Food, Food Safety and Recipes

[psbfan9]

An interesting recipe website.

Key Ingredient

 

[psbfan9]

The 'whole' truth about Whole Foods Market.

Article.

Whole Foods confirms it knowingly sells products containing Monsanto's genetically modified corn: Don't ask, don't tell!

Video.

Whole Foods Hidden Camera GMO Sting - Organic Spies - CENSORED by YouTube - NaturalNews.tv



Natural health news

 

[psbfan9]

Are GMO foods safe? No. No they are not. Here's a letter written by Dr.Tom Huber, Purdue University Ag professor to Tom Villisack Secretary of Agriculture.
In the letter
Dr.Huber states that a virus has been found that has, that has been PROVEN, to be causing some very serious health effects in animals, including spontaneous abortions, and that this virus can be passed from animals to humans when we eat animals that have been GMO feed.

Dr. Don Huber's cover letter to the EU and UK commissions

India has banned GMO eggplants because independent studies have found them to be toxic to humans.

 

[Grador]

Nothing on there had anything to do with GMOs being unsafe and everything to do with the use of roundup. There is nothing inherently dangerous about GMOs.

 

[psbfan9]

Nothing on there had anything to do with GMOs being unsafe and everything to do with the use of roundup. There is nothing inherently dangerous about GMOs.

Then you didn't read the article.

Read the article and then maybe we can have an informed and intelligent conversation.

The first sentence states;
we are experiencing a large number of problems in production agriculture in the U.S. that appear to be intensified and sometimes directly related to genetically engineered (GMO) crops, and/or the products they were engineered to tolerate –

The loss of disease resistance in Roundup Ready® sugar beets.The loss of genetic resistance in Roundup Ready® corn hybrids. Roundup Ready® alfalfa. The disease resistant sugar beets, alfalfa and corn are GMO crops. Anything that is labeled Round Up ready is GMO.

Deleterious effects of GM crops also are vividly demonstrated in reports from livestock producers in the U.S.

The recent Indian Supreme Court’s independent analysis and Ruling that GMO egg plant posed a significant health risk to humans needs further evaluation in the U.S.

Based on the scientific evidence currently accumulating, I do not believe it is in the best interests of the agricultural producer or consuming public for regulatory agencies to approve more GMO crops, particularly Roundup Ready® alfalfa and sugar beets,

 

[Grador]

Yes, all roundup ready is GMO, but the problems with using roundup (which you would only use on roundup ready crops) is NOT an inherent property of GMOs. Roundup ready crops are not the only GM crop, and I strongly disagree with putting a dark cloud over an entire area of research and practice because some portions of it have issues.

I view it akin to claiming that psychological treatment is evil because lobotomies aren't the cure to things.

 

[psbfan9]

I see your point.
But, GMO crops are like cigarette smoke. It can contaminate a large space quickly and ruin a traditionally planted field. Depending on which chemical company is genetically modifying the plant, that plant is made to be resistant to that specific company's weed killer. So that's where you have the same inherent problem with all GMO crops. Except maybe papaya that has been modified. The jury is still out on that. There is soon to be no such thing as unmodified corn or soy beans.

If these products are so safe, then why isn't there more testing or transparency in studies done by the chemical co's. These GMO foods are being manufactured by Dupont, Syngenta, and the worst of the lot, Monsanto. The same biotech companies who have been found guilty of hiding toxic effects of their chemical products are in charge of determining whether their GM foods are safe. Industry-funded GMO safety studies are too superficial to find most of the potential dangers, and their voluntary consultations with the FDA are widely criticized as a meaningless façade

In 2009, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) stated that, "Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with genetically modified (GM) food," including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. The AAEM has asked physicians to advise all patients to avoid GM foods.

About 19% of GM crops produce their own pesticide. Another 13% produce a pesticide and are herbicide tolerant. This does not sound appetizing or healthy to me.

