Saturday, March 21, 2015

GM Foods Should Be Banned and the Technology Stopped

GMO Plenary at Missouri Organic Conference
Robyn O’Brien was one of nine speakers at the GMO Plenary held at the Missouri Organic Conference in February

Expert GMO panel—held in Monsanto’s home state— speaks out about GM food, glyphosate dangers

Scientists, crop advisors, and educators highlight GMO risks from all sides
A “GMO Plenary” recently held in Missouri featured a panel of experts who discussed multiple health and environmental risks with genetically modified crops and foods and glyphosate herbicide.

The plenary, which was held at the Missouri Organic Conference in February in Springfield, Missouri, featured scientists, crop advisors, farmers, and educators.
Conference organizer Sue Baird said the plenary was purposely held in Missouri as a counterweight to the pro-GMO influence of St. Louis-based biotech giant Monsanto.

“Greatest civil rights issue of our time”

Plenary speakers attacked GMOs from all sides—from negative health and environmental impacts, spiritual implications, and FDA’s illegal GM food regulation to the lawsuit threat to farmers by Monsanto, GMO contamination of organics, lack of GMO labeling, and non-GMO market growth.

Keynote speaker and food advocate Robyn O’Brien described how she became involved in the GM food fight after her youngest daughter suffered a life-threatening allergic reaction to a food product.

Are we allergic to food or what’s been done to it?” she asked.

O’Brien cited statistics showing alarming rates of food allergies, autism, asthma, and cancer in children. She correlated the rise in these diseases to the introduction of GMOs in foods.
Correlation is not causation, but correlation of this magnitude demands investigation,” she said.

O’Brien called for mandatory GMO labeling. “Sixty percent of the world’s population is told (whether GMOs are in food), but in the US we have never been given that information,” she said.

O’Brien said the exploding demand for organic food indicates that a “food awakening” is happening in the US.

She called for everyone to work together on what she described as “the greatest civil rights issue of our time.”

Together we are so powerful,” O’Brien said.

“GM foods should be banned and the technology stopped”

Steven Druker, an attorney and executive director of the Alliance for Bio-Integrity, lambasted pro-GMO scientists, the biotech industry, and the US Food and Drug Administration, saying GM foods are not safe and are on the market illegally.

He discussed the L-tryptophan disaster in the late 1980s, when dozens of people died and hundreds maimed after consuming a GM version of the supplement.

It’s more likely than not that genetic engineering caused the toxic contamination that led to the deaths and illnesses,” said Druker, author of a hard-hitting new book about GMOs, Altered Genes, and Twisted Truth.

Druker said the FDA is violating its own policy on food additives, which states that additives developed through new technologies must be proven safe before they enter the market.
This food had no business going to market,” he said.

GM foods, Druker argued, haven’t been proven safe, are produced using a “reckless” technology, and the agency’s own scientists raised alarms about their safety in the early 1990s.
Government scientists raised concerns but they were ignored,” said Druker, who gained access to internal FDA documents revealing agency scientists’ objections to GM technology during his lawsuit against the agency.

As a result, Druker said: “These foods should be banned, and the technology should be stopped. It’s time to tell the truth.”

Glyphosate dangers

Robert Kremer, a microbiologist with the University of Missouri, discussed negative environmental risks with both GM crops and glyphosate herbicide, which is used extensively with the crops.

He said that GM seeds are “inherently weak,” citing an example of GM seed that had a germination rate of just 5% after being stored for two years compared to 75% for conventional seed stored for the same amount of time.

Kremer listed a range of negative impacts from glyphosate herbicide, including harm to beneficial soil microbes, increase of soil pathogens such as fusarium fungal toxins, and immobilization of nutrients such as manganese.

Glyphosate creates a proliferation of pathogens in the soil,” he said.

Kremer criticized the biotech industry’s “solution” to weed resistance to glyphosate, which are new GM crops that work with 2,4-D and dicamba herbicides.

2,4-D and dicamba resistant crops may make plants more susceptible to disease. This obviously won’t be a sustainable approach,” he said.

Finally, Kremer said “Food should be produced in a way that enhances environmental quality. It is in our interest to educate consumers about how GM crops and the use of glyphosate may impact agricultural production systems to develop an awareness of how our food is produced and how food quality might be affected.”

