13:51
By COGwriter
What are GMOs? Since they were not in the food supply until 1994, how could they possibly relate to Bible prophecy? Do GMOs put the USA and others at risk? What are some of those risks?
This article will attempt to answer those and other questions.
GMOs are Genetically-Modified Organisms. Basically scientists change the genetic code of a plant or animal, often by including part of the genetic code of a different species into it.
Here is one definition and comments:
What are GMOs?
GMOs, or “genetically modified organisms,” are plants or animals that have been genetically engineered with DNA from bacteria, viruses or other plants and animals. These experimental combinations of genes from different species cannot occur in nature or in traditional crossbreeding.Virtually all commercial GMOs are engineered to withstand direct application of herbicide and/or to produce an insecticide. Despite biotech industry promises, none of the GMO traits currently on the market offer increased yield, drought tolerance, enhanced nutrition, or any other consumer benefit. http://www.nongmoproject.org/learn-more/
GMOs (also referred to as genetically-engineered foods) are intended to increase crop yield and tend to support the profitability of a USA-based company called Monsanto (and another company, the Switzerland-based Syngenta).
Those GMOs involving animals, especially two or more different animal species are called chimeras (see also Chimeras: Chimeras: Has Science Crossed the Line?).
Monsanto and USA government officials tends to insist that GMOs are safe.
GMOs are sold in grocery and other food stores.
More and more foods and products are being genetically engineered or contain genetically engineered ingredients. Here are eight of the most common to look out for. If a product contains these ingredients and is not labeled non-GMO Verified or Organic Certified, there’s a good chance it contains GMOs:
- Alfalfa
- Canola
- Corn
- Cotton
- Papaya
- Soy
- Sugar Beets
- Zucchini and Yellow Summer Squash
ALSO high-risk: animal products (milk, meat, eggs, honey, etc.) because of contamination in feed...
What product ingredients commonly contain genetically engineered crops?
Amino Acids, Aspartame, Ascorbic Acid, Sodium Ascorbate, Vitamin C, Citric Acid, Sodium Citrate, Ethanol, Flavorings (“natural” and “artificial”), High-Fructose Corn Syrup, Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein, Lactic Acid, Maltodextrins, Molasses, Monosodium Glutamate, Sucrose, Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP), Xanthan Gum (http://action.greenamerica.org/p/salsa/web/common/public/signup?signup_page_KEY=7626&gclid=CMTz9bigzbcCFWIV7Aod2V0AEw)
The first GMO in the food supply was the "Flavor Savr" tomato in 1994, but it was not a particular commercial success, and left the food supply in 1997. The company that introduced it, Calgene, was later acquired by Monsanto.
It is not just plants that are affected by the GMO world.
In Canada, they display some "spider goats":
Two genetically engineered (also called genetically modified or GM, transgenic) goats are now on display at the Canada Agriculture Museum, Central Experimental Farm in Ottawa. The goats were engineered with genetic material from spiders to create spider silk from their milk, for making military grade textiles. (http://foodfreedomgroup.com/2012/04/01/canada-promotes-transgenic-goats-at-ag-museum/ viewed 06/05/13)
Mixing arachnids (a biblically unclean creature) with goats (a biblically clean creature) seems biblically wrong and naturally crazy. Health Canada is also considering approving some type of GMO pig so it will have less phosphorus in its feces.
There have also been GMO experiments to put human genes into cows to make a different type of baby formula, sponge genes into potatoes so that the top portion will wilt to alert farmers when they need to irrigate, mixing mouse genes with cows, etc.
GMOs may be able to destroy the natural environment and produce odd type of plants, and possibly people. Notice the following from Harvard and the World Health Organization (WHO):
Modified organisms can, in addition, escape from greenhouses and fields and aquaculture cages into natural, or quasi-natural, ecosystems, and disrupt their biodiversity.
GM foods may also damage biodiversity, for example, by promoting greater use of certain pesticides associated with GM crops that are particularly toxic to many species, and by introducing exotic genes and organisms into the environment that may disrupt natural plant communities and other ecosystems. (Harvard. Genetically Modified Foods. ©2012 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College. Published by the Center for Health and the Global Environment. http://chge.med.harvard.edu/topic/genetically-modified-foods viewed 06/05/13)
Gene transfer. Gene transfer from GM foods to cells of the body or to bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract would cause concern if the transferred genetic material adversely affects human health. This would be particularly relevant if antibiotic resistance genes, used in creating GMOs, were to be transferred. ...the probability of transfer is low...
Outcrossing. The movement of genes from GM plants into conventional crops or related species in the wild (referred to as “outcrossing”), as well as the mixing of crops derived from conventional seeds with those grown using GM crops, may have an indirect effect on food safety and food security. This risk is real, as was shown when traces of a maize type which was only approved for feed use appeared in maize products for human consumption in the United States of America...
Issues of concern include: the capability of the GMO to escape and potentially introduce the engineered genes into wild populations; the persistence of the gene after the GMO has been harvested; the susceptibility of non-target organisms (e.g. insects which are not pests) to the gene product; the stability of the gene; the reduction in the spectrum of other plants including loss of biodiversity; and increased use of chemicals in agriculture. The environmental safety aspects of GM crops vary considerably according to local conditions. (WHO. 20 questions on genetically modified foods. World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/ viewed 06/05/13)
Also, GMOs may contaminate the natural environment, produce unnatural plants, cause humans to get genetically affected, and are a risk to food security.
There have been massive drops in the honey bee population. So much so, some have suggested that the food supply of the USA, for example, is at risk (see Nearly One Third of American Bees Died: Is Famine Coming to the USA?).
It is such a concern overseas that the Europeans have banned certain pesticides for three years to see if that may help their population recover. But it is not just Americans and Europeans that have concerns. Russia is very concerned as the following shows:
The shocking minutes relating to President Putin’s meeting this past week with US Secretary of State John Kerry reveal the Russian leaders “extreme outrage” over the Obama regimes continued protection of global seed and plant bio-genetic giants Syngenta and Monsanto in the face of a growing “bee apocalypse” that the Kremlin warns “will most certainly”lead to world war.
According to these minutes, released in the Kremlin today by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation (MNRE), Putin was so incensed over the Obama regimes refusal to discuss this grave matter that he refused for three hours to even meet with Kerry, who had traveled to Moscow on a scheduled diplomatic mission, but then relented so as to not cause an even greater rift between these two nations.
At the center of this dispute between Russia and the US, this MNRE report says, is the “undisputed evidence” that a class of neuro-active insecticides chemically related to nicotine, known as neonicotinoids, are destroying our planets bee population, and which if left unchecked could destroy our world’s ability to grow enough food to feed its population.
So grave has this situation become, the MNRE reports, the full European Commission (EC) this past week instituted a two-year precautionary ban (set to begin on 1 December 2013) on these “bee killing” pesticides following the lead of Switzerland, France, Italy, Russia, Slovenia and Ukraine, all of whom had previously banned these most dangerous of genetically altered organisms from being used on the continent.
http://www.eutimes.net/2013/05/russia-warns-obama-global-war-over-bee-apocalypse-coming-soon/
Bees are needed to pollinate many foods. Losses of bees truly put the human food supply at risk. Syngenta recognizes a problem with bees, but does not seem to believe that its products are part of the problem:
There is a lot of publicity throughout Europe blaming pesticides called neonicotinoids for the decline in honey bees and other pollinators...It is clear that the honey bee, which is vital to farming and food production, is beset by a range of different and complicated health threats. (Plight of the Bees. http://www.syngenta.com/eame/plightofthebees/en/Pages/home.aspx viewed 06/05/13)
The interaction between agriculture and bees is a sensitive one. The balance is very precise, as is the ecology...In the past few years, Europe has experienced a decline in the health of managed honey bees which has resulted in damage to colonies and populations. Many different possible causes have been suggested and promoted. But the overall scientific consensus is that the health decline is caused by many different factors acting together, and principal among them are the parasitic mite Varroa, viruses carried by mites, Nosema ceranae, and the loss of suitable habitats and nutrition. The declines in Europe and the USA are not replicated in other regions. (Plight of the Bees. http://www.syngenta.com/eame/plightofthebees/en/causes/Pages/causes.aspx viewed 06/05/12)
At least Syngenta recognizes that the ecological balance needs to be precise. Yet, adding GMOs into the mix affects the ecological balance.
Furthermore, I should add that many in Europe are not thrilled with GMOs and are concerned that a trade deal with the USA called TTIP could make them have to accept them:
April 19, 2015
Hundreds of demonstrations have taken place worldwide against a planned free trade agreement between the US and the EU – in one of the largest series of protests so far. …
Of all European counties, resistance to the proposed agreement is arguably strongest in Germany.
One poll found 43 percent of people thought TTIP to be “bad”, compared to 30 percent of Germans who said it was “good”.
Some believe the pact will threaten health and safety standards in food.
