You Can't Hide Your Lying Lies

I'd like to thank Campbell's and Applegate Farms for correctly embracing the labeling initiative.

However, I'll bet you didn't know that Entenmann's has also indicated on their packaging that they have products "PARTIALLY PRODUCED WITH GENETIC ENGINEERING".

I'd like to contact them and find out exactly what that entails. Is it the wheat? Eggs? Soy flour? Butter? Coconut flour? Or is it all of the aforementioned? It's just that these ingredients are all listed in bold, along with the admission statement.

Get a copy of Dr. Richard Jacoby's Sugar Crush.

Found a new blog, Beyond Pesticides - here's an alarming piece:

Glyphosate Causes Changes to DNA Function Resulting in Chronic Disease, According to Study

(Beyond Pesticides July 18, 2016) A review of the scientific literature links glyphosate, one of the most popular weed killers in the U.S. and the active ingredient in Roundup, to a wide range of diseases through a mechanism that modifies DNA functioning, adding a new even more troubling dimension to the herbicide’s cancer classification by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. According to the most recent review, Glyphosate pathways to modern disease V: Amino acid analogue of glycine in diverse proteins, conducted by independent scientists Anthony Samsel, Ph.D. and Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., a scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), glyphosate acts as a glycine analogue that incorporates into peptides during protein synthesis. In this process, it alters a number of proteins that depend on conserved glycine for proper function. According to the authors, glyphosate substitution for glycine correlates with several diseases, including diabetes, obesity, asthma, Alzheimer’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and Parkinson’s disease, among others.

Glycine, the smallest amino acid commonly found in proteins, has unique properties that support flexibility and the ability to anchor to the plasma membrane or the cytoskeleton. This new direct biological evidence, taken together with correlational data, make a compelling case that glyphosate action as a glycine analogue accounts for much of glyphosate’s toxicity, according to the study. The authors find that glyphosate, as an amino acid analogue of  glycine, may  be  incorporated into polypeptide chains during protein synthesis. In doing so, it has an impact on the structure and function of the proteins. Proteins fold up, and glycine is a small molecule that is often found at the folding places. Since glyphosate is much larger, it prevents the protein molecule from folding properly, leading to the disruption of function of many  proteins with essential roles in metabolism and regulatory processes.

The article cites a number of ways that this affects humans and other organisms. According to the study, the consequences of this action can lead to impaired fatty acid release leading to obesity, impaired insulin receptor response leading to diabetes, impaired one-carbon metabolism leading to neural tube defects and autism, impaired cell cycle control during DNA synthesis, and disregulated phosphorylation cascades leading to cancer, lung disorders, and autoimmune diseases.

Stephen Frantz, Ph.D., a pathobiologist research scientist explains it like this: “When a cell is trying to form proteins, it may grab glyphosate instead of glycine to form a damaged, mis-folded protein. After that it’s medical chaos. Where glyphosate replaces glycine, the cell can no longer conduct business as usual causing unpredicted consequences with many diseases and disorders as a result.”

The release of this study comes on the heels of several other discussions and actions on glyphosate that have taken place over the past few weeks. Last month at a Congressional briefing sponsored by U.S Representative Ted Lieu, a delegation of independent scientists including this study’s authors, presented their findings, urging lawmakers to call on the EPA to ban RoundUp, Monsanto’s flagship herbicide. Beyond Pesticides participated on the panel, providing testimony on the impact of glyphosate on soil systems, as well as the unreasonable risk it poses to humans, animals, and the environment. Following the congressional briefing, scientists spoke at a closed meeting with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), explaining the biochemical and physiological reasons why exposure to glyphosate, the active ingredient in RoundUp, is linked to autism, Alzheimer’s, cancer, birth defects, obesity, and gluten intolerance, among other health issues. EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs’ Deputy Director and his staff met with the panelists and provided an overview of EPA’s registration process for glyphosate. EPA staff had some interest in the information presented, which was forwarded to relevant staffers. However, EPA indicated that much of the information provided may not impact their current risk assessment for glyphosate, which is expected sometime in 2017.

Glyphosate, created by Monsanto, is touted as a “low toxicity” chemical and “safer” than other chemicals by industry. But glyphosate has been shown to have detrimental impacts on humans and the environment. Given its widespread use on residential and agricultural sites, its toxicity is of increasing concern. In early 2015, glyphosate was classified by the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of as a “probable human carcinogen.” Just a few months later, a study published in Environmental Health News found that chronic, low-dose exposure to glyphosate led to adverse effects on liver and kidney health. Roundup formulations can also induce a dose-dependent formation of DNA adducts (altered forms of DNA linked to chemical exposure, playing a key role in chemical carcinogenesis) in the kidneys and liver of mice. Human cell endocrine disruption on the androgen receptor, inhibition of transcriptional activities on estrogen receptors on HepG2, DNA damage and cytotoxic effects occurring at concentrations well below “acceptable” residues have all been observed.

