Cutting Through the Hell of the Medical-Industrial Complex
Her rapists shattered her trust. Now her school is doing the same thing.
An unnamed student at the University of Oregon was brutally gang raped by three basketball players last year. The school ultimately expelled the three criminals — but waited months before taking action, did not pursue a court case, and had even recruited one of them despite knowing he had a record of sexual assault. It gets worse.
The sexual-assault survivor is suing the university — and the school is using her private therapy records from their campus health clinic against her in court.
Even in an era of gridlock, protecting sexual assault survivors' security and trust is a no-brainer. Sign the petition to Congress today and demand that private therapy records be kept private!
The school can get away with violating their students' privacy because of a loophole in FERPA — the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. But legal or not, patients expect confidentiality when they go to counseling, or the counseling won't work. This is especially true for sexual assault survivors whose security and trust has already been shattered once.
Even if it's legal, what the University of Oregon is doing is shocking, cruel, and flat-out wrong. As Kelsey Jones, another student from the school's Organization Against Sexual Assault, told NPR, "It's ten times harder now to seek help and feel safe, and feel OK to share 100 percent of what you're feeling."
Our friends at UltraViolet and Daily Kos have taken the lead on this issue. Let's add our voices and send Congress 50,000 Care2 names demanding action!
Be kind to each other,
|
|
A recent 60 Minutes exposé revealed that one of the country's
largest flooring retailers appears to be selling laminate with levels of
toxic formaldehyde that exceed California health standards. Sign the petition and tell Lumber Liquidators to
stop selling any unsafe Chinese laminate immediately, and
pay to remove and replace the flooring for those who unsuspectingly bought their products containing this toxic chemical.
According to Global Community Monitor, Lumber
Liquidators' Chinese laminate that the group tested can emit on average
over 6 times the legally allowed level of formaldehyde under
California Air Resource Board regulations.
Formaldehyde can cause cancer at high levels of exposure, and
cause chronic respiratory irritation and trigger asthma at lower levels.
Additional 60 Minutes reporting showed that Lumber
Liquidators' Chinese factories were well aware of the elevated
formaldehyde levels, yet may have knowingly and illegally labeled
their products as CARB (California Air Resources Board) Phase 2
compliant.
In response to 60 Minutes’ reporting, and Global Community Monitor’s testing, Lumber Liquidators is offering to send
home formaldehyde monitoring kits to customers who request them, which is inadequate and
ignores the fact that they have sold products which fail to meet CARB health and safety standards.
Thanks for taking action!
|
By now you probably already know that hormone-like compounds hidden in plastic products like water bottles may be bad for your health. In fact, these compounds like BPA, PCBs, and phthalates... have been linked with everything from autism to cancer...HealthProductReviews:
Researchers, from the Department of Waste Management at Dresden University of Technology in Germany, tested toilet paper...
Shockingly, they found that all but one of the hormone pretenders was in the toilet paper... and at very high concentrations.
| Ashley A. The Care2 Petitions Team |
|
Chris B. The Care2 Petitions Team |
GMO SCIENCE – STUDIES & RESEARCH
This compilation is a sample of the scientific references including over 2000 studies, surveys, and analyses that suggest various adverse impacts and potential adverse impacts of genetically engineered (GE/GMO) crops, foods and related pesticides. This list contains references regarding health impacts, environmental impacts, including impact of non-target organisms (NTOs), resistance of target organisms, pesticide drift, genetic contamination, horizontal gene transfer, unintended effects, as well as references regarding yields, social impact, ethics, economics and regulations. In most cases, links are provided to the abstracts for the references or links to sites where the study can be purchased.LANDMARK TEST LINKS TOXIC INSECTICIDE DUST TO BEE HIVE DAMAGE
GMO “science” smacks of “tobacco science”http://drleonardcoldwell.com/tag/protest-gmo?print=pdf-page
All the scientists pushing GMOs today almost perfectly resemble the sellout doctors, scientists and medical authorities who recommend cigarettes three generations ago.
There was a time when Big Tobacco ruled the realm of “science” and even ran full-page advertisements in the Journal of the American Medical Association claiming, “More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette!” ( Click here to see the ad for yourself .)
