Find Articles using keywords

6108+ evidence-based Articles & Reports

Blog Teaser Image Post date
31
[+]

Connecting the Dots: GMOs and Vaccines

What do GMOs and vaccines have in common? You may be surprised to learn how many overlapping issues they share, and why both technologies should be scrutinized far more closely.
I've never been very politically minded. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I've never been arrested and I don't like to get in trouble. I do like, and always have, to think for myself. I'm a natural skeptic and pragmatist. These days, there are a couple of issues that are getting under my skin, and connecting the dots between them helps to establish a framework for a truth in science "sniff-test". Be warned, you may find that many arenas in which you have come to believe that you were being protected by your authority figures and government, in fact, you've been led down a blind path, and will be left there to fend for yourself when it all goes down. That's why I advocate for consumer empowerment and thoughtful decision-making about what we put in our bodies. Humans suffer from hubris – we think we know better than nature, can fix it, manipulate it, and master it. There are (at least) two major transgressions that follow similar patterns, raise important red flags, and most certainly do not pass the sniff test: GMOs (genetically modified "foods") and vaccination.  Here's what they have in common: War with Nature Nature has a sense to it, cultivated over billions of years of evolution. The complexity of botanical systems, the relationship to pests, soil, and the elements sustains optimal diversity and reproduction. It was only when we began to industrialize the process, hijack growth with an eye toward yield, and allow chemical companies to attempt to regulate variables of...
11-12 2013
32
[+]

Can the Scientific Reputation of Pamela Ronald, Public Face of GMOs, Be Salvaged?

Professor Pamela Ronald is probably the scientist most widely known for publicly defending genetically engineered (GE or GMO) crops, but several of her papers have recently been retracted. What's going on?
Image credit: Wikicommons Originally published on Independent Science News Professor Pamela Ronald is probably the scientist most widely known for publicly defending genetically engineered (GE or GMO) crops. Her media persona, familiar to readers of the Boston Globe, the Wall Street Journal, the Economist, NPR, and many other global media outlets, is to take no prisoners. After New York Times chief food writer Mark Bittman advocated GMO labelling, she called him "a scourge on science" who "couches his nutty views in reasonable-sounding verbiage". His opinions were "almost fact- and science-free" continued Ronald. In 2011 she claimed in an interview with the US Ambassador to New Zealand: "After 14 years of cultivation and a cumulative total of two billion acres planted, GE crops have not caused a single instance of harm to human health or the environment." This second career of Pamela Ronald's, as advocate of GMOs (which also includes being a book author, and contributor to and board member of the blog Biofortified) is founded on her first career: at the University of California in Davis she is Professor in the Department of Plant Pathology, Director of the Laboratory for Crop Genetics Innovation, and Director of Grass Genetics at the Joint BioEnergy Institute, among other positions. This background is relevant because Pamela Ronald is now also fighting on her home front. Her scientific research has become the central question in a controversy that may destroy both careers....
11-12 2013
33
[+]

News Release: GMOs Linked to Exploding Gluten Sensitivity Epidemic (FREE PDF)

The Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT) released a report today proposing a link between genetically modified (GM) foods and gluten-related disorders. In today’s report, a team of experts suggests that GM foods may be an important environmental trigger for gluten sensitivity, which is estimated to affect as many as 18 million Americans.
Download Report Now GMOs Linked to Gluten-Related Disorders Do you or a loved one suffer from gluten sensitivity? You may be wondering why you react to gluten now even though you never did in the past. You may be wondering why a gluten-free diet has helped, but has not completely resolved your symptoms. If you are on a quest to find all of the pieces to the gluten puzzle, the following information is for you. In a report released today by the Institute for Responsible Technology, a team of experts proposes a possible link between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and gluten-related disorders. The analysis is based on Dept. of Agriculture data, Environmental Protection Act records, medical journal reviews, and international research. The full 24-page report, a press release, and a recorded interview can all be found at glutenandgmos.com. An article summarizing the findings of this report is presented below: Can Genetically Engineered Foods Trigger Gluten Sensitivity? Gluten sensitivity is currently estimated to affect as many as 18 million Americans. 1 Reactions to gluten, a protein found in wheat, rye, and barley, are becoming increasingly common. Gluten sensitivity can range in severity from mild discomfort, such as gas and bloating, to celiac disease, a serious autoimmune condition that can, if undiagnosed, result in a 4-fold increase in death. 2 Genetics alone cannot explain the rapid rise in gluten-related disorders, and experts believe that there must be an...
11-25 2013
34
[+]

Journal Retraction of Séralini GMO-Cancer Study Is Illicit, Unscientific, and Unethical

