Genetically modified foods (GMOs) have been popular in the news lately ever since California failed to pass Prop 37, which would have required the labeling of GMO ingredients on all products sold within the state. While California may be setting the stage for the discussion of future labeling of GMO foods in our country, currently there is no regulation anywhere in the United States requiring the disclosure of GMO ingredients to consumers. This is in contrast to countries such as those in Europe and South America, who highly regulate the cultivation and sale of genetically modified crops and often require the labeling of foods that contain GMO ingredients (1, 2). In America, unless you buy certified non-GMO food, there is no way to know if your food contains GMOs or not.
So why does it matter if our food contains GMOs? You may have heard from various media sources that genetically modified foods are perfectly safe and there is no evidence to suggest any long term risk from their consumption. On the contrary, there has been some evidence suggesting potential health risks caused by these foods; even scientists within the FDA itself have repeatedly warned that GM foods can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects, including allergies, toxins, new diseases, and nutritional problems. (3, 4) With so much conflicting information, it’s hard to tell fact from fiction. Are GMOs safe for human consumption, or not?
Do GMOs really affect our health as negatively as some believe?
What is Genetic Modification?
Genetic modification involves the transfer of genes from one species of plant or animal to another, using techniques that can cause mutations in the genome that may have unintended consequences for the crop’s safety. (5) The imprecise rearrangement of genes can create new proteins in these plants that may trigger allergies or promote disease. (6) Our immune systems often do not recognize these new proteins and may mount an immune attack against them if they enter our bloodstream intact. These unintended gene transfers, along with those that are intended, can lead to significant changes in gut and immune function, and may have long-term consequences that are not yet known to the scientific and medical communities.
In genetically modified corn and cotton, a gene from a bacteria called Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) is inserted, which causes a pesticidal toxin to be produced in every cell of the plant. This Bt-toxin kills insects that eat the plant by breaking down its gut lining and killing the insect from septicemia caused by the ensuing blood infection. (7) While this toxin has not been proven to be toxic in this way for humans and other mammals, several recent studies have suggested this toxin could have effects on immune health, gut health, liver and kidney function, and fertility.
The potential dangers of GMOs
The gut is most susceptible to the potential dangers of GMO consumption. Bt toxin produced by GMO corn has been shown to significantly alter immune function in mice, and may cause disrupted immune function in the gut. (8, 9, 10) One study suggested that Bt toxin has toxic effects on human cells in vitro, causing them to die prematurely. (11) This could cause damage to gut endothelial cells if the toxicity is found to occur in vivo. The potential intestinal effects of GMO consumption go beyond Bt toxin. Some argue that gut bacteria are capable of acquiring DNA sequences from GM plants, which could lead to the development of antibiotic resistance in those microbes. (12) It’s not yet fully understood what proportion of the GM genes are able to be transferred to gut microbiota.
There have been effects of GM corn found on organs outside of the intestinal system as well. Analysis of Monsanto’s own research and independent research by a lab in France determined that mice and rats eating Bt-toxin producing corn sustained liver and kidney damage. (13, 14) Other harmful effects were also noticed in the heart, adrenal glands, spleen and hematopoietic system of these GM corn-fed rats. Bt toxin has also been demonstrated to reduce fertility in mice, with fewer offspring being produced than by mice fed on natural crops. (15) While these are small, preliminary studies, it’s worth investigating the effects GMOs can have on other organs besides the intestines.
Since the research is in its infancy, GMOs may have associated health risks that we do not fully understand. The organization known as The Institute for Responsible Technology has developed a list of potential hazards of GMO consumption, providing a list of references for each health risk discussed. They have amassed a great deal of support for their position that GMOs are dangerous, and much of their information comes from research studies, clinical experience from doctors, and anecdotal evidence from farmers and parents of children who thrived on a GMO-free diet. (Unfortunately, the website’s statements exaggerate the findings of several studies, so it’s best to be a critical thinker and take the information with a grain of salt.)
Why is there still controversy?
Recent reviews have proposed a different story when it comes to GMO safety, arguing that the bulk of the evidence demonstrates no health risks associated with GMO consumption. (16, 17, 18) These reviews found GMOs to be generally safe with no multigenerational effects, but also recommended that more research continue to be performed on the health effects of GMO consumption in mammals. It’s interesting to note, however, that the majority of the studies considered by these reviews had been conducted by biotechnology companies responsible for commercializing these GM plants; this conflict of interest could have an effect on the reporting of certain data. That said, there’s no denying the fact that independent critical reviews have so far found GMOs to be safe in food.
Unfortunately, credible research demonstrating the potential dangers of GMOs is not only sparse, it is also inconsistent. While many scientists argue that GMOs are unsafe for human consumption, there are many more scientists who suggest that the evidence to date has not found any significant health risks from ingesting GMOs. It’s impossible to tell at this point who has the right answer, and it’s unnerving that there is so much controversy over the safety of a food product that is present in 60 to 70 percent of processed foods found in grocery stores. (19)
A verdict on GMOs?