“We say NO, we don’t want this. We have enough going on here in Germany with genetically modified food,” said one woman at the Munich protest. http://www.euronews.com/2015/04/19/stop-ttip-protests-in-europe-and-beyond-against-us-eu-trade-pact/
So, many in Europe (wisely) do not want GMOs. As far as trade deals go, see also WTO/TTIP and the Babylonian Beast.
Some have falsely claimed that there are no health risks to humans or animals in consuming GMOs. Yet, there have been reports of problems.
Here is one related to pigs:
(Reuters) - Pigs fed a diet of only genetically modified grain showed markedly higher stomach inflammation than pigs who dined on conventional feed, according to a new study by a team of Australian scientists and U.S. researchers...
The study was published in the June issue of the peer-reviewed Journal of Organic Systems by researchers from Australia who worked with two veterinarians and a farmer in Iowa to study the U.S. pigs...
One group of 84 ate a diet that incorporated genetically modified (GM) soy and corn, and the other group of 84 pigs ate an equivalent non-GM diet. The corn and soy feed was obtained from commercial suppliers, the study said, and the pigs were reared under identical housing and feeding conditions. The pigs were then slaughtered roughly five months later and autopsied by veterinarians who were not informed which pigs were fed on the GM diet and which were from the control group.
Researchers said there were no differences seen between pigs fed the GM and non-GM diets for feed intake, weight gain, mortality, and routine blood biochemistry measurements.
But those pigs that ate the GM diet had a higher rate of severe stomach inflammation - 32 percent of GM-fed pigs compared to 12 percent of non-GM-fed pigs. The inflammation was worse in GM-fed males compared to non-GM fed males by a factor of 4.0, and GM-fed females compared to non-GM-fed females by a factor of 2.2. As well, GM-fed pigs had uteri that were 25 percent heavier than non-GM fed pigs, the study said. (Gillam C. Scientists say new study shows pig health hurt by GMO feed. Reuters, June 11, 2013. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/11/us-gmo-pigs-study-idUSBRE95A14K20130611 viewed 06/29/13)
There are also other reports that various animals attempt to avoid consuming GMO feed when given a choice.
We made a video related to the use of pigs, simian species, and humans:
13:51
BBC reported about what it called an animal that would be half-human and half-pig. Is such a thing possible? Are chimeras for real? What about a “humanzee”? Are scientists really working on these type of creatures? Is this good? Can something truly be half human and half animal? How are humans different from animals? What is the ‘spirit in man’? What is man? Dr. Thiel addresses these issues and more with biblical-based responses.
Here is a link to our video: Half human, half pig: What’s the difference?
When God created everything in Genesis 1, He said everything He made was good:
31 Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. (Genesis 1:31)
Notice how God made the creation:
11 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth"; and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:11-12)
20 Then God said, "Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens." 21 So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." (Genesis 1:20-22)
24 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind"; and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:24-25)
GMOs are about stopping life from reproducing after its own kind. This clearly violates Genesis 1:22. But that is what GMOs are all about.
Thousands of years ago, God inspired one of his prophets to pen the following, which encourages people to eat what is good:
2 Why do you spend money for what is not bread, And your wages for what does not satisfy? Listen carefully to Me, and eat what is good, And let your soul delight itself in abundance. (Isaiah 55:2)
GMOs and lab-grown 'food' has risks. So many so, it is not prudent to say that they are good to eat.
Some contend that GMOs are essentially identical to real food, thus are not a threat. Do they have a point?
Notice the following improper defense of GMOs:
June 5, 2013
Perhaps the most difficult thing about being a science journalist is combating and extinguishing malevolent myths, which always seem to spread faster and further than the actual truth. The largest falsehood currently in circulation is that GMOs represent a threat – to our health, to our environment and to our food supply. But nothing could be further from the truth.
GMOs are nutritionally indistinguishable from their non-GMO counterparts...Like agriculture or hunting-and-gathering, GMOs leave an impact on the environment. Some of it is bad, like when farmers overuse the herbicide glyphosate, which in turn may speed the evolution of "superweeds."...
But the science consistently shows that GMOs pose no threat to our health. Therefore, it would make about as much sense to put a warning label on GMO corn as it would to place a warning label on corn grown in Nebraska. In summary, GMOs really aren't controversial in the scientific community. http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-consumers-be-worried-about-genetically-modified-food/the-pervasive-myth-that-gmos-pose-a-threat
While GMOs may not be controversial to the parts of the "scientific community" that does not look into it in depth, as well as scientists affiliated with certain corporations and government entities, the reality is that they are controversial and are not "nutritionally indistinguishable" to there non-gmo counterparts.
The fact is that GMO "foods" are not chemically-identical to non-GMO foods. One reason, for example, is that many produced by Monsanto are designed to be resistant to their trademarked herbicide called Round-Up. Round-Up kills most non-GMO plants, but not the ones that Monsanto sells that are "Round-Up" resistant. GMOs therefore are certainly biological distinguishable.
Thus, they cannot be nutritionally-identical because they are not chemically-identical.
Furthermore, it needs to be understood that government officials publicly considered that human-created partially hydrogenated trans-fatty acids were safe for general consumption until about a century after they had been in the food supply (see FDA finally rules that hydrogenated trans-fatty acids are not safe). How many decades will it take for them to realize that GMOs are not safe?
Notice the following:
Deadly ‘super mosquitoes that are even tougher’ accidentally created by scientists after bungled experiment
Updated September 18, 2019
GENETICALLY modified mosquitoes that were designed by scientists to help populations decrease are actually thriving.
This is according to new research that claims the plan to create gene-hacked mosquitoes that have offspring which die immediately has spectacularly backfired and now scientists don’t know what will happen next.
The modified mosquitoes were released in Jacobina in Brazil and were supposed to mix with the local population and decrease numbers with their weak offspring genetics.
Although the wild population did plummet for a short while, 18 months later it was right back up again.
This is mostly concerning because scientists think the new ‘super mosquitoes’ have properties that might make them harder to kill.
Research about the pests has been published in the journal Nature Scientific Reports. …
Mosquitoes like the Aedes aegypti variety that was edited can carry dangerous diseases like yellow fever, Zika virus and Malaria.
This is why efforts are being made to reduce their numbers.
However, now traces of the genetically modified genes have been found in the natural population.
This means they are successfully interbreeding. …
The offspring of the gene-hacked mosquitoes and the natural ones are thought to be more robust but whether they pose a threat is unknown.
Researcher Jeffrey Powell told News Atlas: “It is the unanticipated outcome that is concerning.” https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/9947305/deadly-super-mosquitoes-accidentally-created/
So, scientists are concerned about “the unanticipated outcome.” Having mosquitoes that are “more robust” makes them harder to kill and, thus tends to increase their longevity.
Well, I anticipated something just like this when I reported about the release of GMOs mosquitoes on July 28, 2018. Here are some of my posted warnings.
Mosquitoes can carry and spread many diseases.
But releasing genetically-modified ones into the wild presents unknown risks.
One assumption that scientists have tended to make with genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) is that if they do not see any dangers, then there are none. That is foolish, yet that continues to be the view of the pro-GMO crowd.
While there certainly are risks associated with contracting the Zika virus (see Zika is more dangerous than many thought; USA has its first Zika death), this ‘solution’ poses risks to various parts of the ecosystem as well as the possibility that some of the offspring produced will have greater longevity as opposed to greatly reduced longevity.
The vast quantity of mosquito offspring increases the possibility that there will be some that have the opposite traits that the GMO crowd is hoping to get. And if this occurs, this could cause much greater problems than the GMO ‘solution’ was supposed to fix. …
Genetically modified mosquitoes pose dangerous risks. (Thiel B. Genetically-modified mosquitoes have been released to ‘fight Zika’. COGwriter, July 28, 2018)
GMOs are very dangerous precisely because scientists CANNOT ANTICIPATE all the potentially negative outcomes.
Super-mosquitoes are a health-risk.
Think the world is prepared for this or other possible pandemics?
Notice the following report:
September 18, 2019
A report compiled by an independent group of experts claims that governments and NGOs are woefully unprepared for the next big pandemic, while subsequently warning of a “very real threat” for a global-scale pandemic to kill 50 million to 80 million people.
“The world is at acute risk for devastating regional or global disease epidemics or pandemics that not only cause loss of life but upend economies and create social chaos,” grimly proclaims the report, published today by the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB).
The independent group, co-convened by the World Health Organization and the World Bank, warns that the world is increasingly facing an array of dire health risks and that preparedness efforts at the state-level are sorely lacking. https://gizmodo.com/the-world-is-grossly-unprepared-for-the-next-major-pa-1838226470
Mosquitoes, GMO or otherwise, have major potential to spread pestilences and cause pandemics.
Notice also the following:
May 28, 2000
A leading zoologist has found evidence that genes used to modify crops can jump the species barrier and cause bacteria to mutate, prompting fears that GM technology could pose serious health risks.