Well documented health hazards, not opinion;

• Soy allergies skyrocketed by 50% in the UK, soon after GM soy was introduced.
• A skin prick allergy test shows that some people react to GM soy, but not to wild natural soy.
• Cooked GM soy contains as much as 7-times the amount of a known soy allergen.
• GM soy also contains a new unexpected allergen, not found in wild natural soy.
• GM soy drastically reduces digestive enzymes in mice. If it also impairs your digestion, you may become sensitive and allergic to a variety of foods.
• Mice fed Bt-toxin started having immune reactions to formerly harmless foods.
• Mice fed experimental GM peas also started reacting to a range of other foods.(The peas had already passed all the allergy tests normally done before a GMO gets on the market. Only this advanced test, which is never used on the GMOs we eat, revealed that the peas could actually be deadly.)
• More than half the babies of mother rats fed GM soy died within three weeks.
• Male ratsand mice fed GM soy had changed testicles, including altered young sperm cells in the mice.
• The DNA of mouse embryos functioned differently when their parents ate GM soy.
• The longer mice were fed GM corn, the less babies they had, and the smaller their babies were.
• Babies of female rats fed GM soy were considerably smaller, and more than half died within three weeks (compared to 10% of the non-GM soy controls).
• Female rats fed GM soy showed changes in their ovaries and uterus.
• By the third generation, most hamsters fed GM soy were unable to have babies.
• Thousands of sheep, buffalo, and goats in India died after grazing on Bt cotton plants after harvest. Others suffered poor health and reproductive problems.
• Farmers in Europe and Asia say that cows, water buffaloes, chickens, and horses died from eating Bt corn varieties.
• About two dozen US farmers report that Bt corn varieties caused widespread sterility in pigs or cows.
• Filipinos in at least five villages fell sick when a nearby Bt corn variety was pollinating.
• The stomach lining of rats fed GM potatoes showed excessive cell growth, a condition that may lead to cancer. Rats also had damaged organs and immune systems.

 

[Grador]

You will get no argument from me that testing needs to be done, and there are certainly risks involved in some choices. Those bullet points may be true, but given how incredibly awful some are there is obviously far more going on than can be accounted for. For instance "More than half the babies of mother rats fed GM soy died within three weeks." Given that humans aren't dropping like flies there are far more factors that need to be considered here.

The one thing I always ask about GMO food is, how is it appreciably different than selective breeding that has been done for many many years?

 

[Grador]

To specify my point there a little more: My problem is that most studies seem to be by people who have an agenda, and they both have semi-convincing proof for their sides. Anything by someone without a vested interest that I have seen has been quite inconclusive.

 

[psbfan9]

. For instance "More than half the babies of mother rats fed GM soy died within three weeks." Given that humans aren't dropping like flies there are far more factors that need to be considered here.

The one thing I always ask about GMO food is, how is it appreciably different than selective breeding that has been done for many many years?

I agree there are more things to consider here. While humans are not dropping like flies there are some things that have been directly related to the consumption, and sometimes breathing, or even coming in contact with GMO's that have caused sickness.

Genetic modification goes way beyond grafting, hybridizing, and cross pollinating. It's combining cells of different species to create a plant that may look like corn, but is far from a 'normal' corn plant. You can breed a horse with a donkey but the offspring, a mule, is infertile. And so are these GMO crops. A plant, food source plant, that produces it's own herbicide/pesticide does not sound safe or appetizing to me.

To specify my point there a little more: My problem is that most studies seem to be by people who have an agenda, and they both have semi-convincing proof for their sides. Anything by someone without a vested interest that I have seen has been quite inconclusive.

Sure, I see your point. The thing here is that Monsanto, Dupont, and Syngenta have provided limited study papers on GMOs to the FDA. They simply say, "It's safe". These companies, especially Monsanto and Dupont are not known for their honesty or concern for public health. Google Monsanto Anniston Alabama.

I think people falling ill from breathing bt-cotton pollen, getting sick from eating GMO eggplant, infertility in cows and pigs from GMO feed is pretty convincing to me.

 

[Grador]

GMOs do go beyond the ability of grafting and hybridization, but that doesn't make it appreciably different in result. It allows you to introduce genes found in plants not related enough to crossbreed. Many plants you do eat produce "herbicides" and "pesticides." Do you enjoy coffee? The purpose of caffeine is very likely to kill off things that would otherwise eat the plant making it a "pesticide." Now I as well am weary of this and would really like to see more testing done, but a lot of the "pesticides" and "herbicides" that we add to these plants are already produced in other plants, many that we eat.

A large number of GMO plants are not infertile, a great number of cross pollinated plants are though. This has actually caused issues with monsanto's crops causing a few cases where people have gotten sued by replanting.

I think people falling ill from breathing bt-cotton pollen, getting sick from eating GMO eggplant, infertility in cows and pigs from GMO feed is pretty convincing to me.

