the daily stirrer

Genetically Modified Food Crops - Complacency Is No Way To Fight Corporate Fascism.

Adovcates of genetically modified food crops, particularly the GM versions of staple foods such as wheat, corn, soya beans and potatoes say 'the science is settled' and Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) pose not risk to human health or the environment and will feed the world's poor. Not so say independent scienctific studies, GM crops are risky, do not provide increased yields and will only result in handing control of the food supply to some very untrustworthy corporate interests.

Contact The Daily Stirrer




daily stirrer home

If Genetically-edited Cooking Oil Is A Scientific Breakthrough Why The Secrecy About Selling It To Us?
Manufacturers of the latest generation of genetically-altered foods, which are gene - edited rather than genetically modifies, are determined their latest attempt to sell us Frankenstein foods will not be sacrificed on the altar of public opinion as were their predecessors with introduced cuillinary delights like glysophate and neonicotinoids into our daily diet if we weren't careful abourt reading labels.

READ ALL
If Genetically-edited Cooking Oil Is A Scientific Breakthrough Why The Secrecy About Selling It To Us?


Monsanto Secret Documents Show Massive Attack on Seralini Study

from Sustainable Pulse

In secret internal Monsanto documents released on Tuesday by legal firms in the U.S. it was made clear how Monsanto successfully pressured Wallace Hayes, Editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal to retract the famous Séralini study, which discovered the damage caused by GM maize NK603 and low doses of Roundup herbicide on rats.

In September 2012 the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) published the research of a team led by Professor Séralini, which found liver and kidney toxicity and hormonal disturbances in rats fed Monsanto’s GM maize NK603 and very small doses of the Roundup herbicide it is grown with, over a long-term period. An additional observation was a trend of increased tumours in most treatment groups.

In November 2013 the study was retracted by the journal’s editor, Wallace Hayes, after the appointment of a former Monsanto scientist, Richard E. Goodman, to the editorial board and a non-transparent review process by until now nameless people that took several months.

The study was then republished by Environmental Sciences Europe, but only after the study’s reputation was wrongly damaged due to the work of Monsanto behind the scenes.

Here is a summary of the Seralini related documents released on Tuesday:

Monsanto Email Chain: Personnel Discusses Plan Seeking Retraction of Seralini Glyphosate Study

No: MONGLY02063095
Date: 9/26/2012

Description

This document contains a series of email exchanges between various Monsanto personnel regarding letters to the editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology seeking retraction of a study by Professor G.E. Seralini. Mr. Eric Sachs writes about his efforts to galvanize scientists in a letter-writing campaign in order to retract the article: “I talked to Bruce Chassy and he will send his letter to Wally Hayes directly and notify other scientists that have sent letters to do the same. He understands the urgency…I remain adamant that Monsanto must: not be put: in the position of providing the critical analysis that leads the editors to retract the paper.” at *3, 2.

Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation as it demonstrates the significant role played by Monsanto in achieving the successful retraction of a scientific study without appearing to be directly involved in such efforts. Monsanto’s influence on the quality and quantity of scientific data on glyphosate is related to the conclusions that regulators and researchers are able to reach with respect to whether carcinogenicity is a biologically plausible feature of glyphosate. The reliability and consensus of scientific literature is directly relevant to general causation. This document also goes to witness credibility.

Monsanto Scientist David Saltmiras Admits to Leveraging Relationship with Editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal in Effort to Retract Seralini Study
No: MONGLY01045298
Date: 8/20/2013

Description
This document identifies the “Business Goals” of Monsanto employee David Saltmiras for the fiscal year 2013. Dr. Saltmiras explicitly states under the “Employee Comments” section: “Throughout the late 2012 Seralini rat cancer publication and media campaign, I leveraged my relationship the Editor of Chief of the publishing journal, Food and Chemical Toxicology and was the single point of contact between Monsanto and the Journal.” at 6. Moreover, Dr. Saltmiras acknowledges that he “[s]uccessfully facilitated numerous third party expert letters to the editor which were subsequently published, reflecting the numerous significant deficiencies, poor study design, biased reporting and selective statistics employed by Seralini.” at 3.

Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation for similar reasons as the previous (MONGLY02063095) document. Dr. Saltmiras acknowledges Monsanto’s intimate contact with the editor of FCT which, per document MONGLY02063095, led to the retraction of professor Seralini’s study from Food and Chemical Toxicology. The reliability and consensus of scientific literature is directly relevant to general causation. This document also goes to witness credibility.

Email from Monsanto Collaborator Bruce Chassy to Editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal Urging Seralini Study Retraction
No: MONGLY00900629
Date: 9/26/2012

Description
This document contains email correspondence between Bruce Chassy and the Editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology, Wallace Hayes, wherein Dr. Chassy urges Mr. Hayes to retract the Seralini paper at Monsanto’s request (discussed above): “My intent was to urge you to roll back the clock, retract the paper, and restart the review process.” at *2.

Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation as it confirms Monsanto’s campaign to eliminate a study which observed the adverse effects of glyphosate. It is relevant for the same reasons as documents MONGLY02063095 and MONGLY01045298. The reliability and consensus of scientific literature is directly relevant to general causation. This document also goes to witness credibility.

Monsanto Consulting Agreement with Food and Chemical Toxicology Editor Preceding Journal’s Retraction of Seralini Study
No: MONGLY02185742
Date: 8/21/2012

Description

This document is a 2012 consulting agreement between Monsanto and editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology, Wallace Hayes for the period immediately preceding Mr. Hayes’s involvement in the retraction of the Seralini paper from Food and Chemical Toxicology.

Relevance

This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation as it demonstrates the conflict of interest between Mr. Hayes’ role as a consultant for Monsanto and his vocation as editor for a research journal which retracted a study determining that glyphosate is capable of being a carcinogen. The document is further indication of Monsanto’s pervasive influence within the scientific community which is related to the availability and quality of data on glyphosate used by researchers and regulators to assess the scientific literature in determining the potential carcinogenicity of glyphosate. The reliability and consensus of scientific literature is directly relevant to general causation. This document also goes to witness credibility.

