back 100% clear. That's because we're one of the few companies to actually test all the raw materials we import. So now we have official confirmation that even the FDA agrees that our products are clean. In truth, our own stringent lab test requirements are MORE STRICT than the FDA!)
    There are also some vitamin companies making non-GMO vitamin C formulations. Expect them to be expensive because all non-GMO vitamin C must be sourced outside the United States. There is currently no U.S.-based producer of non-GMO vitamin C. (It simply doesn't exist.)

    GMO ingredient #3 - Sucrose (heavily used in children's vitamins)

    Take a look at almost any children's vitamins and you'll find they're made with several GMO ingredients: aspartame, sucrose and often citric acid, too.
    In fact, children's vitamins are by far the most toxic because they're usually formulated with a much higher concentration of toxic ingredients such as artificial sweeteners, artificial colors and GMO-derived materials.

    Children should be eating superfoods or food concentrates, not toxic vitamin pills. Remember, too, that the low-grade vitamin pills are manufactured by companies largely owned by the pharmaceutical industry. They have every incentive to make sure their vitamins actually cause health problems rather than prevent disease. This boosts their long-term profits as sick children become Big Pharma customers for life.

    MegaFood receives the first non-GMO certification in the industry

    When it comes to high quality food-based nutrients in a pill format, nobody beats MegaFood, the supplier Natural News has chosen as its supplement partner.
    MegaFood's manufacturing facility is the first and only facility in the United States to be certified non-GMO. Certification of all the company's products is under way, but I have personally been informed that the entire product line has been 100% non-GMO since 2007. (Actual certification takes time and will be announced when the process is complete.)
    Consumers looking for truly non-GMO sources of health-supporting minerals can check out MegaFood's Balanced Minerals formulation.
    Those seeking thyroid support should take a look at MegaFood's Thyroid Strength formulation.
    And for non-GMO multivitamins made from real food rather than isolated chemicals, MegaFood offers a full line of daily multivitamins for men and women.

    Join the call for GMO labeling on vitamins and supplements

    As companies like MegaFood blaze forward in achieving non-GMO certification, they are going to force everyone else in the industry to follow suit (or lose customers). That's because consumers don't want hidden GMOs in their health supplements, obviously.
    People take vitamins based on the belief that vitamins won't poison them. Unfortunately, this is a false assumption given the dirty tricks played by the pharmaceutical industry in churning out harmful, synthetic vitamins loaded with toxic substances such as GMOs.
    That's why I support the mandatory GMO labeling of vitamins and dietary supplements. It's also why my own brand of superfoods and dietary supplements --
    Health Ranger Select -- is 100% non-GMO.
    See, it's not just about labeling GMOs in foods. GMOs need to be labeled (or ultimately, banned) in everything we eat, and that includes vitamins and dietary supplements.
    Most health-conscious consumers already know to avoid GMOs in foods, but they fail to avoid them when selecting vitamins and supplements. So they're taking in quantities of GMO-derived materials in their health supplements, and that defeats the whole purpose of being "health conscious" in the first place.
    Until GMOs are labeled (or banned) on vitamins and supplements, you have to be vigilant in avoiding GMO-derived ingredients such as maltodextrin, sucrose, ascorbic acid, citric acid and others.
    Unless the product is certified non-GMO or comes from a company that is diligently working on the certification process, there is a better than 99% chance that they contain GMOs.
    And what happens when you eat GMOs? Just ask these lab rats, which were fed a combination of GM corn and glyphosate, the weed killer chemical often used on genetically modified crops:

