What is happening to our bodies?
Everybody has an agenda, but the wonderful thing about the internet is that information is no longer restricted and controlled by ‘official’ gate-keepers. As a sovereign human being I am able to examine all the information and then make up my own mind.
What do I think about genetically modified organisms? I’m not sure yet… but I’m getting nervous with the more information I receive from all sides and from the observations I make myself.
Not that it’s related to GMO corn or Round-up, I am curious about the apparent drastic reduction in the age at which females usually experience their first menses. One of the girls in our extended family is just entering puberty. She’s eight years old, just turned.
Tell me if I’m wrong folks, but I don’t think that happened twenty or thirty years ago, at least not with the frequency we hear about now.
What is happening to our bodies… and why?
Barbados Free Press 
The 1hr 24min documentary Genetic Roulette has been made available for free viewing through Oct 31st, After that you might have to pay a charge of a few dollars to view by streaming video from the Genetic Roulette Movie web site or purchase the documentary on DVD.
The documentary, among other things, explains that as health authorities note increasing incidences of decreased fertility, auto-immune type disorders and chronic, non-communicable diseases in North American society twenty years after the first introduction of genetically engineered food on grocery store shelves, these types of disorders are the same type of problems that independent researchers conducting animal feeding trials with GMOs in lab rats etc, found in their own test subjects.
Take the time to watch the video today and find out why medical doctors and credentialed scientists are speaking out and stating their belief that their is strong evidence that GMOs in our food can be linked to human health problems, and at the very least should not be unleashed into our food supply without much more rigorous testing for long term health effects.
As long as the population continue to be proud of purchasing the poisonous garbage imported from the industrialized countries and look on such as some sort of status symbol, and refuse to plant their own food, they have to be prepared for extreme illhealth. Who knows, maybe they will be proud of that also.
For those who are interested in a balanced view and want to read about the science behind this stuff look at this: http://academicsreview.org/reviewed-content/genetic-roulette/
For those who want to blindly believe that GM food is the devil incarnate, don’t stress your brain.
Now I now why my doggie has two heads…not that the gyurls complaining, I ‘fraid it go get damage.
You might be able to make up your own mind, but do you understand any of the issues? All food has health risks associated with it… there is no food that is “safe”.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10977&page=40
Conventional plant production occasionally generates foods with undesirable traits, some of which are potentially hazardous to human health. Most crops naturally produce allergens, toxins, or other antinutritional substances
If you are going to get hysterical about GM, get hysterical about everything… cause none of your conventional food has been tested for safety.
@Silent Bob,
If GMOs are so benign why do you suppose the FDAs own scientists argued that they were potentially dangerous and warned the FDA management that they should not be released into the food supply without rigorous, long term testing for the possible negative side effects? Were the FDA’s own scientists incompetent?
Fact is the GM technology brings a whole new level of hazards to food crops, especially when you create foods whose cells produce their own insecticides..
Is the GM corn you are eating “eating you”?
Any lurkers on this thread should check out the Genetic
Roulette documentary linked above (and look for the GMO Ticking Time Bomb videos on Youtube) and come to their own decision as to who makes the most sense, the scientists and medical doctors who are warning that releasing GMOs into the environment and into the food supply without long term feeding trials and safety testing is irresponsible and hazardous to human health or whether the scientists working for Monsanto and other bio-tech pushing companies (or working in universities and research institutes dependent on donations and financial support from bio-tech companies) make the most sense.
@Green Monkey – Talk about advancing a Straw Man argument I never said they were safe, just that conventional food has risks associated with it as well. And while GM food has at least been tested, conventional food varieties have never been.
GM food needs to be tested for safety on a case by case basis, and it is, there has never been food that has been so extensively studied for safety as gm food.
Speaking as someone who has been poisoned by eating eggplants (yes they are poisonous) I would like to see more conventional food tested for safety.
If you want to find where the majority of our health problems lie you need look no further than the increasing obesity epidemic and the rise of inflammation cause foods (like conventional and gm Corn) which skew our omega oil intake ratio drastically away from what we need,
SilentBob writes:
GM food needs to be tested for safety on a case by case basis, and it is, there has never been food that has been so extensively studied for safety as gm food.