The mantra of the day was that cigarettes had, “no evidence of harm.” This is the exact same false rationalization currently used with GMOs. Of course, the only reason there is “no evidence of harm” is because any scientists who happen to document evidence of harm are immediately railroaded, censored and threatened for daring to conduct real science. Any scientific work that manages to get published showing health risks of GMOs is quickly retracted after journal editors are threatened and intimidated by biotech operatives. (Yes, the biotech industry routinely uses mafia-style tactics to censor the truth about GMOs . )
GMOs have never been tested for long-term safety in humans, so any claim of “no evidence of harm” is obviously ludicrous. A person could say the same thing immediately after leaping off a cliff. “Hey, there’s no evidence of harm!” And there isn’t until you hit the ground, at which point it’s too late to stop the damage.
The biotech industry uses "tobacco science" to claim product safety.http://responsibletechnology.org/10-Reasons-to-Avoid-GMOs
Biotech companies like Monsanto told us that Agent Orange, PCBs, and DDT were safe. They are now using the same type of superficial, rigged research to try and convince us that GMOs are safe. Independent scientists, however, have caught the spin-masters red-handed, demonstrating without doubt how industry-funded research is designed to avoid finding problems, and how adverse findings are distorted or denied.
Independent research and reporting is attacked and suppressed.
Scientists who discover problems with GMOs have been attacked, gagged, fired, threatened, and denied funding. The journal Nature acknowledged that a "large block of scientists . . . denigrate research by other legitimate scientists in a knee-jerk, partisan, emotional way that is not helpful in advancing knowledge." Attempts by media to expose problems are also often censored.
Agent Orange contaminated more than 3 million civilians and servicemen, and an estimated 500,000 Vietnamese children have been born with deformities attributed to Agent Orange, leading to calls for Monsanto to be prosecuted for war crimes. No compensation has been paid to Vietnamese civilians and though some compensation was paid to U.S. veterans, according to William Sanjour, who led the Toxic Waste division of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “thousands of veterans were disallowed benefits” because “Monsanto studies showed that dioxin [as found in Agent Orange] was not a human carcinogen.” An EPA colleague discovered that Monsanto had apparently falsified the data in their studies. Sanjour says, “If [the studies] were done correctly, they would have reached just the opposite result.”http://www.gmwatch.org/gm-firms/10595-monsanto-a-history
By the 1980s Monsanto was being hit by a series of lawsuits. It was one of the companies named in 1987 in an $180 million settlement for Vietnam War veterans exposed to Agent Orange. In 1991 Monsanto was fined $1.2 million for trying to conceal the discharge of contaminated waste water. In 1995 Monsanto was ordered to pay $41.1 million to a waste management company in Texas due to concerns over hazardous waste dumping. That same year Monsanto was ranked fifth among U.S. corporations in EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory, having discharged 37 million pounds of toxic chemicals into the air, land, water and underground. In 1997 The Seattle Times reported that Monsanto sold 6,000 tons of contaminated waste to Idaho fertilizer companies, which contained the carcinogenic heavy metal cadmium.
Then in 2002 the Washington Post ran an article entitled, “Monsanto Hid Decades Of Pollution, PCBs Drenched Ala. Town, But No One Was Ever Told”. Monsanto began production of polychlorinated biphenyls in the United States in 1929. PCBs were considered an industrial wonder chemical – an oil that would not burn, was impervious to degradation and had almost limitless applications. Today PCBs are considered one of the gravest chemical threats on the planet.
What Skeptics are Saying
Like the other studies listed here, Surov’s met a storm of criticism—sometimes even rightfully so.
In reference to another GM study, Mark Tester, a research professor at the Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics at the University of Adelaide asks, “If the effects are as big as purported, and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren’t the North Americans dropping like flies? GM has been in the food chain for over a decade over there—and longevity continues to increase inexorably.”
Sadly, North Americans are dropping like flies. Well, sort of. Genetically modified foods and related technology, like Monsanto’s Roundup, are quite often linked to significant organ disruption, sterility, impotence, and even obesity, one of the American public’s weightiest topics. While the contributors to those conditions, even in animal studies, can hardly be attributed to GMOs alone, they should not so eagerly be cast out of consideration.