Roundup also harms crops’ ability to capture carbon from the air, an important factor in fighting climate change. “Glyphosate negatively affects the soil microbiome,” said Frantz. “It is destroying the ability of soil to be a nutritive medium for producing crops. Organic or biological regenerative agriculture is the solution for the sustainable agricultural sector and will conserve soil, air and water quality, and sequester carbon that helps to mitigate the climate crisis. We call for a ban on glyphosate.”

Beyond Pesticides urges individuals concerned about glyphosate exposure to support organic systems that do not rely on hazardous carcinogenic pesticides. In agriculture, concerned consumers can buy food with the certified organic label, which not only disallows synthetic pesticides like glyphosate, but also the use of sewage sludge and genetically engineered ingredients. Beyond Pesticides also urges the adoption of organic lawn and landscape programs.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Monsanto is daring to sue the state of California for informing the populace that Roundup is a carcinogen?

Monsanto on Thursday stepped up its defense of Roundup, a widely used weed killer, by filing a lawsuit in California seeking to prevent glyphosate, the main ingredient in the herbicide, from being added to the state’s list of known carcinogens. The company said it filed the suit against the state’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the agency’s acting director, Lauren Zeise, in California state court. The state agency said in September that it planned to add glyphosate to the list after the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified it as a probable human carcinogen last March. Monsanto has disputed the assessment, citing numerous studies deeming glyphosate safe. In its lawsuit, Monsanto describes the International Agency for Research on Cancery as an “unelected, undemocratic, unaccountable and foreign body.” It says that the lack of oversight violates the company’s right to procedural due process under state and federal law. The agency did not comment, as it had not seen the suit. Roundup is used by farmers worldwide and generated $4.8 billion in revenue for Monsanto in the 2015 fiscal year. Questions about the safety of the herbicide have dogged Monsanto for years.

Correction: January 26, 2016 

Because of an editing error, a report in the Company Briefing column on Friday about a lawsuit in California by Monsanto, which seeks to prevent the main ingredient in its Roundup weed killer from being listed as a known carcinogen, misidentified the organization that the company described as an “unelected, undemocratic, unaccountable and foreign body.” It is the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a World Health Organization agency that classified the chemical as a probable human carcinogen last March — not the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, which is the target of the lawsuit.

63 Scumbags

Real quick one today.

Adding:

BUSTED: GMO MOSQUITO RELEASED IN BRAZIL WAS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO HAVE IT'S GENETIC CONTROL MECHANISM FAIL.
What good is a control mechanism for a mosquito, when the bacteria that produce the substance that de-activates it are common bacteria that live in the ground, you know, where all the puddles are that the mosquitoes grow in?The GMO mosquitoes Brazil released right in the middle of the microcephaly zone (so there is an obvious link there) were all male mosquitoes that were "supposed to" produce a single generation of GMO offspring that had a biological kill switch that rendered them sterile, so they could not reproduce. However, as it turns out, the kill switch was specifically designed to be turned off if the mosquitoes, while in the larval stage were exposed to tetracycline, an antibiotic which is derived from the biological by products of very common soil bacteria that are so prevalent in soil that they are what makes dirt smell like dirt. The kill switch was designed to fail, you can't tell me biological experts were so stupid they did not know this would happen.Antibiotics work by interfering with the DNA of bacteria when they divide to make new bacteria. Antibiotics will also affect people to some degree, by interfering with cellular mitosis but the impact is not too much for people. So it makes perfect sense that a substance that interacts with DNA could turn a "kill switch" off.
The GMO mosquitoes survived in the wild. Some journalists are saying it is because tetracycline breaks down slowly in the wild, and it is so widely used in Brazil that it is everywhere in the environment now and an accident happened as a result all the while the probable real culprit was soil based bacteria that produce it all the time that any biologist would have known about. It would obviously be in all the puddles the mosquitoes lay their eggs in, puddles that sit right on the ground the bacteria that produce the genetic kill switch substance live in. The survival of the mosquito was intentional, NO IFS OR BUTS.It is flatly impossible (as far as I see it) for the survival of the GMO mosquitoes to not have been planned. All that happened was someone said "Our mosquitoes have a biological kill switch, so they are safe to release", then proved it in lab conditions specifically set up to prove a point, a bureaucrat rubber stamped it, and then an intentional release of a permanently surviving and probably seriously damaging mosquito was done. What's worse? It is now proven that Zika is not causing microcephaly in Brazil, but it is happening where these mosquitoes were released. IF it is not the Tdap shot and it is instead these GMO mosquitoes carrying something other than Zika, I hate to say it - eventually the whole world will be screwed.There is no way any biologist could have possibly overlooked the fact that the kill switch would not stand any chance of working in the wild, where the substance that deactivated it was prevalent everywhere naturally. Why did they allow a deactivation mechanism in the first place? The excuse in the lab was that it was used to make it possible for the mosquitoes to reproduce before they were released. But the choice of substances was, as far as I see it, an intentional act that would easily fool a common core educated bureaucrat, who would not realize (even if papered as a biologist with a stack 3 feet high) that the type of antibiotic used to make it possible for the mosquitoes to reproduce in the lab was everywhere naturally in the wild.