I guess that is a major point of our disagreement then. I (and the scientists and medical doctors seen in the videos like Genetic Roulette linked above and GMO Ticking Time Bomb) believe that the idea that GM foods undergo extensive safety testing is more myth and bio-tech industry propaganda than fact.
For one thing it is absolutely beyond ludicrous that in the USA the FDA claims that the GMO pushers (not the FDA) are responsible for verifying that their products are safe for human consumption while a high level Monsanto executive is on record as stating that their interests and effort as a company is in making money, not in assuring the safety of the products they produce as that is the FDA’s job (emphasis added /GM). In this matter the European Food Safety Authority is apparently equally as naive and incompetent as the FDA. See below:
GMO MYTHS AND TRUTHS REPORT
2.1 MYTH:
GM foods are strictly regulated for safety
TRUTH:
GM food regulation in most countries varies from non-existent to weak
“Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”
– Philip Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications1 (the FDA is the US government’s Food and Drug Administration, responsible for food safety)
“Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety.”
– US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)2
“It is not foreseen that EFSA carry out such [safety] studies as the onus is on the [GM industry] applicant to demonstrate the safety of the GM product in question.”
– European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)3
Industry and some government sources claim that GM foods are strictly regulated.4 But GM food regulatory systems worldwide vary from voluntary industry self-regulation (in the US) to weak (in Europe). None are adequate to protect consumers’ health.
http://earthopensource.org/index.php/2-science-and-regulation/2-1-myth-gm-foods-are-strictly-regulated-for-safety
Judy Carmen PhD (Doctorate degree in medicine from the University of Adelaide in the areas of metabolic regulation, nutritional biochemistry, and cancer) would also take issue with your claim that GM foods receive thorough testing for safety before being unleashed on the public.
Scientist: GM food safety testing is “woefully inadequate”
According to Judy Carman, Ph.D., very little safety testing is done on genetically modified foods, and when it is done, biotechnology companies conduct minimal testing.
Dr. Carmen says that more extensive independent testing of GM foods is needed to ensure they are safe. Her recommendations seem prophetic in light of a recent Austrian government study that found reduced fertility in mice fed GM corn.
snip
Ken Roseboro, editor of The Organic & Non-GMO Report, interviewed Dr. Carman during her recent visit to the United States.
Can you tell me a about your research on the health impacts of GM foods?
We are conducting one of the very few first long-term, independent animal feeding studies with GM foods. To date, most of these types of studies have been done by biotechnology companies or scientists associated with biotechnology companies.
Of the few independent studies being done, a study by the Austrian government recently made public found reduced fertility in mice fed GM corn. Another recent study done in Italy showed immune system problems in mice fed GM corn.
The studies done by biotechnology companies tend to show no health problems associated with eating GM food. The independent studies are finding adverse effects.
snip
GM foods are widely consumed in the United States, and the US government opposes labeling GM foods. What are your thoughts about that?
The big surprise is the lack of GM food labeling here. In Australia, we hear all the time from the US that you are the land of the free. I find it amazing that Americans have no choice about eating GM foods. The most basic democratic right is being denied to you. For those who don’t want to eat GM food, it is being shoved down your throats against your will because it seems that nearly all foods have ingredients from GM corn or soy.
With every US citizen exposed to GM foods, if something goes wrong it could go very badly wrong. If one person in a thousand in the US gets sick from GM foods, that’s 300,000 people sick.
GM food advocates often claim that “no one in the US has ever gotten sick from eating GM foods.”
It’s rubbish to say that no one ever has ever gotten sick eating GM foods. The fact is that no one knows. Since GM foods have been introduced, millions of Americans have been hospitalized and millions have died, and no one has investigated to see if any of those cases have been due to eating GM foods. The HIV/AIDS epidemic went unnoticed for decades, and the relationship between smoking and lung cancer went undetected for generations.
With the current level of safety testing, if GM foods do cause human health problems, it will be very difficult to determine this, even though there may be many cases of illness.
What type of safety testing do you think should be done on GM crops?
We need long-term safety tests that are relevant to human health done by people independent of GM vested interests. The safety testing done now is woefully inadequate (emphasis added /GM). Biotechnology companies often don’t even use the whole GM grain in feeding studies. Instead they tend to only use a protein extract that doesn’t even come from the GM plant. The feeding tests are also only done for few days or a few weeks.