In fact, Surov himself warns against jumping to conclusions. “It is quite possible that the GMO does not cause these effects by itself,” but may also be influenced by the herbicide Roundup (found in greater levels in Roundup Ready GM crops).
To be fair, many critics of these studies have reasonable points. There are factors in Surov’s and others’ studies worth scrutinizing, such as the breed and strain of animal used. King’s College London’s head of nutritional sciences research division, Tom Sanders, notes that Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen—in a French study that found rats fed Roundup-doused GMOs or given water contaminated with Roundup died earlier than those on other diets—didn’t provide data on how much the rats were fed. “This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumors particularly when food intake is not restricted.” Moreover, David Spiegelalter of the University of Cambridge criticized Seralini’s control arm of the study, in which most subjects also developed tumors.
But even with the criticism, it doesn’t change the fact that GMOs are simply not proven safe by any means, and are being approved for human consumption prematurely.
Both Parties Guilty of Bad Science
Statistics can be turned and science performed badly, but this sword has two edges. The very scholars, researchers, and scientists accusing Seralini, Surov, and Ermakova of bad science are often guilty of advocating the widespread cultivation and consumption of genetically modified material after nodding at or performing themselves 90-day trials, assuming that the absence of side effects in what isn’t even a generation for a rat is evidence of safety in lifetime consumption by humans. Many, no doubt, are patted on the back for speaking against anti-GM movements by Big Agriculture and even the US government, repeated found deep in bed with industry.
It’s not like Big Ag and the government are making it easy to believe them when they say GMOs are safe to eat. Here are just a few examples of their sketchy past.
- Monsanto bought out a research firm that pointed its finger at herbicides in colony collapse.
- Processed food manufacturers and GMO firms contributed millions of dollars against GMO food labeling in Proposition 37, and were helped out by the Food and Drug Administration…
In Ermakova’s case, mysterious hands burned paper on her desk and stole samples from her laboratory; her boss, under pressure from his superior, told her to stop researching GMOs. Patents on GMOs and contracts forced upon farmers make it even more difficult to perform studies unless paid for by Big Ag itself.
- Which makes sense because, once-VP and lawyer of Monsanto is the chief commissioner of foods at the FDA. He was also a US Department of Agriculture commissioner.
“We have no right to use GMOs until we understand the possible adverse effects, not only to ourselves but to future generations as well,” says Surov. “We definitely need fully detailed studies to clarify this. Any type of contamination has to be tested before we consume it, and GMO is just one of them.”
GMO SCIENCE – STUDIES & RESEARCH
This compilation is a sample of the scientific references including over 2000 studies, surveys, and analyses that suggest various adverse impacts and potential adverse impacts of genetically engineered (GE/GMO) crops, foods and related pesticides. This list contains references regarding health impacts, environmental impacts, including impact of non-target organisms (NTOs), resistance of target organisms, pesticide drift, genetic contamination, horizontal gene transfer, unintended effects, as well as references regarding yields, social impact, ethics, economics and regulations. In most cases, links are provided to the abstracts for the references or links to sites where the study can be purchased.The Institute of Science in Society:
Research and commercialization of genetically modified (GM) organisms exemplifies how science affects society. The adoption of GM crop cultivation has been widely studied and shown to impact both the health of people and the environment. Scientific publications, industry data, farmers and citizen reports provide toxicological, genetic, ecological, epidemiological evidence as well as witness statements relating to how the genetic engineering and artificial manipulation of life has far reaching consequences. Challenging a corporate coup of our food supply through thorough documentation and analysis of the evidence is necessary for survival of people and planet.
ISIS has been writing on these topics for well over a decade, and due to the very large number of reports we have attempted to categorize them.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) concluded in a study that GM foods contain pesticide residue has shown to produce human cellular endocrine disruptors measured at 1000 times below.http://www.occupycorporatism.com/home/harvard-study-proves-dangerous-gmos-humans/
Corroborating the NIH, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) found that “GM foods pose a serious health risk.”