There hasn’t been nearly enough research performed on GMOs to make an informed decision on their safety. However, lack of proof is not proof against. While the available evidence is still mixed, it seems likely that genetically modified foods could have an effect on the immune response as well as the permeability of the gut. Whether or not this leads to an increase in disease is yet to be determined. However, if regular consumption of GMOs is able to cause leaky gut, it could play a role in the recent dramatic rise in obesity, diabetes, allergies, autoimmune disease, and infertility in our country.
I’m no conspiracy theorist, but I think there is enough inconsistency in the available evidence to support the removal of GMOs from your diet. Fortunately, purchasing certified non-GMO or organic foods and eating a whole-foods or Paleo diet will allow you to steer clear of most GMO foods on the market. Until more legitimate research is conducted, I believe it’s better to be safe than sorry and avoid genetically modified foods as much as possible.
Have you or your family experienced a health improvement from cutting out GMOs? Tell me your story in the comments below!
Like what you see? Join more than 30,000
others and subscribe for email updates.
I hate spam too. Your email is safe with me.
Follow Chris Online:
Not a diet for everyone.
A diet for you!
Discover your own ideal diet & end confusion about what to eat forever.
Learn More
Have the healthy baby you've always dreamed of.
Boost fertility naturally & promote lifelong health for you & your baby.
Learn More
Personal Paleo Launchpad
Personalized online portal with easy-to-use tools, expert advice, and the support of a passionate, intelligent community.
Learn More
Paleologix Paleo Support System
Break through the energy swings, digestive upset, and obstacles of adopting a Paleo diet.
Learn More
{ 61 comments… read them below or add one }
Good article Chris, thanks. Also, lectins are routinely inserted into GMOs to make them pest resistant. This usually sneaks past popular/regulatory scrutiny because lectins occur naturally in non-GMOs. While most lectins are destroyed through the cooking process, many are not.
I used to work for USDA. Approval of these GMOs is a total farce. USDA Biotechnology Resources tells the manufacturer “if you tell us its safe, then we believe you”. I mean this with no exageration. There is no requirement to provide test documentation. The fact that Monsanto spent 40 million to defeat the proposition shows that they dont want consumers to make informed decisions. One other fact Chris, just because a product is labeled Organic, does not mean it is GMO free. The term organic is a USDA regulated term which just means basically no chemicals were applied.
Just to state here about the GMO content of organic labeled food… There’s multiple tiers of organic labeling based on the percent of organic ingredients:
How do I know if something is organic?
The USDA has identified for three categories of labeling organic products:
100% Organic: Made with 100% organic ingredients
Organic: Made with at least 95% organic ingredients
Made With Organic Ingredients: Made with a minimum of 70% organic ingredients with strict restrictions on the remaining 30% including no GMOs (genetically modified organisms)
Products with less than 70% organic ingredients may list organically produced ingredients on the side panel of the package, but may not make any organic claims on the front of the package.
Rich,
Thanks for your comments about your experience working with USDA and how the “approve” GMO’s. I have been under the assumption if I bought organic corn tortillas for my family they would be GMO free. Hmmm I will have to be more diligent..
That is upsetting re organics and GMOs … I had counted on organic foods to be GMO-free! Hope organic producers could make sure to label their GMO-free produce as such.
Dear Rich, could you explain were your claim on GMO in organic foods comes from?
I would say that this claim on GMO seeds is wrong. Without doubt in Europe GMOs are strictly forbidden in organic farming. The EU standard (which is the most lax one in Europe) says: “Absolute prohibition of the use of genetically modified organisms”
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/organic/organic-farming/what-organic_en
And also the EPA writes: “The NOP [National Standards on Organic Agricultural Production and Handling, red.] rule prohibits the use of genetic engineering”
http://www.epa.gov/oecaagct/torg.html#National%20Organic%20Standards
May I ask, are there any benefits for Americans for being the guinea pigs for the rest of the world?
“May I ask, are there any benefits for Americans for being the guinea pigs for the rest of the world?”
Cheap food for the masses, $$$ for the elite!
I believe the second part, Monsanto and co. are making profits.
I get the impression, that they determine the prices in a way that the farmers already do not get much of the profit. As the commodity prices are a very small part of the product price, I do not think the masses notice anything. Even in case of bread, the price of the wheat does not contribute much to the price, most is labor, transport, marketing and opportunity costs.
Hi Victor,
I worked in the government for 30 years. Most people really are unaware of the fraud and devious ways of manipulating rules within the government. As I mentioned in my earlier post, the USDA gives carte blanche approval of products to the manufacturer, i.e. Monsanto. I have seen it done and seen the internal memos. The USDA regulates growth and production of food products, whereas, FDA, regulates the sale of food products. As far as the Organic definition, let me get my hands on the rule which is used (not necessarily published) and I will post it.