    8 Reasons GMOs are Bad for You

    Genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, are created when a gene from one species is transferred to another, creating something that would not be found in nature.
    A large percentage of domestic crops (up to 85% of soybean yields) have DNA that was tweaked in a lab, yet it is nearly impossible to know which food items contain these genetically engineered ingredients. Thankfully new mobile phone apps are making it a bit easier for the consumer to know what she is eating, but this is not enough.
    GMOs are bad for your body, bad for the community, bad for farmers and bad for the environment. This is why:
    1. The health consequences of eating genetically modified organisms are largely unknown. Genetically engineered foods have not been shown to be safe to eat and may have unpredictable consequences. When trans-fats were first introduced, corporations battled to get them onto your grocery shelves – and it is only decades later that this once novel food has been proven to be extremely unhealthful. Many scientists are worried that the genetically altered foods, once consumed, may pass on their mutant genes to bacterium in the digestive system, just like the canola plants on the roadsides of North Dakota. How these new strains of bacteria may affect our body systems’ balance is anybody’s guess. 8 Reasons GMOs are Bad for You
    2. Food items that contain GMOs are unlabeled in America. Why so sneaky? The European Union has banned GMOs, as have Australia, Japan, the UK and two dozen other countries that recognize that a lack of long term studies and testing may be hiding disastrous health defects.
    3. Genetic engineering reduces genetic diversity. When genes are more diverse, they are more robust; this is why a pure bred dog tends to have greater health problems than the dear old mutt. Plants with reduced genetic diversity cannot handle drought, fungus invasions or insects nearly as well as natural plants, which could have dire consequences for farmers and communities dependent on GMO crops for survival.
    4. Once the mutant genes are out of the bag, there is no going back. Genetically modified organisms contaminate existing seeds with their altered material, passing on modified traits to non-target species. This creates a new strain of plant that was never intended in the laboratory. In North Dakota, recent studies show that 80% of wild canola plants tested contained at least one transgene. In Japan, a modified bacteria created a new amino acid not found in nature; it was used in protein drinks and before it was recalled it cause severe mental and metabolic damage to hundreds as well as several deaths. Japan banned GMOs after this horrific experience. Monarch butterflies have also died after their favorite food, milkweed, was cross-pollinated from Bt corn which rendered it toxic to the endangered species.
    5. GMOs are not the answer for global food security. Genetically engineered crops have shown no increase in yield and no decrease in pesticide use. In many cases other farm technology has proven much more successful, and even Monsanto agrees that its genetically engineered crops yield less than conventional farming.
    6. Genetically engineered foods have not been proven to be safe, but the few studies conducted don’t look so hot. The organs of rats who ate genetically modified potatoes showed signs of chronic wasting, and female rates fed a diet of herbicide-resistant soybeans gave birth to stunted and sterile pups.
    7. Big biotech firms have very sketchy track records, but then again what would you expect from organizations who want to patent the world’s food supply? These massive biotech companies have a history of toxic contamination, deceiving the public and suing small farmers when their patented seeds blew across the fence. Biotech firms sell sterile seeds to African farmers- meaning the seeds are only good for one season, because the plants that grow up will not be able to reproduce. Farmers must buy new seeds every year instead of growing from the previous year’s yield. GMOs are not the farmers’ friend.
    8. GMOs require massive amounts of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides. These things are poisons, and should not be eaten or allowed to run off into our water supply. But they are, every day, by companies who care far more about the bottom line than they do about your health, your environment or your children’s future.
    The bottom line is that genetically modified organisms have not been proven in any way to be safe, and most of the studies are actually leaning the other direction, which is why many of the world’s countries have banned these items whose DNA has been genetically engineered. In America, they aren’t even labeled, much less banned, so the majority of the populace has no idea that they are eating lab-created DNA on a daily basis.
    Now you do; your best defense is to purchase certified organic food, which cannot contain any GMOs, and to tell your friends and loved ones to do the same.
    Sources:
    http://www.purezing.com/
    http://www.eathealthyfoods.ca/
    http://www.saynotogmos.org/
    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0220-09.htm
    Article adopted from http://www.organicauthority.com For original article Click









    Why GMOs are dangerous?

    Genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) are a broad group of plants, animals, and bacteria that are engineered for a wide variety of applications ranging from agricultural production to scientific research. The types of potential hazards posed by GMO’s vary according to the type of organism being modified and its intended application. Most of the concern surrounding GMO’s relates to their potential for negative effects on the environment and human health. Because GMO’s that could directly effect human health are primarily products that can enter the human food supply, this website focuses on genetically modified food. To date, the only types of products that have been approved for human consumption in the U.S. are genetically modified plants (FDA website).
    All genetically modified foods that have been approved are considered by the government to be as safe as their traditional counterparts and are generally unregulated (FDA website). However, there are several types of potential health effects that could result from the insertion of a novel gene into an organism. Health effects of primary concern to safety assessors are production of new allergens, increased toxicity, decreased nutrition, and antibiotic resistance (Bernstein et al., 2003).Food AllergyGMOsFood Allergy affects approximately 5% of children and 2% of adults in the U.S. and is a significant public health threat (Bakshi, 2003). Allergic reactions in humans occur when a normally harmless protein enters the body and stimulates an immune response (Bernstein et al., 2003). If the novel protein in a GM food comes from a source that is know to cause allergies in humans or a source that has never been consumed as human food, the concern that the protein could elicit an immune response in humans increases. Although no allergic reactions to GM food by consumers have been confirmed, in vitro evidence suggesting that some GM products could cause an allergic reaction has motivated biotechnology companies to discontinue their development (Bakshi, 2003).Increased ToxicityMost plants produce substances that are toxic to humans. Most of the plants that humans consume produce toxins at levels low enough that they do not produce any adverse health effects. There is concern that inserting an exotic gene into a plant could cause it to produce toxins at higher levels that could be dangerous to humans. This could happen through the process of inserting the gene into the plant. If other genes in the plant become damaged during the insertion process it could cause the plant to alter its production of toxins. Alternatively, the new gene could interfere with a metabolic pathway causing a stressed plant to produce more toxins in response. Although these effects have not been observed in GM plants, they have been observed through conventional breeding methods creating a safety concern for GM plants. For example, potatoes conventionally bred for increased diseased resistance have produced higher levels of glycoalkaloids (GEO-PIE website). Decreased Nutritional ValueA genetically modified plant could theoretically have lower nutritional quality than its traditional counterpart by making nutrients unavailable or indigestible to humans. For example, phytate is a compound common in seeds and grains that binds with minerals and makes them unavailable to humans. An inserted gene could cause a plant to produce higher levels of phytate decreasing the mineral nutritional value of the plant (GEO-PIE). Another example comes from a study showing that a strain of genetically modified soybean produced lower levels of phytoestrogen compounds, believed to protect against heart disease and cancer, than traditional soybeans (Bakshi, 2003). Antibiotic resistance In recent years health professionals have become alarmed by the increasing number of bacterial strains that are showing resistance to antibiotics. Bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics by creating antibiotic resistance genes through natural mutation. Biotechnologists use antibiotic resistance genes as selectable markers when inserting new genes into plants. In the early stages of the process scientists do not know if the target plant will incorporate the new gene into its genome. By attaching the desired gene to an antibiotic resistance gene the new GM plant can be tested by growing it in a solution containing the corresponding antibiotic. If the plant survives scientists know that it has taken up the antibiotic resistance gene along with the desired gene. There is concern that bacteria living in the guts of humans and animals could pick up an antibiotic resistance gene from a GM plant before the DNA becomes completely digested (GEO-PIE website).
    It is not clear what sort of risk the possibility of conferring antibiotic resistance to bacteria presents. No one has ever observed bacteria incorporating new DNA from the digestive system under controlled laboratory conditions. The two types of antibiotic resistance genes used by biotechnologists are ones that already exist in bacteria in nature so the process would not introduce new antibiotic resistance to bacteria. Never the less it is a concern and the FDA is encouraging biotechnologists to phase out the practice of using antibiotic resistance genes (GEO-PIE website).