Eight hundred scientists from the Institute of Science in Society (ISS) have come together from all across the globe to demand that Monsanto’s GM experiment end.
In an open letter “from world scientists to all governments concerning genetically modified organisms” it was expressed that “GM crops offer no benefits to farmers or consumers. Instead, many problems have been identified, including yield drag, increased herbicide use, erratic performance, and poor economic returns to farmers. GM crops also intensify corporate monopoly on food, which is driving family farmers to destitution, and preventing the essential shift to sustainable agriculture that can guarantee food security and health around the world.”
The letter states: “We urge the US Congress to reject GM crops as both hazardous and contrary to the interest of family farmers; and to support research and development of sustainable agricultural methods that can truly benefit family farmers all over the world. We, the undersigned scientists, call for the immediate suspension of all environmental releases of GM crops and products, both commercially and in open field trials, for at least 5 years; for patents on living processes, organisms, seeds, cell lines and genes to be revoked and banned; and for a comprehensive public inquiry into the future of agriculture and food security for all.”
The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) report, authored by more than 400 scientists and backed by 58 governments, stated that GM crop yields were "highly variable" and in some cases, "yields declined." The report noted, "Assessment of the technology lags behind its development, information is anecdotal and contradictory, and uncertainty about possible benefits and damage is unavoidable." They determined that the current GMOs have nothing to offer the goals of reducing hunger and poverty, improving nutrition, health and rural livelihoods, and facilitating social and environmental sustainability.
On the contrary, GMOs divert money and resources that would otherwise be spent on more safe, reliable, and appropriate technologies.http://responsibletechnology.org/10-Reasons-to-Avoid-GMOs
A veteran soil scientist wrote a letter to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack warning of what he says is a newly identified pathogen linked to the herbicide Roundup that might be implicated in livestock fertility problems, as well as diseased corn and soybean crops.http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2011/02/retired-profs-letter-raises-roundup-concerns/#.VQQmQ46YGiQ
Don Huber, plant pathologist and a professor emeritus from Purdue University, sent his letter (posted last Friday on the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance’s website) a week before Vilsack deregulated genetically modified alfalfa. The letter’s public release has generated renewed calls for the government to reverse course on the unrestricted cultivation of GM crops.
Huber coordinates the Emergent Diseases and Pathogens Committee of the American Phytopathological Society as part of the USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System. He has researched glyphosate, the active chemical in Roundup, for two decades and is a longtime critic of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crops that are genetically modified to make them resistant to the herbicide.
In his letter, Huber said the research findings were at an “early stage,” but wrote that this “electron microscopic pathogen appears to significantly impact the health of plants, animals, and probably human beings” and likely is connected to glyphosate.
GE Crops Contain Bacterial DNA That May Be Hazardous To Health
Summary For Laymen
All genetically eningeered crops contain bacterial DNA. This DNA contains a genetic element (the so called "CpG motif") that stimulates the immune system to start a sequence of reactions leading to inflammation. Exposure to these genetic elements may lead to promotion of inflammation, arthritis and lymphoma (a malignant blood disease).
Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that DNA is not broken down in the gastro-intestinal tract to the extent formerly believed. Ingested DNA sequences large enough to contain whole genes have remained intact and entered the blood and tissues. This means that eating GE foods may increase the risk of said disorders.
Professor Cummins concludes: "The available evidence is sufficient to support a moratorium on the massive intake of GM crops by human populations until the genetic consequences are resolved in the laboratory."
The Fate of Food Genes and the DNA CpG Motif and Its Impact
Toxicology Symposium, University of Guelph
March 3, 2001
Dr. Joe Cummins, Emeritus Professor of Genetics,
University of Western Ontario, CanadaIn evaluating the safety of genetically modified (GM) food crops it has previously been assumed that food is completely digested and the genes of the food organisms are not circulated to the cells of the predator. However, that assumption was not tested until quite recently and found to be deficient. Gene fragments from the food are circulated and sometimes integrated into the chromosomes of the predator. Similarly, the products of genes on the DNA of bacteria (principally proteins but sometimes RNA) governed how the bacterium interacted with the animal host.