Call your representatives!

Say NO to the DARK Act!

MIT Professor Stephanie Seneff: "I Have Evidence That Monsanto's Roundup Causing Cancer!"

Hopefully, that works - enjoy!

Get The Picture? Round Two

Got some more...but first:

CALL TO ACTION: Contact Congress TODAY and tell them to reject Fast Track of the TPP: http://www.stopfasttrack.com/

Bernie Sanders Calls Out Media For Not Covering Obama's TPP Trade Deal: “The major television networks are not covering the TPP. Incredible as it may sound, this trade agreement - the largest trade agreement in the history of the United States of America - has received virtually no coverage, no coverage, on the major networks.” - U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders. Why hasn't the TPP gotten any media coverage? Because the TPP would immensely benefit multinational corporations like Monsanto at the expense of people and the environment. And we all know how mainstream media loves to carry water for the agrichemical industry and their other advertisers.

Fast Track (formally known as Trade Promotion Authority) is a power given to the President by Congress that would allow the President to push the TPP deal through without any Congressional debate or public review. STOP FAST TRACK.

CONTACT Congress and tell them to reject Fast Track: http://www.stopfasttrack.com/

READ: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/01/bernie-sanders-media-tpp_n_6777248.html

READ: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kill-the-dispute-settlement-language-in-the-trans-pacific-partnership/2015/02/25/ec7705a2-bd1e-11e4-b274-e5209a3bc9a9_story.html

READ: http://billmoyers.com/2015/04/28/battle-trans-pacific-partnership-fast-track-gets-hot/

LEARN the basics in these short videos:
http://youtu.be/3O_Sbbeqfdw
http://youtu.be/DnC1mqyAXmw

WATCH Segment 1: http://www.democracynow.org/2015/4/16/a_corporate_trojan_horse_critics_decry

WATCH Segment 2: http://www.democracynow.org/2015/4/16/grayson_on_money_politics_if_we

New Study: Monsanto’s Herbicide Chemical Damages DNA (re-post from PatriotRising)

New Study: Monsanto’s Herbicide Chemical Damages DNA

Posted January 21, 2015 11:23 am by PatriotRising

Did Monsanto Know All Along?

---

A new peer-reviewed scientific study has found that soybean workers exposed to glyphosate suffer from DNA damage and elevated cell death. Adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G), and thymine (T) are the components of nucleic acid that make up DNA, and biotech is making these important parts of our biology a mash-up that no sane person would ever want to experience.

Soybean workers in Brazil exposed to fungicides herbicides and insecticides (the main three chemical classifications used extensively by the biotech farming model) experienced an elevated level of cellular apoptosis, as well as remarkable DNA damage according to the Elsevier published, Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis.

The research concentrated on Glyphosate and 2,4-D, two chemicals that practically cover all of the US farming landscape. Glyphosate alone is used doubly as often as it was five years ago, with more than 185 million pounds of glyphosate-based and Round Up ready chemicals sprayed on our crops annually. Most GM crops were made, in fact, to withstand Round Up chemicals specifically. (Interestingly, the USDA won’t even test for glyphosate regularly because it’s ‘too expensive.’)

The herbicide 2,4-D has been used even longer than glyphosate – since the 1940s in fact – so there is no telling just how saturated our soil, and water is with this particular chemical. (Agent Orange, used during the Vietnam war contained 2,4-D.)

Danieli Benedetti and others found that the widespread cultivation of GM soybeans in the State of Rio Grande do Sul (RS, Brazil), especially in the city of Espumoso is particularly toxic to farm workers there.

They find:

“. . .the comet assay in peripheral leukocytes and the buccal micronucleus (MN) cytome assay (BMCyt) in exfoliated buccal cells were used to assess the effects of exposures to pesticides in soybean farm workers from Espumoso.A total of 127 individuals, 81 exposed and 46 non-exposed controls, were evaluated. Comet assay and BMCyt (micronuclei and nuclear buds) data revealed DNA damage in soybean workers.

Cell death was also observed (condensed chromatin, karyorhectic, and karyolitic cells). Inhibition of non-specific choline esterase (BchE) was not observed in the workers. The trace element contents of buccal samples were analyzed by Particle-Induced X-ray Emission (PIXE). Higher concentrations of Mg, Al, Si, P, S, and Cl were observed in cells from workers. No associations with use of personal protective equipment, gender, or mode of application of pesticides were observed.


Our findings indicate the advisability of monitoring genetic toxicity in soybean farm workers exposed to pesticides.”

