Total Pageviews

Showing posts with label Jeffrey Smith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeffrey Smith. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 3, 2014

Why Are The GMO Purveyors Poisoning Our Earth?

I recently came across an article in The Atlantic regarding an Amish farmer who, instead of introducing pesticides to his produce, endeavored to strengthen the immune systems of the produce, found that the plants themselves would then develop their own defenses, eliminating the need for pesticides which end up being less useful while still presenting a danger to you and I.




Here's an excerpt of the dialogue between the interviewer and the farmer:



Roc Morin: Can you describe the differences between how you used to farm and how you farm now?
Samuel Zook: The inputs changed drastically. Instead of trying to grow crops that are healthy with fungicides and pesticides, I started to grow crops that are healthy with nutrition.
Morin: What was the hardest part about making the change?
Zook: Well, there was a big psychological block that I had to get through. I’d see a couple bugs out there and feel like I immediately had to do something about it. But, I learned that if I sit back, things will often take care of themselves. That first summer for instance, we saw a lot of horn worms. Before that, I would have sprayed them right away, but this time I waited and a bunch of wasps came along and killed them. Once I saw that, I started getting really excited.
Morin: So, when you use a pesticide you’re killing the predators too, right?
Zook: Right. You’re killing the entire ecosystem.
Morin: Have all of your problems disappeared?
Zook: I wish I could say that, but not entirely. We’re not living in the Garden of Eden yet. The issues I had before have disappeared, but we still have some other issues that we’re working on. One of the main things that has improved is how it feels to farm. Before, if I applied fungicide on my tomatoes, I had to wait three to seven days before I could reenter the area. Now, it’s so nice to just walk in my field any day of the week and not worry a bit. That in itself is huge. The other thing is, when I used to mix these skull-and-cross-bones chemicals to put in my sprayer, I’d have to be suited up. The children would be around and I’d say, “Now, get in the house. It’s not safe.” Now though, if the children want to help, it’s fine. If I want to mix the solutions better, I’ll just put my hand in a stir it around.
Morin: What are some of the problems that you’re dealing with now?
Zook: One of my major issues in the greenhouse is spider mites—little insects that just love a warm, dry environment. It’s very hard to control them, even conventionally. We usually get them under control, but we often lose some yield.
Morin: How do you get them under control?
Zook: Mainly through applying specific trace minerals like iodine and a whole line of ultra-micronutrients. We analyzed the sap of the plants with the help of a lab and I think we’ve narrowed the problem down to excessive ammonium nitrates. If ammonia builds up in the plants, it’s bug food, so we need to figure out a way to convert ammonia fast. I just spent two days with John [Kempf], and he came up with an enzyme cofactor which we’ll use to stimulate that ammonia conversion. We figure things out ourselves now rather than call up the chemical rep.
Morin: What did your chemical rep say when you told him that you didn’t need his services anymore?
Zook: Well, that was an interesting summer. He used to come here every week telling me horror stories about all the diseases in the neighborhood. But, I had made up my made up my mind, “No mas.” He came back every week for eight weeks telling me what I needed to spray. I said, “I’m fine, thanks.” The last time he was here, we were out picking tomatoes and he walked over. He was looking around and talking about this and that, and he didn’t even mention pesticides. “Well,” he said, “your tomatoes look pretty good.” I thought, “Yes!”
Morin: One thing that I immediately noticed is how great everything smells here. Do you still smell it, or are you accustomed to it?
Zook: Oh, I smell it every time I come here. It’s exciting. Those aromas are actually compounds the plants produce to defend themselves from insects and disease attacks. A lot of people don’t realize that plants have immune systems.
Morin: So, you can smell health—can you can smell problems too?
Zook: Yes. There’s a real science to walking through a field and pausing to feel what the plants are feeling. There’s a huge difference between walking in this field and walking in one that has had six fungicide applications. The plants just don’t radiate that same vitality. Another thing I learned is that every time you spray with a fungicide or something, it’s actually suppressing the plant as well as the fungi.
Morin: The same way that antibiotics can weaken a person’s immune system?
Zook: Yes. It might kill the disease, but then because it has weakened the plant, a week later the plant is much more susceptible to that same disease again. That’s the way it is with miticide. If I come in here and spray the mites with it, it would kill some of them, but it kills by messing with their hormones, so the ones that do survive will then mature 50 percent faster. So, it’s pretty much guaranteed that I’d have a huge mite outbreak 10 years later. Instead of doing that, let’s figure out what this plant wants and provide it. They really do respond.
Morin: What else can you tell by looking at your plants?
Zook: Well, one thing we learn is to read the leaves. This asymmetry here indicates zinc deficiency. The spots over here indicate a phosphorus deficiency. And, this here rippling of the leaf usually indicates excess nitrogen.
Morin: Before you started with this method were you able to read the leaves?
Zook: You know, I barely noticed them at all. I just planted and sprayed. Now, it’s much more fun.