However, it was recently discovered that the DNA sequence motifs serve as important signals that allow animals to recognize the genes of bacterial pathogens and turn on inflammation defenses. GM crops all contain bacterial DNA from the plasmids used in engineering their construction.
Today I will focus on the fate of genes in GM crops and their potential ability to alter and activate the immune system.http://www.saynotogmos.org/scientific_studies.htm
Here are actual cases of GMO’s harm to humans and livestock (that we eat):
1. There have been numerous cases where animals have died or became serious ill and were put down in order to avoid mass contamination or to calm down the panic that would have caused even more damage to the food industry. In Hesse, Germany many cows died suddenly when they were fed with Syngenta’s genetically engineered maize cow food and as a result of this incident the authorities in Germany decided to slaughter the rest of the cows to avoid having the mysterious disease to get out and contaminate other cattle houses. Syngenta did admit that the protein used for the cow food maize is also used for human genetically engineered foods. Oh dear, why has Syngenta now withdrawn this protein from human genetically engineered foods? Let’s ask FDA.
- Syngenta Charged for Covering up Livestock Deaths from GM Corn
- Doctors Warn: Avoid Genetically Modified Food
2. Why should you be concerned that cows eating GMO foods died and/or got contaminated with a mysterious disease? Because, if you eat meat or chicken that is contaminated as a result of a GMO with re-engineered DNA that is contaminated with a pathogen, then the DNA genes contaminate your cells and are also harmful to you. These DNA genes can be INSERTED into your own genes.
- Genetically Engineered Food Alters Our Digestive Systems
- Assessing Survival of Transgenic Plant DNA in the Human Gastrointestinal Tract
- DNA from GE foods can end up in your genes
3. Roundup Ready Soy was given to mother rats as food during a study and it was discovered that 53% of the babies born died within a couple of weeks, about 10 times worse than normal. The biochemical form and structure of rats are very similar to human which is why they are used so often for studies to protect humans against various diseases. So the study should be of a major concern to FDA and other authorities that are concerned with health impediments of GMO’s. What should be even more concerning to FDA is that the GMO soy beans given to these rats caused serious disturbances to the liver by changing the cellular function of the liver and the cell nucleus, which may cause serious changes to the way our body operates at the biological level. Who knows how far this may go – may be in a few years of nucleus changes, men will even get pregnant since some already are growing breasts due to consumption of hormones.
- Mother Rats Fed Genetically Modified Soy Led to 56% Mortality of Offspring
- Biological Effects of Transgenic Maize Fed Long Term to Mice
- Genetically Modified Soy Linked to Sterility, Infant Mortality
4. If you don’t eat beef or don’t much care about rats, then do you like lamb? When was the last time you had lamb kobabs or lamps cutlets? Nearly 2,000 sheep have died after grazing on GMO cotton crops and were found to have server toxicity and inflammation of intestines and the same toxin exists in GMO foods intended for future release to people, starting in Asia and Africa.
- Mortality in Sheep Flocks after Grazing on Bt Cotton FieldsWarangal District, Andhra Pradesh” Report of the Preliminary Assessment, April 2006
5. In United States gastrointestinal diseases (chronic and acute) have increased dramatically since mid 90s and this has been linked to GMO foods given to sheep. In Sweden, where no GMO foods are allowed for humans or cattle, there has been no change whatsoever. Scientists are still researching the inflammation causes to the intestine and the study will take another 2 years to complete, while GMO foods are still being given to sheep in US.
- Liver Damage Caused by GM Food
- How Genetically Modified Foods Lead to Inflammatory Bowel DiseaseThis post first appeared on the Seattle Organic Restaurants website.
6. In UK, GMO soy was put through a thorough test on a group of students at Sheffield University, half on GMO soy and the other on non-GMO soy and the research was conducted with all other parameters being equal, e.g. water consumption, diet size, environmental factors, etc. By the end of the research the GMO soy fed subjects were experiencing some allergies with 50% of them experiencing long term allergies – compared to no GMO soy fed subjects. 7. In laboratory tests, again and again, animals avoided GMO foods compared to non-GMO equivalent. Should we trust the instincts of animals that live based on their instincts? 8. Argentina has been one of the first countries to convert half of their arable land to GMO food production and are now the country with a major serious agricultural nightmare which has resulted in more than 20,000 farmers losing their land and livelihoods to superweeds that have destroyed the soil and is now a major agricultural crises in the world.