GMWatch believes the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology's retraction of Prof Séralini’s paper to be illicit, unscientific, and unethical. It violates the guidelines for retractions in scientific publishing set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE),[2] of which FCT is a member.[3]
Editor's decision violates scientific publication ethics.   Statement by GMWatch Contact: Claire Robinson, [email protected]; +44 (0)752 753 6923 Embargoed until 9:30 hrs GMT, Thursday 28 November 2013 The editor of the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT), Dr A. Wallace Hayes, has decided to retract the study by the team of Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini, which found that rats fed a Monsanto genetically modified (GM) maize NK603 and tiny amounts of the Roundup herbicide it is grown with suffered severe toxic effects, including kidney and liver damage and increased rates of tumours and mortality.[1] GMWatch believes FCT's retraction of Prof Séralini's paper to be illicit, unscientific, and unethical. It violates the guidelines for retractions in scientific publishing set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE),[2] of which FCT is a member.[3]  COPE guidelines state that the only grounds for a journal to retract a paper are: Clear evidence that the findings are unreliable due to misconduct (eg data fabrication) or honest error Plagiarism or redundant publication Unethical research. Prof Séralini's paper does not meet any of these criteria and Hayes admits as much. In his letter informing Prof Séralini of his decision [link here], Hayes concedes that an examination of Prof Séralini's raw data showed "no evidence of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of the data" and nothing "incorrect" about the data. Hayes states that the...
11-30 2013
35
[+]

Hawaii's GMO Ban Is Now Official! Mayor Kenoi Signs Bill 113

Mayor Billy Kenoi signed Bill 113 into law on Thursday, Dec. 6th, prohibiting biotech companies from operating on the Big Island and banning farmers from growing any new genetically altered crops.
Share this image on Facebook here. Mayor Billy Kenoi signed Bill 113 on December 5, 2013. Below is the message he sent to the Hawai'i County Council: Aloha, Chair Yoshimoto and Members: On Nov. 19, 2013 the Hawai'i County Council adopted Bill 113 Draft 3 adding a new article relating to Genetically Engineered Crops and Plants, and on Nov. 21, 2013 delivered the bill to me for my consideration. After careful deliberation and discussions with members of my administration and the public, I am signing Bill 113. Our community has a deep connection and respect for our land, and we all understand we must protect our island and preserve our precious natural resources. We are determined to do what is right for the land because this place is unlike any other in the world. With this new ordinance we are conveying that instead of global agribusiness corporations, we want to encourage and support community-based farming and ranching. The debate over this bill has at times been divisive and hurtful, and some of our hard-working farmers who produce food for our community have been treated disrespectfully. We are determined to protect every farmer and rancher. Agriculture on Hawai'i Island will continue to grow with county assistance, investment and support. That commitment includes initiatives such as the public-private partnership to improve and expand the Pa'auilo Slaughterhouse to support our grass-fed beef industry, and the launch of the Kapulena Agricultural Park, the largest...
12-06 2013
36
[+]

105 Scientists Slam GMO-Rat-Study Retraction

What kind of hornet’s nest was opened up for the GM industry in view of the retraction of the two year "Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize", by G E Séralini et al, published in Food and Chemical Toxicology 2012, 50(11), 4221-31? According to the article published December 5, 2013 in the Ecologist, This arbitrary, groundless retraction of a published, thoroughly peer-reviewed paper is without precedent in the history of scientific publishing, and raises grave concerns over the integrity and impartiality of science. These concerns are heightened by a sequence of events surrounding the retraction: the appointment of ex-Monsanto employee Richard Goodman to the newly created post of associate editor for biotechnology at FCT  the retraction of another study finding potentially harmful effects from GMOs (which almost immediately appeared in another journal)  the failure to retract a paper published by Monsanto scientists in the same journal in 2004, for which a gross error has been identified. [1] The first bulleted item apparently speaks volumes as to Monsanto’s tactics in gaining corporate-style control over many segments of society, commerce, and government. Shouldn’t someone question the revolving door policy Monsanto’s former chief lobbyist Michael Taylor [2] has enjoyed at federal agencies, and now as FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods? Can that be why we have FDA-mandated “No GMO...
12-08 2013
37
[+]

BREAKING NEWS: GMO 'Suicide Seeds' On Edge of Approval in Brazil

After promising on World Food Day (October 16) to block legislation that would legalize the planting of Terminator seeds in Brazil, the country’s Judicial Commission is set to approve suicide seeds as a Christmas gift to Monsanto, DuPont and Syngenta.
News Release 10 December 2013 ETC Group  After promising on World Food Day (October 16) to block legislation that would legalize the planting of Terminator seeds in Brazil, the country's Judicial Commission is set to approve suicide seeds as a Christmas gift to Monsanto, DuPont and Syngenta. Intense internal and external pressure in mid-October forced the Brazilian Congress to pull back from adopting pro-Terminator legislation, and the Judicial Commission's Chair pledged never to allow legislation while at his post. Now, the same chair will entertain a motion Wednesday to accept Terminator seeds, making Brazil the first country in the world to defy a 13-year-old UN moratorium on the use of the technology. "If the Commission passes the bill this week," says Centro Ecológico's Maria José Guazzelli, "the Congress could make it law after it reconvenes in February. While most of Brazil is celebrating a Christmas birth, the seed multinationals will be celebrating the death of the 10,000-year right of farmers to save seeds." If the bill is passed this week (the Judicial Commission meets Wednesday and Thursday), ETC Group expects the Brazilian government to take a series of incremental steps that will orchestrate the collapse of the 193-country consensus moratorium when the UN Convention on Biological Diversity meets for its biennial conference in Korea in October 2014: First, the government will announce that adoption by the Judicial Commission...
12-10 2013
38
[+]