Email Confirming Monsanto’s Intention to Pay Wallace Hayes (Editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology) as Consultant
No: MONGLY00971543
Date: 8/12/2012 – 8/13/2012

Description
This document is an email from Dr. David Saltmiras to Dr. Heydens wherein Dr. Saltmiras “Contact Wallace Hayes to determine his availability and fees for attending the meeting.”

Relevance
The document does not contain trade secrets, sensitive commercial information or privileged material. This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation for the same reasons as the above (MONGLY02185742) document. Mr. Hayes’ paid consultancy for Monsanto constitutes a conflict of interest with his role as editor of a journal publishing research on glyphosate- especially given his involvement in retracting a study pertaining to the biological plausibility of glyphosate as a human carcinogen. The reliability and consensus of scientific literature is directly relevant to general causation. This document also goes to witness credibility.

Monsanto Email Confirming Company’s Intimate Relationship with Wallace Hayes, Editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal
No: MONGLY01096619
Date: 9/19/2012 – 9/20/2012

Description
This document contains an email correspondence between various Monsanto personnel wherein Dr. Saltmiras expresses the following with respect to the recently published study in Food and Chemical Toxicology by Seralini: “Wally Hayes, now FCT Editor in Chief for Vision and Strategy, sent me a courtesy email early this morning. Hopefully the two of us will have a follow up discussion soon to touch on whether I C’I’ Vision and Strategy were front and center for this one passing through the peer review process…. and what is that, Vision and Strategy? I also suspect this paper may be in our own best interests – the last rites for Seralini’s few remaining shreds of scientific credibility.” at *2.

Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation as it confirms Monsanto’s intimate relationship with Wallace Hayes who was subsequently involved in retracting professor Seralini’s study pertaining to the biological plausibility of glyphosate as a human carcinogen, a conclusion that was adverse to Monsanto’s commercial agenda. The reliability and consensus of scientific literature is directly relevant to general causation. This document also goes to witness credibility.

Monsanto Email Confirming Attempt to Seek Retraction of Seralini Study
No: MONGLY00978886
Date: 10/9/2012 – 10/10/2012

Description
This document contains email correspondence between various Monsanto personnel wherein Daniel Goldstein writes the following with respect to professor Seralini’s study: “Retraction- Both Dan Jenkins (US Government affairs) and Harvey Glick made a strong case for withdrawal of the paper if at all possible, both on the same basis- that publication will elevate the status of the paper, bring other papers in the journal into question, and allow Seralini much more freedom to operate. All of us are aware that the ultimate decision is up to the editor and the journal management, and that we may not have an opportunity for withdrawal in any event, but I felt it was worth reinforcing this request.” at *3.

Relevance
The document does not contain trade secrets, sensitive commercial information or privileged material. This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation as it confirms Monsanto’s attempt to seek retraction of a study pertaining to the biological plausibility of glyphosate as a human carcinogen; a conclusion adverse to Monsanto’s commercial agenda. Mr. Goldstein makes it clear that a retraction would curtail professor Seralini’s “freedom to operate.” Id. The reliability and consensus of scientific literature is directly relevant to general causation. This document also goes to witness credibility.

Monsanto Email Chain Confirming Undisclosed Involvement in Successful Retraction of Seralini Study
No: MONGLY00936725
Date: 9/28/2012

Description
This document contains email correspondence between Dr. Goldstein and Eric Sachs regarding the Monsanto campaign to retract professor Seralini’s paper. Dr. Goldstein states: “I was uncomfortable even letting shareholders know we are aware of this LTE…. It implies we had something to do with it- otherwise how do we have knowledge of it? I could add ‘Aware of multiple letters to editor including one signed by 25 scientists from 14 countries’ if you both think this is OK.” at *1. Mr. Sachs responds: “We are ‘connected’ but did not write the letter or encourage anyone to sign it.” Id.

Relevance
This document is relevant and reasonably likely to be used in this litigation as confirms Monsanto’s undisclosed involvement in the successful retraction of a paper pertaining to the biological plausibility of glyphosate as a human carcinogen; a conclusion adverse to Monsanto’s commercial agenda. Moreover, the document demonstrates that Monsanto personnel were aware of the imperative need to covertly instigate the retraction campaign and the inappropriateness of such action. The reliability and consensus of scientific literature is directly relevant to general causation. This document also goes to witness credibility.

Originally Published at sustainablepulse.com
Reproduced under fair use terms in the public interest.

Monsanto Losing Millions As Farmers In India Rebel & Plant Indigenous Cotton Seed

from Anonymous.com, 28 Feb, 2017

farming cotton in India

Monsanto is losing millions on failed GM cotton. The company illegally pushed a form of Bt cotton into India and Africa more than a decade ago, but farmers are now pushing back by planting their own indigenous seed.

Monsanto is accused of writing laws and then breaking them to enter the market in India, but after more than 300,000 farmer deaths between 1995 and 2013, many of them attributed to Monsanto, the company is finally paying for their misdeeds. The corporation’s greed is linked to farmer suicides throughout Maharashtra, considered the ‘Cotton Belt’ in India.

The Indian government is now actively promoting the use of indigenous seed, and has called Monsanto out for profiteering illegally on Bt cotton seed.

Monsanto has already lost nearly $75 million in royalties this year (5 billion rupees) due to the change in seed choice by farmers. Sales in India have fallen by 15 percent, and though this is a relatively small market share, it is still making a huge impact on the company’s bottom line.

This could be the end of Monsanto, altogether, in India. Keshav Raj Kranthi, head of India’s Central Institute for Cotton Research said:

“Just wait for the crucial three to four years to see a complete, natural turnaround. By then most farmers will give up Bt cotton and go for the indigenous variety.”

Notably, Burkina Fasso in West Africa also recently rejected Monsanto’s Bt cotton seed after finding the seed produced a poor quality cotton that fetched low prices for the farmers who bothered to grow it…

While Monsanto argues that its genetically modified seed is better, many studies state that their comparisons were not looking at hybridized and indigenous seed (not GM seeds) that give better crop quality and higher yields.