    Hybrid Seeds vs. GMOs

    Written by Kristen
    Hybrid Seeds. Genetically-modified (GMO) seeds. Heirloom seeds. The labels often confuse people. Not a single day passes without some well-meaning reader leaving a comment like this one: “GMOs are perfectly safe. Farmers and gardeners have been cross-breeding seeds like this for thousands of years. Take off your tinfoil hats, people!”
    Um… no. Just no.
    Farmers and gardeners have NOT been cross-breeding seeds like this for thousands of years. What those well-intentioned readers fail to understand is the fundamental difference between hybrid seeds and GMOs.

    Hybrid Seeds: What are they?

    Farmers and gardeners have been cultivating new plant varieties for thousands of years through selective breeding. They did this by cross-pollinating two different, but related plants over 6 to 10 plant generations, eventually creating a new plant variety.
    The process required patience, but was rewarding. By selectively cross-pollinating related plants in this way, farmers could create varieties that were healthier and stood up to the farmer’s micro-climate — their soil, their weather patterns, their predatory insects.
    Yet in the mid-nineteenth century, Darwin and Mendel discovered a method of controlled crossing that can create these desired traits within just one generation. This method produces what’s known as F1 hybrid seeds.Hybrid Seeds vs. GMOs
    These hybrid seeds are just as natural as their historic counterparts; they’re still cross-pollinating two different, but related plants.

    Hybrid Seeds: The Consequences

    The biggest disadvantage of hybrid seeds is that they don’t “reproduce true” in the second generation. That means that if you save the seeds produced by F1 hybrid plants and plant them, the plant variety that will grow from those seeds (known as the second generation) may or may not share the desired traits you selected for when creating the first generation hybrid seed.
    I like how Rebsie of Daughter of the Soil describes it:
     
    When two dissimilar varieties are crossed, the result is a hybrid which will often be bigger, brighter, faster-growing or higher-yielding than either of its parents, which makes for a great selling point. But it’s a one-hit wonder. Subsequent generations don’t have the same vigour or uniformity, and the idea is that you don’t save seed from it, you just throw it away and buy some more. This is bad for the plants, bad for the garden and bad for you, but the seed companies make a packet out of it and gain increasing control of what we buy and grow.
    (
    source)
    While there may not be anything inherently wrong with this process, it does keep you dependent on seed companies year after year since you can’t save your seeds and expect the next generation of plants you grow to be identical to the first.
    While this is a small nuisance to a home gardener, it can be devastating to subsistence farmers around the world.
    In fact, this is precisely what happened. Dawn from Small Footprint Family writes:
    When the peasant farmers grew these new hybrids, they were indeed more productive, even though they required more fertilizer and water. But when they collected and saved the seed for replanting the next season—as they had done for generations and generations—none of it grew true to the parent crop, little food grew, and these poor farmers, having none of their open-pollenated traditional varieties left viable, had no choice but to go back to the big companies to purchase the hybrid seeds again for planting year after year.
    U.S. companies like Cargill intentionally disrupted the traditional cycle of open-pollinated seed saving and self-sufficiency to essentially force entire nations to purchase their seeds, and the agricultural chemicals required to grow them.
    Most of these poor subsistence farmers never had to pay for seed before, and could not afford the new hybrid seeds, or the new petrochemical fertilizers they required, and were forced to sell their farms and migrate to the cities for work. This is how the massive, infamous slums of India, Latin America, and other developing countries were created.
    By the 1990s an estimated 95% of all farmers in the First World and 40% of all farmers in the Third World were using Green Revolution hybrid seeds, with the greatest use found in Asia, followed by Mexico and Latin America.
    The world lost an estimated 75 percent of its food biodiversity, and control over seeds shifted from farming communities to a handful of multinational corporations.
    (source)

    GMO Seeds: What are they?

