- Human health
- The health of our soil and environment
- The parallel between Big-Pharma and the GMO industry
Many people will be shocked to learn that up until the study led by molecular biologist Dr. Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen in 2012, no other study sought to examine the long-term (chronic) effects of eating GMOs. Here are some of the findings of that study as reported by Mike Adams of Natural News.
- Premature deaths – up to 50% in male rats, 70% in female rats
- 200% – 300% increase in large tumors after rats drank trace amounts of Roundup at levels legally allowed in the water supply (see photos below)
- Liver damage and kidney damage – rats fed GMO corn and traces of Roundup suffered severe organ damage
The Monsanto variety of GMO corn fed to the rats was NK603. This is the same corn that’s grown in America and fed to animals and humans. This is the corn that’s in corn-based breakfast cereals, corn tortillas and snack chips.
Why were no studies performed on the long-term effect of consuming GMO products? Perhaps the following quote from Phil Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications sheds light on this. From “Playing God in the Garden” New York Times Magazine, October 25, 1998.
“Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the F.D.A.’s job.”
Dr. Elaine Ingam, founder of the Soil Foodweb Inc., is one of the world’s foremost soil biologists. Her work emphasizes the complex interrelationships between biological systems, the health of our soil and ourselves.
Nutritionally dense food cannot come from conventionally grown crops that make use of pesticides and herbicides! Why? Because these products kill the very microorganisms that support nutrient uptake into plants, thus making them less nutritious.
The chemical spiral
Once soil has been treated with pesticides and herbicides it is damaged. This makes soil prone to weeds and it takes an ever-increasing cavalcade of chemicals to make sure weeds and bugs do not get out of hand—thus the spiral. This is horrible for the soil that has been treated and the surrounding environment, on the other hand it is a very good profit model for chemical companies.
No MD would recommend a life-long prescription of antibiotics for a patient. These are meant to be temporary measures to clear an imbalance so internal microbiology can naturally right itself back into health. But this is not what happens with our soil. In our lifetime we have witnessed a life-long prescription of pesticides and herbicides for our soil. This inevitably produces less nutritious food and spawns the onset of super weeds.
By far the most widely used GMOs are Monsanto’s Roundup Ready products. Roundup Ready crops are genetically modified to be resistant to Roundup which is both an herbicide and a registered pesticide. Current Roundup Ready crops include corn, soy, canola, alfalfa, cotton and sorghum. Because these GMO crops are resistant to Roundup, the herbicide can be used to eliminate weeds.
The use of Roundup Ready seed offers no protection from chemical spiraling. Just as antibiotics in hospitals breed “super bugs,” the consistent use of herbicides produces super weeds that require ever-stronger chemicals to deal with.
The only long-term solution is creating healthy soil where weeds do not flourish. This would severely limit the use of pesticides and herbicides and of course the profits of chemical companies.
The parallel between Big-Pharma and the GMO industry
The study I referenced earlier, by Dr. Gilles-Eric Seralini, was retracted by the publisher – Food and Chemical Toxicology, an Amsterdam based global journal. The retraction was over the specific objection of its authors and brings into question the veracity of the study.
Dr. Seralini and his team stand by their results They allege the retraction is connected with the journal’s editorial appointment of biologist Richard Goodman, who worked for Monsanto for seven years.
Prior to publishing “The magazine reviewed our paper more than any other,” says co-author and physician Joël Spiroux de Vendômois, who is president of the Paris-based Committee for Research and Independent Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), which collaborated in the study with Dr. Seralini . He calls the retraction “a public-health scandal.”
The Big-Business parallel
How far will big companies go to make a profit?
Many go quite far apparently. GM has been in the news recently regarding not recalling cars after repeated complaints and many deaths.
The classic example is the Ford Pinto.
For seven years the Ford Motor Company sold cars in which it knew hundreds of people would needlessly burn to death. Estimates range between 500 and 900 burn deaths. Uncounted others were seriously injured.
Burning Pintos became such an embarrassment to Ford that J. Walter Thompson dropped a line from the end of a radio spot that said: “Pinto leaves you with that warm feeling.”
Ford knew the Pinto was a firetrap but waited eight years to make changes because its internal “cost-benefit analysis,” placed a dollar value on human life. It simply was more profitable to wait.
The company paid out millions to settle damage suits out of court, and spent millions more lobbying against safety standards. The sum of these figures were less than retooling its production line—so people had to die.
The Big-Pharma parallel
In 2012 total food sales in the US was 1.3 trillion dollars. What would corporate executives do to capture a significant share of that market? The closest parallel comes from the Pharmaceutical Industry.
In 2012 GlaxoSmithKline agreed to pay $3 billion in fines and plead guilty to criminal charges. What were the charges?
- Bribery of Doctors
- Lying to the FDA
- Fabricating test results on its drugs
- Defrauding Medicade and Medicare out of billions
Is this case an aberration?
Unfortunately it’s just the opposite, it is business as usual. Just like Ford, doing business at this level begets cold calculations. Glaxo’s revenues in this case were $27.9 billion. The fine of $3 billion ended up being an expensive speeding ticket because nobody went to jail or was even on trial.
The strongest voice for this point of view comes from Marcia Angell, M.D. She was the first woman to serve as editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine. She is currently a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School in Boston.
When she retired from the Journal she wrote an article for the New York Review of Books, here is an excerpt:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authorities.
Doctor Angell’s book The Truth About the Drug Companies describes in detail the practices she witnessed over her 20 year tenure as editor of the Journal. Here are a few excerpts:
“She saw them gain nearly limitless influence over medical research, education, and how doctors do their jobs.”
“As Dr. Angell powerfully demonstrates, claims that high drug prices are necessary to fund research and development are unfounded.”
“Drug companies routinely rely on publicly funded institutions for their basic research; they rig clinical trials to make their products look better than they are; and they use their legions of lawyers to stretch out government-granted exclusive marketing rights for years.”
Here is a quote from a talk that was captured and is available via YouTube.
“Nearly every large drug company has recently paid huge fines to settle charges of illegal activities.”
It’s about trust.
I trust a researcher in France, who has little to gain, and the wrath of giant corporations to lose, more than I trust the GMO companies who have billions of dollars to gain peddling their wares.
I trust the small organic farmer who, by experience, shows that healthy soil can produce a sustainable, nutritious crop year in and year out.
I trust the world’s foremost soil biologist, who again has little to gain by saying that a long-term, unhealthy chemical spiral will occur once you start down the Chem/GMO road.
The simple logic is that GMO and pharmaceutical companies are kissing cousins. When companies admit that they lie, cheat, steal and bribe to make a profit. I do not trust them with the food that goes into my mouth.
The reason I avoid GMOs is that they are in the business of selling as much of their product as possible and I do not trust that they do that with my health in mind.
One last thing.
Anyone who goes up against Big-Pharma or the Big-GMO companies will, if they get enough press, most likely be treated to the attentions of their propaganda machines. They will be disparaged; their findings will be ridiculed. This is to be expected.
To this I say, look at the evidence, listen to Dr. Angell’s YouTube and think about the ideas you put in your head, as well as the food in your mouth and drugs in your arm.