Bt cotton is genetically modified seed which contains Bacillus thuringiensis, a bacterium that produces toxins harmful to a variety of insects, including, supposedly, bollworms that attack cotton; however, like weeds that have become impervious to RoundUp, many organisms become even stronger when introduced to genetic mutations of Mother Nature’s perfection. Monsanto even admits that insect resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis is ‘natural’ and ‘to be expected’.

Indeed, the indigenous varieties of cotton have fared better against the bollworm, whitefly, drought, and other dangers that cotton farmers face.

Monsanto (doing business in India as Mahyco Monsanto Business Limited) has even threatened to pull out of India completely, calling the bluff of a government who threatened to lower their royalties; but the government was undeterred, cut their seed royalties by 74 percent, and capped seed prices.

This will bring much relief to cotton farmers in India, but with 96 percent of India’s cotton crop being developed with Monsanto’s Bt cotton, it could take generations to recapture the indigenous crop completely, while bankrupting the corrupt Monsanto simultaneously. As Sanjeev Kumar Balyan, India’s Junior Agricultural Minister has said of Monsanto, “The greed has to end.” (via UndergroundReporter)


RELATED POSTS: Back to top GM (genocidal malfeasance) exposed as bee killer Heading For The Last Roundup(tm) Amateur Politician and Professional Rent Seeker Says Kill Yourselves To Help Monsanto He Who Controls The Spice Controls The Universe Squint Eyed Science and GM foods Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] ... [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]... [ Ian's Authorsden Pages ]... [ It's Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] [Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [ Boggart Abroad] ... [ Grenteeth Bites ] ... [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] ... [Latest Posts] ... [ Tumblr ] ... [ Authorsden blog ] ... [Daily Stirrer Headlines]
[ Ian at Facebook ]

GM insects for disease control should be trialled in the UK, says House of Lords Committee

by Arthur Foxake

Staking its claim as a leading contender for "science worshipping idiot of the year, The Canary blog pubshished this in December 2012.

"Genetically modified (GM) insects could be trialled in the UK to prevent the transmission of disease and reduce agricultural pests. That’s if the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee get their way.

The Committee’s report, released on Thursday 17 December 2015, discusses the results of an inquiry into the science and potential benefits and risks of using genetically modified insects as a tool to tackle major challenges of food security and human and animal health.

The committee concluded that the UK’s considerable expertise in this area and the potential of the technology in, for example, stamping out malaria, which has already been shown in overseas field trials (for example, by University of Oxford spin-out Oxitec), warrants a UK-based field trial."

Read All :

GM insects for disease control should be trialled in the UK, says House of Lords Committee

GM Crops Drenched With Deadly Pesticide Right before Harvest

by Ian R Thorpe, 19 November, 2014

One of the myths of the GM foods biotech industry is that while the majority of Genetically Modified crop plants are engineered not to resist drought or flood, but to resist being sprayed with weed killer, particularly Monsanto's deadly to humans Roundup, which contains Glyphosate (read much more about that is other items from this page's contents menu), a toxin that has been linked to many deadly diseases in humans and animals. The official story promises that the herbicide breaks down quickly so by the time the crops are harvested it is no longer dangerous. First, many studies say this is untrue, not all the glyphosate degrades in nature and medical studies have shown the substance is toxic to humans in very small concentrations.

Another myth generated by the propaganda offices of the biotech industry is that crop plants are only sprayed with Roundup herbicide early in their development. A new leak from a whistleblower, Dr. Stephanie Seneff, suggests this is yet another corporate lie in the campaign to gain control of the entire world's food supply. It turns out that Monsanto themselves, the biggest corporate player in the GM food crops industry, published a document in 2010 which recommends the spraying of crops intended for human consumption, shortly before they are harvested (See page 28 of the linked.pdf "The agronomic benefits of glyphosate in Europe" )Remember this is the result of a report commissioned as sales puff for Roundup by Monstant, do not expect objectivity, balance or honesty.

Here's a snippet via the excellent Washington's Blog

Uneven maturity and green tissue delays harvest. Spraying glyphosate desiccates green foliage & stems. The photograph (below left) shows the uniform dessication of sunflower by the use of glyphosate(Roundup Bioaktiv) applied by helicopter in Hungary (Czepó, 2009a). The photograph (below right) shows complete foliar desiccation of grain maize on the right side 14 days after application of glyphosate (Roundup Bioaktiv) at 0.54kg ae/ ha in 7 0L/ ha applied by helicopter using Reglojet nozzles and including Bandrift Plus at 0.1 % at 34% grain moisture in Hungary, with the untreated visible on the left-hand side.

Genetically Modified Crops readied for harvest by being sprayed with Monanto herbicide

Continue reading:

Given that enough Roundup is applied to full-grown plants to completely kill them, much higher quantities of Roundup are obviously being applied than would be required simply to keep away weeds (while keeping the plants alive).

Similarly, the plants don’t have time to metabolize or otherwise get rid of the Roundup, and there is not time for rains to wash away the Roundup before harvest. Instead, Roundup is dumped on the plants to dry them out, and then they are quickly harvested … with high levels of Roundup still present to be eaten by humans or animals that will become part of the human food chain.

Big food may save a buck … but they are playing fast and loose with our health to do so.

RELATED POSTS:

Back to top

"I'm Not Stupid" Monsanto Lobbyist Refuses To Drink Weedkiller After Proclaiming "It Won't Hurt You"
The glib claim backfired however when the Monsanto lobbyist was offered a glass of diluted Roundup (active ingredient Glyphosate) and asked to drink it.
"Do you think I'm stupid, " the lobbyist blustered ...

Monsanto Demands Retraction for WHO's Glyphosate Cancer Connection

UN Report Says Small-Scale Organic Farming Only Way To Feed The World
Even as the United States government continues to push for the use of more chemically-intensive and corporate-dominated farming methods such as GMOs and monoculture-based crops, the United Nations is once against sounding the alarm about the urgent need to return to (and develop) a more sustainable, natural and organic system.