From what I've read bt-cotton is pretty bad stuff, you'll find no disagreement from me. They are less regulated since you aren't eating the cotton, it is unfortunate that farm workers and people living near the fields have to deal with this.

You should NOT find these animal issues convincing though, animals are only very tentative analogs for human toxicity. As an example chlorinated dioxins which are quite hazardous [but generally not fatal] to humans in moderate doses are fatal to rats in extremely low doses. Rats are considered one of the best models for toxicity study.

Possibly a more related example would be persin toxicity in dogs. Persin is a natural antifungal that avocados produce that is considered harmless in humans, but it will most certainly kill your dog. Would you take the death of dogs that are fed avocado as a sign that avocados are unsafe for you to eat?

Additionally do you find avocados containing a fungicide to "not sound safe or appetizing"? No person put that in, it is all natural and evolved in on its own. If i were to go one step further and say that I have now made a strawberry that produces this same compound in a proportional manner would these strawberries now become unsafe to eat?

 

[psbfan9]

GMOs do go beyond the ability of grafting and hybridization, but that doesn't make it appreciably different in result. It allows you to introduce genes found in plants not related enough to crossbreed. Many plants you do eat produce "herbicides" and "pesticides." Do you enjoy coffee? The purpose of caffeine is very likely to kill off things that would otherwise eat the plant making it a "pesticide." Now I as well am weary of this and would really like to see more testing done, but a lot of the "pesticides" and "herbicides" that we add to these plants are already produced in other plants, many that we eat.

I disagree. Why do organ recipients need to take anti rejection medications? These hosts plants are given genetically altered genes that are unnatural. Even though, in most cases, organ recipients are given organs from the same species there is still a risk of toxicity or rejection by the host because something foreign has entered the host.



A large number of GMO plants are not infertile, a great number of cross pollinated plants are though. This has actually caused issues with monsanto's crops causing a few cases where people have gotten sued by replanting.

Yes. This is why Monsanto has a legal team the size California. They have sued farmers when their GMO crops have pollinated natural crops.



From what I've read bt-cotton is pretty bad stuff, you'll find no disagreement from me. They are less regulated since you aren't eating the cotton, it is unfortunate that farm workers and people living near the fields have to deal with this.

Cool! We agree!

You should NOT find these animal issues convincing though, animals are only very tentative analogs for human toxicity. As an example chlorinated dioxins which are quite hazardous [but generally not fatal] to humans in moderate doses are fatal to rats in extremely low doses. Rats are considered one of the best models for toxicity study.

I'll get back to you on this...

Possibly a more related example would be persin toxicity in dogs. Persin is a natural antifungal that avocados produce that is considered harmless in humans, but it will most certainly kill your dog. Would you take the death of dogs that are fed avocado as a sign that avocados are unsafe for you to eat?

I'm familiar with toxin in plants being harmful to animals. I used have a very large house plant collection. Then, the cat came... so I did a good bit research and most of my collection was given away.
No, I would not take the death of a dog as a sign avocados are unsafe. This 'dog seath' analogy may be a bit of a slippery slope though. My wife is allergic to nuts. I'm not. What is in the nuts that are 'toxic' to her that doesn't affect me? We are talking natural, not man made, genetically altered.


Additionally do you find avocados containing a fungicide to "not sound safe or appetizing"? No person put that in, it is all natural and evolved in on its own. If i were to go one step further and say that I have now made a strawberry that produces this same compound in a proportional manner would these strawberries now become unsafe to eat?

My answer is yes, avocados containing fungicide do not sound safe or appetizing. But, I eat avocados. I use avocado oil. Sound hypocritical? See your next sentence.
My problem with GMOs is, the plants have had genes from unrelated species modified and added back to the host plant. These genes have been genetically altered to contain 'man made' synthetic pesticides and herbicides, and that does not sound safe or appetizing.

Again, Monsanto and Dupont have proven they do not care about public safety and will lie in order to make a buck. Why should I trust them with my food?

Have you had a chance to look up Anniston Al.?

 

[Grador]

I disagree. Why do organ recipients need to take anti rejection medications? These hosts plants are given genetically altered genes that are unnatural. Even though, in most cases, organ recipients are given organs from the same species there is still a risk of toxicity or rejection by the host because something foreign has entered the host.