A four-year study by Professor Hans-Hinrich Kaatz, a respected German zoologist, found that the alien gene used to modify oilseed rape had transferred to bacteria living inside the guts of honey bees. ...
The 47-year-old Kaatz has been reluctant to talk about his research until it has been published in a scientific journal, because he fears a backlash from the scientific community similar to that faced by Dr Arpad Pustzai, who claimed that genetically modified potatoes damaged the stomach lining of rats. Pustzai was sacked and had his work discredited. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2000/may/28/gm.food?CMP=share_btn_tw
It was never humanly possible to thoroughly test GMO foods. And, from an environmental perspective, how GMOs could interfere with biological entities.
Scientists do not know as much as many hope they do.
Some cracks in the vulnerability of GMOs have been discovered. Notice the following:
February 3, 2014
(CNN) — Most people like to know what they are eating. However, labeling for genetically modified organisms is not required in any state. This is largely because of the money expended by GM seed producers toward blocking food-labeling laws.
A common claim made by this group is that GM foods have been proved safe to eat and that there is a global scientific consensus to support this statement; therefore, no labeling is needed.
However, an examination of the scientific data, along with discussions on this topic in other countries, show that both claims are blatantly false…
With the promise of reducing the use of agricultural chemicals, most of the current GM crops are supposedly either insect or herbicide resistant. In reality, GM crops have fostered an epidemic of herbicide resistant weeds and insects that are no longer killed by the built-in toxins.
The result is a massive increase in herbicide use — an additional 527 million pounds over the past 16 years…An Associated Press story in October documented the large increase in cancer and birth defects in commercial farming areas of Argentina since the introduction of GM crops. These data confirm recent animal studies showing that GM corn and the herbicides sprayed on it caused a dramatic increase in cancer in the same strain of rats used in FDA drug safety tests…
In reality, there is no evidence that GM food is safe for human consumption, nor is there any consensus on this topic within the scientific community.
It is critical for the public to educate itself about the realities of GMOs and not be fooled by the rhetoric from companies that sell it.
Most of the world has studied this issue and concluded that GMOs are not worth the risk. http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/03/opinion/schubert-gmo-labeling/
Furthermore notice, for an example, a type of corn humanly engineered to thwart a certain bug now has resistance to what was supposed to kill it:
Monsanto Corn Plant Losing Bug ResistanceWall Street Journal – Aug 29, 2011Widely grown corn plants that Monsanto Co. genetically modified to thwart a voracious bug are falling prey to that very pest in a few Iowa fields, the first time a major Midwest scourge has developed resistance to a genetically modified crop.
The discovery raises concerns that the way some farmers are using biotech crops could spawn superbugs.
Iowa State University entomologist Aaron Gassmann’s discovery that western corn rootworms in four northeast Iowa fields have evolved to resist the natural pesticide made by Monsanto’s corn plant…http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904009304576532742267732046.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection
This news item provides further secular proof that my long-held beliefs concerning the risks of genetically-modified foods are getting more current scientific validation. Corn, more properly known as maize, is a very important food crop in the USA. Furthermore, as Wikipedia reports, 85% of the US maize crop was genetically modified in 2009. This increased dependance upon genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) for the American food supply is putting the USA at tremendous risk
Superweeds pose GM-resistant challenge for farmers
BBC – Sept 18, 2012US farmers are facing a growing challenge from weeds resistant to chemical sprays, and enduring millions of dollars in losses as a result. The so-called “superweeds” have arisen because of the success of genetically modified crops, which now account for the vast majority of US corn, soya and cotton.Genetically engineered (GE) crops are often discussed as the way to feed the world’s growing populations and to mitigate the affects of climate change. But the spreading of those same genetically engineered traits to weeds is now well documented. Invasive plants become “super weeds” and insects develop resistance to the trait, making them even tougher to fight than they were before the use of GE crops.How Genetically Modified Corn Is Creating Super Worms
There’s “mounting evidence” that Monsanto Co. (MON) corn that’s genetically modified to control insects is losing its effectiveness in the Midwest, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said.Monsanto’s worst resistance problem is with crops engineered to tolerate its Roundup herbicide. “Superweeds” that Roundup no longer kills have invaded as many as 20 million acres (8.1 million hectares) of corn and soybeans, according to a Dow study. As many as 28 million acres of cotton, soybean and corn may host Roundup-resistant weeds by 2015, according to Basel, Switzerland-based Syngenta.
Corn fields in four states — Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota and Nebraska — were overrun by rootworm last year, prompting the EPA to say in a November memo that Monsanto’s bug-killing corn may be losing its effectiveness. The agency also said at the time that Monsanto’s program for monitoring suspected cases of resistance was “inadequate.”http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-04/-mounting-evidence-of-bug-resistant-corn-seen-by-epa.html
A five year study on proposed GMO wheat found that it failed to protect against aphids, like scientists claimed it should:
Insect pheromones offer potential for managing pests of crop plants. Volatility and instability are problems for deployment in agriculture but could be solved by expressing genes for the biosynthesis of pheromones in the crop plants. This has now been achieved by genetically engineering a hexaploid variety of wheat to release (E)-β-farnesene (Eβf), the alarm pheromone for many pest aphids, using a synthetic gene based on a sequence from peppermint with a plastid targeting amino acid sequence, with or without a gene for biosynthesis of the precursor farnesyl diphosphate. Pure Eβf was produced in stably transformed wheat lines with no other detectable phenotype but requiring targeting of the gene produced to the plastid. In laboratory behavioural assays, three species of cereal aphids were repelled and foraging was increased for a parasitic natural enemy. Although these studies show considerable potential for aphid control, field trials employing the single and double constructs showed no reduction in aphids or increase in parasitism. (Bruce TJA, et al. The first crop plant genetically engineered to release an insect pheromone for defence. Scientific Reports 5, Published 25 June 2015)
June 25, 2015
A genetically engineered wheat that gives off a special smell designed to repel aphids has flopped in field-scale tests, underscoring the difficulty of harnessing the controversial technology.
Scientists said the result was disappointing but they aim to amend the process to do better in future, believing that genetic modification (GM) offers a way to develop resilient crops that don't need to be sprayed with pesticides.
Critics, however, fear such GM plants risk contaminating the environment and could jeopardise the food chain.
The work at Britain's Rothamsted Research institute in southern England was the first test of a crop engineered to release an anti-insect pheromone, or smell, and it provoked protests from anti-GM activists who threatened -- but failed -- to rip up the plants.
While the crop survived human attack, however, it fared less well against the aphids.
Results from the five-year project published in the journal Scientific Reports on Thursday showed the GM wheat did not repel aphid pests in the field as hoped, despite initial success in laboratory tests.
Aphids damage wheat by sucking sugar out of plants and spreading viruses, prompting extensive spraying with insecticides made by companies like Bayer and Syngenta. ...
It is not clear why the GM crop failed to work as expected... http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/06/25/science-gmo-wheat-idINL8N0Z81Y420150625
The problem with GMOs is that scientists really do NOT understand all the ramifications of them--how they claim they will work and reality is not always the same.
Notice also the following report:
GMO SEEDS ALREADY OBSOLETE?
March 2, 2021
If you’re a GMO seeds proponent, or an employee of Mon(ster)santo or I.G. Farbensanto, don’t say we didn’t warn you. Our warning was that by trying to create genetically modified crops that would repel pests, that nature would adapt to the modifications faster than research laboratories could adapt GMOs to nature’s adaptations, thus rendering them not only potentially obsolete, but by creating a pest problem, endangering the food supply (and don’t forget those falling crop yields-per-acre that the University of Iowa documented a couple of years ago with respect to GMO yields: falling yields + higher costs to maintain GMO crops = GMO failure, and cost effectiveness makes natural seeds over the long term a better investment. Now it’s officially come home to roost, according to this article shared by B.:
There’s much to note about this article, but there was one thing that it stated that leaped out at me:
For the $55 billion genetically modified seed industry, the news hasn’t been good lately. The great “successes” of Bt corn and cotton seeds are turning to failure as insects such as corn rootworms and cotton bollworms are developing resistance to the GMO crops. As a result, farmers have to spray more toxic insecticides to kill the resistant insects.
The situation has become so bad that the Environmental Protection Agency has proposed phasing out more than 40 varieties of Bt corn and cotton over the next three to five years as a way to reduce the insect resistance.
Meanwhile, herbicide-tolerant GMO soybeans are facing massive weed resistance problems. With U.S. farmers spraying 300 million pounds of glyphosate on their fields each year, weeds have naturally developed resistance. Monsanto and other biotech companies’ solution was to develop new GMO seeds that would work with dicamba and 2,4-D herbicides, which are more toxic than glyphosate and prone to drift, causing damage to other crops.