To me it is a no brainer, that GMOs should be avoided. This story resembles Big Sugar’s fight to disprove the harmful effects of sugar consumption on human health. Good old Europe is very right in regulating the stuff extensively. Feed GMOs to your enemies if you want to do them harm. Avoid them yourself.
Well done. My take is, since we don’t know why risk it? When we mess with the foods mother nature gives us, it tends to turn out bad. Until there’s a definitive answer, I’m fine with skipping them… of course, I eat a Primal/Ancestral diet so I’m not too concerned anyway!
I have tried to avoid GMOs after reading Seeds of Deception. Hard to do since they are not labeled.
Isn’t it possible for responsible food producers to label non-GMO foods as such? Then consumers may start looking for the “non-GMO” label to trust the foods they buy. If the GMO proponents don’t want to their products as containing GMOs, so what? All we need is for the “good guys” to label their foods “non-GMO” and that’s what we buy. Leave the unlabeled stuff on the shelves. It’ll probably never rot…
I think this article is pretty reasonable and thank you Chris for the work. I tend to have more a problem with specific GMO’s that either create their own insecticides, or allow the plant to withstand heavier doses of herbicides, etc. I’m not opposed to hybridization or other means to create more drought resistant plants, but that’s not entirely where this GMO thing is headed. In the end, you can’t beat the advice to at least be wary, and to eat well probably means choosing the cleanest and most natural foods that you can. It’s hard to go wrong via that route.
This past August I was diagnosed with Ulcerative Colitis. In an effort to heal the internal bleeding, I cut all sugar and grains from my diet. Four months later, and I’ve lost almost 20 pounds. I have more energy. I’m having normal bowel function again and the bleeding has mostly stopped, although I have had times where the bleeding flairs up again for a day or two. I don’t know if these improvements in my health are from avoiding sugar, GMOs, or wheat, but what ever it is, I will continue to make all my food from scratch and avoid grains and sugar, even though it is extremely difficult, than go back to the way I was eating, which made me sick!
I’ve had UC for 40+ years. I hope eventually your gut will be stable enough to let you eat a few targeted grains, but wait a while. Hopefully you will be able to eat millet, wild rice and quinoa (soak them first). I’m very glad you are doing so much better. Keep managing it well!
Great article. The effects on health could be minimal. That really isn’t the reason I oppose GE. There are too many other extant reasons, from economic to environmental. Being tied to an unsustainable farming system is reason enough. Resisitance of plants to relatively benign chemicals (like glyphosate) leads to greater use of the same product and increased use of much less benign (and more expensive) herbicides. The same could be said of BT and insects.
It’s all about corporate profits.
I’m glad GE agriculture is prohibited here in NZ.
I enjoyed Chris’s article very much. I was especially surprised to read that even cotton has been GM’d! My husband is “sensitive” to many foods [even one major grocery store's brand of Organic Spinach bothers him] and even cotton, especially his socks. I buy hemp or bamboo socks for him. Many times even hemp socks contain a large % of cotton. Bt might be the reason for his sensitivity. But to those of you who say you are Paleo/Primal/or??, don’t you still eat vegetables? Vegetables, even organic, may be GM’d apparently–unless you grow your own–and then you have to be careful of the seeds It’s just not fair for those who live in climates that can’t grow much more than spinach and lettuce–and can’t afford health-food store produce which are miles away from our area anyway. All we can do for now is make the best choices we can to try to stay healthy.
Marlene – Most vegetable crops have not been genetically modified. The most notable food crops that have been GMO’d include soybeans, corn & sugarbeets. A good reason to buy cane sugar and not just “sugar” – if you buy sugar that is.
One more concerning element about the trend towards genetic modification is that it’s driving thought further way from the health of the soil being the element we need to focus on. If the soil quality is getting so poor, and plants so week, that we need to insert virus DNA into them so they can grow, then we’re ignoring a huge demineralisation issue and subsequent ill health of the population using those foods for the bulk of their calories.
Also, would it really be the wise thing to do to trust a company with such a track record as Monsanto’s? They’ve told us in the past that things like DDT and Agent Orange were okay. Are genetically modified foods to be on next on the list of regrets 20 years from now?
It is somewhat concerning that, with all the talk in the past years about the bees and colony collapse, that Monsanto went and bought out a bee research firm which had been investigating their involvement…
I’ve read that the French study with rats was pretty flawed. Here is a link. Any thoughts?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2012/09/24/does-genetically-modified-corn-cause-cancer-a-flawed-study/
I find it suspicious that almost all of the (actually concerning) references you cited as evidence that GMOs are potentially dangerous come from the same guy (Séralini) who has demonstrated sketchy behavior and a likely anti-GMO bias, y’know? The research should be done, of course, but we have to have reasonable risk-benefit analyses in the meantime. It seems ridiculous that people are so afraid of genetic modification, requiring so much testing, while crops created from breeding or mutagenesis are given a pass. At least with the former we know exactly what the genetic change is, y’know?