Dangers of GM foods - The Scientific Evidence
Genetically modified lies used to sell GM foods
GM will not feed the world - GM crops don't provide increased yields, expensive fertilisers do
Genetically Modified Humans - The GM food fad is a vast experiment on the human race
Geneticist says GM foods will never be safe
Black Hat Biotech index



daily stirrer home

Monsanto’s GMO Creations Caused 291,000 Suicides in India

by Ian R Thorpe, 15 November, 2014

The Daily Stirrer has always been keen to expose corporate malfeasance and criminality, in pursuit of this policy we have highlighted many times the ways GM corps Biotech giant Monsanto likes to make life difficult for small, independent farmers in the USA and Canada by imposing one-sided and unfair contracts on customers who buy its parented Genetically Modified seeds. It is a matter of public record that the biotech giant has already filed 145 lawsuits, or on average about 9 lawsuits every year for 16 straight years, against farmers who have “improperly reused their patented seeds.” (so ignore any Monsanto shills you see claiming otherwise in online forums). But did you know that Monsanto is also leading hundreds of thousands of third world farmers to suicide?

The Biotech Corporation, which has just about the worst track record of any global corporation for bullying, intimidation and willingness to cooperate with corrupt government officials, has attempted use its highly effective propaganda public relations operation to dismiss the increase in suicides among subsistence farmers in India due to the introduction of genetically modified crops, but the problem has now grown too big to be swept under the carpet. Though getting involved with monsanto and their 'no get out' contracts is not the only contributary factor to farmer suicides in India, alongside debt (incurred by having to buy expensive Monsanto seed, Monsanto fertilizer, Monsanto herbicide and pesticide?) it is about the largest concern. The farmers problems are largely caused by non-viable crops.

Genetically modified plants can be modified to cope with any one of a number of problems, drought, flood, insect infestation, choking by weeds, fungust infection or resistance to unusual heat or cold. They cannot be engineered to cope with all though. Biotech sells seeds that either don’t grow in the prevailing conditions because nobody can predict year to year variations, or they lead to the development of unstoppable superweeds and superbugs. Subsequently, Monsanto effectively compels farmers to purchase RoundUp and other herbicidal or insecticidal chemicals or fertilizers which the farmers can ill afford. Monsanto's contracts may be no get out for farmers but the samall print provides Monsanto with a get out for everything. If the company's representative feel a farmer has not adequately irrigated his fields, Monsanto cannot be held responsible for the failure of drought resistant seeds. Thus, the soul - destroying cycle of ruin begins.

Biotech has tried to dismiss the accounts of farmer suicides in India due to the introduction of genetically modified crops, but the problem is pervasive. Once the farmer is gone, the debt falls on the remaining family members. Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, and other suicide seed sellers have essentially created a generational slave economy based on their toxic chemical and seed monopolies. Here are the tesimonies of some Indian Farmers:

Indian Farmer Suicide Testimonials


Commissioned by the 2014 Food Safety and Sustainable Agriculture Forum, YIELD presents testimonies from the cotton farmers in Vidarbha, Maharashtra.

According to figures outlining farmer suicide rates, 17,638 Indian farmers committed suicide in 2009 — about one death every 30 minutes. Oftentimes, the farmers would commit the act by drinking the very same insecticide that Monsanto supplied them with — a terrible end in which Monsanto has wrecked the lives of independent and traditional farmers.

Many families have lost their livlihood and the main breadwinner due to the suicide, and are left to economic ruin and must struggle to fight off starvation:

"We are ruined now,’ said one dead man’s 38-year-old wife. ‘We bought 100 grams of BT Cotton. Our crop failed twice. My husband had become depressed. He went out to his field, lay down in the cotton and swallowed insecticide.’

In Indian society honour is still important as it was in European societies in the past. A man whose business failes or who loses his job cannot live with the shame. We in the west cannot understand such a mindset but we should not condem it, instead we should learn it is best to leave eastern and African societies to develop in their own way and at their own pace rather than supporting politicians who constantly try to impose out values and our corporate - dominated culture on the entire world.

Monsanto has caused an estimated 290,000 suicides in India with its GMOs, chemical creations, and shameless business practices.

Dr. Vandana Shiva an Indian environmental activist said recently:
“. . . the motivations for these suicides follow a familiar pattern: Farmers become trapped in a cycle of debt trying to make a living growing Monsanto’s genetically engineered Bt cotton. They always live close to the edge, but one season’s ruined crop can dash hopes of ever paying back their loans, much less enabling their families to get ahead. Manjusha’s father, like many other suicide victims, killed himself by drinking the pesticide he spreads on his crops.”

While European consumers and environmental protection groups battle Big Biotech and the unelected Bureaucrats who would run the EU as a profit centre for corporate business, an US consumer protection groups battle Corporate fascism and Government contempt for democracy, human rights and the constitution over GMO labeling and the righht to grow natural seed on their own land (including suburban gardens), it is easy to lose sight of the fact that Big Biotech's influence extends far beyond European and American borders. Micha Peled’s documentary Bitter Seeds is a stark reminder of that fact. The final film in Peled’s “globalization trilogy,” Bitter Seeds exposes the havoc Monsanto has wreaked on rural farming communities in India, and serves as a fierce rebuttal to the false claim that genetically modified seeds can save the developing world.

RELATED POSTS:
Back to Contents table
India's Ruling BJP Party Crushed In Regional Poll
New ‘Monsanto Law’ in Africa Would Force GMOs on Farmers
Latest Posts

Elsewhere: [Boggart Blog]...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]...[Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [Boggart Abroad]



Things You Should Know About GMOs

If you are anything like me you probably want to know (and believe you have the right to know) what is in what is in the food on your plate. We are probably not fanatics and do not research every chemical compound listed, knowing that a coulour enhancer and a preservative or two, while not natural will in small quantities do no harm. But if those of us who take responsibility for ourselves, understand that diet is very important in maintaing good health and try to make sensible choices in what we eat are denied the information about what we are eating, then we must exercise our right to hold government and food manufacturers to account.

There is a movement among food and chemicals corporations, academics, bureaucrats and politicians dedicated to keeping us in the dark about genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), not to mention a host of other nasties in your food. There are hundreds of reasons why we should be suspicious of Genetically Modified Organism in our food, a new report by Dr Edward F Group focuses on a few and reveals how corporate money has currupted science and bought legal approval for many foods that independent scientists (i.e. those whose research is not funded by biotech corporations or government and United Nations agencies that take funds from corporate donations.