It isn’t just farm workers that need to be concerned, though. Research in the German journal Ithaca stumbled upon significant concentrations of glyphosate in the urine samples of city dwellers. Many of the participants in this study showed glyphosate levels in their blood and urine that were up to 20 times the allowable levels in drinking water.

Other Studies Agree – Pesticide Chemicals Damage DNA

Multiple studies prior to the Brazilian research just conducted have shown cytotoxic and DNA-damaging effects of glyphosate exposure. In one study, Koller and his colleagues found that:

“. . . lymphocytes and cells from internal organs indicate that epithelial cells are more susceptible to the cytotoxic and DNA-damaging properties of the herbicide and its formulation. Since we found genotoxic effects after short exposure to concentrations that correspond to a 450-fold dilution of spraying used in agriculture, our findings indicate that inhalation may cause DNA damage in exposed individuals.”

As Natural Society previously reported, another study found that it only takes 57 parts per million for Round Up to completely destroy human kidney cells. We kind of need our kidneys. Agricultural levels of glyphosate are often more than 200 times this level.

You have to assume Monsanto knew that its RoundUp chemicals would damage DNA. After all, they’ve hidden toxicity results before, saying that they were a ‘commercial secret.’

Approximately 92% of all soybeans grown in the US are GMO, which means they are grown with Round Up or glyphosate-containing chemicals, and the Koller study found that even smaller concentrations (.02%) of Monsanto’s best seller sprayed on our crops causes DNA damage.

That means you can dilute Round Up more than 98% and it will still damage your cells.

In what country is a company allowed to knowingly, purposefully, scientifically kill human DNA (and thus humans) and not be charged with murder, treason, or at the bare minimum the withholding of information? Oh, that’s right – America.

Sure, biotech companies will tell you that DNA gets damaged all the time – from UV rays, oxidation, medical X-rays, even environmental toxins which biotech doesn’t create, but hen they systemically market a product(s) that kills your cells – shouldn’t they be stopped?

Damaged DNA leads to cancer, faster aging, neurological disease and the break down of our organs. There are hundreds of pathological conditions which are caused by damaged DNA, not that we can’t take proactive steps to heal our DNA, but agencies which allow these products to stay on the market are an abomination.

Even 9^th graders understand the importance of DNA, and while the human genome project that sequenced more than 100,00 genes stilldidn’t explain the whole picture of our genetic make-up, DNA is an essential part of it, and shouldn’t be damaged. You can revisit the basics of DNA, here.

This article originally appeared at Natural Society.

Discover The Evils of Monsanto

Good morning, and Happy Hump Day!


Early November morning, I was greeted with a commercial for Monsanto on the News12 channel.


I don't know how much a commercial costs on that network, but it may be time to purchase one. I re-read my last posting, featuring an interview with Dr. Stephanie Seneff, who articulately details the dangers of glyphosate to our well-beings and to that of our families and friends.


It's incredible to me how inserting the term "technology" into something utterly harmful can brainwash a civilization.


I worked with someone who kept mouthing the sound byte, "It's the wave of the future", every time GMOs came up. He refused any bit of research I sent his way, and he recently had a son. I wonder if his family is dealing with any difficulties due to his embracing the "future".


I implore you all to take some time and read the last posting. I've read and have done a lot of research into the dangers of GMOs, and sometimes, it's been harder than it should. A lot of the research is presented very dryly, and with unfamiliar terminologies and hard-to-obtain references. The interview goes right into the actions that glyphosate performs on flora and fauna, and it tellingly reveals that, like most of the so-called experimentation performed, there was only a three-month period allotted to gauge whether or not the compound posed a danger to humans.


Three months.


All research that has exceeded that three-month period has shown exactly the opposite - and that gives me cause to pose the question of whether this is INTENTIONAL.


More in a future posting - have a good day, dear readers.

Monsanto's Roundup Linked to Cancer - Again (Re-Post from TruthOut)

Monsanto's Roundup Linked to Cancer - Again

Monday, 06 October 2014 09:19 By Jeff Ritterman, M.D., Truthout | News Analysis 

 

A brilliant and celebrated inventor, John Franz, gave us an herbicide, Roundup, which has changed the face of agriculture. This herbicide has become the foundation for an entirely novel approach to farming - biotech agriculture - that has expanded rapidly throughout the globe.

Monsanto makes seeds for soy, corn, canola, cotton, alfalfa and sugar beets that are genetically engineered to be tolerant to Roundup. The seeds are marketed in 120 countries. Throughout the world, Roundup is sprayed heavily as a weed killer without fear of damaging the cash crops, which have been engineered to survive the herbicide's effects.

"The change in how agriculture is produced has brought, frankly, a change in the profile of diseases. We've gone from a pretty healthy population to one with a high rate of cancer, birth defects and illnesses seldom seen before."