Cross pollenation and hybridization are NOT the same as scientifically injecting and splicing DNA together in a lab. The former can happen in nature without human intervention, the latter cannon. GMO crops are not a product that could have happened in nature.
Actually, transformation of plant cells with bacterial genes is something that happens in nature all the time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrobacterium_tumefaciens
But the more important question is, what difference does it make whether it happens in nature or not?
The difference, Jesse, is that Mother Nature, although not completely perfect, has had MILLIONS of years to create and improve each organism and plant in a way that will benefit the most. And while scientists are discovering more things each day, there are still many, many things that the human race just does not understand about how the body works and the consequences of putting different things into our bodies. We are very much still in the process of learning. For these reasons, I personally feel much more compelled to trust what nature has produced and feel it best that scientists not try to mess with it (at the very least, they need to PROVE as best they can with many long-term, controlled, randomized studies that it is not harmful, before I might feel safe ingesting it).
Thanks for the reply. I’m not sure I see things the same way. Is Mother Nature actively interested in our well-being so much to develop things for our benefit? Aren’t there many deadly substances in Nature that can harm or kill us, either in the short-term or the long-term? Aren’t many of the things we enjoy eating today such good food because of human intervention and ingenuity (for example, the banana)? I don’t think almost anything we eat has been studied with such rigor as you suggest, so is being a hunter/gatherer the only option?
Right on. Have we tested organic apples to determine whether they cause cancer? I mean, seriously, apple seeds contain ARSENIC. Feed that to mice and you’ll kill them. Should we ban apples now?
dude, you need to eat a cupful of apple seeds to die. Its extremely bitter, your body wont take it. There is a reason why things we have taste buds for things we should accept and deny in our body.
Banana! I have seen the absurd logic to for gods existence. Then there is a coconut tree right next to the banana tree. LOL. You can debate genetic mutation all you want. The fact is Monsanto’s GMO has not been fully researched. Why should anyone trust the FDA, or AMA for the things they have pushed into society without proper research and then 20 to 40 years laters we find out cigarettes are bad, BPA is bad, etc. People don’t think conspiracy happens because its a taboo word. Conspiracy happens daily.
Jesse – Can I recommend a book called Seeds of Destruction by William Engdahl and I urge you to spend a day on the Organic Consumer Associations website just reading all of the articles and studies they have gathered regarding GMO’s. I’m not as concerned with specific breeding of crops within the same species of plants but would agree mutagenesis should get much more review.
Ok, caution makes sense. Your article focused on the Bt effect, while others have focused on the massive amounts of pesticides which are used on so many GMO crops, enabled by the genetic modifications of the plants. The combination of these two factors could indeed be dangerous.
However, it seems to me that the “dramatic rise in obesity, diabetes, allergies, autoimmune disease, and infertility in our country” was well underway long before the rise of GMO crops and foodstuffs and may be equally or more traceable to poor diet, high grain and sugar consumption, powerful antibiotics and advancing age of the childbearing cohort. Certainly pollutants can only contribute to this downhill spiral. Seems that organic foodstuffs/retailers will be a growth industry for many years to come.
Thanks Chris a good balanced view, we all need to investigate what we are eating, drinking and wearing. I’m increasingly concerned about the increase in soy formula given to babies as young as 4 months and would love to see an article about the pros and cons of soy formula? The babies are lactose or milk protein intolerant but soy products do concern me.
Good, even-handed analysis, as always. Thanks Chris. It would have been good to have this article a few weeks ago before we had to vote on labeling GMO’s. I actually voted against prop 37 (though I felt uncertain about it). It just seemed to me somewhat pointless to try to label GMO, since, as you pointed out yourself, it’s become so ubiquitous. Also, with cross-pollination and all… My feeling is that we should just assume that food produced by mega-farms will be compromised in a number of ways, and the best we can do is to buy organic or from small traditional farms. I’m the strongest proponent of clean, healthy food that I know, but I caught a lot of flack for my vote. Ah well…
It does surprise me you would vote against prop 37 yet support “small traditional farms.” Kinda defeats the purpose if you vote in favor of big multinational corporations on a measure, yet vote with your dollar in favor or small farms when it comes to your food.
That makes a lot of sense to me. I figure, with all the furor about GMOs in the public eye, any product that IS GMO-free is going to want to state that clearly on the label as a marketing strategy… so GMOs are already labeled, basically. If it doesn’t say it’s GMO-free, there’s a good chance it isn’t.
That will only happen with enough demand. Most of the population has no clue whats going on. Now when trans fats came out and were horrible, thats when companies started labeling “TRANS FAT FREE!” Which in a way is absurd to see sorbet marketed as trans fat free. When GMO if ever is considered very bad to the public you will labeling everywhere. You guys are not very progressive, are you?
Seriously? that was your reason for voting no? I’m speechless.
I read “The world according to Monsanto” the other day, scary stuff. I too feel for economic and environmental factors GMOs should be left alone. History of monsanto speaks for itself, its bad all the way around. Massive deregulation in such an ethically slippery field is not the way towards real progress.