Glyphosate found everywhere

Iowa farmer and crop consultant Howard Vlieger also focused on harm caused by glyphosate. He said the herbicide is everywhere—in the air, waterways, and rain—according to the US Geological Survey. It’s also found in many food crops and foods, such as Froot Loops cereal.
What will it take to wake people up?” he asked. “You and I.” 

Agronomist Michael McNeil discussed the “shot in the dark” approach of genetic engineering that can cause harmful unintended consequences to other genes.

The industry tells us ‘we insert one gene and it doesn’t change much,’ but it does,” he said.

Jim Gerritsen, organic farmer and president of the Organic Seed Growers Trade Association, discussed the lawsuit his group filed against Monsanto to prevent the company from suing farmers whose crops are accidentally contaminated by the company’s patented GMOs.
Ken Roseboro, editor of The Organic & Non-GMO Report, highlighted the exploding demand for non-GMO foods spurred by companies such as Whole Foods, Ben & Jerry’s, and Chipotle.

© Copyright The Organic & Non-GMO Report, March 2015 

 By Ken Roseboro
Published: February 26, 2015 

SOURCE:  PLEASE: Visit the Non-GMOREPORT website, sign up for their newsletter and STAY INFORMED! 

Wednesday, January 7, 2015

New Study Concludes GMO Deleterious for Health

GMO found yet again as deleterious for health in new study.

Plasmid copyThe rats were fed an ordinary rat chow found to contain GMOs on PCR analysis using probes for the cauliflower mosaic virus 35S promoter, a gene control element in more than 80 % of commercial GM crops grown with potential health hazards predicted since 1999. 

Dr Mae-Wan Ho
Institute of Science in Society

Researchers led by Hanaa Oraby at Egypt’s National Research Center in Cairo are not the first to look for horizontal transfer of genetically modified (GM) DNA into animal cells, but certainly among the first to do an experiment aimed at detecting it and succeeded [1]. Horizontal gene transfer is the direct uptake of DNA (or RNA) into cells and integration of the sequence into the cell’s genome. Some of us regard horizontal gene transfer as the most serious hidden hazard of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) released into the environment ([2] Horizontal Gene Transfer – The Hidden Hazards of Genetic Engineering (ISIS special report). But a prevailing culture of denial by vested interests and regulators has obstructed proper investigation until very recently (see [3] Horizontal Transfer of GM DNA Widespread, SiS 64).
A GMO is an organism with synthetic foreign DNA gene sequences inserted into its genome in a laboratory process of artificial genetic modification that bypasses normal reproduction. Part of the foreign DNA is a control element called a promoter that is necessary for expressing the foreign genes. The most widely used is the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) 35S promoter (which is what enables the virus to hijack the cell for making endless copies of the virus). The CaMV 35S promoter is now in more than 80 % of all GM plants [4], and is the first test for the presence of GMOs in unknown samples.