The result has been a disaster. Dicamba has damaged millions of acres of non-dicamba tolerant soybeans as well as other crops, fruit orchards, millions of trees, and gardens in the past four years. The largest peach producer in Missouri lost 30,000 trees to dicamba drift damage. He sued Monsanto, now Bayer, and won a $265 million settlement. One farmer even murdered another over a dicamba drift dispute.
GMO seeds are failing because GMO technology is short-sighted and supports a failing system of agriculture. GMOs still dominate U.S. corn, soybean, and cotton production but I believe their days are numbered. They are going against the trends in agriculture, which are toward regenerative and organic methods.
A growing number of farmers are focusing on practices to build soil health such as planting cover crops and diverse crop rotations and grazing livestock. Because of those practices, regenerative farmers find they no longer need the GMO seeds, and they are also able to slash their use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers.(Boldface emphasis added)
“… a failing system of agriculture”: Let those words sink in. And let the other words “the result has been a disaster” sink in too. But wait, there’s more:
The main point is that soil health and regenerative practices are the leading trends in agriculture today, and as farmers journey on the path to soil health, many don’t see the need to plant GMO seeds.
GMO seed technology was designed to work with a system of industrial agriculture whose toxic effects—pesticides that threaten human health, depleted and eroded soils, polluted waterways from fertilizer runoff, greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change, among others—are becoming more apparent and threatening to the world. As more farmers move away from this system toward regenerative and organic practices, the use of ag chemicals and GMOs will fall away.
Biotechnology proponents point to the emergence of gene editing, and say that new gene edited seeds and crops will be developed. They say these crops will increase crop yields, produce more nutritious foods, reduce pesticide use, and help to “feed the world.” Wait, wasn’t that the promise of the “old” GMO seeds? Gene editing supporters say the technology is precise. But a study published in Nature magazine last July found that gene editing of human embryonic cells caused “chromosomal mayhem.” That isn’t precise. Similar genetic mayhem has been seen in gene edited rice and other crops. Gene edited crops will have the same problems as the older GMO crops, and consumers will likely reject them.(Boldface emphasis added)
In other words, human genetic tinkering is creating chaos in agriculture; think of the growing number of stories about adverse reactions to the mRNA covid “vaccines” and transfer that to crops and you get the picture: we are playing with systems which in spite of our vaunted “science” we do not yet completely understand, and in our rush to “play” with them and “improve” them, are creating a mess, possibly one that could threaten the food supply. And in both cases, crops and “vaccines”, the model used is one to maximize profits of a few big corporations. Why sponsor hydroxychloroquine for covid, when it’s so cheap, when profits can be maximized for a “vaccine” which comes with all sorts of health risks. Why sponsor ordinary seeds, when GMO seeds and their associated pesticides are so much more expensive, and can maximize profits? https://gizadeathstar.com/2021/03/gmo-seeds-already-obsolete/
Yes, GMOs of various types have severe risks.
A while back a pro-GMO source put together the following:
GMOs: Are they really that bad?
November 14, 2019
I guess I’ll never understand why there are so many people that think GMOs are the devil. Especially when there’s scientific proof that says they legit are fine for us. https://whbl.com/podcasts/ag-news-on-demand/111666/gmos-are-they-really-that-bad/
Scientific “proof” that says GMOs are fine?
Notice the following:
Are GMOs safe?
Most developed nations do not consider GMOs to be safe. In more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs. In the U.S., the government has approved GMOs based on studies conducted by the same corporations that created them and profit from their sale. Increasingly, Americans are taking matters into their own hands and choosing to opt out of the GMO experiment…In the U.S., GMOs are in as much as 80% of conventional processed food. Click here for a current list of GMO risk crops.
GMOs were developed to increase profits. Politicians receive money from many profit-oriented corporations, and this tends to blind them to listen to opposing views.
I have been warning about GMOs for some time. Back in 1999, I started to get published for my positions against genetically-modified foods (Thiel R. Labeling of genetically modified foods should be a fundamental consumer right. HealthKeepers, 2000; 2 (3):16-19; Thiel R. ANMA’s official position on genetically-modified foods. ANMA Monitor, 1999;3(4)5-8).
Notice the following prophecy which shows that destruction comes after pestilence:
GMOs are susceptible to pestilences in ways that other crops are not.4 What the chewing locust left, the swarming locust has eaten;
What the swarming locust left, the crawling locust has eaten;
And what the crawling locust left, the consuming locust has eaten.5 Awake, you drunkards, and weep;
And wail, all you drinkers of wine,
Because of the new wine,
For it has been cut off from your mouth.
6 For a nation has come up against My land,
Strong, and without number;
His teeth are the teeth of a lion,
And he has the fangs of a fierce lion. (Joel 1:4-6)
Are GMOs safe. Notice the following:
Are GMOs safe?
Most developed nations do not consider GMOs to be safe. In more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs. In the U.S., the government has approved GMOs based on studies conducted by the same corporations that created them and profit from their sale. Increasingly, Americans are taking matters into their own hands and choosing to opt out of the GMO experiment...In the U.S., GMOs are in as much as 80% of conventional processed food. Click here for a current list of GMO risk crops.
Some have claimed that rats fed GMO corn developed tumors and organ damage:
Rats fed a lifetime diet of Monsanto's genetically engineered corn or exposed to the company's popular Roundup herbicide developed tumors and suffered severe organ damage, according to a French study...The study links varying levels of both the Roundup herbicide and the transgenes in Monsanto's patented NK603 corn to mammary tumors and severe liver and kidney damage.
The rats were either fed the NK603 corn alone, corn treated with agricultural levels of Roundup, or given water treated with Roundup at low levels commonly found in contaminated drinking water and used in agriculture in the United States. In each group, there were two to three more deaths among female rats compared to control groups, and the rats on the Monsanto diet tended to die more quickly. (Ludwig M. French Study Finds Tumors and Organ Damage in Rats Fed Monsanto Corn. September 19, 2012. http://truth-out.org/news/item/11639-french-study-finds-tumors-and-organ-damage-in-rats-fed-monsanto-corn viewed 06/05/13)
While some have dismissed the above study, the reality is that it is giving humans an indication that GMOs do present health risks. Notice also:
A delegation of politicians and community activists gathered on August 7 in La Leonesa, a small farm town in Argentina, to hear Dr. Andres Carrasco speak about a study linking a popular herbicide to birth defects in Argentina's agricultural areas.
But the presentation never happened. A mob of about 100 people attacked the delegation before they could reach the local school where the talk was to be held...Carrasco is a lead embryologist at the University of Buenos Aires Medical School and the Argentinean national research council. His study, first released in 2009 and published in the United States this past summer, shows that glyphosate-based herbicides like Monsanto's popular Roundup formula caused deformations in chicken embryos that resembled the kind of birth defects being reported in areas like La Leonesa, where big agribusinesses depend on glyphosate to treat genetically engineered crops.
The deformations resulted from much lower doses of herbicide than those commonly found on crops, according to the study.
Biotech chemical giant Monsanto patented glyphosate under the trade name Roundup in the 1970's. (Ludwig M. War Over Monsanto Gets Ugly. November 9, 2010. http://archive.truthout.org/war-over-genetically-modified-crops-gets-ugly-birth-defects-superweeds-and-science-intimidation64915 viewed 06/05/13)
Notice also the following:
“Is Genetically Modified Food Killing Us?” Alex Daley asks in today’s Daily Reckoning. “Probably not,” he confidently responds to his own question. But the worldwide scientific community is slightly less confident. The long-term effects of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are simply unknowable…
No, the problem with GMOs is not that they might kill us; the problem is that we have no idea how they might kill us. We have no idea if they might harm us quickly, or slowly…or not at all.
More importantly, we have no idea if — down the road — they might catastrophically alter the genetic traits of various organisms — in particular, the human organism. Therefore, the entire GMO experiment promises feast or famine…literally. (Eric Fry)
The new wheat is in early-stage field trials (i.e., it’s been planted to grow somewhere, but has not yet been tested for human consumption), part of a multi-year process on its way to potential approval and not unlike the rigorous process many drugs go through. The researchers conducting this trial are using RNAi to turn down the production of glycogen. They are targeting the production of the wheat branching enzyme which, if suppressed, would result in a much lower starch level for the wheat. The result would be a grain with a lower glycemic index — i.e., healthier wheat.
This is a noble goal. However, Professors Heinemann and Carman warn, there’s a risk that the gene-silencing done to these plants might make its way into humans and wreak havoc on our bodies. In their press conference and subsequent papers, they describe the possibility that the siRNA molecules — which are pretty hardy little chemicals and not easily gotten rid of — could wind up interacting with our RNA.
