Are Genetically Modified Organisms in 80+% of US foods making us sick?

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are rampant in the US. We're supposed to be getting healthier with all the new vitamins and healthy foods, etc. So why is infertility down and why are diseases rising?

Even if you're not in the US, it would be wise to pay attention, as it may affect you in the future.

Organic seed banks popping up:

"On this God-forsaken island Bill Gates is investing tens of his millions along with the Rockefeller Foundation, Monsanto Corporation, Syngenta Foundation and the Government of Norway, among others, in what is called the ‘doomsday seed bank.’ Officially the project is named the Svalbard Global Seed Vault on the Norwegian island of Spitsbergen, part of the Svalbard island group." Doomsday Seed Vault in the Arctic

Link between GMOs and gluten allergies

Genetically Modified Salmon Can Breed with Wild Fish and Pass On Genes

"Will humans who eat GM salmon produce growth hormones year round?
Tampering with the genes of a popular fish to make it twice as large is sick and demented. Plus, GM salmon can breed with other fish and pass on the messed up genes. (http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27667.cfm) Did you hear about GM tilapia too? Here's some recent research: "Tilapia fish engineered for transgenic expression of growth hormone had deformed heads and backs, atrophied gonads, and lower mineral content" (http://natureinstitute.org/nontarget/reports/tilapia_001.php).

People are already frustrated and overwhelmed with food choices, and some people still think "farm raised" fish means some "pond" farmer took good care of them, but it's just the opposite, they are feeding them hormones and pumping the lake full of antibiotics to kill the disease that spreads from population and fish feces overload. This is like breeding CANCER and auto-immune disorder on purpose! "

Genetic pollution: When GMO salmon escape into the oceans, there will be no boycotting Franken-fish

"Are GMO Foods Safe?

Industry and health leaders cite hundreds of studies to support the safety of GMOs. That includes 20 years of studies in animals that have eaten modified food.

But experts like Krimsky say nearly two dozen studies show bad effects, like harm to the kidneys, liver, heart, and other organs. He says they should carry more weight as people judge the pros and cons." GMOs: What You Need to Know

10 Reasons to Avoid GMOs

"Is it possible that the foods you eat are actually affecting your fertility and inhibiting your chances of getting pregnant? The answer is a resounding, “Yes,” according to dozens of research groups worldwide who have been studying the effects of Genetically Modified Organisms found in many of today’s most common foods." Research Indicates That GMO Could Be a Cause of Infertility

"Corn is in everything from take-away coffee cups to Vitamin E supplements
Experts say that natural cross-pollination from genetically modified crops to organic crops means there is no such thing as GMO-free corn anymore" Is GMO CORN making you sick? How one woman was told that the popular ingredient was the cause of her insomnia, headaches and chronic nausea

"See that apple on your desk? Or what about that Naked Juice or Odwalla bar you will use as a meal replacement after the gym? They look healthy and one even says it’s GMO free on the back, so they must be good for you, right? Wrong. Would you believe me if I told you that these every day foods you and I consume are packed full of GMO, toxic ingredients, that over time will result in us becoming sicker and our own government richer?" GMO Foods Are Killing Us


If these GMO foods are causing our illnesses and making us sicker, why do we continue to buy them and eat them? And if they aren't, why are there organic seed banks popping up everywhere?

[jaysabi]

If these GMO foods are causing our illnesses and making us sicker, why do we continue to buy them and eat them? And if they aren't, why are there organic seed banks popping up everywhere?

The first instance is not shown. Your own sources claim "hundreds" of studies showing they are safe and "dozens" showing they can cause harm. Without independently judging all the studies myself, I find it reasonable to dismiss your claims on the basis that your own stats don't support a conclusion that GMOs cause all the problems you want to believe they do.

The second instance is a false equivalency. There's no reason to conclude that organic seed banks "popping up everywhere" is evidence of your claims. It doesn't follow.

[TECSHARE]

YES

Horizontal gene transfer: you are what you eat.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20494129
http://www.life.umd.edu/labs/delwiche/bsci348s/lec/GeneTransfer.html

Epigenetics: A New Bridge between Nutrition and Health
http://advances.nutrition.org/content/1/1/8.full

Food as exposure: Nutritional epigenetics and the new metabolism
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3500842/

Nutri-epigenomics: lifelong remodelling of our epigenomes by nutritional and metabolic factors and beyond. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378726

[MakingMoneyHoney]

If these GMO foods are causing our illnesses and making us sicker, why do we continue to buy them and eat them? And if they aren't, why are there organic seed banks popping up everywhere?