Probing for CaMV 35S promoter in the rat diet and in rat tissues

The Cairo researchers used three pairs of primers – specific short anchoring sequences that bind by specific base-pairing to the opposite ends of the DNA segment of interest – so as to amplify different segments from the CaMV 35S promoter with PCR (polymerase chain reaction). The amplified segments can then be isolated and detected on electrophoresis. The primers together amplify nearly 80 % of the entire promoter sequence. The experimental diet was an ordinary lab chow containing 60 % yellow maize and 34 % soybean, but unlabelled as to whether it is GM or not. The presence of GM material in the diet was ascertained using PCR assay with the three pairs of primers, which all gave the expected positive results, indicating that the diet contained GM material (up to a maximum of 94 %, if both the soybean and maize were completely GM).
The experimental animals consisted of 29 male Wistar albino rats immediately after weaning (age three to four weeks), which were divided into two main groups. One was fed on the lab chow containing GM ingredients for three months, and were further divided into three subgroups of 5, 5, and 7 animals, euthanized after 30, 60, and 90 days. The other control group was fed on a balanced non-GM diet for the same period and euthanized at the end of the experiment.
The lab chow diet used all through this experiment gave positive results when screened with primers for CaMV 35S promoter. The expected 195 bp (base pairs) amplified product was detected in all samples of the GM diet, but was absent in the control diet made up with non-GM material to match the nutritional content of the GM diet. As further confirmation, the PCR product obtained from the GM diet was sequenced, and shown to have 100 % identity with the CaMV 35S promoter at nucleotide coordinate 7190-7380 of the CaMV on sequence alignment analysis using the GenBank database. It also showed 100 % sequence identity with a number of binary vectors used for transferring genes in the lab that also contain the CaMV 35S promoter.
PCR analysis of the different tissues showed amplified sequence segments of the expected sizes for the three pairs of primers – 70, 88 and 195 bp – in some of the DNA samples of blood, liver and brain of rats fed the GM diet after 30, 60 and 90 days. None of the three primers gave amplification product in DNA samples of tissues from the controls fed the non-GM diet.
The 195 bp segment amplified from DNA samples of liver and brain in rats fed GM diet was subjected to DNA sequencing, and comparison with GenBank database revealed 100 % identity with the CaMV whole genome at the same nucleotide coordinates 7190-7384 for the 35S promoter. Furthermore, it also showed 100 % identity with the PCR segment amplified from the GM diet, and with the binary vectors segments that are 100 % identical to the PCR product from the GM diet.
Feeding rats with GM diet for 30, 60, and 90 days increased the mean transfer frequency of GM target sequences significantly from 0 in the controls to 8 + 0.0000 %, 12.3 + 1.2018 % and 16.7 + 2.4529 % respectively. Thus, there is a cumulative effect with time of exposure.
Bearing in mind that the three primer pairs together amplify nearly 80 % of the entire CaMV 35S promoter, and in some animals, the three segments were all amplified in the same sample, it suggests that the whole CaMV 35S promoter may have been transferred into the genome of those animals. Considering that even a promoter containing only 46 bp of the 5’ sequence from the CaMV 35S promoter was previously reported to be sufficient for accurate initiation of gene transcription for gene expression [5], it is highly likely that the transferred CaMV35S promoter sequence would alter the activity of some genes in the host cell genome that may have harmful consequences (see later).
There was no significant difference in the rate of transfer into blood, liver, or brain tissues. Moreover, the frequency of uptake for the larger segments was greater than that for the smaller segments; thus, the transfer frequency of the 70 bp segment was the lowest at 1.09 + 0.4161 %, the 88 bp at 2.09 + 0.7318 %, and the 159 bp at 3.8 + 0.8069 %. This finding is consistent with previous researchers who postulated that the shorter the fragment, the lower the uptake efficiency [6].

GM fed rats suffered damages to liver, kidney and testis

In a separate report written by some of the same researchers in Cairo, the same GM diet was fed to identical rats in a post-market safety assessment of GMOs [7]. Biochemical, histopathological, and cytogenetic analyses on liver, kidney, and testis revealed that the GM diet fed for 30, 60 and 90 days suffered significant deleterious effects.
A total of 30 rats were fed the GM diet, 10 each for 30 days, 60 days and 90 days. The controls were on a wheat-based non-GM nutritionally matched diet for similar periods of time.
Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) enzyme activities were measured in blood serum as indicators of liver cell damage. Creatinine and uric acid levels were determined also in blood serum as indicators of kidney function. Malondialdehyde in liver cells resulting from lipid peroxidation is a biomarker of oxidative stress. In addition, specimens of liver, kidney and testis were dissected immediately after the rats were euthanized and sectioned for histopathological and histochemical investigations. Cytogenetic and DNA damage analyses were carried out on testis and liver. Chromosome analysis was done on germ cells from the testis. Sperms were examined for morphological abnormalities and DNA fragmentation was determined in liver cells.
The results were unambiguous.