If their theories prove true, the results might be as bad as mimicking glycogen storage disease IV, a super-rare genetic disorder which almost always leads to early childhood death…the wheat might cause very severe adverse reactions in humans. (Alex Daley) (Daily Reckoning. November 28, 2012)
Here is a report from Harvard:
The decrease in glutelin levels in rice, for example, was associated with an unintended increase in levels of compounds called prolamines, which can affect the nutritional quality of rice and increase its potential to induce an allergic response. (Harvard. Genetically Modified Foods. ©2012 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College. Published by the Center for Health and the Global Environment. http://chge.med.harvard.edu/topic/genetically-modified-foods viewed 06/05/13)
Notice also the following:
CRISPR gene-editing tool causes unintended genetic mutationsMay 29, 2017It's not hyperbolic to say that the CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing technique has been a revolutionary breakthrough, allowing scientists the ability to quickly, easily and precisely edit sections of DNA. But questions over how precise the CRISPR tool is have been raised in a new study from Columbia University Medical Center, which shows this gene-editing technology can introduce hundreds of unintended mutations into the genome....
In examining the entire genome from the CRISPR-treated mice, they found that the tool had successfully corrected the specific gene they were targeting, but it also potentially caused a great deal of other genetic changes. In two CRISPR-treated animals, more than 100 large gene deletions or insertions and over 1,500 single-nucleotide mutations were identified.Most significantly, all of these identified mutations were not picked up by the general computer algorithms most researchers use to look at the off-target effects of CRISPR-editing. There were no obvious or immediately deleterious effects in the animals from these unexpected mutations, but it is unknown what longer term effects the altered genes could have.
"Researchers who aren't using whole genome sequencing to find off-target effects may be missing potentially important mutations," says co-author Dr. Stephen Tsang. "Even a single nucleotide change can have a huge impact." http://newatlas.com/crispr-gene-editing-causes-mutations/49762/
Scientists simply CANNOT anticipate all the negative potential of GMOs.
The fact is that GMOs are not natural foods and pose a lot of health risks. Despite what various science and health professionals wish to imply, the plain truth is much about nutrition is simply not known. What is known is that humans survived on non-GMO foods for millenia. GMOs simply have not been tested enough to insure that they will not cause problems.
There is a major push to produce engineered, laboratory-grown, 'meat':
“Big Ag’s” Conflicting Positions About Regulating New Food Technologies
June 14, 2019
New food technologies are poised to transform the trillion-dollar meat industry. …Beyond Meat—a plant-based meat company best known for its “Beyond Burger” and “Beyond Sausage”—has relished one of the “biggest-popping IPOs” since 2000.
In light of these successes, it is remarkable to say that plant-based meat may actually be the less disruptive of the new meat innovations. A second wave of companies has been using stem cells to create meat that is identical, at the cellular level, to animal flesh. This meat has yet to reach the marketplace, but it has already become the subject of heated legal debates. People have called the product by names ranging from “IVF meat” and “lab-grown meat” to “clean meat” and “slaughter-free meat,” depending on their angle. Throughout this article, for ease of discussion, I will refer to it with the neutral term “cell-based meat.”
Two issues quickly rose as the legal “hot topics” concerning cell-based meat: which agency—the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) or the Department of Agriculture (“USDA”)—would regulate these products, and how the agency would require companies to label them. “Big Ag” industry organizations, which profit from raising and slaughtering animals, proposed the following: the USDA should regulate cell-based meat, and that agency should restrict cell-based meat companies’ use of words like “meat” on their labels.
Creating meat from stem cells is simply a new production process—and unlike pumping antibiotics into animals, the introduction of cell-based meat will alleviate animal suffering, environmental damage, and human health concerns. The end product of this process, as the National Cattlemen and the NAMI acknowledged in their bid for USDA jurisdiction, is as much “meat” under the FMIA as slaughtered animals are. Cell-based meat companies therefore have the right to call their products “slaughter-free meat,” “cruelty-free meat,” “antibiotic-free meat,” or simply “meat”—and nothing in the law tells them otherwise. https://verdict.justia.com/2019/06/14/you-cant-have-your-meat-and-eat-it-too-big-ags-conflicting-positions-about-regulating-new-food-technologies
No, laboratory grown cells are not producing the same ‘meat’ product as actually-raised animals do.
This is another example of money influencing food production.
There simply have not been sufficient studies to prove proper safety and health impacts, nor is it practical to do them. In order to do this, millions of people would need to be involved. And the time period would need to be enough to cover 3-5 generations–it would probably need to take between 200-400 years to be able to have the data to come to a proper scientific conclusion about that. And, of course, that has not happened. Nor will that happen.
Consider also the following about studies on regular food:
November 4, 2019
A major reason why the nutrition science field is in turmoil is because the science itself is so complicated. Researchers can’t feasibly lock up people for decades and meticulously track their diets. Even if they could, people eat so many different foods in different combinations that isolating the impact of one variable is incredibly difficult. https://www.politico.com/news/agenda/2019/11/04/why-we-dont-know-what-to-eat-060299?utm_source=pocket-newtab
If sufficient studies cannot be done on regular foods, how can any claim that GMOs have been sufficiently tested?
Well, the reality is that GMOs have not been.
There is a significant mutant risk for GMOs that the US government has tended to intentionally overlook:
The U.S. National Academies of Science warned in 1989 and again in 2004 that regulating genetically modified crops while giving a pass to products of mutation breeding isn’t scientifically justified.
Health Risks
The increase in mutation breeding raises questions of fairness and safety compared with genetic engineering, a regulated technique used by companies such as Monsanto Co. that involves transferring specific genes from one species to another. Monsanto’s Roundup Ready soybean, a blockbuster product in the U.S. and Brazil, can’t be grown in the European Union, where national governments have cited concerns about risks to health and the environment.
In contrast, mutagenesis deletes and rearranges hundreds or thousands of genes randomly. It uses a man-made process that mimics with a greater intensity what the sun’s radiation has done to plants and animals for millennia, spawning mutations that sometimes are beneficial or hazardous to the organism.
The randomness makes mutagenesis less precise than St. Louis-based Monsanto’s genetically modified organisms, known as GMOs, the NAS said in a 2004 report. It’s the breeding technique most likely to cause unintended genetic changes, some of which could harm human health, the academy said. (Kaskey J. Mutant Crops Drive BASF Sales Where Monsanto Denied: Commodities. Bloomberg, November 13, 2013. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-13/mutant-crops-drive-basf-sales-where-monsanto-denied-commodities.html
As happens in politics in the USA, a bill that was supposed to do one thing, had an attachment to do something not related to the intent of the bill:
Critics slam Obama for “protecting” Monsanto
There’s no love lost between Washington and the American public, it seems, five days after Congress for the first time in years managed to handle a budget-related issue without reaching the brink of crisis.
Protesters have descended on Pennsylvania Avenue outside the White House this week, enraged at a potentially health-hazardous provision they allege lawmakers inserted surreptitiously into a continuing resolution (CR) that will fund the government through the remainder of the fiscal year. The bill sailed through the Capitol on Friday; President Obama signed it into law on Tuesday.
Opponents have termed the language in question the “Monsanto Protection Act,” a nod to the major agricultural biotech corporation and other like firms geared at producing genetically modified organisms (GMO) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds and crops. The provision protects genetically modified seeds from litigation suits over health risks posed by the crops’ consumption. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57576835/critics-slam-obama-for-protecting-monsanto/
Obama signs ‘Monsanto Protection Act’ written by Monsanto-sponsored senator
United States President Barack Obama has signed a bill into law that was written in part by the very billion-dollar corporation that will benefit directly from the legislation.
On Tuesday, Pres. Obama inked his name to H.R. 933, a continuing resolution spending bill approved in Congress days earlier. Buried 78 pages within the bill exists a provision that grossly protects biotech corporations such as the California-based Monsanto Company from litigation.
With the president’s signature, agriculture giants that deal with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds are given the go-ahead to continue to plant and sell man-made crops, even as questions remain largely unanswered about the health risks these types of products pose to consumers. http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-bill-blunt-agriculture-006/
Overseas, this is not making the USA popular.
Around the world, thousands marched against the Missouri-headquartered multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation called Monsanto:
May 26, 2013…
Organizers said “March Against Monsanto” protests were held in 52 countries and 436 cities, including Los Angeles where demonstrators waved signs that read “Real Food 4 Real People” and “Label GMOs, It’s Our Right to Know.”
Genetically modified plants are grown from seeds that are engineered to resist insecticides and herbicides, add nutritional benefits or otherwise improve crop yields and increase the global food supply. Most corn, soybean and cotton crops grown in the United States today have been genetically modified. But critics say genetically modified organisms can lead to serious health conditions and harm the environment. The use of GMOs has been a growing issue of contention in recent years, with health advocates pushing for mandatory labeling of genetically modified products…
Protesters in Buenos Aires and other cities in Argentina, where Monsanto’s genetically modified soy and grains now command nearly 100% of the market, and the company’s Roundup-Ready chemicals are sprayed throughout the year on fields where cows once grazed. They carried signs saying “Monsanto-Get out of Latin America”
In Portland, thousands of protesters took to Oregon streets. Police estimate about 6,000 protesters took part in Portland’s peaceful march, and about 300 attended the rally in Bend. Other marches were scheduled in Baker City, Coos Bay, Eugene, Grants Pass, Medford, Portland, Prineville and Redmond.