I find it hard to believe that none of these so-called "scientists" had thought of this before.


That leads me to my big question, one that kept me up for most of last night: if all that's needed is to promote self-defense in our produce, then why the hell are we allowing tons of POISON to be sprayed upon our produce and into our soil?


We've all heard of this purported "gluten intolerance". Is the truth really that we are being poisoned by pesticide residue that doesn't wash off and maintains itself until it reaches our gut and continues to disrupt bodily functions and cause imbalances?




Glyphosate, one of the many compounds used as a "pesticide", works by chelating minerals essential to growth and absorption.




That affects the viability of the plant, as well.




Research has proven beyond doubt that GMO varieties of produce lack the levels of nutrients that organic and conventional produce contains.




For all intents and purposes, you may as well be eating plastic versions of produce when you choose GMOs. Here is a repost of my observations after watching Genetic Roulette by Jeffery Smith:




  • The human body does not see GMOs as foodstuffs; instead, the "organisms" promote inflammation, disease, etc.
  • Crossing zones can create mutations in DNA
  • GMO "science" is equivalent to an episode of Gunsmoke (check out the method by which genes are "fired" into other organisms)
  • Pesticide-producing crops destroy the stomachs of insects - why do we believe that the stomachs of other organisms are immune to this?
  • "Scientific consensus" is equivalent to quackery
  • Long-term studies to gauge effects of GMOs on organisms were never performed
  • The FDA actually doesn't approve any GMO crops, and biotech firms are free to market their FrankenFoods as viable alternatives to naturally grown/organic crops
  • The biotech firms have "bad science" down to a science
  • The main ingredient in Monsanto's BT crops, Bacillus Thurgeniensis, breaks open stomach tissue - that is its primary function...so why would this affect only insects?
  • The bacteria (BT) in Roundup soybeans persisted in the human gut - this would seem to account for the increase in gastro-intestinal ailments in the last few decades
  • Food allergies/intolerances are caused by intestinal function disruption
  • 35 years ago, there was no such thing as a "food allergy"
  • There is a relationship between GMOs and autism, though the firm link has not been established
  • Roundup functions as a deprivation agent (glyphosate is a chelator - it makes nutrients unavailable to the organism) - by definition, Roundup-ready crops have less nutritional value than conventional crops; Roundup can also affect the human body in the same way - those missing trace minerals adversely affect immune response
  • Glysophate is genotoxic
  • Fertility clinics now abound - once, they were scarce and unnecessary
  • The mystery organism discovered by Dr. Don Huber is transferable and heat-tolerant; in examining aborted fetal tissue, it exhibited the functions of a fungus but was the size of a virus
  • A number of testimonials from pet owners and from farms report adverse effects from GMO feed/pet foods, and the positive reactions once those GMOs are removed from their diets
  • Monsanto's rBGH ingredient IGF1 is linked to breast and prostate cancer - scientists performing these experiments later refused to ingest rBGH-laced milk
  • Children's immune systems are not prepared for GMOs - their young genes are mutable
  • The WIC Program that assists low-income families with essential supplies actually promote GMO baby formulae (including Similac, Enfamil, Gerber)
  • WHY GMOs? GMOs are a PRODUCT
  • Monsanto's true mission statement should read: "To take control of the world's foodstuffs and to marry them with our chemicals"




  • I didn't copy any of that from any website - those are my own words. I took some time to update some of my points with links.