Roundup seemed, at first, to be the perfect herbicide. It blocks the ESPS synthase enzyme, which prevents the synthesis of amino acids that plants need for growth. Since animals don't have this enzyme, it was initially hypothesized that they would be safe from Roundup's effects.
Unfortunately, Roundup has now been shown to affect much more than the EPSP synthase enzyme. The herbicide has been proven to cause birth defects in vertebrates, including in humans, and it may also be the cause of a fatal kidney disease epidemic.
An increasing number of studies are now linking the herbicide to cancer.
Roundup Linked to Increased Cancer in "Soy Republic"

Roundup is now heavily sprayed in what is known as the "Soy Republic," an area of Latin America larger than the state of California. This region has undergone a profound transformation since genetically modified (GM) crops were first introduced in 1996. Some 125 million acres in Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Uruguay and Paraguay are now devoted to GM soy production.
Doctors serving these areas have documented an alarming increase in cancers. A group of dedicated physicians formed an organization, Doctors of Fumigated Towns. They held a national conference in August of 2010 in Córdoba, the center of Argentina's soy region. The Department of Medical Sciences of the National University at Córdoba sponsored the conference. An estimated 160 doctors from throughout the country attended.
Dr. Medardo Avila Vazquez, a pediatrician specializing in environmental health, explained his concerns:
"The change in how agriculture is produced has brought, frankly, a change in the profile of diseases. We've gone from a pretty healthy population to one with a high rate of cancer, birth defects and illnesses seldom seen before. What we have complained about for years was confirmed and especially what doctors say about the sprayed towns and areas affected by industrial agriculture. Cancer cases are multiplying as never before in areas with massive use of pesticides."
Dr. Avila Vazquez blamed the biotech agricultural corporations for placing their profits over the public's health:
"The tobacco companies denied the link between smoking and cancer, and took decades to recognize the truth. The biotech and agrochemical corporations are the same as the tobacco industry; they lie and favor business over the health of the population."
It was the health of the population that concerned Dr. Damian Verzeñassi, professor of social and environmental health from the National University at Rosario. In 2010, he began a house-to-house epidemiological study of 65,000 people in Santa Fe, also in Argentina's soy region. He found cancer rates two to four times higher than the national average, with increases in breast, prostate and lung cancers.
Dr. Verzeñassi commented on his findings: "Cancer has skyrocketed in the last fifteen years."
Much the same was found in Chaco, Argentina's poorest province. In 2012, two villages were compared, the heavily sprayed farming village of Avia Terai and the non-sprayed ranching village of Charadai. In the farming village, 31 percent of residents had a family member with cancer while only 3 percent of residents in the ranching village had one.
Carlos Fria lives in Avia Terai. He has complained about glyphosate spraying in close proximity to his home:
"If the wind changes, the agrochemicals come into the house. My uncle just died of cancer. My wife too, passed away from cancer. Now many, many people are dying of cancer. It didn't used to be like that. In my opinion, this has to do with the poison they put on the fields."
Roundup Linked to Lymphoma
Research has also been done in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia and New Zealand investigating possible links between glyphosate, Roundup's active ingredient, and cancer. A large number of studies have focused on glyphosate's possible association with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Scientists from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) have analyzed studies spanning almost three decades. The IARC is the branch of the World Health Organization that promotes cancer research. Scientists throughout the world with skills in epidemiology, laboratory sciences and biostatistics are brought together to identify the causes of cancer so that preventive measures may be instituted. The agency views cancers as linked, directly or indirectly, to environmental factors.

The research shows that Roundup is linked to a host of cancers in those living in the heavily sprayed regions of Latin America. It has also been linked to B cell lymphoma, and to brain cancer.

In April of 2014, scientists at the IARC published their review of twenty-five years of research on the relationship between pesticide exposure and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. They found a positive association between organo-phosphorus herbicides, like glyphosate, and this cancer. The B cell lymphoma sub-type, in particular, was strongly associated with glyphosate exposure.
Roundup Linked to Brain Cancer