After becomig aware of the GMOs products implications in our diet, I cleaned my pantry and replaced all products with verified non GMO ingredients. I spent a lot of time on the phone with the manufacturers to decide what I could continue purchasing for my family and what product I should avoid totally. In consequence, I also switched to gluten free products and as well as to coconut products to replace the butters, milk and sugar needed in my recipees. As a result, no one in the family has complained of the adjustements, the kids have lost in average 5 pounds, I have lost 11 pounds after 12 weeks into “our family awareness program” I would encourage anyone who cares for their family to pursue a non GMO awareness program. It is worth it!
In 1989, the “contaminated” tryptophan that killed about 30 people and permanently disabled over 1000 was produced by an untested GMO process. How can anyone say that untested GMO can be safe, or how can the FDA claim they know of no problem? At the recent WAPF conference, I asked Jeffery Smith about this, and he confirmed that my information is correct.
Ira Edwards, author of HONEST NUTRITION
How many of you know that the current food safety czar is Mike Taylor who is the former Vice President for Public Policy at Monsanto? How many know that the current Secretary of Agriculture is former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack who has been in bed with Monsanto, Dupont et al for years. How many of you voted for Obama in the last election?
http://www.kingwoodunderground.com/topic.jsp?topicId=11556087
The wolf is watching the hen house folks.
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/09/romney-monsanto-bain
I agree that Vilsack has been extremely disappointing. But Mitt Romney helped make Monsanto what they are today.
It’s not like the only choices were between Obama and Romney. As long as everyone believes that, it will continue to be effectively true.
That’s true. There was Ron Paul(a politician who seemed mostly sensible to me) and others as well.
My retail food company has a no-GMO policy, but IMO, the problem is not GM technology per se, which is neutral, but lax regulation and lack of independent research.
Bt corn is a an example, but is not emblematic of GM crops, per se … it is just one choice from an in infinitude of possibilities, made by one creepy, politically powerful company (Monsanto)
Jeffrey Smith (who runs IRT) routinely distorts the evidence, and he has very strong career/financial interests for spinning reality.
According to a wide range of independent scientists, the Caen et al. studies (cited as 13, 14) were scientifically bogus.
Unsurprisingly, re: the most recent Caen study, Smith failed to note that many of the rats fed regular corn got equally huge, ugly tumors, and that the study has been refuted as bogus by experts in study design and cancer research.
See http://the-scientist.com/2012/09/25/anti-gm-crop-study-gets-audited/
and
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19654825
and
http://news.discovery.com/earth/gm-corn-tumor-study-120920.html#mkcpgn=emnws1
This Slate article is also worth reading and links (indirectly) to a EU report, excerpts of which are shown below.
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2012/06/frankenfood_debate_over_gmos_in_europe_and_the_united_states_.html
The EU’s science panel and the U.S. NRC agree that GM crops are not inherently unsafe, or inherently less safe than crops bred conventionally, by exposing seeds to toxic chemicals and radiation, creating far more mutation, and totally random one, vs. gene splicing.
The EU does not have a blanket ban on GMOs (though it had approved only two GM crops as of 2011) and recently sued France over a GM-corn ban which the European Food Safety Authority’s Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms ruled unscientific.
In a 2010 report, The European Commission’s Directorate-General for Research found that GMOs per se are not less safe than conventional crops.
See http://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf
A decade of EU-funded GMO research (2001 – 2010)
These are the key excerpts [my comments in brackets]:
Back Cover:
This publication (June 2010) summarizes the results of 50 selected research projects on genetically modified organisms (GMO), co-funded by the European Commission under the Framework Programmes for Research and Innovation, and conducted in the period 2001 – 2010, including a summary of the latest Eurobarometer survey 2010 on Life Sciences and Biotechnology.
A decade of EU-funded GMO research (2001 – 2010), pg. 16
The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research, and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies.”
[This echoes the conclusions of the U.S. NRC (see "Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods:
Approaches to Assessing Unintended Health
Effects" at http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309092094) and everything I’ve read about conventional hybridization methods, which, BTW, produced many of the commercial organic crops raised/sold today … see pg. 3 and 4 of the report and the “GM fear-mongering doesn’t help” section at http://www.vitalchoice.com/shop/pc/articlesView.asp?id=1772 ]
Safety Assessment, pg. 128 (from Chapter 2: GMO and Food Safety, which starts on pg. 127)
A number of projects (ENTRANSFOOD, GMO CARE, SAFOTEST, NOFORISK, and GMOBILITY) have focused on the development of safety assessment approaches for GM foods/feed.
Conclusions, pg. 133:
These activities [referring to the research programs cited on pg. 128] provide at least equal assurance of the safety of these foods compared to conventional counterparts, provided these GM products have been approved by the EU and the national food safety evaluation procedures.