Read the full report, 7 Things You Should Know About GMO's at TheDailyCoin.com


Another 'Scientific Consensus' Turns Out To Be Corporate / Government Scam

So there are no scientists in the world who question the corporate lieOpen Letter from World Scientists to All Governments Concerning Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)

The World Scientists Statement dates from 1999. It was superceded by the Independent Science Panel Report in 2003, and by the most recent report Ban GMOs Now in 2013. We are no longer collecting signatures for this statement.

The scientists are extremely concerned about the hazards of GMOs to biodiversity, food safety, human and animal health, and demand a moratorium on environmental releases in accordance with the precautionary principle. They are opposed to GM crops that will intensify corporate monopoly, exacerbate inequality and prevent the essential shift to sustainable agriculture that can provide food security and health around the world.

They call for a ban on patents of life-forms and living processes which threaten food security, sanction biopiracy of indigenous knowledge and genetic resources and violate basic human rights and dignity. They want more support on research and development of non-corporate, sustainable agriculture that can benefit family farmers all over the world.

Previous versions of this letter were submitted to many governments and international forums including:

World Trade Organization Conference in Seattle (November 30 ? Dec. 2, 1999)
UN Biosafety Protocol Meeting in Montreal (24 ? 28, Jan. 2000)
UN Commission on Sustainable Development Conference on Sustainable Agriculture in New York (April 24-May 5, 2000)
UN Convention on Biological Diversity Conference in Nairobi (May 16-24, 2000)
United States Congress (29 June, 2000)

Signed by 815 scientists from 82 different countries, (
find out who)
RELATED POSTS: GMO Corporate lies - omnibus post
GM foods? biotech lieotech
Mexico bans GM crops over health issues
We need more CO2 to feed the world, not Monsanto GM monoculture
GM danger? Ha ha show us the evidence they said. Here it is
GM will not feed the world
Why are governments so keen to collaborate with corporate fascists on GM crops
GM food will never be says for humans or animals says respected geneticist
Corporate giants bullyig small nations to accept GM seed
GM seed: Scientists playing God in the garden
Corporate claims for GM seed demolished by independent research
Black Hat Biotech


Playing God In The Garden. The Risks Of Messing About With Nature.



As the corrupt politicians, greedy corporate businesses and insane scientists stepo up their efforts to assure the public that food containing Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) is safe, why is public opposition growning. OK, recently exposures of corporate corruption, scientific fraud and politicical dishonest have destroyed trust but is there more to it than that?

Playing God In The Garden. The Risks Of Messing About With Nature.



GMO-Loaded Food Corporation Targets Natural Foods for Being ‘Unfair Competition

posted by Arthur Foxake


Hellmann's Real Mayonnnaise - full of man made shite

Hellmann's Real Mayonnaise - Real? Aren't there laws against tellig lies on food packaging?

You might have heard of Unilever? The company sells products under 1,000 brands from soap power to Ice cream (it isn't always easy to tell the difference) and their portfilio includes Hellmann’s 'Real' mayonnaise. In addition to donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to shut down local campaigns in the USA demanding foods containing GMO products be clearly labeled, the mega-corp has also filed a lawsuit against a vegan mayonnaise brand from a tiny company, claiming “false advertising and unfair competition.”

A Hellmann’s advertising states:

“At Hellmann’s, we make our mayonnaise with real, simple ingredients like good eggs, delicious vinegar and oils rich in omega 3. So it’s definitely a step in the right direction. Lean about he Real Food Project at hellmanns.com.”

A look at the ingredient list reveals however that their grandiose claims go sour under the light of scrutiny. They reason then to be nervous about a company that makes a truly healthy and natural mayo: Hellmann's product is full of soya (mostly made from GMO soya beans), factory farmed eggs from chickens who are kept in cruel circumstances and fed GMO feed laced with antibiotics and homone supplements to boost egg production, and non brewed vinegar (i.e. a by product from oil based chemicals). Heinz was recently censured for claiming its vinegar was “all natural,” when GMOs no more natural than breast implants. Will Unilever, the parent company of Hellmann’s, face similar issues?

The Anglo-Dutch mega-conglomerate Unilever complains the independent little vegan company, Hampton Creek whose 'Just Mayo'," is stealing market share from Hellmann’s. Hang on? Aren't Unilever a capitalist outfit and don't capitalists believe in competition. Erm ... capitalists do but corporatists don't (Cometition is sin - David Rockefeller)

It must be a tad frustrating for Unilever corporate bosses when tiny, competitors insist on playing by rules the corporates pay lip service to but really despise, and when consumers vote with their wallets and refuse the inferior, toxic shite the Big Food corporations sell, in spite of the multi million £$€ advertising campaigns. Poor mites, we feel for them.

Unilever, which included Ben & Jerry’s, Knorr, Flora (aka arterial plaque in a plastic pack, Brooke Bond, Marmite, Walls, Colmans, Elmlea and hundreds of other brands into its multinational. Lawyers for Uinlever argue that:

“Hampton Creek’s materially false and misleading Just Mayo name, packaging, and advertising has caused and unless restrained will continue to cause great and irreparable injury to Unilever.”

Related: 5 Substitutions for Store-Bought Mayonnaise

Unilever is seeking to reverse success that Hampton Creek is experiencing with their new mayo product. The company wants Hampton Creek to remove all jars from shelves, and pay Unilever three times damages, plus attorney’s fees. Hampton Creek is also being told to start calling their mayo something else because it, damages the entire product category, which has strived for decades for a consistent definition of ‘mayonnaise’ that fits with consumer expectations.

The FDA, Unilever points out, defines mayonnaise as including an “egg-yolk containing ingredient.”

Now Hampton Creek has had to prepare a countersuit, in order to determine what makes mayo mayo.”

Part of the legal dispute may have been triggered because Hampton Creek posted on Facebook that it was “Beating Hellmann’s in taste tests,” and also posted a cartoon of a jar of Just Mayo with boxing gloves standing over a KOed jar of Hellmann’s and being declared “The Winner!”

Unilever was not happy. “Hampton Creek’s superiority claims are false because they are not supported by reliable testing that reflects actual consumer preferences.”

The outcome, which is easy to predict, will determine how easy it is to control the market as a mega-corporation with deep pockets.