Across the country in Orlando, about 800 people gathered with signs, pamphlets and speeches in front of City Hall. Maryann Wilson of Clermont, Fla., said she learned about Monsanto and genetically modified food by watching documentaries on YouTube.
“Scientists are saying that because they create their own seeds, they are harming the bees,” Wilson told the Orlando Sentinel. “That is about as personal as it gets for me.” http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/05/25/global-protests-monsanto/2361007/
In order to take full control of the global food chain the world’s largest owner of patents on seeds Monsanto is lobbying, bribing, suing small farmers out of business and altering scientific research, geopolitical analyst F. William Engdahl told RT.
Hundreds of thousands around the world gathered on Saturday in a global move dubbed ‘March Against Monsanto’.
Protesters all across the US joined the march calling for a boycott of Monsanto products, following the Senate’s decision to turn down a bill which requires the labeling of GM food.
RT: What’s wrong with GM food?
William Engdahl: The fundamental problem with GM food that it’s genetically and biologically unstable. There’s no genetic modification known to science and this I have from some of top scientists in the world on this question that’s stable – it’s always mutating. And No.2, all the GM products that are in the human and animal food chain over the last 20 years are modified primarily to do one thing – 80 per cent of all the GM is modified to accept chemicals, the pesticides. Monsanto Roundup being the most prominent of them, which are highly, highly toxic and they’re modified to be resistant to that deadly chemical so that it kills everything inside, except the Monsanto corn or the Monsanto soy beans or what will you. All those chemicals are equally as dangerous to the human food chain as the GMO seeds themselves. http://rt.com/op-edge/monsato-manipulation-food-chain-799/
There are many, many risks with GMO crops.
As far as bees go, their population keeps dropping (see Nearly One Third of American Bees Died: Is Famine Coming to the USA?). Furthermore, there are a lot of unanticipated problems from GMOs. For example, because of the use of GMO corn, the amount of milkweeds have diminished–hence the herbicide intent of GMOs has negative side effect.
Notice:
December 31, 2014
Over the past 20 years, North America’s population of monarch butterflies has declined by a catastrophic 90 percent, a plight that may be caused by pesticides and loss of the once-vast acres of wild milkweed that are the creatures’ food source. But now with some fearing that the butterflies — many of which migrate 3,000 miles from Canada and the U.S. to Mexico — are in danger of vanishing completely, the federal government may finally intervene.
On Dec. 29, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced that it is launching a scientific review to determine whether the monarch butterfly should be protected by law under the Endangered Species Act, a 1973 law designed to protect species from becoming extinct.
The law not only bans the killing designated species or harming it in other ways, but it also requires federal officials to work with state and local agencies to come up with a recovery plan for restoring its numbers. … Xerces tied the decline of monarchs to the widespread planting of genetically modified corn and soybean crops in the U.S. Midwest, where most of the butterflies are born. The GMO plants are designed to be immune to an herbicide that kills off milkweed. http://news.discovery.com/animals/monarch-butterfly-may-join-endangered-species-list-141231.htm
WASHINGTON— In response to a petition by the Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, Xerces Society and renowned monarch scientist Dr. Lincoln Brower, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said today that Endangered Species Act protection may be warranted for monarch butterflies. The agency will now conduct a one-year status review on monarchs, which have declined by 90 percent in the past 20 years. …
The butterfly’s dramatic decline is being driven in large part by the widespread planting of genetically engineered crops in the Midwest, where most monarchs are born. The vast majority of genetically engineered crops are made to be resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, a potent killer of milkweed, the monarch caterpillar’s only food. The dramatic surge in Roundup use with Roundup Ready crops has virtually wiped out milkweed plants in Midwestern corn and soybean fields. In the past 20 years it is estimated that these once-common iconic orange and black butterflies may have lost more than 165 million acres of habitat — an area about the size of Texas — including nearly a third of their summer breeding grounds.
The population has declined from a recorded high of approximately 1 billion butterflies in the mid-1990s to only 35 million butterflies last winter, the lowest number ever recorded. http://www.xerces.org/2014/12/29/monarch-butterfly-moves-toward-endangered-species-act-protection/
September 14, 2015
Since 1997, the estimated monarch population has decreased from one billion to 56.6 million.
The monarchs’ only habitat and food supply, the milkweed plant, is quickly being eradicated through the use of glyphosate, the primary ingredient in Monsanto's popular weed-killing herbicide Roundup. ...
In June the EPA announced that it will spend the next five years studying the effects of Roundup on more than 1,500 endangered species, including the monarch. This study is the result of a settlement between the EPA and the Center for Biological Diversity, a San Francisco-based group that sued the agency in 2007 for violating the Endangered Species Act.
"The EPA apparently plans to study the monarch migration to extinction,” said Dr. Sylvia Fallon in June, an NRDC senior scientist and director of its Wildlife Conservation Project. “It’s inexcusable for the EPA to call for more time to show glyphosate’s harm while at the same time approving new glyphosate-based pesticides that kill the sole food source monarchs need to live.” ...
"Everyone loves the monarchs, including the Obama White House," said Dr. Fallon. "But love isn’t going to save monarchs from glyphosate." http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2015/0913/Dwindling-North-American-monarchs-begin-3-000-mile-journey-video
There are many, many risks with GMO crops. Because of the use of GMO corn, the amount of milkweeds have diminished–hence the herbicide intent of GMOs has negative side effect. This in turn has diminished the amount of monarch butterflies as they benefit from milkweed. In our local area here, the migration of the monarch butterflies to Pismo Beach from November through February draws a lot of tourists. But the numbers coming to Pismo Beach have tended to drop.
Could the loss of monarch butterflies be the proverbial "canaries in the coal mine?" A creature whose death should serve as a warning to humans? I believe so.
But it is worse that that. Scientists are combining a variety of animal genes as well as creatures like spiders, etc. This is not going to end well.
As far as nutritional benefits of GMOs, many of those ‘benefits’ are based upon a lot of assumptions that I do not believe hold up well in the real world and will leave at that for now.
While the supposed intent of GMOs is to increase the food supply and provide crops that are resistant to pesticides, the reality is that the GMO thrust is essentially based upon lust for profits. Notice also the following:
GMOs didn’t come to dominate our agricultural system simply because they’re awesome, and they’re not struggling for acceptance because the public is fearful and/or misinformed. Corporations made billions on GMOs and all we got was ethanol and an unsustainable diet. (Laskawy T. Frankenfoods: Good for Big Business, bad for the rest of us. May 2013 http://grist.org/food/frankenfoods-good-for-big-business-bad-for-the-rest-of-us/ viewed 06/05/13)
December 2, 2022
Many scientists lobbying for the deregulation of agricultural biotechnology ‘new genomic techniques’ (NGTs) in the European Union have either direct or indirect interests in commercialising and marketing new genetically modified organisms (GMOs). They have patents or patent applications or other connections to the seed industry.
That is the conclusion of a September 2022 investigatory report commissioned by the Greens/EFA in the European Parliament – Behind the smokescreen: Vested interests of EU scientists lobbying for GMO deregulation. These scientists will benefit financially or in terms of career development, either personally or through their organisations.
FOAM Organics Europe, an umbrella organisation for organic food and farming, notes that a group of 91 international scientists and policy experts have released a public statement opposing the use of the term ‘precision breeding’ to describe gene editing, on the grounds that it is “technically and scientifically inaccurate and therefore misleads parliament, regulators and the public” because gene editing is neither precise nor is it breeding.
FOAM quotes Claire Robinson, from industry watchdog GMWatch, who says:
“It is not only misleading but also dangerous, as deregulating these new techniques will have serious socio-economic consequences as well as potentially serious impacts on health and the environment.”
The European Court of Justice recognised this in 2018, ruling that organisms obtained with new genetic modification techniques must be regulated under the EU’s existing GMO laws. But there has been intense lobbying from the agriculture biotech industry to weaken the legislation: the industry had by late 2021 spent at least €36 million lobbying the EU.
The push for GMOs and their newer NGT versions is relentless – despite the risks and despite most of the public not wanting them. That is according to research by Pew Research Center conducted between October 2019 and March 2020. For instance, in Russia, 70% of the public regard GM foods as generally unsafe to eat. The figure is 62% in Italy, 58% in India and 57% in South Korea.
In reviewing research findings into public perceptions of GMOs, GMWatch concludes that many consumers do not want GM (including gene-edited) foods and a large majority want to see gene-edited foods assessed for safety and labelled. https://www.globalresearch.ca/who-needs-wants-gmos-not-public-not-india-farmers/5801009
As our video Lab grown chicken?, also points out, the Bible says, love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.