Histopathology of liver, kidney and testis

Liver cells showed slight damage in rats fed GM diet for 30 days, with damage increasing after 60 and 90 days. The effects start as a slight dilatation and congestion of the central vein (supplying the liver) and fragmentation of the nucleus in some cells. After 60 days, mild cellular infiltration (from the blood) was observed. After 90 days, the blood sinusoids (spaces) also showed slight dilatation and congestion (Figure 1).
Figure 1   Liver sections: a, control; b, 30 day GM-fed; c, 60 day GM-fed; d 90 day GM fed (see text for details)
Kidney sections show damaging effects of the GM diet evident even after the first 3o days as interstitial haemorrhage (blood in spaces between cells) and a widening of the tubules. This got worse in 60 and 90 days (Figure 2).
Figure 2   Kidney sections: a, control; b, 30 day GM-fed; c, 60 day GM-fed; d 90 day GM fed (see text for details)
The testis of rats fed on GM food for 30 days showed mild thickening of the basement membrane of the seminiferous tubules (where germ cells develop) with gaps appearing between the germinal epithelium  of some tubules. At 60 and 90 days, an increase in the connective tissue component and in the number of Leidig cells (in the connective tissue), with a disarrangement of the germinal epithelium (Figure 3).
Figure 3   Testis sections: a, control; b, 30 day GM-fed; c, 60 day GM-fed; d 90 day GM fed (see text for details)
Protein content in liver tissues decreased significantly after 30 or 90 days, indicating dysfunction of some hepatocytes. Abnormal cellular activity in the kidney was also confirmed by a statistically significant increase in the protein content.
Consistent with the liver and kidney damages seen, AST and ALT activity increased in the serum of experimental rats by 33 to 107 % and 33 to 92 % respectively. Blood creatine and uric acid concentrations significantly increased by 15 to 315 % and 37 to 96 % respectively. MDA concentrations in liver, as an indicator of oxidative stress, increased significantly in all animals fed GM diet by 286 to as high as 940%.
Mitotic index (as a measure of cell division) was significantly reduced in the 60 and 90 days fed rats from 8.8 + 0.326 % in controls to 8.4 + 0.221 % (30 days), 6.8 + 0.466 % (60 days) and 6.6 + 0.266 % (90 days). Concomitantly, there was a significant increase in chromosomal aberrations, from 0.4 + 0.163 % in controls to 6.6 + 0.221 %, 13.8 + 0.326 % and 8.0 + 0.632 % respectively for 30, 60 and 90 day GM fed rats. The frequency of morphologically abnormal sperm increased by up to two-fold, from 3.33 +0.35 % to 5.83 + 0.60 %, 7.8 + 0.65 % and 6.6 + 0.24 %. At the same time DNA fragmentation went up from 11.83 + 0.7 % in controls to 19.0 + 1.2 %, 28.3 + 1.6 % and 24.3+ 0.7% respectively.
The researchers concluded the results [7] “indicate that there are health hazards linked to the ingestion of diets containing genetically modified components.”
However, the investigations have not gone further into the mechanisms whereby the genetically modified components were hazardous to health; nor do the results directly implicate the CaMV 35S promoter found transferred to rat blood, liver and brain in the other report [1]. It will be useful to review the potential hazards of the CaMV 35S promoter, which were first pointed out 15 years ago.

Predicted hazards of cauliflower mosaic virus 35S promoter

When first deployed, geneticists assumed that the CaMV 35S promoter would only work in plants, as the complete virus (wrapped in its protein coat) specifically infects only plant cells. But it soon transpired that the isolated piece of promoter DNA without its coat is extremely promiscuous, and works in cells across kingdoms of plants and animals, as well as bacteria. We issued a serious warning against its use in 1999 [8] Cauliflower Mosaic Viral Promoter – A Recipe for Disaster (ISIS scientific publication) when it was found to have a recombination hotspot where it tends to fragment and join, which makes it prone to unintended (horizontal) gene transfer into cells of all organisms exposed to the GMO, including bacteria, fungi, pollinators, wild animals and humans (see [9] CaMV 35S promoter fragmentation hotspot confirmed, and it is active in animals (ISIS scientific publication).  What that implies is the CaMV 35S promoter can break loose from the plant genome DNA and jump into the genome of all those other cells, with the potential to mutate, activate or inactivate genes (including those leading to cancer), reactivate dormant viruses, or create new viruses by recombination (gene shuffling) [8,  10] (Hazards of Transgenic Plants Containing the Cauliflower Mosaic Viral Promoter, ISIS scientific publication)  But our warnings were met with abuse and denial and ultimately ignored.
Since then, evidence has emerged that the CaMV 35S promoter may enhance the multiplication of disease-associated viruses including HIV and cytomegalovirus through the induction of proteins required for transcription of the viruses [11] (New Evidence Links CaMV 35S Promoter to HIV Transcription, ISIS scientific publication). Further, the CaMV 35S promoter overlaps with a virus gene, the product of which is toxic to plants and likely also to animals [12]. For a more detailed description on the risks of the CaMV 35S promoter and indeed on GMOs in general, see [13] and final chapter in [14] Ban GMOs Now, ISIS Report.