The first instance is not shown. Your own sources claim "hundreds" of studies showing they are safe and "dozens" showing they can cause harm. Without independently judging all the studies myself, I find it reasonable to dismiss your claims on the basis that your own stats don't support a conclusion that GMOs cause all the problems you want to believe they do.

The second instance is a false equivalency. There's no reason to conclude that organic seed banks "popping up everywhere" is evidence of your claims. It doesn't follow.

You act like I stated they were making us sick and was trying to prove it, instead of asking a question.

The whole post is a question, except for the quotes from other pages. The links aren't sources trying to prove a point, but some articles that are anti-GMO, to help people look into the question and make their own decisions. Mostly because nobody argues if they're good or not.

Seeing as how most people are buying them and eating them, they're either a) thinking GMOs are healthy, or b) not looking into if they are healthy or not, which shows they probably haven't heard the opposition before.

If they have, they are free to answer the question with a NO.

And I'm not concluding anything; as I said the post was a question.

[jaysabi]

If these GMO foods are causing our illnesses and making us sicker, why do we continue to buy them and eat them? And if they aren't, why are there organic seed banks popping up everywhere?

The first instance is not shown. Your own sources claim "hundreds" of studies showing they are safe and "dozens" showing they can cause harm. Without independently judging all the studies myself, I find it reasonable to dismiss your claims on the basis that your own stats don't support a conclusion that GMOs cause all the problems you want to believe they do.

The second instance is a false equivalency. There's no reason to conclude that organic seed banks "popping up everywhere" is evidence of your claims. It doesn't follow.

You act like I stated they were making us sick and was trying to prove it, instead of asking a question.

The whole post is a question, except for the quotes from other pages. The links aren't sources trying to prove a point, but some articles that are anti-GMO, to help people look into the question and make their own decisions. Mostly because nobody argues if they're good or not.

Seeing as how most people are buying them and eating them, they're either a) thinking GMOs are healthy, or b) not looking into if they are healthy or not, which shows they probably haven't heard the opposition before.

If they have, they are free to answer the question with a NO.

And I'm not concluding anything; as I said the post was a question.

Fair enough, I mistook your intent. The question seemed to be guiding toward a specific result. From my perspective, all anyone does is question GMOs, but usually the ones who do so the most vociferously are the ones talking about chemtrails too.

Modifying genes is nothing new. Mankind has been genetically modifying genes in plants since Mendel's pea plants, and the agricultural revolutions that enable us to feed the planet were done through gene manipulation (weeding out less desirable traits through generations and amplifying desirable ones). The only thing different now is the sophistication and the commercialization of it, which is perhaps why the tin foil hatties get nervous.

[kuroman]

GMOs are forbiden in many countries, because there is a danger factor, as long as there aren't conclusive studies, that it is safe and not some bullshit studies financed by corporations that are selling GMOs then I suggest people to avoid GMOs, we already getting enough toxins from pesticides and so on ...

[MakingMoneyHoney]

If these GMO foods are causing our illnesses and making us sicker, why do we continue to buy them and eat them? And if they aren't, why are there organic seed banks popping up everywhere?

The first instance is not shown. Your own sources claim "hundreds" of studies showing they are safe and "dozens" showing they can cause harm. Without independently judging all the studies myself, I find it reasonable to dismiss your claims on the basis that your own stats don't support a conclusion that GMOs cause all the problems you want to believe they do.

The second instance is a false equivalency. There's no reason to conclude that organic seed banks "popping up everywhere" is evidence of your claims. It doesn't follow.

You act like I stated they were making us sick and was trying to prove it, instead of asking a question.

The whole post is a question, except for the quotes from other pages. The links aren't sources trying to prove a point, but some articles that are anti-GMO, to help people look into the question and make their own decisions. Mostly because nobody argues if they're good or not.

Seeing as how most people are buying them and eating them, they're either a) thinking GMOs are healthy, or b) not looking into if they are healthy or not, which shows they probably haven't heard the opposition before.

If they have, they are free to answer the question with a NO.

And I'm not concluding anything; as I said the post was a question.

Fair enough, I mistook your intent. The question seemed to be guiding toward a specific result. From my perspective, all anyone does is question GMOs, but usually the ones who do so the most vociferously are the ones talking about chemtrails too.