The linkage to lymphoma is the most recent research raising concerns about glyphosate's connection to cancer. Scientists from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, a branch of the US Department of Health and Human Services, specialize in illnesses caused by toxic substances. They published the results of the US Atlantic Coast Childhood Brain Cancer Study in 2009. Children with brain cancer from Florida, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania were compared to age matched controls. The researchers found that if either parent had been exposed to Roundup during the two years before the child's birth, the chances of the child developing brain cancer doubled.
Roundup and Cancer: Human Observations Summarized
The research shows that Roundup is linked to a host of cancers in those living in the heavily sprayed regions of Latin America. It has also been linked to B cell lymphoma, and to brain cancer.
While the epidemiological studies show close correlation, they cannot prove causality. The gold standard for scientific proof is a randomized controlled trial, which would be unethical in this instance. You cannot ethically expose humans to an herbicide. Scientists therefore use a variety of experimental models to assess cancer risk.
Roundup Causes DNA Damage, Errors During Cell Division
Cancer risk can be evaluated by experiments that measure Roundup's ability to induce DNA damage.
One of the initial steps in the development of cancers is often damage to our DNA. Each of our cells gets its operating instructions from its DNA. If the DNA is damaged, the faulty operating instructions can re-program cells to divide rapidly and chaotically. When this happens, cells become transformed into cancers.
A number of experiments have been done using various animal models, all showing the same results: after exposure to Roundup, cells exhibited DNA damage. This was true in fruit fly larvae, in mice, in the blood cells of the European eel and in the lymphocytes of cows.
Another experimental model that has been used to judge glyphosate's cancer risk focuses on the herbicide's impact on cell division. Cells are vulnerable to being turned into cancers if an error is made during this delicate process. In the process of cell division, the DNA must be copied precisely. Each daughter cell must receive from its parent cell an identical copy of the DNA. If a mistake is made, the daughter cells will receive faulty DNA copies. Cells with damaged DNA can turn into cancers.
In a 2004 study done at the National Scientific Research Center and the University of Pierre and Marie Curie in France, Roundup caused significant errors in the cell division of sea urchin embryos. The scientists commented that these abnormalities are hallmarks of cancer and delivered a particularly chilling warning: The concentration of Roundup needed to cause these errors was 500 to 4,000 times lower than the dose to which humans may be exposed by aerial spraying or handling of the herbicide.
Roundup Damages Human DNA
The most worrisome of the DNA studies are the ones that show DNA damage in humans.
Dr. Fernando Manas, a biologist at the National University of Rio Cuarto in Argentina, has been investigating the effects of pesticides for years. He believes that glyphosate spraying is causing cancer by inducing DNA damage. His research has documented genetic damage in those exposed. When Dr. Manas studied pesticide sprayers working in the soy industry in Córdoba, he found significantly more DNA damage in their lymphocytes than in those of an unexposed group of controls. Roundup was one of the most commonly used pesticides.

The pesticide sprayers in Córdoba, the Ecuadorians living in Sucumbíos, and the normal volunteers all developed Roundup-induced DNA damage in their lymphocytes.

Genetics researchers from the Pontifical Catholic University in Quito, Ecuador evaluated Ecuadorians living in the Sucumbíos district in northern Ecuador for evidence of DNA damage. This area was heavily sprayed with Roundup by the Colombian government to eradicate illicit crops. Those exposed to the herbicide developed a number of acute symptoms, including abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, fever, heart palpitations, headaches, dizziness, numbness, insomnia, depression, shortness of breath, blurred vision, burning of eyes, blisters and rash. When compared to a control group, they also showed significantly more DNA damage.
Interestingly, scientists have known since 1998 that when normal human lymphocytes were exposed to Roundup in a test tube, the lymphocytes developed DNA damage.
The pesticide sprayers in Córdoba, the Ecuadorians living in Sucumbíos, and the normal volunteers all developed Roundup-induced DNA damage in their lymphocytes. A cancer of the lymphocytes is known as a "lymphoma," the very same type of cancer that the International Agency for Research on Cancer showed to be strongly associated with glyphosate exposure.
Roundup Boosts Cancer in Tissue Culture Studies
Another method that scientists have used to assess Roundup's cancer risk is to expose cells grown in "tissue culture" to the herbicide. Sheets of cells are grown on a small dish with nutrients. Glyphosate is added and its effects are observed.
In 2010, researchers in India exposed mouse skin cells grown in tissue culture to Roundup. When the herbicide was added, the cells became cancerous.
Scientists in Thailand studied the impact of Roundup on human estrogen-responsive breast cancer cells in tissue culture. They published their results in 2013. Hormone-responsive breast cancer cells are known to grow when exposed to estrogen. Roundup also stimulated these cells to grow. The herbicide was able to bind to the cancer's estrogen receptors, thus mimicking the effects of estrogen and accelerating tumor growth.
Roundup Causes Cancer in Test Animals
Roundup's effects have been assessed in studies with a variety of test animals for more than three decades.
One of the earliest studies was done in 1979-1981, under the auspices of the United Nations Environmental Program, the International Labor Organization and the World Health Organization. Rats exposed to low levels of the herbicide developed testicular cancer. A larger dose did not produce the cancer. Unfortunately, at the time of the experiment, it was not understood that certain substances have more potent effects at lower doses than at higher doses. The evaluators erroneously dismissed the results showing the low-dose effect.
In a study from the Institute of Biology at the University of Caen in France, researchers studied glyphosate's effects on rats. Originally published in 2012, the resulting report was retracted after the biotech agriculture industry complained. After extensive review failed to show any fraud or problem with the data, the report was re-published in 2014. In this study, Roundup was shown to double the incidence of mammary gland tumors. These cancers developed much faster in rats exposed to Roundup than in controls. There was also an increase in cancers of the pituitary gland.
Rounding Up the Evidence
Epidemiological studies in humans, in the soy regions of Argentina and in Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have shown Roundup to be linked to an increase in cancer risk. There is a strong association between Roundup and B cell lymphoma, brain cancer and a variety of other cancers in those living in heavily sprayed areas.
In addition to these epidemiological observations, laboratory studies have shown that Roundup causes DNA damage, disturbs cell division, increases cancer growth in tissue culture and induces cancer when fed to test animals.
Proving Causality