Food Fascists: GMO and Pesticide Manufacturers Down and Dirty

by Ian R Thorpe, 25 November, 2014


"When using GM feed I saw symptoms of bloat, stomach ulcers, high rates of diarrhea... but when I switched [to non GM feed] these problems went away, some within a matter of days," Danis farmer Ib Pedersen. (image source)

Anyone who watched the Danish Television Political Drama Borgen*, (and not many will have - it was on BBC4 and subtitled) will be aware how important the pig farming industry is to the Danish economy. A reasonable therefore think governments wanting to know the impacts of using genetically Modified organisms as feedstuff for Danish Porkers who turn to the farming community for advice rather that scientists and public relations officers employed by biotech corporations that make and sell Genetically Modified foods. Danish farmer IbBorup Pedersen has made his living rearing hogs for decades so you can be sure he knows a thing or two about the animals. But when Pedersen became alarmed at the growing incidence of deformities and biological defects among newborn piglets, which included gaps in skulls, misshaped bones, missing legs and even a female piglet with testicles (don't tell the feminists, they'll all want what the piglet was fed on).

When Pedersen talked about this with other pig farmers, they concurred that they were witnessing greater numbers of deformed pigs that ever before before. More in depth discussion led the farmers to realize that the trend of greater incidence of birth defects began after the introduction three years earlier of a GMO feed derived from Monsanto Roundup ready crops which had been treated with the herbicide glyphosate.

After slaughtering the deformed piglets, Pedersen had the their bodies sent to an independent laboratory for analysis. The results were conclusive; there were high concentrations of Monsanto’s glyphosate pesticide in the piglets’ vital organs. The findings were published in the Journal of Environmental and Analytical Toxicology, (not available online, follow THIS LINK to .pdf of source document at omnicsonline.org.

The Danish Pig Farmers' experience and the attention it is receiving is another blow against Monsanto’s public relations campaign to convince governments and consumers that Roundup is one of the world’s safest pesticides and poses no risk to animal and human health. For many years Monsanto has stood by this myth with fanatical religious fervor against all existing independent evidence to the contrary. This PR scam is typical of the whole Genetic Engineering business which for years has been sold as no different to the selective breeding which farmers and stockmen have practiced for thousands of years and is merely a way of speeding up the process.

That used to be true, popular types of tomatoes, apples and potatoes have all been produced by introducing genes from one strain into the seeds of another to produce a better product. And delicious Nectarines were created by splicing together the DNA of peaches and plums, two fruit species that are genetically very close. What the biologists learned to do from those experiments however led us into more dangerous territory.

We would normally expect a powerful herbicide to kill any green leafed plant it was sprayed on so how is it that GM crop plants can be sprayed with Roundup and produce higher crop yields because the weeds that compete for water and soil nutrients with them are destroyed? The answer is that crops such as staple foods maize, wheat and soya beans can now be genetically engineered to be immune to the herbicide. Biotech corporations claim the herbicide breaks down quickly in the environment and thus poses no risk to people who eat the produce. A growing number of studies show this is simply not true, residue on the plants at the time of harvesting contains enough glyphosate to pose long term health risks to humans and animals.

Rainfall runoffs containing pesticides and herbicides discharge into rivers, streams and drinking water reservoirs. This further complicates the task of trying to measure the extent to which humans are being exposed to life threatening chemicals through their diet.

The mission of Monsanto and the cartel of agro-chemical seed companies was never truly to increase crop yields and make drought, flood, heat and cold resistant strains that would feed the world's poor. That was just public relations. Data are now coming in from independent agro-science community showing that the years of higher GM yields are short lived and drop dramatically thereafter to levels far below those yields harvested from traditional, organic farming methods, it is becoming clear that the agenda behind promotion of GM technology was to establish a global hegemony for the USA and hand control of the food chain to a few corporate entities with a track record for holding concepts like sovereign law and consumer rights in utter contempt. The terms and conditions of the free trade deals know as TTIP and TPP bear out this view.

While an increasing number of studies published in scientific journals identify the health risks associated with GMO consumption and glyphosate independently, no research is yet available which assesses the combined adverse effects of GMOs and pesticides in animals and humans. The original purpose of agricultural biotechnology was to promote sales of pesticides by genetically engineering crops to be immune to spraying with herbicides and pesticides. In theory weeds and insect pests were to be eradicated but cash crops would be spared. This would allow farmers to spray massive amounts of toxic chemicals on soy, maize, sugar beets and other agricultural foods without injury to people who ate GM produce. This was the unwise assumption that led to the agro-genetic revolution.

Only during the past decade with more and more GM products coming to market, more and more farm acreage being sprayed with glyphosate and other toxic pesticides and herbicides, and more and more pressure being put on governments resistant to allowing GM crops to be grown within their national boundaries, are the very real risks to animals, humans and the general environment being recognized within the those parts of the scientific community that cannot be described as, to paraphrase Robert Burns, a sack of rogues bought and paid for with corporate gold.

*all three seasons now available on DVD and Blu Ray from BBC Shop, Amazon and other online retailers. An excellent insight into the machinery of modern politics; should be required viewing for political science students.

RELATED POSTS:
Back to Contents table
The dangers of GM crops: Show us the evidence science fans said. OK, here it is
GM food products will never be safe - geneticist
GM science heading for the last roundup
We need less GMO and more CO2 to feed the world
In the science community resistance to GMO propaganda is growing
Labeling is an Essential Element in Achieving Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods
Latest Posts

Elsewhere: [Boggart Blog]...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]...[Scribd]...[Wikinut]




GM (genocidal malfeasance) exposed as bee killer

A very dark kind of satire here. Just a few days ago we had yet another 'prominent scientist' (i.e. one who has sold his arse for corporate money) repeating the discredited claim that there is NO EVIDENCE THAT GM CROPS HARM THE ENVIRONMENT And yesterday we get this: from Whiteout Press (where you see the news blacked out by governments and mainstream media).