To conclude

GMOs are once again found to be deleterious for health in a feeding trial that last no longer than 90 days. And within that time, the most widespread piece of transgenic DNA found in the GM diet, the CaMV 35S promoter, was found transferred horizontally into the animals’ tissues at high frequencies. The CaMV 35S promoter is not the only hazardous piece of transgenic DNA, there are similar aggressive promoters designed to make genes express out of context, as well as genes coding for antibiotics and other dangerous functions, together with numerous recombination hotspots that enhance horizontal gene transfer; all of which contribute to making all GMOs unsafe. That is indeed the conclusion from research carried out by scientists independent of the industry up to now, which fully corroborates what farmers have been witnessing in their livestock and doctors in their patients for years [14]. People need to take immediate action to ban GMOs from their own home and local communities. Governments should recall all GMOs from the market. And companies and regulators should face prosecution for causing damages to health and criminal negligence.

A fully referenced and illustrated version of this article is posted on ISIS members website and otherwise available for download here

If you find this report useful, please support ISIS by subscribing to our magazine Science in Society, and encourage your friends to do so. Or have a look at the ISIS bookstore for other publications

Friday, December 5, 2014

Hawaii is Ground Zero

Hawaii is ground zero: banning, not labeling GMOs

Let me put it this way. It would mean a lot more than winning a few GMO-labeling initiatives.

“The right to choose what’s in your food” does not stop the ongoing gene drift, from GMO crops to non-GMO, across America. This drift is well on its way to making organic crops into genetically modified food, whether we like it or not.

And the blown-on-wind spread of tons and tons of Roundup, the poisonous Monsanto herbicide so “vital” to GMO farming…well, that’s straight-out chemical warfare.

As it continues, what organic farmer will be able to guarantee his crops are pristine?

In Hawaii, we have a far different situation. Voters on the Big Island, Maui, and Kauai, against all odds, have managed to pass measures that would block Monsanto (and other biotech giants) from continuing their GMO/pesticide operations.

In other words, ban, not label.

However, on the Big Island and Kauai, the corrupt court system has (so far) rendered the voters’ decisions null and void. On Maui, the same tactic is in progress.
Hawaii isn’t just a small biotech center. Huge numbers of GMO seeds are produced and shipped out around the world.

Monsanto, Dow, Pioneer, and BASF are doing intensive R&D to develop new GMO seeds and new poisonous pesticides (which they are spraying on the people of Hawaii).
Cutting off their work in Hawaii would be a major victory.

However, if you did an overall survey of news sites, including independent centers of reporting, you’d find GMO labeling has been garnering far more coverage than the bans enacted in several US counties or the struggle in Hawaii.

Why is that?

One reason: the anti-Monsanto movement in America has been shaped and funded to be about product-labeling.

Because it’s about shopping and choosing and buying and consuming, it seems to have more “broad appeal.”

But how well is that soft approach going work in the face of the biotech fait accompli—gene drift plus pesticide drift, blanketing the whole country, penetrating all food crops?

According to “received wisdom,” banning GMOs and their attendant pesticides is a much harder sell.
In past articles, I’ve outlined an attack strategy against the biotech giants that could have worked at the outset of the anti-GMO movement—and could still work. I won’t run it all down here. Suffice to say, it is predicated on the understanding that we are in a late-game situation, and the clock is ticking.
The biotech crime bosses are running the show—our show—into the ground. The sane response is to go all-out on the offensive. This is miles beyond avoiding a potato in the market labeled “GMO.”
And by the way, who would be in charge of putting those GMO labels on foods? The state governments where the labeling initiatives pass? Really? You would trust that process to be both honest and competent?

The leaders of the labeling movement apparently welcome the prospect of Monsanto and their allies suing states in which labeling initiatives or laws pass. This is a chance to expose the shady tactics of the biotech giants.

I would point out, though, that such court battles would ultimately impact only the labeling issue, nothing more.

Yes, it would represent another small step in educating the public about these monster corporations—but small steps that come too late are not useful.