Quality studies of micro-organisms used for food fermentation, pg. 130
The results suggested that gene modifications induced by molecular biology tend to produce less unexpected events than classical methods.
[Again, this echoes the conclusions of the NRC and everything I’ve read about conventional hybridization methods.]
I highly recommend “Tommorows Table” by husband-wife team Pamela Ronald (UC Davis plant geneticist) and Raoul Adamchak (Head of UCD’s organic farming program), and “Food, Inc.” by Perter Pringle.
Ronald makes the case that GM could be a valuable ally to organic farming, and her husband agrees.
Here in New Zealand, our legislation currently dictates that the label on the packet etc. states there is GMO present in the food. If it weren’t for this, I would have had no idea that the South African breakfast cereal (Pro-Nutro) I was eating on hikes contained GMO soy. BTW, no longer eat unfermented soy. It seems to me that if a nation is resistant to this kind of labelling then they either don’t want the label suggesting that people need to be informed i.e. this may be a caveat for some folks or they don’t want their nationals to be informed about the food they eat. Something rotten in the state of things here.
Of course with the current NZ government, led by a former money trader at Merrill Lynch, being one of the leading brown nosers of Uncle Sam and persuing the frightening TPPA (TransPacific free trade act that will remove our sovereignty to protect corporatocracies) this will likely change and we will lose the right to be informed of GMO’s in our food and non-food.
Sorry, but I will stay as far away from GM foods as possible. I might agree that both sides could be distorting information to make their point; however, if the TRUTH was really told, individuals could make up their own mind and choose for themselves. As for me, I will go out of my way to support local farmers who are growing REAL, organic food and support the companies who will not use GM ingredients. If we would all support local, organic farmers and stand with them for their right to grow real chemical-free food, we might not be in such dire straits with our food system.
Hi, Chris,
Not a conspiracy theorist, you say?! Well, my friend, you are about to be in the minority! The hundredth monkey is about to freaking pop!
In addition to being a patient and loyal, long-time reader of your site and listener of RHR, I am a proud conspiracy theorist. I lost my political virginity about one year ago when my daily migraines forced me out of school in my senior year of biochem/biophysics, and so I started a blog to help others do the same more quickly, gently and easily. Nearly 90 articles now!
Let’s start with the easy stuff…
Learn about Bohemian Grove:
http://thecalmcanaryblog.blogspot.com/2012/04/weaving-spiders-come-not-here.html
learn about the Bilderberg Group! “Hil-dawg! Hil-dawg! Hil-dawg!” (cheering for Hilary Clinton, a member)
Learn about soy prisons and undeniably INTENTIONAL chemical castration (this article links to your article, “The Soy Ploy”):
http://thecalmcanaryblog.blogspot.com/2012/07/the-soy-conspiracy.html
Learn about Rick Simpson oil (herbal, like your milk thistle/alpha lipoic acid/LDN/selenium cancer treatment) and (Stanislaw) Burzynski’s antineoplaston therapy, two excellent, non-toxic, certifiably government-suppressed chemotherapy alternatives:
http://thecalmcanaryblog.blogspot.com/2012/02/marinations-volume-iii-phoenix-tears.html
http://thecalmcanaryblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/dr-oz-approves-of-burzynski.html
If you don’t believe in chemtrails, you really just haven’t been watching the sky carefully enough. I actually saw my very first GRAY one on Tuesday, alongside ordinary milky-colored chemtrails – obviously a different substance than the others. Please see the documentaries “What In The World Are They Spraying?” and “Why In The World Are They Spraying?” by Michael Murphy. They are relevant to the GMO issue. I do NOT consider Mr. Murphy’s films to be physical proof of the chemtrails phenomenon, so I plan to release a documentary of my own in 2013 that will employ a (peaceful) drone to fly into a local Corvallis chemtrail and scoop up a chemical sample for analysis! I do, however, consider his films to be some of the best out there so far.
If you still doubt the chemtrails phenomenon, I suggest you learn a bit of obscure history – there is historical precedent for aerosol spraying of much more harmful substances than Mr. Murphy alleges in his films. Cold War zinc cadmium sulfide (with possible radionuclide) spraying:
http://thecalmcanaryblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/cold-war-zncds-spraying-over-usa-and-uk.html
Also, don’t forget Project Popeye – the secret mission to modify the weather in the Vietnam War and make it rain to wash out the Ho Chi Minh trail! The American pilots must have sung, “Wash out the Ho Chi Minh trail…wash out the Ho Chi Minh trail…” (to the tune of “Follow The Yellow Brick Road”)
If you think World Trade Center 7 was brought down by fire, collapsing like a house of cards into its own footprint in less than 7 seconds, then I am quite concerned for your health and skepticism, Chris Kresser!!! :O What? Haven’t heard of WTC 7? Only heard of WTC 1 and 2? Check out “Blueprint For Truth” by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. It’s a good start.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQgVCj7q49o
To quote Jesse Ventura, “EVERY war begins with a false flag operation.” The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a lie.