July 11, 2014. Canada. (ONN) In 2006, a global die-off of our planet?s bee population began. Bee keepers the world over reported the sudden and mysterious deaths of entire colonies. Since then, researchers have struggled to learn the cause of the death of over 500 billion honey bees and counting. With 80 percent of edible plants and 7 billion humans dependent on bees for survival, this could become a catastrophe of biblical proportions.

death of bees Death of Bees by neonicotioid poisoning (source)

The secret?s out. Catastrophe on a global scale. When the annual March Against Monsanto demonstration took place a few weeks ago in cities around the world, your author was surprised to see that genetically modified foods (GMOs) weren?t the number one topic of protest. Instead, millions of people in almost 100 countries around the world elevated the plight of the globe?s honey bees to emergency #1. For Whiteout Press readers, this isn?t new. We exposed the pesticides in an article over two year ago titled, ?Emergency Motion to stop Nicotine Pesticide in Global Bee die-off?.

After looking at the rapidly growing mountain of recent evidence, it?s obvious why bees were the hot topic for anti-Monsanto activists. The companies that are producing laboratory-created GMO food substitutes are some of the same corporations that are producing the pesticide now being blamed for killing off the Earth?s bees. And in turn, possibly killing off 80% of the world?s plants and plant-dependent species that rely on bees for their existence. According to a recent Huffington Post report, that includes 7.2 billion humans and 200,000 different plant species. - Continue reading

Now before the science heads and Monsanto shills start screaming "Unscientific" let's just remind ourselves that the improved crop yield promised (but not delivered) by genetically engineered orgnisms are improved because food crop plants are engineered to resist herbicide and pesticide, thus preventing productivity being reduced by weeds and insects.

The main crops are Monsanto Roundup Ready Maize and Soya, engineered to survive being sprayed with Monsanto's glyphosate based Roundup herbicide. A growing mountain of evidence shows that Roundup ready GM organisms make a perfect delivery vehicle to get highly toxic glyphosate into human bodies.

Next most popular with exponents of GM (the science of Genocidal Malfeasance) are a type of pesticides named neonicotinoids that when sprayed on vegetation kill just about everything but are highly efficient at killing bees and other insects that pollinate the crops. And while the neonicotnoids stop insects eating the plants, they stop them fertilising said plants so the crop does not produce a harvest. No harvest, no food. So poison or starvation folks, no - one can says science does not give you a choice.

Ironic isn't it that while the scienceheads and Monsanto shills and the idiots like Cameron, Obama and the Euronazis of Brussels are screaming that GM crops are needed to solve the problem of this world hunger by feeding the masses, the corporate scientits appear to have come up with an entirely different approach to solving the food supply problem.

RELATED POSTS:
New GMO Approval Will Go Ahead Despite Public Outcry.
Independent Scientists Demolish The Lies About GMOs And The Safety Of Glyphosate
We Told You That GM Crops Are Harmless Claims Were Bollocks
Only Lunatics Would Endager The Food supply For The Sake Of Corporate Profits
Five reasons why Roundup should be banned forever
The Insanity Of Those Who believe Genetically Modified Foods Are Safe
Bee conony collapse
Bee extinction due to pesticide
Black Hat Biotech index


European Commission To Ban Heirloom Seeds and Criminalize Plants & Seeds Not Registered With Government


Having totally failed in their efforts to force European Union consumers to accept food containing Genetically Modified organism, the neo - Fascist leaders of the EU, the bureaucrats of Brussels are trying to use sneaky laws to prevent farmers using non GM seeds. A new plan to ban the cultivation of crops grown from heirloom (i.e. not been fucked up by scientists) seeds is adding th the wave of anti - EU, anti - American and anti - Corporate feeling sweeping Europe. When we examine the track record of the corporations involved in genetically modified seed technology, Monsanto, Du Pont, Dow chemicals, Merck, Syngenta and others, they have longer rap sheets than members of Al Capone's gang in ninteen twenties Chicago.

RELATED POSTS:
Back to Contents table
Black Hat Biotech index Latest Posts

Elsewhere: [Boggart Blog]...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]...[Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [Boggart Abroad]



the daily stirrer

New Book Exposes GMO Corporate Fraud


by Xavier Connolly, 10 March 2015

gmo food not safe say scientists


We have dropped off the pace somewhat in our coverage of the public debate on the safety of Genetically Modified crops (GMOs) so let me express our apologies for that to the increasing numbers of people who look to alternative media for news of what is really going on in the world, rather than relying on the political / corporate propaganda pumped out by broadcast and print news. The government of the USA with a corporate office boy in The White House has been pushing ahead with its efforts to ensure there is no food product produced by planting seeds on the shelves of any shop unless it has been grown from Genetically Modified seeds.

Several US states, in response to public pressure, have tried to introduce laws requiring foods producers to clearly label foods that contain produce from GM seed. These states are now invoved in legal battles with the Obama administration whose devotion to the money donated by biotech corporations they have granted the producers immunity from prosecution when it is finally proved in a court of law that their GM crops harm people and the environment.

We will catch up on those stories and the other main issues that have come up while The Daily Stirrer has been focused on the corrupt and anti - democratic trade deals, TTIP, TPP and TISA.

A big event in the battle to keep the food we eat natural, healthy and affordable for the poorest families this month was the publication in London of a new book by American public interest attorney Steven Druker. The text reveals how the U.S. government and leading scientific institutions have systematically suppressed misrepresented the facts about GMOs and the scientific research that casts doubt on their safety.

It should surprise nobody that the big players in the biotech industry, the corporate businesses that make $$$billions from putting the very dodgy produce of genetically modified seeds, names like Monsanto, Dow, DuPont and other big players with very bad track records on ethical issues are major contributors to US political campaigns, supporting both Democrats and Republicans in order to ensure they have influence no matter who is in power.

The book, titled Altered Genes, Twisted Truth, has a foreword written by the highly respected biologist Dame Jane Goodall, hailing it as “without doubt one of the most important books of the last 50 years.”

The book is published at a time when some European countries are considering allowing commercial adoption of GM crops following the European Parliament’s decision to allow member states to opt out of the blockade that has barred them from the E.U. until now. Concurrently with this there is a political battle between the establishment and grass roots opinion over the trade treaties mentioned above that, if adopted, would allow global corporations to overturn the laws of sovereign nations if they felt those laws impacted their ability to steal taxpayers money maximise profits.