Modifying genes is nothing new. Mankind has been genetically modifying genes in plants since Mendel's pea plants, and the agricultural revolutions that enable us to feed the planet were done through gene manipulation (weeding out less desirable traits through generations and amplifying desirable ones). The only thing different now is the sophistication and the commercialization of it, which is perhaps why the tin foil hatties get nervous.

Hmmm. I don't think that's why the "tin foil hatties" as you put them care so much about it being commercialized. I think it's more about the fact that people end up being forced to eat or use them, in a way. More than 80% of the foods in the US are GMO foods in some way.

I was watching something last night, that discussed that Indian farmers were told these GMO crops would give better yields and be pest resilient, and now they end up being forced to use the GMO crops.

"According to a report by Daily Mail, every 30 minutes an Indian farmer commits suicide as a result of Monsanto’s GMO crops. In the last decade, more than 250,000 Indian farmers have killed themselves because of Monsanto’s costly seeds and pesticides. Globalization and monopoly have forced farmers to buy GMO seeds and since GMO crops have become pest resistant, the farmers have no choice but to purchase Monsanto’s popular herbecide. In 2008, the Daily Mail called the continuous suicide of Indian farmers a “genocide” in the human history. What’s really disturbing is that often time farmers commit suicide by drinking the insecticide shipped to them by Monsanto. Here is the full article

After the use of Monsanto’s BT cotton in 2002, the rate of suicide among Indian farmers increased drastically. The stroy started when 90% of Indian cotton farmers were forced to swtich to Monsanto’s Bt crop hoping that Bt crops were pest resistant (so farmers did not have to buy Monsanto's costly herbecide). However after a while, Bt cotton’s pests resistant quality started to fade away so farmers had to again buy and use Monsanto's costly herbecide.

The high cost of GMO seeds, extensive use of herbecides and great reduction in crop value have often times left farmers bankrupt and as a result many farmers are falling into the endless cycle of debt, depression, hopelessness and despair and they have no choice but to ends their lives."
...
"Monsanto’s domination is threatening sustainable organic agriculture and the livelihood of Indian farmers and health of all of us as consumers. Thanks to biotech companies, what was once a sustainable diverse way of agriculture is now replaced with unsustainable globalized agribusiness in the hands of few people consumed by greed and power." Indian Farmers are Committing Suicide because of Monsanto's costly GMO Crops

GMOs are forbiden in many countries, because there is a danger factor, as long as there aren't conclusive studies, that it is safe and not some bullshit studies financed by corporations that are selling GMOs then I suggest people to avoid GMOs, we already getting enough toxins from pesticides and so on ...

The children of the US are just eating this stuff, their whole lives, without ever thinking about it. I know parents should be in charge of paying attention, but we all know most people just buy what's in the store, and it's becoming increasingly hard to find non GMO-foods.

One of the articles I listed, says all corn is effectively GMO from cross pollination at this point and many, many other products use the corn oil, etc. The woman who had her symptoms disappear from not eating corn, had to completely change her diet, because corn was everywhere.

Also there was the GMO salmon... by letting it loose, it may cross breed with other fish, which cross breed, etc, effectively over time, could lead to most fish being GMO in some way. That would take a while, just from salmon, but who's to say other GMO fish have not already been released?

[jaysabi]

The anecdotal evidence of a tabloid rag (Daily Mail) are worthless to me, as are other anecdotes about random people deciding GMOs are their problem. Besides, the suicides have much less to do with GMOs than farmers committing suicide to escape debt from a bad business decision. It's not relevant to the discussion on the safety of GMOs to eat. And the other instances you cite are similarly not credible for basing policy on. Things that are credible are science, and the the science we have shows no legitimate risk in using GMOs. And the obsession with Monsanto ignores the fact that genetic modification has been going on in crops for hundreds of years, just without the aid of sophisticated technology. Ultimately, if people decide to remain irrational and want to avoid GMOS, I support efforts to label products that contain them so they can if they wish, because having more information is not a bad thing. But science falls very heavily on the side that GMOs are safe. Unless the science changes, the only debate to be had in my mind is over mandatory labeling.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/08/29/are-gmos-safe-global-independent-science-organizations-weigh-in/  
http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/gmo-safety-labeling-obama-20150706

[TECSHARE]

Modifying genes is nothing new. Mankind has been genetically modifying genes in plants since Mendel's pea plants, and the agricultural revolutions that enable us to feed the planet were done through gene manipulation (weeding out less desirable traits through generations and amplifying desirable ones). The only thing different now is the sophistication and the commercialization of it, which is perhaps why the tin foil hatties get nervous.