    Unlike hybrid seeds, GMO seeds are not created using natural, low-tech methods. GMO seed varieties are created in a lab using high-tech and sophisticated techniques like gene-splicing.
    Furthermore, GMO seeds seldom cross different, but related plants. Often the cross goes far beyond the bounds of nature so that instead of crossing two different, but related varieties of plant, they are crossing different biological kingdoms — like, say, a bacteria with a plant.
    For example, Monsanto has crossed genetic material from a bacteria known as Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) with corn. The goal was to create a pest-resistant plant. This means that any pests attempting to eat the corn plant will die since the pesticide is part of every cell of the plant.
    The resultant GMO plant, known as Bt Corn, is itself registered as a pesticide with the EPA, along with other GMO Bt crops. In other words, if you feed this corn to your cattle, your chickens, or yourself, you’ll be feeding them an actual pesticide — not just a smidgeon of pesticide residue.

    GMO Seeds: The Consequences

    seeds of deception

    Sadly, GMOs are a great, big scientific unknown.
    On the one hand, biotech firms like Monsanto argue that the GMO seeds they create are so unique that they need to be patented — something that has far-reaching and devastating effects on the global economy. (Just ask Percy Schmieser.)
    Yet on the other hand, the same firms argue that the GMO seeds are “substantially equivalent” to other seeds, so they have no need to be labeled, tested, or otherwise regulated.
    So far, the U.S. government has allowed biotech firms to get away with this crazy juxtaposition. However, some testing of GMO seeds has been done in other countries, and it takes investigative journalism found in books like Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You’re Eating to expose just what’s at risk.
    Vickie Mattern of Mother Earth News summarized it this way:
    The trouble is that nobody knows how these unnatural new organisms will behave over time. The seed companies that develop these varieties claim intellectual property rights so that only they can create and sell the variety. In some cases, companies — such as Monsanto — even refuse to allow scientists to obtain and study their GM seeds. For some crops, such as corn, wind can carry the pollen from GM varieties and contaminate non-GM varieties. And there is no mandatory labeling of GM content in seed, says Kristina Hubbard, advocacy and communications director for the Organic Seed Alliance.
    (
    source)

    Hybrid Seeds vs. GMOs

    In short: Hybrid Seeds are nothing to fear, but you may not want to support them given that they fail to breed true and have caused so much global havoc. GMO seeds are far more unnatural and likely to cause harm — both to your environment and your health.

    How to Avoid GMOs

    Unfortunately, because GMOs aren’t currently labeled in the U.S., you have no way of knowing whether or not you’re eating them. Roughly 85% of all grocery store foods contain GMOs, and there only a handful of sure-fire ways to avoid them:
    1. Opt to buy single-ingredient certified organic food.
    2. Choose
    Non-GMO Verfied labeled foods.
    3. Grow your own open-pollinated, heirloom variety plants.
    4. Know your farmer and ask pointed questions about his or her growing practices, then opt to support GMO-free growing.