In India every 30 minutes, one farmer commits suicide because of devastating side effects of genetically modified organisms. 9. Scientists and Genetic Engineers themselves (if not coerced nor threatened with unemployment – or worse) tell us that GMO as used in crop development is not precise or predictable and has not been shown to be safe. The technique can result in the unexpected production of toxins or allergens in food that are unlikely to be spotted in current regulatory checks.
10. The scariest of them all – the authorities (FDA and others) as well as food corporations protest profusely to any kind of labeling of GMO foods. I don’t know about you, but that certainly concerns me that they would be so adamantly against labeling and so vehemently fighting against it – as if they have nothing better to do. Why are they so much against it? What is wrong with labeling or essentially saying, “… some foods are GMO and we (FDA) as well as our partners (Food Companies) don’t think there is anything wrong with them, but for the informed consumers’ choice and for fairness, we decided to include it in the labeling”. The fact that they assume that they know best and that they are the informed, logical, and trustworthy entity and us the people, who want labeling, are ignorant, fearful, and paranoid – tells me that they are hiding something. Why not be open and truthful and let people decide if they want GMO in their food or not? In a free country, should we not have the choice to eat GMO-free foods if we want?
Monsanto’s ‘biopesticide’ known as Bt is not only developing mutated insects and requiring excessive pesticide use, but new findings show that it is also killing human kidney cells — even in low doses. Amazingly, Monsanto’s superweed-breeding Roundup also has the same effect. Scientists have demonstrated in new research that the Bt pesticide, in addition to Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Roundup, exhibit direct toxicity to human cells. The findings add to the long list of hazardous effects presented by Monsanto’s genetically modified creations.
These dangerous Bt crops currently engulf 39% of globally cultivated GMO crops, and Monsanto does not seem to be slowing down on their campaign to expand usage. Led by Gilles-Eric Séralini, a French scientist from the University of Caen, Séralini and his team are no strangers to the toxic effects of both Bt and glyphosate — the main component used in Roundup. Previously, Séralini and a group of other scientists found that Roundup is linked to infertility, killing testicular cells in rats. The report stated that within 1 to 48 hours of exposure, testicular cells of the mature rats were either damaged or killed.
At only 100 parts per million (ppm), Monsanto’s biopesticide lead to cell death. Furthermore, they found that Roundup at 57.2ppm killed half of the cell population – 200 times below agricultural use. This is concerning as researchers have previously detected Roundup in 41% of the 140 groundwater samples taken from Catalonia Spain that were actually above the limit of quantification. Even in very small doses, the research indicates that Roundup appears to be assaulting your biology.
What you ingest can't change your DNA?
http://metro.co.uk/2012/09/21/feeding-your-dna-does-your-diet-affect-your-genes-581760/
I found a slew of claims otherwise. I picked this one as it's completely unrelated to the GMO controversy. And, there's been a lot of claims made over the years that the amount of corn consumed is so high (it's used in much of the processed food as a filler, and sweetener) that it's detectable in the DNA. Again, unrelated to the GMO controversy.
So, I was thinking about something I vaguely remembered about cancer. And sure enough:
http://www.cancerquest.org/mutation-and-cancer.htmlgrowth
"For almost all types of cancer studied to date, it seems as if the transition from a normal, healthy cell to a cancer cell is step-wise progression that requires genetic changes in several different oncogenes and tumor suppressors. This is one reason why cancer is much more prevalent in older individuals"
And, we've been advised that the ingestion of tobacco products, through smoking or chewing causes cancer. Were we lied to?
So, I'm thinking Myles claim here is bullshit. Look, I don't know if GMO's are harmful or not. But, I'm seeing so much hand waving dismissal of studies that just keep popping up, and don't appear to be agenda driven, wrists must be getting strained. And, the advisers for all the countries that have issues with GMO's? Well, they're all silly bastards that buy in to conspiracy theories. Right.