In Hawaii, however, there is an authentic spark. The fight centers around the possibility of a partial ban on GMOs and dangerous pesticides—in the heart of the enemy’s camp.

The outcome would be helped considerably, if enough people shifted their focus to the Islands, where the real action is. Now.

In Hawaii, the reality-egg has cracked. The Monsanto facade of GMO/pesticide safety and humane intentions has been blatantly rejected, on the record, by voters.

This has set off a parade of biotech/political/judicial/land-baron counter-attacks. The players are, as usual, arrogant, self-entitled, devious, slimy, fake Jesuses who want to save the world and lift up the less fortunate and less informed.

“We’ll help you. Just let us run things.”

Hawaii could be a candle that is quickly snuffed out, or it could become a sun that illuminates the truth.

The point is, the struggle there is about the right thing. Stopping the poisoners. Not labeling them.

Source: Jon Rappoport with

Please visit Jon Rappoport's website and join his newsletter.  Real reporting on the events that do effect each and every one of us.  CLICK HERE

Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at

Thursday, July 10, 2014

Monsanto’s Roundup Herbicide Found To Be 125X More Toxic Than Regulators Claim

90% of the food in the supermarket is grown using Roundup... Organic food is now allowed to contain a percentage of GMO.Soon the corporations will push the FDA into allowing Roundup on organic food.

Monsanto’s Roundup Herbicide Found To Be 125X More Toxic Than Regulators Claim

Roundup herbicide was manufactured by Monsanto and is one of the worlds most widely used herbicides around the world. Within the past few years, numerous studies have emerged linking its main ingredient, glyphosate, to a number of health ailments that include cancer, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease and more. Sri Lanka recently joined the long list ( and growing) of countries who have completely banned it, citing a link to deadly kidney disease. You can read more about that and view other studies here. Russia also became the latest country to completely ban GMOs, you can read more about that here

A new study published in the journal Biomedical Research International  shows that Roundup herbicide is 125 times more toxic than its active ingredient glyphosate studied in isolation.(1)  The eye opening abstract reads as follows:
“Pesticides are used throughout the world as mixtures called formulations. They contain adjuvants, which are often kept confidential and are called inerts by the manufacturing companies, plus a declared active principle, which is usually tested alone. We tested the toxicity of 9 pesticides, comparing active principles and their formulations, on three human cell lines. Glyphosate, isoproturon, fluroxypyr, pirimicarb, imidacloprid, acetamiprid, tebuconazole, epoxiconazole, and prochloraz constitute, respectively, the active principles of 3 major herbicides, 3 insecticides, and 3 fungicides.  Despite its relatively benign reputation, Roundup was among the most toxic herbicides and insecticides tested. Most importantly, 8 formulations out of 9 were up to one thousand times more toxic than their active principles. Our results challenge the relevance of the acceptable daily intake for pesticides because this norm is calculated from the toxicity of the active principle alone. Chronic tests on pesticides may not reflect relevant environmental exposures if only one ingredient of these mixtures is tested alone.” (1)

Greenmedinfo describes it perfectly, stating that this just further illustrates the “deceptive semantics of pesticide formulations and their regulation.” This paper does indeed prove that the agrochemical industry conceals the truth about how toxic their chemicals really are, is this not a crime? Is this not mass poisoning through deception? Who exactly is setting the ‘acceptable’ amount when it’s clear there should be no acceptable amount at all?

It’s also worth mentioning here that the African Center for Bio-safety orders Monsanto to stop making false claims about GMOs, you can find out more about that here.

“The problem of underestimated toxicological risk is so severe that the researchers describe previous research which found unexpected toxicity in so-called ‘inert’ adjuvants that were up to 10,000 times more toxic than the so-called active principle glyphosate itself, revealing them to be a greater source for secondary side effects than the main ingredient itself. They also note that this ‘synergistic toxicity’ may explain the results of previous long-term animal research where glyphosate-based formulations showed toxicity in the parts per trillion range that could not be explained by glyphosate alone” (2)(3)

If you think about it, it seems insidious that Roundup herbicide is still heavily used in North America despite the numerous studies that have surfaced illustrating its extreme toxicity. It’s time for North America to do what what many other countries have already done, completely ban these pesticides and the GMOs that go with them.

Thursday, June 5, 2014


China protects its massive Army from GMOs

By Jon Rappoport
June 5, 2014

Worldwide sentiment is shifting against Monsanto and GMO food crops. And China is making major moves.