This is false. Selective breeding and hybridization is a totally different process than creating modern genetically modified organisms. The first is perfectly natural, while the latter allows for combinations of genetic code you would never find in nature, because things like fish don't mate with things like tomatoes, and our understanding  of how this will effect gene expression in humans is extremely limited.

"Production
Further information: genetic engineering, genetic modification, horizontal gene transfer, molecular cloning, recombinant DNA and transformation (genetics)

Genetic modification involves the mutation, insertion, or deletion of genes. Inserted genes usually come from a different species in a form of horizontal gene-transfer. In nature this can occur when exogenous DNA penetrates the cell membrane for any reason. To do this artificially may require:

    attaching the genes to a virus
    physically inserting the extra DNA into the nucleus of the intended host with a very small syringe
    with the use of electroporation (that is, introducing DNA from one organism into the cell of another by use of an electric pulse)
    with very small particles fired from a gene gun.[1][2][3]

Other methods exploit natural forms of gene transfer, such as the ability of Agrobacterium to transfer genetic material to plants,[4] or the ability of lentiviruses to transfer genes to animal cells.[5]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism

[MakingMoneyHoney]

The anecdotal evidence of a tabloid rag (Daily Mail) are worthless to me, as are other anecdotes about random people deciding GMOs are their problem. Besides, the suicides have much less to do with GMOs than farmers committing suicide to escape debt from a bad business decision. It's not relevant to the discussion on the safety of GMOs to eat. And the other instances you cite are similarly not credible for basing policy on. Things that are credible are science, and the the science we have shows no legitimate risk in using GMOs. And the obsession with Monsanto ignores the fact that genetic modification has been going on in crops for hundreds of years, just without the aid of sophisticated technology. Ultimately, if people decide to remain irrational and want to avoid GMOS, I support efforts to label products that contain them so they can if they wish, because having more information is not a bad thing. But science falls very heavily on the side that GMOs are safe. Unless the science changes, the only debate to be had in my mind is over mandatory labeling.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/08/29/are-gmos-safe-global-independent-science-organizations-weigh-in/  
http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/gmo-safety-labeling-obama-20150706

I don't know why anyone would be against labeling GMO foods from non-GMO foods.

As TECSHARE said, it's a bit different for people to have studied and genetics back then, to the now cross-breeds that don't belong with one another (as in species to another species).

I was just thinking that in the bible, right before Noah, there was cross breading, such as we're doing now, to the point there was a flood to save the pure bloods for animals and humans. If that's the reason, it makes sense to stay away from cross-bred animals and fruits and vegetables, but of course that's only from a Christian-stance, something many would call irrational.

I also find it frustrating that it's becoming so prevalent, it's hard to get away from it whatever you eat.

[TECSHARE]

I don't need God to tell me GMO foods are potentially very dangerous.

[countryfree]

Modifying genes is nothing new. Mankind has been genetically modifying genes in plants since Mendel's pea plants, and the agricultural revolutions that enable us to feed the planet were done through gene manipulation (weeding out less desirable traits through generations and amplifying desirable ones). The only thing different now is the sophistication and the commercialization of it, which is perhaps why the tin foil hatties get nervous.

Of course, it's new. It was impossible in the past. It has always been possible to select seeds, but the things they do know like making plants unable to reproduce themselves, or making plants insect-resistant was unthinkable in the past. Humanity has fed itself for several thousands years before genes were discovered, less than 200 years ago.

[jaysabi]

Modifying genes is nothing new. Mankind has been genetically modifying genes in plants since Mendel's pea plants, and the agricultural revolutions that enable us to feed the planet were done through gene manipulation (weeding out less desirable traits through generations and amplifying desirable ones). The only thing different now is the sophistication and the commercialization of it, which is perhaps why the tin foil hatties get nervous.

This is false. Selective breeding and hybridization is a totally different process than creating modern genetically modified organisms. The first is perfectly natural, while the latter allows for combinations of genetic code you would never find in nature, because things like fish don't mate with things like tomatoes, and our understanding  of how this will effect gene expression in humans is extremely limited.