Does the evidence linking Roundup to cancer prove causality? In the 1964 landmark Surgeon General's Report, which for the very first time linked tobacco to cancer, Surgeon General Dr. Luther Terry presented criteria for the establishment of a cause and effect relationship in a scientific study.
To meet Dr. Terry's criteria, an association must be strong, specific and consistent. Cause must precede effect. And the association must be biologically plausible.

Biotech agriculture's most powerful backer, it seems, is the government of the United States.

How well does the association between Roundup and cancer fit these criteria?
Roundup exposure is consistently and specifically associated with precancerous abnormalities in a wide variety of experimental settings. Epidemiological observations show a tight linkage between glyphosate and cancer. In the laboratory research, as well as in the epidemiological studies in the field, exposure to the herbicide precedes the development of the abnormalities. There are plausible biological mechanisms that explain how glyphosate can transform cells into cancers.
In citing the Surgeon General's report, Drs. Wild and Seber, in their highly regarded statistics textbook, Chance Encounters, provide an example of a strong association. If an "illness is four times as likely among people exposed to a possible cause as it is for those who are not exposed," the association is considered strong.
Most of the glyphosate exposure experiments and epidemiological observations show a doubling of cancer risk. This leaves some room for doubt.
But who, given the science, would want to expose their loved ones to Roundup?
The State of the Science vs. the Science of the State

Roundup has now been conclusively proven to cause birth defects and to be closely linked to cancer. If we do not want this herbicide to accumulate in our water, land, and food, we need to stop using it.

In the final sad irony, when the cancer cells reach their growth peak, they kill their host and die in the process.

The science is clear, but powerful economic interests have, thus far, prevailed. The executives of the biotech agricultural corporations and their backers have ignored or denied the science documenting Roundup's harm.
Biotech agriculture's most powerful backer, it seems, is the government of the United States.
This official policy was explained in a 2010 US State Department cable from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton:
"Our biotech outreach objectives for 2010 are to increase access to, and markets for, biotech as a means to help address the underlying causes of the food crisis, and to promote agricultural technology's role in mitigating climate change and increasing biofuel production."
The US government has been willing to exercise its muscle in support of the biotech agricultural corporations.
In El Salvador, for example, the United States recently pressured the government to buy Monsanto's GM seeds or risk losing $277 million in development aid. El Salvador refused and stood firm, preferring to buy the seeds from its own struggling farmers.
Cancer's Lessons
There is a disturbing parallel between the exponential growth of biotech agriculture and the spread of a cancer in the human body.
Cancers are cells that reproduce rapidly and haphazardly with no regard for the greater good of the organism. Cancer cells consume valuable energy, starving out normal cells. They grow so wildly and so quickly that they crowd out their neighbors. They send off emissaries to start new cancer colonies. They make harmful substances that damage healthy cells. They spread relentlessly. In the final sad irony, when the cancer cells reach their growth peak, they kill their host and die in the process.
Like a cancer, biotech agriculture has crowded out its neighbors and is spreading relentlessly. Also like a cancer, it makes harmful substances. Roundup is one of them. As more acreage comes under GM cultivation, we can expect Roundup use to continue to increase.
Roundup kills plants, causes birth defects in vertebrates, and is linked to cancer. Can a living planet withstand the continuous assault from this poison any more than the human body can withstand the attack from an aggressive cancer?
Do we need to fight biotech agriculture with the same persistence, commitment and force that we bring to bear in battling cancers?
The author thanks Vivien Feyer for contributions to this article.

Copyright, Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.

Jeff Ritterman, M.D.

Jeff Ritterman, M.D. is vice president of the board of directors of the SF Bay Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility. He is the retired chief of cardiology at Kaiser Richmond and a former Richmond, California, city councilman. Follow him on Twitter @JeffRitterman.

Related Stories

Roundup Ready Alfalfa Damages US Seed Industry

By Phillip Geertson, Activist Post | Report

Monsanto Found Guilty of Chemical Poisoning in France

By Anthony Gucciardi, Natural Society | Report

Monsanto and Big Food Losing the GMO and "Natural" Food Fight

By Ronnie Cummins, Organic Consumers Association | News Analysis

Who really thinks is a good idea to inundate soil with this POISON?!?


One person commented how "back-breaking" it is to simply pull weeds from the soil...well, sometimes, things take hard work, and there's no getting around it.


Tell me what YOU think.