    Our Food Supply: What You and Your Family Need to Know

    By Isabelle Beenan
    What does smoking have to do with our food supply?  Allow me to draw a little analogy between the conventional tobacco industry and the conventional food supply industry.
    There is no need to rehash the whole tobacco industry debacle, other than to point out that morality and health do not have a place in the tobacco industry’s continued business. Admitting to the addictive and destructive poisons added into commercial cigarette tobacco and the effects of such poison on human health took over 50 years!  The tobacco industry vehemently DENIED and LIED about the disastrous effects of their product and fought tooth and nail to perpetuate this destructive business TO THIS DAY! They continue to market to children and have made little if any modifications to the product (besides the warning labels) that WIPES OUT vast amounts of human lives every year.
    According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 5 million people die from the effects of smoking per year worldwide -with the projected stats sitting at an estimated 8 million deaths per year by 2030. Everyday, over 3800 people younger than 18 years of age smoke their first cigarette.
    I have to point out that from a purely selfish and immoral business/ profit standpoint, they’ve got it nailed down! Addiction to the product ensures repeat consumption from the consumer for life. And the targeting of ‘youngens’ works perfectly in replacement of those that die. It’s the perfect way to keep the consuming cycle going! The cycle extends even further when the consumers find themselves faced with disease or illness and have nowhere but pharmaceuticals to run to. (Oh and I’m sure the projected increase in population reduction over the next 17 years has nothing to do with big tobacco still being in business!)
    The only way to achieve vibrant health and clarity of mind is to ONLY consume ORGANIC FOOD.  Plain and simple.
    If I prepared a beautiful meal for your children and family and you saw me spray some glyphosate (look it up) on it, would you eat it?
    Would you serve it to your children knowing I just poisoned it? How about if you saw me add a few drops of sodium fluoride to their sippy cups?  Would you let them drink it?
    Your answers are probably no. So why do so many of us continue to consume these things? Is it because we don’t see ’what is going on in the kitchen’ so to say, that we turn a blind eye to what is going into the food and just take it and swallow?
    It took over 50 years for the tobacco industry conglomerates to admit after lengthy litigation to the disastrous effects of cigarette smoking on human health and to add warning labels to the packaging.  How long are we going to keep feeding poison to our families? For the next 50 years until big agriculture has been pressured and litigated enough that they have no choice but to fess up to their criminal negligence and issue a statement that the food *may* be toxic?  It’s time for us all to wake up and smell the genetically modified coffee.
    We are facing the same issue with the food supply here in North America. The good news is that the rest of the world seems to be ahead of us on this one and it’s time to catch up. This is made evident in the image shown below outlining the GMO labeling requirements globally. Thankfully, the organic food market has grown exponentially in North America as a result of the conscious awakening that is taking place towards the healing power of organic food and the dangers associated with GMO crops. Funny note: Monsanto (one of the largest producers of GMO agriculture) has banned GMO foods within their own cafeteria!
    MTB2_05
    It’s no coincidence that Spain, Germany and so many other countries require labeling or have outright banned GMO foods in their food supply. It is time for us all to wake up. Ignorance is not bliss. Public misinformation has definitely played a role in getting us into this mess but it is not the only factor at fault.
    Do you now see the correlation between the GMO food industry assault on the mass public and the tobacco industry assault on the mass public?
    I’ve heard that a picture is worth a thousand words which is why when it comes to something as important as the GMO food issue, I’ve included a pretty powerful image in this lesson.  This is what happens when rats are fed GMO Monsanto corn (which FYI all conventional food is basically engineered from a GMO corn base):
    MTB2_06
    After seeing what happens to rats when fed GMO, are you now still willing to feed it to your kids?  To yourself?  Look at the results, sure as humans we have a longer lifespan, so the visible effects may take longer to manifest than they did for the rats, but seriously are you willing to knowingly do that to your body?  Or inflict that kind of damage on your family?  Is that ‘happy’ meal box and commercial on TV distracting and cute enough to trick us into ingesting that rubbish on a daily basis? 
    There has been progress made in the food supply issue.  Many are awakening to the importance of preparing our own food and eating 100% organic food.  Whole Foods has even announced mandatory labeling of GMO foods in its stores as of 2018.  Tomorrow would be better. But still it’s progress. In the meantime, vote with your dollars.  You are voting for GMO if you buy GMO, plain and simple.  And WE will shift the supply to organic, when WE  start buying organic, which essentially is a vote for organic.  Do you understand now?  We are all connected, and a simple ‘switch’ in critical thinking and shift in consumerism is all it takes instigate change.squash this food beef!
    I could elaborate on this fundamental issue for days, but the bottom line is in my opinion you NEED to consume organic food exclusively in order to THRIVE and prevent disease.  It will contribute to thriving in all areas of your life.  Do your own research, the information is out there for you to access. Make the truth mainstream by sharing knowledge with your loved ones, and later the mainstream will catch up.  Turn off the TV for a couple minutes and SEEK knowledge instead of ignorantly swallowing whatever ‘they’ put on your plate.
    And if you didn’t know, now you do! And when you know better, you can CHOOSE to do better. How simple is that?  So get to it!
    SOURCES

    This article originally appeared here at Collective-Evolution
    Isabelle Beenen is a World Citizen. Independent Writer. Founder of the upcoming Unprogram Yourself TV and Unprogram Yourself Radio. BD for Street Queen Energy Shots. Problems= Opportunities!! I am re-creating my life!

    Genetically modified crops pass benefits to weeds

    Herbicide resistance could confer an advantage on plants in the wild.
    Jane Qiu
    A genetic-modification technique used widely to make crops herbicide resistant has been shown to confer advantages on a weedy form of rice, even in the absence of the herbicide. The finding suggests that the effects of such modification have the potential to extend beyond farms and into the wild.
    Several types of crops have been genetically modified to be resistant to glyphosate, an herbicide first marketed under the trade name Roundup. This glyphosate resistance enables farmers to wipe out most weeds from the fields without damaging their crops.Genetically modified crops pass benefits to weeds
    Glyphosate inhibits plant growth by blocking an enzyme known as EPSP synthase, which is involved in the production of certain amino acids and other molecules that account for as much as 35% of a plant’s mass. The genetic-modification technique — used, for instance, in the Roundup Ready crops made by the biotechnology giant Monsanto, based in St Louis, Missouri — typically involves inserting genes into a crop’s genome to boost EPSP-synthase production. The genes are usually derived from bacteria that infect plants.
    The extra EPSP synthase lets the plant withstand the effects of glyphosate. Biotechnology labs have also attempted to use genes from plants rather than bacteria to boost EPSP-synthase production, in part to exploit a loophole in US law that facilitates regulatory approval of organisms carrying transgenes not derived from bacterial pests.
    Few studies have tested whether transgenes such as those that confer glyphosate resistance can — once they get into weedy or wild relatives through cross-pollination — make those plants more competitive in survival and reproduction. “The traditional expectation is that any sort of transgene will confer disadvantage in the wild in the absence of selection pressure, because the extra machinery would reduce the fitness,” says Norman Ellstrand, a plant geneticist at the University of California in Riverside. 
    But now a study led by Lu Baorong, an ecologist at Fudan University in Shanghai, challenges that view: it shows that a weedy form of the common rice crop, Oryza sativa, gets a significant fitness boost from glyphosate resistance, even when glyphosate is not applied.
    In their study, published this month in New Phytologist, Lu and his colleagues genetically modified the cultivated rice species to overexpress its own EPSP synthase and cross-bred the modified rice with a weedy relative.
    The team then allowed the cross-bred offspring to breed with one another, creating second-generation hybrids that were genetically identical to one another except in the number of copies of the gene encoding EPSP synthase. As expected, those with more copies expressed higher levels of the enzyme and produced more of the amino acid tryptophan than their unmodified counterparts.
    The researchers also found that the transgenic hybrids had higher rates of photosynthesis, grew more shoots and flowers and produced 48–125% more seeds per plant than non-transgenic hybrids — in the absence of glyphosate.
    Making weedy rice more competitive could exacerbate the problems it causes for farmers around the world whose plots are invaded by the pest, Lu says.
    “If the EPSP-synthase gene gets into the wild rice species, their genetic diversity, which is really important to conserve, could be threatened because the genotype with the transgene would outcompete the normal species,” says Brian Ford-Lloyd, a plant geneticist at the University of Birmingham, UK. “This is one of the most clear examples of extremely plausible damaging effects [of GM crops] on the environment.”
    The study also challenges the public perception that genetically modified crops carrying extra copies of their own genes are safer than those containing genes from microorganisms. “Our study shows that this is not necessarily the case,” says Lu.
    The finding calls for a rethinking of future regulation of genetically modified crops, some researchers say. “Some people are now saying that biosafety regulation can be relaxed because we have a high level of comfort with two decades of genetic engineering,” says Ellstrand. “But the study shows that novel products still need careful evaluation.”
    Source
    image