This is a fair point, and I find it convincing. It doesn't make any GMO automatically bad, but if people just want to avoid the debate about good/bad and skip GMOs completely, I think they should have that ability. And that's where mandatory labeling comes in.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Since this got bumped up and I just saw this video today...

Facebook Censors Post Revealing Secret Bill to Ban GMO Labeling

"Social media giant suppresses spread of information on damning legislation

Facebook is actively censoring shares of an article regarding a federal bill aiming to ban GMO food labeling.

Multiple users of the social media platform are finding themselves unable to share an article entitled, “This New Bill Could Ban GMO Labeling For Good,” which discusses H.R. 1599 – a bill known as the “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015.”

Instead of allowing immediate shares, Facebook prompts users with an error that reads, “This message contains content that has been blocked by our security systems,” according to a screen capture provided by author Anthony Gucciardi."

68% of Doctors Think GMOs Should Be Labeled: Survey


Huffington Post: Congress Moves To Stop States From Requiring GMO Labeling

"WASHINGTON -- Congress took the first step Tuesday to ban states such as Vermont from requiring companies to label whether foods contain genetically modified organisms, advancing a House Agriculture Committee bill that would pre-empt such laws.

The bill, called the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015, sets up a voluntary program for companies that want to disclose genetically modified ingredients, and requires firms that develop new bioengineered foods to get them approved through what is now a voluntary program run by the Food and Drug Administration. Under that program, the FDA reviews a company’s claims that a product is safe, and either objects or not."

[jaysabi]

Do you have a link to the article in question? I'd like to test post it to FB and see what happens. It could be that the article is from a known spam site, so automatically trips the censors, rather than being censored based on content.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Do you have a link to the article in question? I'd like to test post it to FB and see what happens. It could be that the article is from a known spam site, so automatically trips the censors, rather than being censored based on content.

Here's the link: http://naturalsociety.com/bill-ban-gmo-labeling-for-good-3/

"This New Bill Could Ban GMO Labeling for Good
We can't let the 'right to know' slip away

Update: This Post was Blocked by Facebook – Until Now

Thousands of our fans, including those with March Against Monsanto, have found this post to be blocked on Facebook. Why is this being blocked? When I tried to post this article to both the Natural Society page and my Anthony Gucciardi Facebook page I was met with a warning that this post was blocked due to ‘security measures.’ Needless to say, this raised many questions. What do you think?

 

Want some more proof that Monsanto and other biotech giants are deathly afraid of GMO labeling initiatives passing within the United States? A new bill introduced by Monsanto’s star representative, Mike Pompeo, could soon ban all mandatory GMO labeling in the US.

The worst part? It was just approved by the House Agriculture Committee, which means it’s one step closer to becoming a full-fledged law. The bill is formally known as H.R. 1599, or the ‘Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015.’"

It says it was flagged, but the way they write it now, it sounds like it will work. I have no idea how they got it fixed.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

I was watching this video, that seemingly has nothing to do with GMOs. It's about Fox news reporters getting fired. But apparently it has all to do with GMOs.

FOX News Reporters Fired For Telling The Truth

[TECSHARE]

Do you have a link to the article in question? I'd like to test post it to FB and see what happens. It could be that the article is from a known spam site, so automatically trips the censors, rather than being censored based on content.

It is a well known fact among activist groups that Facebook/Google/Youtube actively censors content. Search the web you will find documentation. The master's tools shall not be used to tear down the master's house.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Do you have a link to the article in question? I'd like to test post it to FB and see what happens. It could be that the article is from a known spam site, so automatically trips the censors, rather than being censored based on content.

It is a well known fact among activist groups that Facebook/Google/Youtube actively censors content. Search the web you will find documentation. The master's tools shall not be used to tear down the master's house.

It's disgusting. But to me, the last few posts here only prove that GMOs are bad, and that the government knows it, and the powers that be want them to be ingested by us. I've given up caring, as I firmly believe they will be punished some day.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Half of All Children Will Be Autistic by 2025, Warns Senior Research Scientist at MIT

"Why? Evidence points to glyphosate toxicity from the overuse of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide on our food.

For over three decades, Stephanie Seneff, PhD, has researched biology and technology, over the years publishing over 170 scholarly peer-reviewed articles. In recent years she has concentrated on the relationship between nutrition and health, tackling such topics as Alzheimer’s, autism, and cardiovascular diseases, as well as the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health."