The Bible warns:
10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. (1 Timothy 6:10)
The production of GMO crops places massive amounts of the food supply at risk for destruction. While in nature, there is variety of crops, with GMO-crops there is a uniformity that is unnatural. This uniformity puts the entire crop at risk as if one plant succumbs to a pesticide, the entire crop is susceptible as well–this can lead to famines. Paul told Timothy that love of money can cause many sorrows. Notice that Jesus told of famines were one of the sorrows that would come:
8 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be earthquakes in various places, and there will be famines and troubles. These are the beginnings of sorrows. (Mark 13:8)
While multiple thousands have protested in the USA and internationally, the GMO industry pushes forward.
Notice the following:
March 27, 2015
While being filmed by French cable channel Canal+, GMO advocate Dr. Patrick Moore claimed that the chemical in the company's Roundup weed killer is safe for humans to consume and "won't hurt you."
He then refused to drink it when offered a glass by the interviewing journalist. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/03/27/monsanto-herbicide-roundup-cancer_n_6959300.html
March 27, 2015
PARIS -- Lobbyist Patrick Moore told a French TV interviewer Monsanto's Roundup weed killer is safe to drink -- but he subsequently declined an offered glass.
Moore told an interviewer for French station Canal that glysophate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is not responsible for rising cancer rates in Argentina.
The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer announced last week the results of a study that concluded the chemical is "probably carcinogenic to humans."
Moore countered the chemical is not harmful, even when directly ingested.
"You can drink a whole quart of it and it won't hurt you," he said.
Moore balked, however, when the interviewer offered him a glass of Roundup and asked if he would drink it.
"I'm not stupid," Moore said ... http://www.bignewsnetwork.com/index.php/sid/231456649
It is one thing to claim something, but consider that some truly know that some of what they say is not so. If Dr. Moore is NOT stupid, why did he indicate it was safe to drink Roundup, but then state it would be stupid for him to do so. Roundup is not safe.
A reader sent me a link to the following:
SHOCK as Trump signs executive order that will end most regulations and oversight on genetically engineered food
June 12, 2019
Even though Trump is far from an “establishment” Republican, to the frustration of health-conscious Americans, he just signed an executive order that might as well be called “the GMO Streamlining Act.” As reported by the Associated Press, this executive order directs federal agencies to reduce or eliminate regulations and oversight mechanisms that might help ensure the safety of genetically engineered crops.
In other words, President Trump just ordered the federal government to turn American into a massive GMO experiment where anything goes. “The move comes as companies are turning to newer genetic engineering techniques that make it easier to tinker with the traits of plants and animals,” reports AP, meaning that regulations are being dropped at exactly the moment in history when easy, low-cost genetic modification methods such as CRISPR are rapidly emerging, placing GE technology into the hands of small companies and even determined individuals.
Under the new rules, modern-day GMO corn and soybean crops would have never been subjected to safety testing at all. As AP reports:
Last week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture proposed changing its regulations in a way that would mean much of the genetically modified corn and soy grown in the U.S. today would not necessarily have been subject to special oversight.
In addition, the new streamlining would relax regulatory oversight of genetically engineered animals. https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-06-12-trump-signs-executive-order-genetically-engineered-food.html#
This was NOT a shock to me as Donald Trump is 1) interested in the farm-state vote, 2) is not known for appreciating benefits for a more natural diet, and 3) the following was already in my book Donald Trump and America’s Apocalypse:
Humans should eat what is good (cf. Isaiah 55:2). Donald Trump, like others before him, has made statements supporting the use of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) to be consumed as foods (Goldberg M. President-Elect Donald Trump and Organic Food – How Concerned Should We Be? Living MaxWell, November 10, 2016). Increased reliance on GMOs by the United States puts the nation at major risk for nearly complete crop failures. The Bible warns that famines (Matthew 24:7) and food shortages (Revelation 6:5-6) are coming and Donald Trump may further help set the stage for this. (Thiel B. Donald Trump and America’s Apocalypse. Nazarene Books, 2017)
Of course, Democrat and former US President Barack Obama was also pro-GMO.
Politicians are not GMO experts and sadly have allowed GMOs to proliferate.
Many things associated with GMOs are unknown, and most of what has gone wrong so far was "unexpected" by Monsanto and the government.
In the last few years, however, there have been unsettling "incidents": a shipment of organic corn from Texas was rejected by France (GMO foods are banned in Europe, Japan, Brazil, and other nations) because it contained the altered genes, apparently the result of pollen drifting from farms growing altered corn onto the fields of the organic farmers; a load of GMO corn not approved for human consumption ended up unannounced in Taco Bell's corn products; scientists found that Monarch butterflies were sickened and dying from exposure in the Midwest to GMO grain; Mexico, which does not allow GMO corn it its country, has found native varieties deep in the country's interior to be tainted by Monsanto's corn pollen, which had drifted hundreds of miles, much farther and in a much quicker time than the industry and our government thought possible. (Hightower J. Frankenfood Corporate bioengineers tinker merrily and dangerously with the DNA of food bioengineers tinker merrily and dangerously with the DNA of food. Utne, June 2004. http://www.utne.com/2004-06-01/frankenfood.aspx#axzz2VMR0LulS viewed 06/05/13)
Although ‘experts’ have claimed that there is no GMO wheat in the food supply, the USA government now has reason to doubt that (note bolding below is from me):
WASHINGTON — A strain of genetically engineered wheat never approved for sale or consumption by authorities was found sprouting on a farm in Oregon, the U.S. Agriculture Department said on Wednesday.
The wheat was developed years ago by biotechnology company Monsanto Co. but never put into use because of worldwide opposition to genetically engineered wheat…
Roughly half of the U.S. wheat crop is exported and most of the crop is used in making food such as breads, pastries, cookies and noodles. USDA officials said the Food and Drug Administration determined years ago there is no health risk to humans from the strain, though.
“Hopefully, our trading partners will be very understanding,” Michael Scuse, the acting U.S. deputy agriculture secretary, said at a briefing with reporters.
Scuse said trading partners and major customers for U.S. wheat had been informed of the discovery over the past day.
Genetically modified crops cannot be grown legally in the United States unless the government approves them after a review to ensure they pose no threat to the environment or to people.
Monsanto entered four strains of glyphosate-resistant wheat for U.S. approval in the 1990s but there was no final decision by regulators because the company decided there was no market.
The genetically modified wheat sprouted this spring on an Oregon farm, in a field that grew winter wheat in 2012.
When the farmer sprayed the so-called “volunteer” plants with a glyphosate herbicide, some of them unexpectedly survived. Samples were then sent to Oregon State University and to USDA for analysis…
Scuse and Michael Firko, who oversees USDA’s biotechnology approval process, said USDA was investigating how the strain appeared on the farm when no seeds should have been available for several years.
“I think it will have a significant impact,” said Ronnie Cummins, national director of the Organic Consumers Association, which battled to keep genetically modified wheat out of the marketplace years ago.
The U.S. Senate last week rejected by a wide margin a measure to allow states to order labeling of food made with genetically engineered, or GE, crops. Cummins said the discovery of the rogue plants in Oregon would accelerate efforts to require GE food labels. (US Finds Unapproved Genetically Modified Wheat in Oregon. Reuters. May 29, 2013. http://www.voanews.com/content/us-unapproved-genetically-modified-wheat-oregon/1670962.html viewed 05/29/13)
There are many, many risks with GMO crops. Notice that this crop allegedly occurred because “some of them unexpectedly survived.”
No matter what the USA government or other officials claim, there is no humanly possible way to guarantee that genetically-modified organisms ” no threat to the environment or to people.”
The fact that this GMO strain of wheat survived when presumably USA government and/or Monsanto scientists did not think that it could is further proof (there have been other “unexpected” incidents as well).
Some of the results are affecting the USA economically:
It has already begun: Japan has just cancelled a large contract to purchase U.S. wheat. “We will refrain from buying western white and feed wheat effective today,” Toru Hisadome, a Japanese farm ministry official in charge of wheat trading, told Reuters…Now we’re already seeing the result: the ditching of U.S. wheat by world nations that want nothing to do with GMOs.
Monsanto is a ticking time bomb for U.S. agriculture
This proves, without any question, that Monsanto’s genetic experiments which “escaped” into commercial wheat fields are now going to devastate U.S. wheat farmers. Expect the floor to drop out on wheat prices, and watch for a huge backlash against the USDA by U.S. farmers who stand to lose hundreds of millions of dollars on this.
As the USDA has now admitted, Monsanto’s GMO experiments from 1998 – 2005 were held in open wheat fields. The genetically engineered wheat escaped and found its way into commercial wheat fields in Oregon (and possibly 15 other states), causing self-replicating genetic pollution that now taints the entire U.S. wheat industry.