    Major GM food company Monsanto 'pulls out of Europe'

    By Christopher Hope, Senior Political Correspondent

    Monsanto, one of the world's biggest and best known genetically modified crops companies, is effectively pulling out of Europe, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

    The news is a major blow to the nascent British GM industry which ministers have been championing this year as fears grow about food security.
    Monsanto, whose name is synonymous with GM crops, confirmed that it is withdrawing all of its EU applications for approval for new crops.
    The decision is understood to affect as many as 10 applications for approval for new GM crops. It is understood that Monsanto is pulling all of its applications for crops in frustration at delays over clearing existing crops at EU level. Major GM food company Monsanto 'pulls out of Europe'
    It does not affect clearance for an existing crop grown from GM seeds in Portugal and Spain.
    Monsanto currently sells only one biotech seed product in Europe — a biotech corn which is modified to be resistant to a destructive pest called the European corn borer. It accounts for less than one per cent of the corn grown in the EU.
    A company source pointed to the fact that the EU has not approved a new GM crop for cultivation since 1998, adding that it "currently has suspended the progression of cultivation files towards decisions for political reasons".
    The source added: "As the EU today is effectively a conventional seed market we have been progressively de-emphasising cultivation of biotech crops in Europe.
    "Amongst other things, this means we are no longer seeking approval to commercialise biotech seeds in the EU. We intend to withdraw pending regulatory applications for commercial cultivation of new biotech crops in the EU."
    A Monsanto spokesman told The Daily Telegraph: "Monsanto´s business in Europe is very strong and growing. In order to better serve farmers in Europe we will be investing several hundred million dollars in Europe over a decade to expand our conventional seed production and breeding.
    "In parallel, biotech crops are highly successful in the rest of the world. In order to fully support both of these success stories, we will no longer be pursuing approvals for cultivation of new biotech crops in Europe.
    "Instead, we will focus on enabling imports of biotech crops into the EU and the growth of our current business there."
    Monsanto is planning to invest hundreds million dollars in Europe through the end of the decade including €225 million ($300 million) in corn production plant expansions that are already under way in France, Hungary,
    Romania and Turkey, creating more than 150 new full-time jobs and many more seasonal jobs.
    The news comes just as the Government, led by Environment secretary Owen Paterson and Science minister David Willetts, lead a major push to persuade Britons to eat more GM food.
    Source: The Telegraph