Fakethrough! GMOs and the Capitulation of Science Journalism

If the purpose of the press is to be a public interest watchdog then the science media is a uniquely unsuccessful institution. This is nowhere truer than in its coverage of the ag-biotech industry.
Republished with permission from Independence Science News Good journalism examines its sources critically, it takes nothing at face value, places its topics in a historical context, and it values above all the public interest. Such journalism is, most people agree, essential to any equitable and open system of government. These statements about journalism are especially applicable to the science media. But while the media in general has recently taken much criticism, for trivialising news and other flaws, the science media has somehow escaped serious attention. This is unfortunate because no country in the world has a healthy science media. This is science journalism? According to the New York Times genetically engineered Xa21 rice was big news (Song et al 1995). In a 1995 article titled "Genetic Engineering Creates Rice Resistant to Destructive Blight", journalist Sandra Blakeslee wrote it was: "the first time that a disease-resistance gene has been put into rice" Yet another biotech breakthrough? Blakeslee then quoted a senior figure, Gary Toenissen, deputy director of agricultural sciences at the Rockefeller Institute in New York, as saying it heralded "a new era in plant genetics and resistance breeding". But eighteen years after that artice was written, the failure of these predictions is clear. No commercial GMO rice of any kind exists, nor has Xa21 or any similar gene for disease resistance been developed for commercial purposes. Neither was the research as...
01-07 2014
39
[+]

Roundup Accumulates in GMO Food, Proving Its Lack of Safety

The widely held claim that GMO food is as safe as traditional food has been disproved by a new study showing that Roundup accumulates in genetically modified plants and not conventional and organic ones.
An important new manuscript accepted for publication in the journal Food Chemistry disproves the widely held notion that GMO crops are 'substantially equivalent' to their traditional counterparts; a notion which forms the basis for national and international agencies – including the U.S. FDA, the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization – declaring genetically modified foods to be safe without having performed adequate health risk assessments. The new manuscript titled, "Compositional differences in soybeans on the market: Glyphosate accumulates in Roundup Ready GM soybeans,"[i] was submitted by a team of researchers from Norway and the United Kingdom who explored the compositional differences of 31 soybean batches from Iowa, USA, which consisted of three different types: Genetically modified, glyphosate-tolerant soy (GM-soy); Unmodified soy cultivated using a conventional "chemical" cultivation regime; Unmodified soy cultivated using an organic cultivation regime. Their analysis revealed the following discoveries: "Organic soybeans showed the healthiest nutritional profile with more sugars, such as glucose, fructose, sucrose and maltose, significantly more total protein, zinc and less fibre than both conventional and GM-soy."  "Organic soybeans also contained less total saturated fat and total omega-6 fatty acids than both conventional and GM-soy." "GM-soy contained high residues of glyphosate and...
02-05 2014
40
[+]

New GMO Studies Demonstrate 'Substantial Non-Equivalence'

Studies document substantial differences of GM maize and GM soybean from their conventional non-GM counterparts, exposing a permissive regulatory regime that has failed miserably in protecting public health and biodiversity
Originally published on ISIS, by Dr. Eva Sirinathsinghji Studies document substantial differences of GM maize and GM soybean from their conventional non-GM counterparts, exposing a permissive regulatory regime that has failed miserably in protecting public health and biodiversity Several new studies carried out by scientists independent of the biotech industry are showing up glaring differences between GMOs and their non-GMO counterparts. This makes a mockery of the regulatory principle of 'Substantial Equivalence' which has facilitated approvals of GMOs with practically no protection for public health and the environment [1] (see [2] The Principle of Substantial equivalence is Unscientific and Arbitrary, ISIS news). The principle of 'Substantial Equivalence' The concept of 'Substantial Equivalence' was first introduced in 1993 by the Organisation for Economic Development (OECD), an international economic and trade organisation, not a public health body.  The principle states that if a new food is found to be substantially equivalent to an already existing food product, it can be treated the same way as the existing product with respect to safety. This concept has greatly benefited the trade of GM produce, allowing it to effectively bypass regulatory requirements that would apply to novel food and other products including novel chemical compounds, pharmaceuticals, pesticides and food additives, all of which require a range of toxicological tests and can be subject...
03-06 2014

This website is for information purposes only. By providing the information contained herein we are not diagnosing, treating, curing, mitigating, or preventing any type of disease or medical condition. Before beginning any type of natural, integrative or conventional treatment regimen, it is advisable to seek the advice of a licensed healthcare professional.

© Copyright 2008-2024 GreenMedInfo.com, Journal Articles copyright of original owners, MeSH copyright NLM.