---

Hide Comments

What’s up with Monsanto and genetically modified organisms (GMOs)? (R8 Re-Post)

What’s up with Monsanto and genetically modified organisms (GMOs)?

posted by Vincent Nunes
Mon, 07/11/2011 - 12:27pm

What’s up with Monsanto and genetically modified organisms (GMO)

Monsanto makes no apologies about the fact that it is doing genetic engineering to create a whole new breed of food crops. The word from this corporate giant is that it is working to develop crops that grow faster and are resistant to the things that typically cause crops to fail. Bottom line, they are producing more crops to feed more people. Seems to make sense, doesn’t it. After all the new GMO seeds have been tested and found to be safe, right?






Maybe not. Many geneticists believe that if we error we should error on the side of safety. Living organisms are incredibly complex. If you thought a computer was an engineering complexity, just wait until to see DNA. So, their bottom line is that there really isn’t enough solid research to know whether the GMOs are really safe or not.
What is certain is that Monsanto is out to improve their bottom line, and, frankly that is their legal obligation for their investors. One way that Monsanto has approached this is to create GMO seeds that don’t reproduce. Throughout the history of the planet, the way crops worked is that you planted a seed, it grew into a plant, you ate part of the plant, but the plant also produced more seeds that you could plant and start the cycle again. Monsanto has managed to make plants that don’t grow more plants, and that means you have to keep buying Monsanto seeds to grow more plants. It’s actually pretty clever.
The point is that Monsanto is out to make some money by doing Genetic Engineering. Some of the genetic engineering is well intended, but other genetic engineering is all about making more profit.

So what does this have to do with Chemtrails?

One of the “dots” that seems to be backed by some solid research is that the soil in places that are exposed to chemtrails show an unusually high amount of aluminum. Another interesting dot is the role that was played by the Aluminum industry in the fluoridation of our water. A third interesting dot is the fact that Monsanto has developed GMOs that are resistant to aluminum in the soil. The question is whether these three dots need to be connected.
Michael Murphy, noted chemtrails researcher, seems to think so. In his writings he says there is no coincidence in the fact that chemtrails seem to contain aluminum and Monsanto has seeds that flourish in aluminum rich soil were most other plants die… just another way to increase the bottom line. Kill of the normal plants so that everyone has to buy Monsanto seeds.
Others point out that aluminum rich soil is naturally occurring in some areas and so it makes sense for Monsanto to develop such a product. There is quite a bit of information on the internet concerning this topic. Do a little hunting and come up with your own conclusions. The question is whether the food industry is willing to poison us and destroy the natural environment in order to make a buck. So far, their track record seems to be to make a buck before really worrying about the impacts of what they are doing.

Original URL: http://enjoyabetterworld.com/2011/03/11/chemtrails-aluminum-and-monsanto-genetic-engineering-ge/
Do your own research.

Further reading

Submitted by Vincenzo (not verified) on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 3:03pm.

http://farmwars.info/?p=2927

reply | email this comment

Did the Casey Anthony trial obfuscate THIS?

Submitted by Vincenzo (not verified) on Mon, 07/11/2011 - 4:01pm.

http://motherjones.com/environment/2011/07/usda-deregulate-roundup-gmo-tom-philpott
Just the beginning paragraphs, dear readers:

It's a hoary bureaucratic trick, making a controversial announcement on the Friday afternoon before a long weekend, when most people are daydreaming about what beer to buy on the way home from work, or are checking movie times online. But that's precisely what the US Department of Agriculture pulled last Friday.
In an innocuous-sounding press release titled "USDA Responds to Regulation Requests Regarding Kentucky Bluegrass," agency officials announced their decision not to regulate a "Roundup Ready" strain of Kentucky bluegrass—that is, a strain genetically engineered to withstand glyphosate, Monsanto's widely used herbicide, which we know as Roundup. The maker of the novel grass seed, Scotts Miracle Gro, is now free to sell it far and wide. So you'll no doubt be seeing Roundup Ready bluegrass blanketing lawns and golf courses near you—and watching anal neighbors and groundskeepers literally dousing the grass in weed killer without fear of harming a single precious blade.
Which is worrisome enough. But even more worrisome is the way this particular product was approved. According to Doug Gurian-Sherman, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists' Food and Environment Program, the documents released by the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) along with the announcement portend a major change in how the feds will deal with genetically modified crops.
Notably, given the already-lax regulatory regime governing GMOs (genetically modified organisms, click here for a primer), APHIS seems to be ramping down oversight to the point where it is essentially meaningless. The new regime corresponding with the bluegrass announcement would "drastically weaken USDA’s regulation," Gurian-Sherman told me. "This is perhaps the most serious change in US regs for [genetically modified] crops for many years."

Be afraid...but don't just sit back - demand ANSWERS.
 

Monsanto-Resistant Weeds Take Root, Raising Food Prices

Submitted by Vincenzo (not verified) on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 2:28pm.

http://www.fastcompany.com/1768090/resistant-weeds-take-roots-and-threaten-food-supply?partner=gnews