    How to Avoid Genetically Engineered Food by Green Peace

    GMO Agriculture and Chemical Pesticides are Killing the Honeybees

    By Dr Joseph Mercola
    The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has failed to protect honeybees from neonicotinoid pesticides, according to a lawsuit against the agency, filed by beekeepers and environmental groups. Said Paul Towers, spokesperson for the Pesticide Action Network (PAN), one of the groups involved in the lawsuit:
    “Despite our best efforts to warn the agency about the problems posed by neonicotinoids, the EPA continued to ignore the clear warning signs of an ag system in trouble.”
    Lawsuit Maintains the Link Between Neonicotinoids and Honeybees Die Off Is ‘Crystal Clear’
    Neonicotinoid pesticides are a newer class of chemicals that are applied to seeds before planting. This allows the pesticide to be taken up through the plant’s vascular system as it grows, where it is expressed in the pollen and nectar.
    GMO Agriculture and Chemical Pesticides are Killing the HoneybeesThese insecticides are highly toxic to Honeybees because they are systemic, water soluble, and pervasive. They get into the soil and groundwater where they can accumulate and remain for many years and present long-term toxicity to the hive as well as to other species, such as songbirds.
    Neonicotinoids affect insects’ central nervous systems in ways that are cumulative and irreversible. Even minute amounts can have profound effects over time.
    The disappearance of bee colonies began accelerating in the United States shortly after the EPA allowed these new insecticides on the market in the mid-2000s. The lawsuit alleges that the EPA allowed the neonicotinoids to remain on the market despite clear warning signs of a problem.
    It also alleges the EPA acted outside of the law by allowing conditional registration of the pesticides, a measure that allows a product to enter the market despite the absence of certain data.
    European Food Safety Authority Ruled Neonicotinoids ‘Unacceptable’
    The EPA’s continued allowance of neonicotinoids becomes all the more irresponsible in light of recent findings by other government organizations. Earlier this year, for instance, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) released a report that ruled neonicotinoid insecticides are essentially “unacceptable” for many crops.1 The European Commission asked EFSA to assess the risks associated with the use of three common neonicotinoids – clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiamethoxam – with particular focus on:
    Their acute and chronic effects on bee colony survival and development
    Their effects on bee larvae and bee behavior
    The risks posed by sub-lethal doses of the three chemicals
    One of the glaring issues that EFSA came across was a widespread lack of information, with scientists noting that in some cases gaps in data made it impossible to conduct an accurate risk assessment. Still, what they did find was “a number of risks posed to bees” by the three neonicotinoid insecticides. The Authority found that when it comes to neonicotinoid exposure from residues in nectar and pollen in the flowers of treated plants:2
    “…only uses on crops not attractive to honeybees were considered acceptable.”
    As for exposure from dust produced during the sowing of treated seeds, the Authority ruled “a risk to honeybees was indicated or could not be excluded…” Unfortunately, neonicotinoids have become the fastest growing insecticides in the world. In the US, virtually all genetically engineered Bt corn crops are treated with neonicotinoids.
    Serious Risks to Bees Already Established
    One of the observed effects of these insecticides is weakening of the bee’s immune system. Forager bees bring pesticide-laden pollen back to the hive, where it’s consumed by all of the bees.
    Six months later, their immune systems fail, and they fall prey to secondary, seemingly “natural” bee infections, such as parasites, mites, viruses, fungi and bacteria. Pathogens such as Varroa mites, Nosema, fungal and bacterial infections, and Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus (IAPV) are found in large amounts in honeybee hives on the verge of collapse.
    Serious honeybee die-offs have been occurring around the world for the past decade but no one knows exactly why the bees are disappearing.
    The phenomenon, dubbed Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), is thought to be caused by a variety of imbalances in the environment, although agricultural practices such as the use of neonicotinoid pesticides are receiving growing attention as more research comes in. As written in the journal Nature:3
    “Social bee colonies depend on the collective performance of many individual workers. Thus, although field-level pesticide concentrations can have subtle or sublethal effects at the individual level, it is not known whether bee societies can buffer such effects or whether it results in a severe cumulative effect at the colony level. Furthermore, widespread agricultural intensification means that bees are exposed to numerous pesticides when foraging, yet the possible combinatorial effects of pesticide exposure have rarely been investigated.”
    This is what the Nature study set out to determine, and it was revealed that bees given access to neonicotinoid and pyrethroid pesticides were adversely affected in numerous ways, including:
    Fewer adult worker bees emerged from larvae
    A higher proportion of foragers failed to return to the nest
    A higher death rate among worker bees
    An increased likelihood of colony failure
    The researchers said:
    “Here we show that chronic exposure of bumble bees to two pesticides (neonicotinoid and pyrethroid) at concentrations that could approximate field-level exposure impairs natural foraging behavior and increases worker mortality leading to significant reductions in brood development and colony success.
    We found that worker foraging performance, particularly pollen collecting efficiency, was significantly reduced with observed knock-on effects for forager recruitment, worker losses and overall worker productivity. Moreover, we provide evidence that combinatorial exposure to pesticides increases the propensity of colonies to fail.”
    Why the Food Supply Could Be Dependent on Urgent Action by the EPA
    The EPA acknowledges that “pesticide poisoning” may be one factor leading to colony collapse disorder,4 yet they have been slow to act to protect bees from this threat. The current lawsuit may help spur them toward more urgent action, which is desperately needed as the food supply hangs in the balance.
    There are about 100 crop species that provide 90 percent of food globally. Of these, 71 are pollinated by bees.5 In the US alone, a full one-third of the food supply depends on pollination from bees. Apple orchards, for instance, require one colony of bees per acre to be adequately pollinated. So if bee colonies continue to be devastated, major food shortages could result.
    There is also concern that the pesticides could be impacting other pollinators as well, including bumblebees, hoverflies, butterflies, moths and others, which could further impact the environment.
    Four Steps to Help Protect the Bees
    If you would like to learn more about the economic, political and ecological implications of the worldwide disappearance of the honeybee, check out the documentary film Vanishing of the Bees. If you’d like to get involved, here are four actions you can take to help preserve and protect our honeybees:
    Support organic farmers and shop at local farmer’s markets as often as possible. You can “vote with your fork” three times a day. (When you buy organic, you are making a statement by saying “no” to GMOs and toxic pesticides!)
    Cut the use of toxic chemicals in your house and on your lawn, and use only organic, all-natural forms of pest control.
    Better yet, get rid of your lawn altogether and plant a garden or other natural habitat. Lawns offer very little benefit for the environment. Both flower and vegetable gardens provide excellent natural honeybee habitats.
    Become an amateur beekeeper. Having a hive in your garden requires only about an hour of your time per week, benefits your local ecosystem, and you can enjoy your own honey!
    Source: Global Research