Based on the collected evidence cited in the book, Druker and Goodall insist it would be foolish to impose on consumers a technology that independent research has shown to be unacceptably risky and which should never have been approved for human consumption or agricultural use.

Druker has invested more than 15 years of intensive research and investigation in the project, after having gained public recognition for initiating a lawsuit against the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that forced it to divulge its files on GM foods. Those files revealed that GM foods first achieved commercialization in 1992 only because the US Food And Drug Administration, (FDA):

• Covered up the extensive warnings of its own scientists about their dangers.

• Lied about the facts.

• And then violated federal food safety law by permitting these foods to be marketed without having been proven safe through standard testing.

The book points out that if the FDA had heeded its own experts’ advice and publicly acknowledged their warnings that GM foods entailed higher risks than their conventional counterparts, the GM food venture would have imploded and never gained traction anywhere.

It also reveals:

• Many well-placed scientists have repeatedly issued misleading statements about GM foods, and so have leading scientific institutions such as the US National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the UK’s Royal Society.

• Consequently, most people are unaware of the risks these foods entail and the manifold problems they have caused.

• Contrary to the claims of biotech advocates, humans have indeed been harmed by consuming the output of genetic engineering. In fact, the technology’s first ingestible product (a food supplement of the essential amino acid, L-tryptophan) caused dozens of deaths and seriously sickened thousands of people (permanently disabling many of them). Moreover, the evidence points to the genetic alteration as the most likely cause of the unusual contamination that rendered the supplement toxic.

• Laboratory animals have also suffered from eating products of genetic engineering, and well-conducted tests with GM crops have yielded many troubling results, including intestinal abnormalities, liver disturbances, and impaired immune systems.

• Numerous scientists (including those on the FDA’s Biotechnology Task Force) have concluded that the process of creating genetically modified food radically differs from conventional breeding and entails greater risk.

• There has never been a consensus within the scientific community that GM foods are safe, and many eminent experts have issued cautions – as have respected scientific organizations such as the Royal Society of Canada and the Public Health Association of Australia.

Druker says: "Contrary to the assertions of its proponents, the massive enterprise to reconfigure the genetic core of the world’s food supply is not based on sound science but on the systematic subversion of science – and it would collapse if subjected to an open airing of the facts."

Openness is not a quality that is considered virtuous by corporations like Monsanto however, in fact, as the search results produced when I binged Monsanto Whistleblower reveal, the biggest player in the GM seeds business is not keen on facts, truth or publishing the unaltered results of its own research.

In her foreword, Goodall commends the book for countering the disinformation and providing much-needed clarity. She states:

"I shall urge everyone I know who cares about life on earth, and the future of their children, and children’s children, to read it. It will go a long way toward dispelling the confusion and delusion that has been created regarding the genetic engineering process and the foods it produces. . . . Steven Druker is a hero. He deserves at least a Nobel Prize." That's pretty unequivocal then, and a host of other scientists who receive no funding from Monsanto or any other biotech industry source have expressed similar doubts, as you will see from perusing other posts on this omnibus page and our links to posts on GM biotech.

Pat Thomas, Director of U.K. campaigning group Beyond GM, says: "Under pressure from new legislation and the ongoing TTIP negotiations, the UK and the rest of Europe are on the precipice of making sweeping changes to their historical stance on GMOs. Much of our regulatory framework has been informed by foundations laid down in America in the early 1990s, and the belief that they got it right in terms of understanding the science of genetic modification. Steven Druker’s investigation into the history of fraud and deceit that ushered in the era of GMOs deserves serious consideration before we take actions that will irreversibly alter the European food supply."

RELATED POSTS:
Back to Contents table
Corporate bullying behind spread of GMO seeds
GM crops will never be safe says geneticist
GM food crops are a vast, uncontrolled experiment on the entire human race
The science scandal that has led to GM food on our tables
If there's a danger from GM crops they said, show us the evidence. Here it is
Widespread use og GM seed led to agricultural crisis in Argentina
The scientific fraud behind GM seed
GM science: Playing God in the garden
GM crops produce higher profits but not higher yield - they will not feed the world TISA - If you Hated Undemocratic TTIP You'll Loathe This
Bill Gates Foundation Giving Millions to Top University In Order To Influence GMO “Debate” - It Must Be Dodgy
UN Report Says Small-Scale Organic Farming Only Way To Feed The World
Black Hat Biotech index Latest Posts

Elsewhere: [Boggart Blog]...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]...[Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [Boggart Abroad]



the daily stirrer

To Feed The World In A Grain Of Golden Rice, The Controversy Of GMO Foods


posted by Arthur Foxake

One of the onging controversies we have posted on many times and will no doubt return to many more is the subject of Genetically Modified food crops. With consumers in the deeloped world having voted with their wallets and thwarted the corporate biotech firms ambition to replace all the natural foods we eat with Genetically Modified alternatives (thus putting control of the world's food supply in the hands of a few global corporations that have in common, amongst other things, very dubious records on ethical issues.

With their business plans in tatters and their GM products languishing unwanted on shop shelves, the chances of Big Biotech and Big Ag corporations revovering the billions they had invested looked bleak. Then came a scientific breakthrough, not in the field of genetics or biology, but in the science of public relations. Thus Golden Rice, an expensive and inefficient solution to a malnutrition peoblem in South East Asia for which there are many cheap and efficient solutions became the darling of globalists.

Read more in the embedded article:

RELATED POSTS: GM Golden Rice Con
If GM crops arehttp://www.greenteethmm.com a risk, show us the evidence, they said. Here it is
GMcrops will not feed the world
GM organisms in food are an uncontrolled experiment being carried out on humanity
Health crisis in Argentina linked to use of GM crops
Geneticist says GM crops will never be safe for large scale human consumption
GM crops being rejected by farmers
Elsewhere: [ The Original Boggart Blog] ... [ Daily Stirre.shtml ] ...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]... [ Ian's Authorsden Pages ]... [Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [ Boggart Abroad] ... [ Grenteeth Bites ] ... [ a http://www.greenteethmm.com/latestposts [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] ... [] ... [ Tumblr ] ... [Ian at Minds ] ... [ Authorsden blog ] ... [Daily Stirrer News Aggregator]