Safety tests should involve comparing animals fed GM foods with animals fed the equivalent non-GM food. The animals should be fed long enough and involve tests that, at a minimum, measure risks of cancer and allergy and threats to reproduction and organ health.
http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/dec08/gm_food_safey_testing_inadequate.php
Monsanto has been carrying out a campaign against farmers whose non-GM farms have been polluted by pollen from GM crops blowing on the wind from neighboring farms growing Monsanto’s patented GM seeds. When the pollen from GM crops pollinate the non GM crops and pass on the patented traits of the GM crops to heretofore non-GM plants, Monsanto will sue these farmers for having crops on their land that contain Monsanto’s patented traits without having paid royalties to Monsanto.
Even though the farmers might have had no desire to have Monsanto’s GM traits in their crops and the way they see it their crops have been polluted by these unwanted GM traits, Monsanto will sue the non-GM farmer claiming patent infringement. Because Monsanto is a very powerful and wealthy corporation many farmers will not attempt to go up against them in court even though they might feel they are the aggrieved party having had their pure, non-GM crops pollinated by Monsanto’s GM crops. They figure they don’t have the money or the resources to fight against a giant like Monsanto, so they come to a settlement and pay Monsanto royalties and destroy the seeds that they were planning to save to replant, as they are now subject to Monsanto’s claim that because the contain the patented GM traits, they are bound by Monsanto’s rule that they cannot be saved and replanted.
Because of these bullying tactics against small family farms, many farmers figure its not worth the risk to continue growing traditional, non-GM crops if the vagaries of nature and the wind will leave them open to a law suit from Monsanto. Which is no doubt why Monsanto puts so much effort into their efforts to sue farmers whose crops have been unknowingly polluted by Monsatno’s GM crops’ pollen. One small farmer that stood up to Monsanto’s bullying tactics was Canadian, canola farmer Percy Schmeiser of Saskatchewan whose own canola crops got polluted by having wind blown Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crop pollen blown onto his land. His struggle for justice against the Monsanto behemoth was made into a video. You can view it online at the link below for free until Nov 10th. (As a side note the Genetic Roulette video above has had the free viewing period extended until Nov 6th.)
@Green monkey all your copy and paste hasn’t really answered any of the points I have raised about the safety of conventional food. You say no ones has tested GM food for safety, no one has tested conventional food for safety!
Secondly, do not conflate the argument against Agro buisness with the argument about GM food. They are not the same thing. There is a GM rice, “golden rice” which if it was allowed to be released could greatly improve the nutrition of the poor in SE asia, http://www.goldenrice.org/.
Not all GM is equal, and by ignoring the benefits of GM you are condemning millions to poorer nutrition, you are deny farmers the tools that will be needed to achieve greater yields on less water with less fertiliser inputs.
These are agronomic trait that may be impossible to obtain without the use of GM technology.
What you anti GM zealots have been unable to provide despite GM crops being in production of over 12 years you have not been able to provide any independently verifiable evidence for human harm, or a mechanism by which human harm is being caused, yes you have lots of maybe and ifs and could, but if the level of risk associated with GM food bothers you, I suggest you don’t drink the water, you don’t get in car, that you don’t take any medicine and that you don’t use a cell phone or a computer.
Silent Bob now says: “What you anti GM zealots have been unable to provide despite GM crops being in production of over 12 years you have not been able to provide any independently verifiable evidence for human harm.”
The burden of proof should not be on the doubters to prove that GMOs are harmful. It should be on the GMO pushers, playing at sorcer’s apprentices with mother nature by altering millions of years of evolution in the blink of an eye, to prove that these novel, new creations are safe. These GM products cannot be recalled once released into the natural world. (We have seen that GM crops cannot be prevented from cross pollinating with non GMO crops and passing on their traits to the traditional crops over very wide distances, even though some farmers did not need or want these traits in their crops – see the Percy Schmeiser David vs Monsnto video linked in my previous post.) We do know that scientific studies of feeding trials on lab animals especially when they are done by independent scientists with no ties to the GMO pushing corporations (nor with ties to labs and universities funded by GMO pushing corporations) tend to find significant health issues turning up in the lab animals fed GM products vs. the control groups fed non-GM products.