    Seed Saving Could Replace disastrous GMO practices

    Practically everything we have all been told about the supposed benefits of biotechnology is false, at least as far as its necessity and usefulness in agriculture is concerned. As it turns out, traditional methods of agriculture, which include things like seed saving, seed sharing, selective breeding, and permaculture, are all far more viable and sustaining for human life on this planet than anything Monsanto has to offer in the way of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs).nature_pic_13
    To think that forcing farmers to buy new "terminator" seeds and crop chemicals every year from private corporations will provide any sort of long-term security for the food supply is naive at best. The biotechnology model dictates that corporations control the price, availability, and performance of seeds and crop chemicals, both of which are confined to restrictive patents that prevent farmers from taking true ownership of the foods they grow.

    Seed saving, which is prohibited for GMOs, is absolutely vital for food sovereignty

    Long before GMO crop systems were ever even a thought in the minds of agribusiness opportunists, farmers relied on nature to reproduce new seeds for them for free. By growing a variety of different crops within the same fields, as well as regularly rotating them, farmers also utilized natural growing methods that promote soil health without the need for artificial fertilizers and other expensive chemicals.
    Since every growing region of the world has its own unique combination of climate conditions, native bug species, native plant and weed species, and soil conditions, farmers, not corporations, are best equipped to maintain independent control over the growing process, which includes saving and distributing seeds. And it is the many years of learning and adapting to the distinct ecological balance in a particular area that continues to allow farmers to develop the most effective and efficient ways to grow food.

    Biotechnology threatens existence of food supplies worldwide

    But biotechnology is destroying this heritage of cultural farming, and replacing it with a one-size-fits-all system that is controlled by private interests seeking maximum profits at any cost. And perhaps the worst part about it is that the industry is doing this by making up lies about the alleged benefits of GMOs which, contrary to popular belief, do not perform better than traditional crops at producing higher yields.
    "It is a myth that mechanized, chemical, GMO
    agriculture maximizes yield per hectare," writes Charles Eisenstein for the U.K.'s Guardian. "Numerous studies show that when organic agriculture is practiced well, it can bring double or triple the yields of conventional techniques. With intensive intercropping on mixed permaculture farms, yields can be higher still."
    Unlike
    GMO crop systems, traditional growing systems are essentially fluid, as the variables of input often have to adapt and change. As Eisenstein puts it, traditional farmers learn to "co-evolve" with the land over many generations, which creates a lasting legacy of deep understanding about how the natural world works, and how mankind can successfully share its bounty without destroying it in the process.
    Traditional growing methods, many of which are openly embraced today throughout Russia,
    are undoubtedly proving to be the most effective way to maximize crop yields; create food independence and sovereignty; and ensure a healthy, clean food supply.
    "Western-style agriculture faces a mounting crisis that is insurmountable through the usual application of more control-based technology," adds Eisenstein. "This crisis calls us toward more ecological farming methods that draw from the world's ancient agricultural traditions ... [which] include not only agronomic knowledge, but also social structures that allow that knowledge to evolve and circulate."
    Source: NaturalNews.com

    Say NO to GMOs



    Say NO to GMO
    Petition the FDA to “JUST LABEL IT

    Frank Lipman
    Genetically modified foods — there’s little doubt in my mind that they’re poisonous to the earth and dangerous to our bodies — and I’m certainly not alone in this belief. As people across the country have grown increasingly concerned about the dangers of genetically modified foods, a coalition of more than 450 environmental, agricultural, consumer and parenting groups has formed to petition the FDA for the right to know which foods are genetically modified and which are not.
    The campaign, known as “JUST LABEL IT: We Have the Right to Know,” is dedicated to the mandatory labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods, also referred to as genetically modified, or GMOs. The JUST LABEL IT message is simple: consumers have a right to know what’s in their food so they can make informed choices about what they eat and feed their families. Such labeling will give American consumers the power to choose foods wisely, just as consumers in Europe, Japan, Australia, Brazil, Russia and China already do.
    As as a health evangelist, I encourage everyone to visit the Just Label It website (www.justlabelit.org/takeaction) to submit your comment to the FDA in support of the petition. It takes less than a minute to submit and in turn, empower millions of Americans to make healthier food choices — truly a cause worth fighting for!



    Frank Lipman
    (Author)
    About Author:

    I am the founder and director of the Eleven Eleven Wellness Center in New York City, where my personal blend of Western and many other medicines, what I call Good Medicine, has helped thousands of people recover their energy and zest for life

     
    Support : agrinfobank.com | Oasis Agro Industries Pakistan
    Copyright © 2012. Agriculture Information Bank - All Rights Reserved
    Template Created by agrinfobank.com Team Published by agrinfobank Blog Team
    Proudly powered by Blogger