    So, once again, I ask - why are the purveyors of GMOs allowed to poison our produce and our soil with utterly unnecessary pesticides, when one could strengthen the immune systems of our produce instead, and give us all better produce with more benefits for you and I?




    I think it's time for us to make that inquiry of Monsanto, BASF, Sygenta, Dow and all of the rest, and if we don't get a satisfactory answer, we need to SHUT THEM DOWN.

    Friday, September 26, 2014

    Playing Genetic Roulette With Your Body? I Smell A Crap-Out (R8 Re-Post)

    The news that crops can be effectively immunized against the adoption of GM genes is a whiff of fresh air!


    You can see that I changed my profile image - animals know better than to eat that stuff.


    They can understand that the taste is just wrong. We have been conditioned to cover our foods in all sorts of garnishes, sweeteners and other obfuscators of taste.


    It looks the same.


    It seems to taste the same.


    You can seem to do the same things to it that you did with real foods.


    Understand, though...you aren't getting the same amount of nutrition.


    You are also receiving a sizable amount of pesticide that doesn't necessarily wash off when you rinse.


    Anywho...gotta get back to the old grind. Have a great weekend.


    Playing Genetic Roulette With Your Body? I Smell A Crap-Out


    I had a great time at my reunion this weekend, despite my not being in the best of shape. I did get to see quite a number of my fellow classmates, though I couldn't make the rounds completely - please forgive me, you guys.
    I read a number of stories that really made me get up and speak to my mom in regards to the dangers of artificial sweeteners, specifically Splenda. Without further ado:
    Stop Using Splenda - Tuesday, October 09, 2012 by: Melissa A. Bartoszewski, DC
    (NaturalNews) Do you put Splenda in your coffee? Or use it in your baked goods, instead of regular sugar or other natural alternatives? You may think you are making a better choice, but in fact, you are doing more harm than good. Many foods labeled as "healthier for you," low calories, no/low fat, are typically worse for you than the real thing. Ingredients that are chemically altered and processed are not better for you. Although long-term studies performed on Splenda and their effects on humans have not been performed, willingly ingesting possibly carcinogenic materials is unsafe.
    The Many Problems With Splenda
    Splenda, also known as sucralose, is a combination of maltodextrin and dextrose and is 600 times sweeter than regular sugar. Splenda is a synthetic compound discovered in 1976 by scientists in Britain seeking a new pesticide formation and is similar in chemical composition to DDT. Splenda is found in countless products and advertised as a "safe" alternative to sugar. "The inventors of Splenda admit around fifteen percent (15 percent) of sucralose is absorbed by the body, but they cannot guarantee us (out of this 15 percent) what amount of chlorine stays in the body and what percent flushes out" (Brahmini, 2012). Chlorine is considered a carcinogen. Possible side effects of Splenda include: "gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes." (Brahmini, 2012)
    A 12-week study performed by Duke University on rats determined that Splenda caused pH imbalances in the body, disrupted absorption in the intestinal tract, depletion of good bacteria, swollen livers, kidney calcification and promoted weight gain (Gerson, 2008). No long-term studies have been performed regarding the dangerous effects of Splenda on humans, yet this product continues to be put on the shelves of our grocery stores, advertised and bought by "health conscious" consumers, trying to make healthier decisions.
    Au Naturale
    Our society needs to get away from the common perception that sugar substitutes are safer, healthier options; they are NOT! Agave is an example of a natural sweetener that is not chemically processed. Sugar in the raw form and Stevia are some other examples of natural, healthy sweeteners. Organic honey can also be used to sweeten many things naturally. Just because a product is on the shelf, does not mean it is safe. The Food and Drug Administration has approved many unsafe products for human consumption. NutraSweet is a known neurotoxin that has been proven to cause tumors and had been previously banned in Europe; yet was previously deemed safe for human consumption, like Splenda has been today. The truth is, the long-term consequences of ingesting man-made chemical substitutes are unknown, but it is better to be safe than sorry, and avoid products containing such ingredients at all costs.