Here’s just a partial list of problems with GMOs found in various animal feeding trials:
Regarding the argument that “we have been eating GMOs for so many years, we would know if there was a problem with them having negative effects on human health”:
Well thanks to the USA’s FDA ignoring and hiding from the public the advice of its own scientists at the time and declaring there was no substantial difference between GM and the equivalent non-GM products (although differences were still substantial enough that Monsanto and others were allowed to slap patents on their GM products), GMOs were unleashed on the public at large without the rigorous, long term testing the FDA’s own scientists were calling for, and the entire population of the US, Canada and many other countries in the world have been made into human guinea pigs. It’s pretty obvious that When you are doing an experimental feeding trial of a possible toxin with, for example, guinea pigs in a lab, it is important to have a control group or population of similar guinea pigs set aside that is not fed the suspect product in order to compare results with the guinea pigs that are fed the suspect product. In the case of us humans there has been no such control group, so it is rather hard to determine just how much sicker we might be today because we’ve been eating GMOs simply because in general there is no clearly defined group from the same population who have not been eating GMOs.
However, it is interesting to note that the Genetic Roulette documentary does indicate that some auto-immune related disorders and infertility problems etc. have increased after the introduction of GM products into the food supply and the rates at which Americans are getting sick today with chronic, non-communicable diseases is higher than the Europeans who tend to avoid GM products and can do so to a larger extent than Americans because EU food labelling laws require GM products to be labelled as such.
As author Tom Philpott puts it in the article Long-term study: GMOs lower fertility in mice:
Regarding the golden rice issue, that appears to me and some scientists to be another high-tech, bio-tech solution in search of a problem where other simpler, cheaper and more effective non-GM solutions are already available:
You can’t prove that ANYTHING is safe, you can only show that something has not caused any harm yet. People cannot prove that mother’s milk is safe. Asking to prove that GM is safe is illogical and unscientific, and has never been required for any food or medicine or technology in the history of mankind.
What you could do is ask is do we see any evidence of harm? And that argument has not been convincingly made, certainly some GMO are bad and you know what? They failed testing and we not released. You cannot make claims about all GMOs because they are all different.
Now as for you you claim about playing Sorcerer’s apprentice and altering millions of years of evolution in the blink of an eye, this is exactly what has been done in the conventional breeding programs for all modern crops.
As for your tenuous link between consumption of GM crops in the population, we have also been driving more, exercising less, the climate has become warmer, population dynamics have changed.
Correlations does not equal causation. What you have there is not evidence, it is not even anecdote, it is pure speculation with luddite overtones.
When I hear these so called scientist talk about the dangers of GM I agree with them, introducing a new gene or two or three into a plant can have unexpected consequences, but during conventional breeding you are often not introducing one or two or three genes, but several thousand!
http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/articles/agbio-articles/myths.html
And some actual science answer the fear mongering.
Global risk expert speaks out on the danger of GMOs.
Last week the maverick biologist and billionaire entrepreneur Craig Venter tweeted: “Golden rice vitamin A could prevent blindness in 250000 children/year. Anti GMO people check your morals.” https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/372779980230369280
The global risk expert and the Distinguished Professor of Risk Engineering at New York University, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, responded on Twitter:
“Pro GMO people, check your understanding of 1) Risk & probability and 2) invoking ‘morals’ as a tactic while endangering people.”
“Point 2: There are other alternatives with controlled & known side effects.”
He also told Venter, a synthetic biologist with massive vested interests in the acceptance of genetic engineering and no background in risk (nor toxicology for that matter!):
“@JCVenter In other words it is not rigorous to make something with fat-tailed risks look like the ‘only’ alternative to [blindness] when it is not.”
“Fat-tailed risks” means that when things go bad, they can go catastrophically bad.
Taleb has outlined his strong concerns about GM before. Below is what he wrote a couple of months ago. There are graphs in the original text, which are available at the link.
Continued here:
http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2013/15032-expert-who-predicted-global-economic-crash-thinks-risks-from-gmos-too-great