At, we have this May 14, 2014, article: "Chinese Army Bans All GMO Grains and Oil from Supply Stations":

"The Chinese army has ordered all military supply stations to only allow the purchase of non-GMO grain and food oil due to health safety concerns over GMOs.

"This move by the Chinese army is being seen as yet another step towards the Chinese government's expected ban on the import of all GMO grains and oilseeds within the next 2 years, due to growing public concern over GMOs. The expected ban would be a huge blow to the Biotech industry worldwide.

"The Hubei Province Xiangyang City Grain Bureau's website announced on May 6, 2014:

"'During recent years, as China's grain and oil market has continuously developed, certain GMO grain and GMO food oil products have entered the market. In view that the safety concerns about GMO grain and oil products in China at present has not yet been determined, in order to overall assure the health of military members residing in our city and safety of their drinks and food, in accordance to the request from the Guangzhou Military Command Joint Logistics Department and the Provincial Military Grain & Food Oil Supply Center, from this date all military supply stations are allowed to only purchase non-GMO grain and food oil products from the designated processing enterprises. It is forbidden to supply GMO grain and food oil products to military units within their administration areas.

"'Chen I-wan, an Advisor to the Committee of Disaster History to the China Disaster Prevention Association has stated: "The army has established [an] excellent model for people of the whole nation: No GMO staple food and GMO food oil should enter the army food supply."

China---protecting its Army from GMOs. And soon, perhaps the entire population of the country.

Apparently, Chinese GMO science differs from American GMO science, where a mere nod and a wink between the FDA and Monsanto, 20 years ago, launched a big Ag revolution that continues to contaminate US lands.

China, by the way, is home to 20% of the world's population. "GMO-free China" has an interesting ring. Which domino will fall next? India, where 17% of the Earth's people live, where farmers who have been duped and bankrupted by Monsanto, have been committing suicide in large numbers?

Then there is Russia. Putin recently declared, in reference to a possible ban on GMOs: "We need to properly construct our work so that it is not contrary to our obligations under the WTO. But even with this in mind, we nevertheless have legitimate methods and instruments to protect our own market, and above all citizens."

Likewise, groups in Africa are pushing back against the US/Monsanto/Bill Gates plan to flood the continent with GMO crops.

In all these cases, world leaders outside the US are seeing the GMO sell-job as an attempt to extend American hegemony, through what amounts to an act of war.

Well, what else would you call artificial gene-contamination and poisoning by herbicides?

Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at

Sunday, June 16, 2013


YOUR NEIGHBORS and CO_WORKERS, FAMILY and FRIENDS may be eating poison every day!!! HELP STOP the GMO take-over of our food supply---through MASSIVE EDUCATION!!!  (we should let them know what to expect)
 Monsanto Video Revolt Begins 
- Anthony Gucciardi

The Monsanto Video Revolt brings together activists from around the world in order to put the final stake in the vampire heart of Monsanto. Anthony Gucciardi sounds the alarm and calls concerned citizens to join the fight in an unscripted video take.

Anthony Gucciardi is the founder of natural health website 

and investigate reporting hub the official Monsanto Video Revolt website and join the fight:

Tuesday, June 11, 2013


The criminal case against Monsanto is growing.
The following documents will detail evidence into the criminal prosecution of the Monsanto Company.   Additional information, documents and news articles can be found in the links below.

The Monsanto investigation part 1 - The Bayer investigation -

- Aspartame & Monsanto - The Monsanto investigation 2 -

- Diacetyl & Monsanto - The Monsanto investigation 3 -

- GMOs investigated - The Monsanto investigation 4 -

- Children & animals - The Monsanto investigation 5 -

- George Bush & Monsanto - The Monsanto investigation 6 -

- RBGH & FDA corruption - The Monsanto investigation 7 -

- PCBs & pollution - The Monsanto investigation 8 -

- Political corruption & rBGH - The Monsanto investigation 9 -

- UN & Agenda 21 - The Monsanto investigation 10 -

- The Bilderberg connection & Monsanto - The Monsanto investigation 11 -

- March against Monsanto - The Monsanto investigation 12 -

- Acetaldehyde & Monsanto - The Monsanto investigation 13 -