    Always read labels and question anything that has a long name that you cannot pronounce; more than likely it is a chemical you should steer clear of.

    Sources:

    http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/artificial-sweeteners.html
    Myths and facts about aspartame and sucralose: a critical review Maganti Brahmini*, Tanikonda Keerthi, Birudugadda Priyadarshini, Idpuganti Sudheerbabu Sir C.R. Reddy College Of Pharmaceutical Sciences. Santhinagar, Eluru-534007 India

    http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.nycc.edu
    Splenda, The Calorie-Free Artificial Sweetener, May Leave Consumers with Something Worse
    Than a Bitter Aftertaste. (Total Health, Mar/Apr2009, Vol. 30 Issue 4, p17-17, 1/2p)
    http://www.draxe.com

    Gerson Healing Newsletter, Nov2008, Vol. 23 Issue 6, p8-9, 2p (http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.nycc.edu)

    About the author:
    Dr. Melissa Bartoszewski is a chiropractor at Estramonte Chiropractic & Wellness Center in Charlotte, NC. She is a graduate of New York Chiropractic College. Dr. Bartoszewski is also a raw food and natural healthcare advocate. Follow her on Twitter at PolishChiro.
    There are four containers of La Yogurt in the refrigerator that contain sucralose. I advised everyone in the household to leave that garbage on the store shelves. It really should not be available for human consumption.
    Let's segue into a review of Jeffrey Smith's latest film, Genetic Roulette, which can be seen at http://geneticroulettemovie.com/
    From my notes:
    • The human body does not see GMOs as foodstuffs; instead, the "organisms" promote inflammation, disease, etc.
    • Crossing zones can create mutations in DNA
    • GMO "science" is equivalent to an episode of Gunsmoke (check out the method by which genes are "fired" into other organisms)
    • Pesticide producing crops destroy the stomachs of insects - why do we believe that the stomachs of other organisms are immune to this?
    • Scientific consensus is equivalent to quackery
    • Long-term studies to gauge effects of GMOs on organisms were never performed
    • The FDA actually doesn't approve any GMO crops, and biotech firms are free to market their FrankenFoods as viable alternatives to naturally grown/organic crops
    • The biotech firms have "bad science" down to a science
    • The main ingredient in Monsanto's BT crops, Bacillus Thurgeniensis, breaks open stomach tissue - that is its primary function...so why would this affect only insects?
    • The bacteria (BT) in Roundup soybeans persisted in the human gut - this would seem to account for the increase in gastro-intestinal ailments in the last few decades
    • Food allergies/intolerances are caused by intestinal function disruption
    • 35 years ago, there was no such thing as a "food allergy"
    • There is a relationship between GMOs and autism, though the firm link has not been established
    • Roundup functions as a deprivation agent (glyphosate is a chelator - it makes nutrients unavailable to the organism) - by definition, Roundup-ready crops have less nutritional value than conventional crops; Roundup can also affect the human body in the same way - those missing tace minerals adversely affect immune response
    • Glysophate is genotoxic
    • Fertility clinics now abound - once, they were scarce and unnecessary
    • The mystery organism discovered by Dr. Don Huber is transferable and heat-tolerant; in examining aborted fetal tissue, it exhibited the functions of a fungus but was the size of a virus
    • A number of testimonials from pet owners and from farms report adverse effects from GMO feed/pet foods, and the positive reactions once those GMOs are removed from their diets
    • Monsanto's rBGH ingredient IGF1 is linked to breast and prostate cancer - scientists performing these experiments later refused to ingest rBGH-laced milk
    • Children's immune systems are not prepared for GMOs - their young genes are mutable
    • The WIC Program that assists low-income families with essential supplies actually promote GMO baby formulae (including Similac, Enfamil, Gerber)
    • WHY GMOs? GMOs are a PRODUCT
    • Monsanto's true mission statement should read: "To take control of the world's foodstuffs and to marry them with our chemicals"
    Was that harsh?
    The real question to ask is: is any of that UNTRUE?
    There's much more you can take from the movie - watch it for yourself, and see if I am wrong. It's only 85 minutes of your time.
    Watch it in segments, if you like - it's not a race. It's important that you are aware of the danger that GMOs pose to you, your family and your health.
    GMOs ARE A PRODUCT.
    GMOs MAY SIMULATE THE LOOK OF FOOD, BUT ARE NOT FOOD.
    I'm going to give Monsanto a new goal.
    Why don't you create a chelating agent that removes TOXINS from the human body? I mean, you found a way to capture necessay nutrients and successfully inoculate them; why not the opposite? It sounds like the kind of research you should have been involved with in the first place.
    Think about it!
    A chelating agent for HFCS! You could pop one of those, then drink all of the surgary soda pop you wanted, with nary an ill effect! It's all going out with the bathwater, so to speak.
    Let's get back to the topic of GMOs - do you know that GMO crops have been banned pretty much all over the world?
    Do you know that Monsanto itself serves only non-GMO foods in their cafeterias?
    What, you say? These guys make FrankenFood, but they themselves won't eat it?
    You tell me what that says to you. I know what it says to me. In fact, the current Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, I understand, is a big booster for the biotech companies, yet on his plane, the meals are certified organic.
    From Jon Kirby's blog:

    Does Monsanto Man Mitt Romney Secretly Eat Organic? Not just Mitt, All the Clintons,Bushes, and Obamas ; Michelle said Corn Syrup is Poison: One has to ask Does someone know something we don’t?!

    Repost mother Jones
    By Tom Philpott
    Wed Sep. 26, 2012 3:00 AM PD
    Mitt Romney hasn’t divulged many details about what kind of agriculture policy he’d pursue as president. (Sound familiar?) But all signs suggest that he’d follow the agribiz party line. As Wayne Barrett showed in a recent Nation piece (my comment here), Romney has ties to agribusiness giant Monsanto that date to the ’70s, when GMO seeds were an R&D project, not a business model. According to Barrett, Romney, then a young Bain consultant, helped nudge Monsanto on its path away from disgraced industrial chemical concern toward its current status as world-beating agribiz player. Then there’s the agribiz execs and shills the GOP nominee tapped for his campaign’s Agriculture Advisory Committee.
    But guess what? In the privacy of his campaign jet, the beleaguered presidential contender apparently eats organic, reports the Today show’s Peter Alexander:

    And, while I’ve never been invited up front, sources close to the campaign tell me the shelves are stocked with a wide variety of healthy fare. Kashi cereals, hummus, pita as well as organic applesauce. Everything’s organic, I’m told, including the ingredients to Romney’s favorite, peanut butter and honey sandwiches.
    Nor is this the first time the Romney family has been linked to organic food. Get a load of this 2002 profile of Ann Romney from the Worcester (Mass.) Telegram & Gazette:
    Mrs. Romney was introduced to several practitioners of holistic medicine, who persuaded her to adopt alternative therapies. She now eats organic foods and very little meat. She practices reflexology and undergoes acupuncture treatments. She credits the lifestyle with turning her health around.
    I have calls and emails into the Romney campaign to confirm these reports. I have yet to hear back. But if they’re true—and it’s hard to imagine either the Romneys or the journalists would make them up—Romney would hardly be the only prominent politician to publicly promote genetically modified foods while privately avoiding them by sticking to organics. (USDA organic code forbids GMOs from any food labeled organic, along with the application of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides).
    Indeed, he’s following a tradition that dates to Bill Clinton, includes George W. Bush and his family, and is alive and well in the White House of Romney’s opponent, Barack Obama. What’s my evidence that the Clintons and Bushes ate organic? Get this, from someone who knows—Walter Scheib, who served as White House executive chef during the Clinton and Bush years:
    From 1994 to 2005 I was the executive chef at the White House. This offered me not only the personal honor of serving two unique and interesting first families, but the professional challenge of fulfilling Hillary Clinton’s mandate of bringing contemporary American cuisine and nutritionally responsible food to the White House.
    This meant that nearly all the product used was obtained from local growers and suppliers. There was a small garden on the roof of the White House where produce was grown.
    The ethic of the purchasing and the cooking at the White House under my direction and under the continuing direction of [current Obama White House executive chef] Cris Comerford is one of respect for the pedigree of the product and manner it is grown, gathered, raised or caught.
    The Clinton and Bush families dined regularly on organic foods. Both wagyu and grass-fed beef were frequently used.
    And here’s Scheib again, in an interview with the blog Obama Foodorama, on Hillary Clinton’s unheralded rooftop veggie garden:
    “Not certified organic,” Mr. Scheib said. “But everything was absolutely grown without pesticides and fertilizers. I guess it’s what these days we call ‘natural.’”
    And “the emphasis on organics became even more important when the Bushes arrived in the White House,” Obama Foodorama reported. “Laura Bush was ‘adamant’ about organics, according to Mr. Scheib.” Scheib also told the New York Times that Laura Bush “insisted that fresh, organic foods be served in the White House,” but she just didn’t talk “much about it outside the house.”
    While the Clintons and Bushes quietly dined on organic and grass-fed, their administrations pushed policies that propped up industrial agriculture and the companies that dominate it. Clinton promoted GMOs to the very end of his term—a cause his wife Hillary has kept up as secretary of state. At least Clinton was fairly progressive on maintaining strict USDA standards for organic farming; Bush matched Clinton’s zeal for propping up industrial farming but also tried to weaken organic standards.
    As for the Obamas, Michelle Obama, unlike her predecessors, was pretty open about her preference for organics—at least at first. For a pre-election 2008 profile, Ms. Obama told the The New Yorker that “in my household, over the last year we have just shifted to organic.” She added a little critique of a famous industrial-food sweetener:
    And the fruit-juice-box thing, and we think—we think—that’s juice. And you start reading the labels and you realize there’s high-fructose corn syrup (BIOWEAPON) in everything we’re eating. Every jelly, every juice. Everything that’s in a bottle or a package is like poison in a way that most people don’t even know
    And, of course, soon after she moved into the White House, Ms. Obama famously broke ground on an organic garden on the lawn—and launched a campaign to inspire children to make healthier food choices.
    But the agrichemical industry quickly chided the Obamas for not using “crop protection products” (i.e., pesticides) in their garden; the administration began making pro-agribiz appointments and policy moves (a trend that continues to this day); and Michelle Obama shifted her kids’ health campaign to emphasize exercise over diet change.
    Now the Obamas appear to have settled into the pattern established by their predecessors: privately eat organic while publicly maintaining the food system status quo—a pattern that Romney, if he wins, seems ready to maintain. So, organic for the elite, GMOs for everyone else? That’s precisely the kind of exclusive mindset that gives organic food a bad name.
    ——–
    One has to wonder what are politician for if they aren’t standing up for the poisons we are injesting.
    Let's highlight this sentence: So, organic for the elite, GMOs for everyone else?
    GMOs are NOT food. Consider the movement to keep GMOs unlabled.
    A fellow in the film Genetic Roulette says it best - I paraphrase: "No one gets up in the morning anxiously awaiting their next bite of some GMO food - in the 30 years since the idea of GMOs, there has not at any point been any improvement in any GMO food compared to conventional/organic food."
    Watch the film and see how he states it - much better than the above.
    In California, Proposition 37 is on the ballot, to be voted upon on Election Day. The biotech firms and their benefactors are adamant upon you and I not knowing the origin of the foods upon our shelves.
    I believe that, after watching this film, reading Jeffrey Smith's books, verifying the information I've imparted to you above and in past articles, you will implore everyone you know in California to vote YES! on Proposition 37.
    Download a poster (4.2MB, PDF) listing both both the corporate charlatans who are selling organic while fighting Prop. 37 and the organic companies who have donated money in support of Prop. 37.
    To help you eat safer, visit http://www.NonGMOShoppingGuide.com or download the iPhone app ShopNoGMO.