“Asian consumers are keenly sensitive to gene-altered food, with few countries allowing imports of such cereals for human consumption,” writes Reuters. It continues:
Asia imports more than 40 million tonnes of wheat annually, almost a third of the global trade of 140-150 million tonnes. The bulk of the region’s supplies come from the United States, the world’s biggest exporter, and Australia, the No. 2 supplier. Another incredible Monsanto achievement: the genetic contamination of the U.S. wheat supply
Nice job, Monsanto. You’ve managed to spew your genetic pollution across the fields of innocent U.S. farmers who are now going to lose huge sums of money due to the reject of U.S. wheat by all the other world nations that refuse to feed their populations GMO…
Genetically modified wheat is only the beginning. Monsanto has no doubt unleashed genetic pollution across many other crops as well. We’re now living in an age where Monsanto is essentially ejaculating its patented seed across all the farms of America, then claiming to “own” the contaminated crops. (Adams M. Monsanto is a Ticking Time Bomb for U.S. Agriculture: Japan halts Imports of U.S. Wheat after USDA’s Finding of Genetic Pollution from GMOs. Natural News, June 2, 2013. http://www.globalresearch.ca/monsanto-is-a-ticking-time-bomb-for-u-s-agriculture-japan-halts-imports-of-u-s-wheat-after-usdas-finding-of-genetic-pollution-from-gmos/5337283 viewed 06/02/13).
There are many risks of GMOs. And what may happen to the USA because of them will also be considered as "unexpected" by most government officials.
Back in 2010, I wrote:
I suspect that one of the biggest pestilences that will hit the USA and Canada will be when some pathogen(s) attacks one or more of their genetically-modified crops (also known as GMOs) and results in some type of famine within the North America (USA, UK, Canada, Australia, & New Zealand Facing Many Potential Pestilences).
The time is coming when the USA will have severe food shortages. And at that same time, the USA may have to provide grain to China and other creditors that it owes when some Americans will be starving. The reliance on genetically-modified grain crops will likely contribute to disaster in the USA.
Notice also:
Now it appears that GMO crop failures are growing. Do we face the risk of famine as well?
In 2009 the South African Corn Crop Failure was linked to GMO seeds(1). “On January 17 [2010], internationally recognized plant pathologist Dr. Don Huber, wrote a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack warning of the discovery of a new pathogen and a possible link between Roundup Ready® (GMO) corn and soybeans and severe reproductive problems in livestock as well as widespread crop failure.”(2)This past March, scientists with the Natural Society called for immediate action to stop the GMO crop failure threat(3).
The USDA did nothing...
The Biotech system, that provides through “user fees” most of the FDA and USDA budget, can never be questioned.
Could it be, though, that GMO cloned monoculture itself is to blame? Are these chimeric species failing when they face stressed conditions?...GMOs literally invade natural species and infect them with “alien” DNA. We need to rid the planet of these dangerous species that could lead to famine if not checked. (Bert G. Famine in America. July 11, 2012. http://drrimatruthreports.com/gmo-corn-crops-failing-in-the-usa-famine-to-follow/ viewed 06/05/13)
As the above suggests, the reality is that hunger is not just something that will affect children and poor outside the USA. More on chimeric species can be found in the article Chimeras: Has Science Crossed the Line?
One difference between conventional and GMO crops is that there is some biodiversity in conventional crops and almost none in GMO crops. This puts the entire GMO crop at risk of complete failure from pathogenic microorganisms. This greatly increases the risk of food shortages and famines.
According to the Bible, many in the USA will die from lack of food in the future and be taken captive. Notice:
47 “Because you did not serve the Lord your God with joy and gladness of heart, for the abundance of everything, 48 therefore you shall serve your enemies, whom the Lord will send against you, in hunger, in thirst, in nakedness, and in need of everything; and He will put a yoke of iron on your neck until He has destroyed you. 49 The Lord will bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flies, a nation whose language you will not understand, 50 a nation of fierce countenance, which does not respect the elderly nor show favor to the young. 51 And they shall eat the increase of your livestock and the produce of your land, until you are destroyed; they shall not leave you grain or new wine or oil, or the increase of your cattle or the offspring of your flocks, until they have destroyed you. (Deuteronomy 28:47-51)
9 Her uncleanness is in her skirts; She did not consider her destiny; Therefore her collapse was awesome; She had no comforter. “O Lord, behold my affliction, For the enemy is exalted!” (Lamentations 1:9)
19 “Arise, cry out in the night, At the beginning of the watches; Pour out your heart like water before the face of the Lord. Lift your hands toward Him for the life of your young children, Who faint from hunger at the head of every street.” (Lamentations 2:19)
9 Those slain by the sword are better off than those who die of hunger; For these pine away, Stricken for lack of the fruits of the field. 10 The hands of the compassionate women have cooked their own children; They became food for them in the destruction of the daughter of my people. (Lamentations 4:9-10)
4 We pay for the water we drink, And our wood comes at a price. 5 They pursue at our heels; We labor and have no rest. 6 We have given our hand to the Egyptians And the Assyrians, to be satisfied with bread. 7 Our fathers sinned and are no more, But we bear their iniquities. 8 Servants rule over us; There is none to deliver us from their hand”. (Lamentations 5:4-8)
10 Then He said to them, “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. 11 And there will be great earthquakes in various places, and famines and pestilences; and there will be fearful sights and great signs from heaven. (Luke 21:10-11)
5 When He opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature say, “Come and see.” So I looked, and behold, a black horse, and he who sat on it had a pair of scales in his hand. 6 And I heard a voice in the midst of the four living creatures saying, “A quart of wheat for a denarius, and three quarts of barley for a denarius; and do not harm the oil and the wine.” (Revelation 6:5-6)
It will probably take a “perfect storm” of events for this to occur including droughts, floods, earthquakes, civil unrest, hurricanes, tornadoes, gmo and other crop failure, combined with foreign events and/or the increasingly increased debt of the USA to trigger some of this (and not all will be related to, or limited to, the USA), but it will happen.
In the last century, prior to the introduction of GMO “foods”, the late Herbert W. Armstrong wrote:
And so man IS just what he eats. Some of the most famous physicians and surgeons have said that 90% to 95% of all sickness and disease comes from faulty diet!
Most people are in utter ignorance of the fact that it does make a difference what we eat! Most people, and the customs of society, have followed a regimen of eating whatever tastes good to the palate.
Adults are babies grown up. Observe a nine-month-old baby. Everything that comes into his hands goes to his mouth!
My youngest brother may not like to read this in print, but I remember when he was about nine months old, and had managed to creep into the basement coal bin. We found him trying to eat little chunks of coal—his mouth and face well blackened!
You may laugh at babies trying to eat silver cups and chunks of coal. Or at people who dip small mice into a sauce, and, holding them by their tails, drop them as a delicious delicacy into their mouths.
If you do, they will laugh back at you. They will tell you that mice eat clean grain and clean foods, while you dip slimy, slithery oysters and other scavenger seafoods into cocktail sauces, and consider them a delicacy!
You think adults have actually LEARNED any better than nine-month-olds babies? Go to your fancy grocer’s and you’ll find on his shelves canned eel and canned rattlesnake.
WHY? As I said, humans know nothing at birth! We have to learn! But most of us do not know that! And, again, what we don’t know, we don’t know that we don’t know! And somehow, ever since babyhood, most humans seem to have grown up putting everything into the mouth. Most have grown up eating just whatever seemed to taste good—and whatever they saw others eating. There has been little education or even study about WHAT we ought—or ought NOT—to eat.
Most degenerative diseases are modern diseases—penalties for eating foods that have been demineralized in food factories—usually an excess of starch, sugar (the carbohydrates) and fats. Others are caused by a type of malnutrition—lack of needed minerals and vitamins in foods. Then people try to put the “vitamins” back into their systems by buying pills at the drugstore! (More on this can be found in the article HWA: Third Law of Success: Good Health.)
Basically the Bible advocates eating real food (it does not consider unclean meats to be food) and not too much of it.
Jesus warned about a time of sorrows and famines:
7...And there will be famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows. (Matthew 24:7-8)
Could a massive loss of crops due to the reliance on genetically-modified organisms be a factor for this type of famine and the ultimate destruction of the USA and its Anglo-allies? This is a very real possibility.
The Bible warns:
13 But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. (2 Timothy 3:13)
Sadly, many who defend GMOs are deceived and truly do not properly represent true science, or what is "false called knowledge" (cf. 1 Timothy 6:20).
GMOs are not real food. Humans are supposed to eat real foods. GMOs are potentially harmful and a major risk.
The increasing reliance on genetically-engineered "foods" is putting the USA and its Anglo-allies at increased risk of destruction and famine (Matthew 24:7).
GMOs appear to violate various things that God said were good.
Do you avoid GMOs? Something to think about.
Thiel B. Ph.D. GMOs and Bible Prophecy. http://www.cogwriter.com/gmos-bible-prophecy.htm COGwriter (c) 2014/2015/2017/2019 /2021 0/2022 1204