Of course we can poison the well by attacking the fringe elements. That's easy. The problem is, people are biased. On both sides of this issue. Confirmation bias is in play, and working overtime. It appears we're getting some major spin.
...
WTF did i just watch? hahahah, who is this Myles Power kid? "I FOUND OUT A MAJOR CONSPIRACY! IN HER WEB SITE IT SAYS! "Not intended to diagnose, prescribe for, treat or claim to cure, or prevent disease conditions" is he for real? is he aware of basic law? the FDA requires ANY "alternative" medical practices to type write this down or else they would be taken to courts.
what a shame, i actually thought i would see something valuable, but then again, it comes from pseudo-intellectuals that think that GMO's are good for you.
i wonder if there is any GMO pusher that can go POINT BY POINT the whole movie seeds of death and prove that its all wrong, so far he shown 5 minutes of the movie he found "inaccurate" to his taste, 95% accurate documentary is pretty good.
funny the same people pushing GMO's now (after being brainwashed by idiots like this Mylis kid) said that sodium fluoride is also healthy, now that the whole world know that ALL there BILLION of dollars of laboratories and ACADEMIC GENIUSES were wrong and the "kooks" were right all along with spot on accurate science, they are removing it from the water supply around the world, here in Israel the head scientist who was responsible to the water fluoridation openly apologized and said "we were wrong all along", you know what this means? THEY WERE POISONING PEOPLE FOR YEARS!.
hem, no one cares, lets put spider genes into a water melon so it would be silky smooth from within, this is a good idea.
this is after THE SAME stupid campaigns, same stupid fake corporate "proves" same stupid paid puppets that push this poison, same shit same shitty dumb-asses different subject, when will they learn? its fucking hilarious.
and i cant go beyond the
"I FOUND OUT A MAJOR CONSPIRACY! IN HER WEB SITE IT SAYS! Not intended to diagnose, prescribe for, treat or claim to cure, or prevent disease conditions"
this is too funny :D i wont take his advise on the weather let alone on his opinions on such subjects as nutrition and genetic mutated chimeras as foods or medicine.
...
With all this debunking, I'm curious to know- if GMOs and vaccines, and modern medicine are so awesome, what the F*** is causing all these G** D***ed immune disorders, cancers, & autism in your opinion. Or is your "science" only good for "proving" things DON'T exist? I like some-to-a-lot of the points you make in your videos, but then you lose me by your lack of acknowledging of the issues that remain. And making fun of a rap doesn't debunk. It (rapping) may be a tacky gimmick for attention to otherwise important information, but it doesn't disqualify that info. Unless you are running a popularity site and not a debunking one.
...
There is absolutely NO reason to genetically modify food or anything EVER!. All the lies being told to you are from all the people connected to Monsanto or who actually want people to be killed off. THERE ISN'T ANYONE WHO WORKS AT MONSANTO OR IN THE WHITE HOUSE WHO EATS GMOS. IF GMOS ARE SO SAFE, WHY ISN'T THE PRESIDENT AND HIS FAMILY EATING THEM? BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY ARE POISON. Michelle Obama made a big deal about the fact that they have an organic garden to supply food for themselves. The evidence that GMOs are poison is everywhere. Ask any farmer who raises animals on GMO feed what happens to them after consuming the feed. They get miscarriages, birth defects, cancer, all kinds of reproductive damage and then they die. All the cows and pigs that have been dying in recent years is because of GMOs. All the bees dying is because of GMOs. I know for a fact that GMOs make people sick. I was constantly throwing up and feeling sick all the time and didn't know why. Then after I found out about GMOs and switched to an organic/non GMO diet, I stopped throwing and feeling sick. It was immediate too. Within 1 month of switching to non GMO food, I lost 15 lbs. GMOs are poison! GMOs were created to control the entire world's food supply and to kill off 90% of the population, but especially those people in Africa, India and Hispanic countries. No one should be allowed to patent a living organism.
37 Million Bees Found Dead In Ontario, Canada After Planting Large GMO Corn Field