Have you heard about the Anti-Vaccine Surveillance and Alert System, funded by Gates Foundation? Do you think you are on the list because of your website? I’m sure I am!
http://thecalmcanaryblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/vaccine-drones-thanks-george.html
Conspiracy theorizing, like true Alchemy, is a noble Art, and will lead to the demise of the Surveillance Orwellian World State New Order Technocorporatocracy (SOWSNOT) Agenda!
Finally, while I do believe in many conspiracy theories, particularly the one known to many as The Grand Conspiracy (the New World Order), I do not wish to inspire fear in you, your readers, or anyone. Many of the conspiracy theory websites out there are sort of like “fear porn,” to borrow a term from David Wilcock. That is, they titillate their audience by creating fear. That is not my goal here. If anything, I would suggest people do MBSR (Jon Kabat-Zinn) before watching or reading anything conspiratorial in nature to prevent undue arousal of the sympathetic NS. Speaking of which, I need to get back into doing that tape every day… Also, humor and comic relief are a must. In any case, my goal is to inform: we who stand for truth are facing nothing less than total tyranny. Facing this does not require us to be fearful, but by God we have a fight on our hands and it does require a response!
Finally, if you need a break and are up for a music video with lyrics somewhat relevant to the chemtrails phenomenon, check this out!
“Wake Up” – Arcade Fire:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEKC5pyOKFU
“We’re just a million little gods causin’ rain storms turnin’ every good thing to
rust.”
If you thought that video was very strange, I am in total agreement with you. My evil twin recommended it to me. For more info about my evil twin, see post “KGH, my evil twin”:
http://thecalmcanaryblog.blogspot.com/2012/11/kgh-my-evil-twin.html
Also see this video by a Korean reggae star, which is definitely about chemtrails:
http://thecalmcanaryblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/chemtrail-music-video.html
Thanks for reading!
Peace,
John
Your little rant was the most entertaining thing I’ve read all day. Rant on! I love when folks aren’t inhibited by political correctness. It’s so refreshing! Thanks for putting your ideas out there. Only by considering all options, politically correct and otherwise, can we ever hope to find the truth.
Yo, Greg,
Thanks for the kind words. You can see more of my rants at my website:
http://thecalmcanaryblog.blogspot.com/
John
I have just read the wheat belly by William Davis who strongly believes that the hybridization of wheat that has occurred over the past 40+ years is very detrimental to the health of the human body. If GMO’s are unleashed into our food I don’t think the human race will survive for very much longer.
Love the article Chris. Thank you for bringing light to a much needed topic. So many great comments on the board as well. There is much study, but you are correct most of them are biased. In doing my own research I was very surprised to see there is in fact no internal watchdog for these practices. FDA says it’s an environmental concern, EPA says it’s an agricultural matter and the USDA says it’s a FDA concern. Hmmm. What’s wrong with this picture. A few things to point out is 1. The environmental impact on the birds and animals that eat the bugs that died from the pesticide. That is having a serious impact on our environment. Also the creation of “superweeds” and 2. For me very important is the residual impact of the pesticide, fungicide and herbicide left in the ground that does not become inactive for I have no idea how long. To think that potatoes or foods grown in this media and put on the shelves in grocery stores and we have no idea is inexcusable. One day when the “fertilizer” hits the fan, who will be accountable?
Love reading your posts, and I am wondering your take about the way some companies are processing some of the foods like soy to make them “acceptable” for those who are informed about wanting to avoid GMO’s and the estrogenic effect of soy.
I recently came across a soy protein supplement that states the following about its product:
“includes non-GMO soy protein (not genetically modified or bio-engineered). The soy was specially processed to remove the isoflavones, to alleviate concerns about impacting estrogen
levels. We use soy because it is a complete protein, and is heart healthy too.”
I traditionally stick to plant based protein supplements if I use them, but avoid soy due to all the issues it creates hormonally.
Any Thoughts?
Didn’t expect you to pull so many punches, and was especially surprised you never mentioned glyphosate (Round-Up), the toxic herbicide farmers are drenching GM plants with in ever higher doses. Not only is it proven to be highly toxic, recent evidence suggests it accumulates in soils and renders them unusable for over a decade, and is even appearing in detectable levels regularly in rain.
You also didn’t go into Monsanto and DOW’s predatory practices of suing farmer’s for patent infringement when their crops are inadvertently contaminated with GM pollen from adjacent fields, or for their blatant corruption of the USDA, FDA and the Supreme Court. And I would expect any article about the hazards of GM to include the millions of livestock that have died in India after consuming GM fodder, and the subsequent suicides of tens of thousands of their herders and farmers.
I liked seeing you call out Jeff Smith for exaggerating; He does tend to go over the top on his claims from time to time and it’s annoying. But overall, Dr. Oz could have written this article. I expected more from you.
A timely list of GMO and Monsanto quotes to further enlighten (taken from Grow Food, Not Lawns Facebook feed):
“Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the F.D.A.’s job” – Phil Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications. “Playing God in the Garden” New York Times Magazine, October 25, 1998.
“Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety” – FDA, “Statement of Pol…icy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties” (GMO Policy), Federal Register, Vol. 57, No. 104 (1992), p. 229
“What you are seeing is not just a consolidation of seed companies, it’s really a consolidation of the entire food chain” – Robert Fraley, co-president of Monsanto’s agricultural sector 1996, in the Farm Journal. Quoted in: Flint J. (1998) Agricultural industry giants moving towards genetic monopolism. Telepolis, Heise.
“People will have Roundup Ready soya whether they like it or not” – Ann Foster, spokesperson for Monsanto in Britian, as quoted in The Nation magazine from article “The Politics of Food” [49] by Maria Margaronis December 27, 1999 issue.
“‘It’s important for countries around the world to adopt a uniform standard’ of acceptable levels of contamination” – Biotechnology Industry Association’s Lisa Dry [50]
“The hope of the industry is that over time the market is so flooded [with GMOs] that there’s nothing you can do about it. You just sort of surrender” – Don Westfall, biotech industry consultant and vice-president of Promar International, in the Toronto Star, January 9 2001.
“The total acreage devoted to GM crops around the world is expanding. That may be what eventually brings the debate to an end. It’s a hell of a thing to say that the way we win is don’t give the consumer a choice, but that might be it” – Dale Adolphe, biotech booster and President of the Canadian Seed Growers Association and previous president of the Canola Council of Canada (Western Producer, 4/4/02).
“I recognized my two selves: a crusading idealist and a cold, granitic believer in the law of the jungle” – Edgar Monsanto Queeny, Monsanto chairman, 1943-63, “The Spirit of Enterprise”, 1934.
“Genetically engineered food constitutes a massive experiment on the planet, with potentially devastating effects on human health and the global environment” – Adam Kapp, Columnist for the Penn State Digital Collegian, Nov. 7, 2002.
“Stark denials in the face of documented evidence to the contrary have been corporate policy at Monsanto and GE for decades” – Eric Francis author of Conspiracy of Silence [51]
“For years, these guys said PCBs were safe, too. But there’s obviously a corporate culture of deceiving the public” – Mike Casey of the Environmental Working Group
“The thing I’m most proud of is the industry’s impeccable environmental and safety record” – Robert Fraley, Monsanto’s technology chief [52]
“That is what drives a lot of people crazy. The scope of the fraud, if you will–I know that’s a harsh word–the scope of the fraud that’s being sold to the American public about this technology is almost unprecedented” – Interview with Dr. Charles Benbrook on GMOs
“I’m not a religious person, but I think there’s something just inherently wrong with this-that they can take different species and combine ‘em the way they wanna combine ‘em” – Phil Geertson, who runs a small seed business in Idaho [53].
“I have the feeling that science has transgressed a barrier that should have remained inviolate” – Dr Erwin Chargaff, biochemist and the father of molecular biology in his autobiography
“Genetic Power’s the most awesome force the planet’s ever seen, but you wield it like a kid who’s found his dad’s gun…. and before you even knew what you had you patented it and packaged it and slapped it on a plastic lunch box, and now you’re selling it, you want to sell it” Ian Malcolm from Jurassic Park
Hi Chris,
I developed Autoimmune Gastritis which cause stomach cancer and had 1/3 of my stomach removed. I believe that it is directly connected to GMO’s. When it was diagnosed, I was already gluten free for over a year. If I eat a tortilla chip made with “regular” corn, I bloat up severely and feel like I have barb wire in my intestines. Same happens with 1 bite of bread, even though I tested negative for celliac. If I eat organic corn, I still bloat. Only organic, NON-GMO corn doesn’t give me symptoms. Thus, I concluded that GMO’s are the culprits. However, I have serious problems finding which foods don’t contain them. Still hoping we will wake up and start labeling. It might just save my life! …and other’s!
Per the article on how Bt works, they state the conditions must be just right. “The toxic crystal Bt protein in commercial formulations is only effective when eaten by insects with a specific (usually alkaline) gut pH and the specific gut membrane structures required to bind the toxin. Not only must the insect have the correct physiology and be at a susceptible stage of development, but the bacterium must be eaten in sufficient quantity.” So, are our guts alkaline and do we have the binding receptors?
You can debate what YOU want to support and eat, but an informed public is a wise public. We want labeling of products so we can make OUR choice. As the people from countires other then the US have mentioned, when they made THEIR choice, their health got better. That is proof enough for me.
Hello. I’m doing a project on GMO’s. If anyone can help that’d be great!
Why is it good? Why is it bad? What does it have to do with DNA?
If anyone can help please email me (:
I can help you some if you’re interested, what’s your email address?
I have been physically ill for 8 years. I know it’s because of GMO. I will never be able to prove it and not knowing which gmo. I shall be sick forever. Please help change corporate minds. No company should have this much power.
{ 9 trackbacks }