This is now really how that works at all, it's completely incomparable. The gene being different, which it really isn't, is no big deal if it functions the exact same. If the gene were really that different it wouldn't function.... If you're interested I can give a far more detailed explanation of what is different about those scenarios.

You still have no argument from me about the companies involved. I'm only trying to dispel this general malese about GMO as a practice. I think it's likely going to be more than vital to keep this world fed in the fairly near future.

I have not had a chance to look up Anniston, I will read up tomorrow as I am interested, though I really don't think it will have any bearing on what I have been saying.

Edit: Just read up, this literally has nothing to do with GMOs

 

[psbfan9]

This is now really how that works at all, it's completely incomparable. The gene being different, which it really isn't, is no big deal if it functions the exact same. If the gene were really that different it wouldn't function.... If you're interested I can give a far more detailed explanation of what is different about those scenarios.

You still have no argument from me about the companies involved. I'm only trying to dispel this general about GMO as a practice. I think it's likely going to be more than vital to keep this world fed in the fairly near future.

I have not had a chance to look up Anniston, I will read up tomorrow as I am interested, though I really don't think it will have any bearing on what I have been saying.

Edit: Just read up, this literally has nothing to do with GMOs

The genes are different, hence modified. The genes that the plants are getting not a natural part of the host plant. It's like adding genes of a cat to a dog.
If it is so safe, why won't these biotech/chemical co.'s allow or be more open about testing?

You asked about unbiased tests earlier in our conversation. The animals that have died or had spontaneous abortions did not show a bias.

Anniston is indirectly related to GMOs. It shows the lack of ethics by the company making this franken food. They have long history of showing disregard for human and environmental health.

Some background. My grandparents were farmers. I have an uncle has a 900 acre farm. He raises soy beans, corn and hogs. We have long conversations about these things and I have seen first hand how manipulative these companies are to farmers. It's sickening. These GMOs are not the safe plants the public and farmers are being told they are. That's first hand, personal knowledge. Not something from the internet or a biased scientific report.

 

[Grador]

You asked about unbiased tests earlier in our conversation. The animals that have died or had spontaneous abortions did not show a bias.

Unbiased, but of extraordinarily low generalizability.

For my background I'm a biologist, I have no vested interest in GMOs and have never worked in that particular sector.

I guess my question is, do you believe that there is now and will never be such a thing as a safe GMO?

 

[psbfan9]

I guess my question is, do you believe that there is now and will never be such a thing as a safe GMO?

Yes. I think it can be done.

 

[psbfan9]

Since we're asking questions, I have a couple for you. I see you're in SoCal. Why did these food co's. spend so much money to defeat prop 37? I don't understand these co's resistance to labeling. Why can't I make own decision on whether I want to eat it?
Are you familiar with rBGH? Would that be considered a GE product? That stuff is bad, very bad, yet the FDA is considering GE salmon. I see no difference in the two. Both are growth hormones and it seems that the GE salmon would carry the same ill affects as the rGBH milk.

 

[Grador]

There's a huge stigma against GM foods, just based off of that labeling requirements would have been a huge hit to their bottom line. That is a pretty good reason to try and stop labeling.

As far as I know rBGH has never been linked to any change in milk that causes any problems in humans. I have done no reading on it's effects upon the meat. I am however against that for the effects on the cows themselves.

As for salmon, I've read nothing about this so I can make no real statements. The only thing I will say is that the use of growth hormone on an animal meant to produce milk and one meant to eat would be 100% incomparable. The biological effects of an overabundance of growth hormone [or any hormone really] will do very different things to different systems in a creature.

 

[Rickster71]

The 'whole' truth about Whole Foods Market.

Article.

Whole Foods confirms it knowingly sells products containing Monsanto's genetically modified corn: Don't ask, don't tell!

Video.

Whole Foods Hidden Camera GMO Sting - Organic Spies - CENSORED by YouTube - NaturalNews.tv



Natural health news

I doubt there's much we can do about GMO's.
Since President Obama has appointed the former Monsanto Vice President to a senior position at the FDA.
He also signed HR933 into law. 'Monsanto Protection Act': 5 Terrifying Things To Know About The HR 933 Provision

 

[psbfan9]

you have no idea how disappointed i am with this president. I have written/emailed, and called all my senators/congress people.

Here's a very enlightening video.

Institute for Responsible Technology