Tag Archives: GMO

Dr. Mercola Responds

Posted on by

Deep State Trying to Take Down Mercola.com and 2 Decades of Alternative Health Information

Lies Exposed: CSPI’s Organized Attack Against Mercola

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
Mercola.com

For the past two decades, my mission has been to help you take control of your health. Recent developments now threaten my ability to do that. July 21, 2020, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) issued a press release1 and testified in a Senate hearing on the topic of COVID-19 scams.

The press release contained lies, fabrications and a reckless disregard for truth in an attempt to put an end to me and this website.

Additionally, in an August 12, 2020, email, CSPI president Dr. Peter Lurie2 — a former FDA associate commissioner — claims I’m “profiting from the pandemic” through “anti-vaccine fearmongering” and reporting of science-based nutrition shown to impact your disease risk. According to Lurie:

“Mercola brazenly has claimed that many of his products are coronavirus treatments or cures, including vitamin C, vitamin D, zinc, selenium, ‘molecular hydrogen,’ licorice, and other substances.

Besides profiting from the pandemic, Mercola has seemingly advised people to contract COVID-19 after taking supposedly ‘immunity boosting’ supplements (which of course he sells). Making matters worse, Mercola is a leading proponent of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories — and has been fearmongering against prospective COVID-19 vaccines even before such vaccines are available!”

CSPI is now urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Trade Commission “to bring enforcement proceedings against Mercola and his companies for their unlawful disease claims that falsely and misleadingly claim to treat, cure or prevent COVID-19 infections.”

Lurie is asking CSPI members to flood these agencies with prewritten Tweets urging them to take action against us. You may have been one of the people who received this urging if you made the mistake of subscribing to their irresponsibly misleading organization.

How CSPI Is Spinning False Claims

Conveniently omitting the fact that I am a board-certified physician, the CSPI falsely claims I am promoting “at least 22 vitamins, supplements and other products” available on my website as being able to “prevent, treat or cure COVID-19 infection.”

These are some pretty hefty accusations to make, but luckily CSPI has provided an Appendix of Illegal Claims to easily verify the evidence they’ve uncovered, which you can view here.3 According to Lurie, I make COVID-19 claims for products such as Fermented Licorice Powder sold in the Mercola Market.4

You won’t find any claims as Lurie says, because they don’t exist. He is either delusional or lying. In CSPI’s listing for Solspring brand Fermented Licorice Powder in the Appendix, CSPI provides a link to an article about the benefits of glycyrrhizin, a compound found in licorice.

The article contains nine references to scientific journals, including The Lancet. What is not found in this article? Product advertisements or references to fermented licorice powder of any kind, let alone the Solspring brand.

Each product listed in the CSPI Appendix goes through the same bogus rearrangement of information, grabbing a snippet from a newsletter article and falsely applying it to my product pages. In reality, no product claims are made in the articles, and no COVID-19 claims are made on my product pages.

Here’s what The Lancet had to say about licorice:

“Of all the compounds, glycyrrhizin was the most active in inhibiting replication of the SARS-associated virus.”

Is this newsworthy to you? Do you find it interesting and relevant? Do you see any product ads on this page? Can you find any mention of “fermented licorice powder” on this page, as Lurie claims? No. That’s a complete lie and fabrication.

Each product listed in the CSPI Appendix goes through the same bogus rearrangement of information, grabbing a snippet from a newsletter article and falsely applying it to a completely unrelated product advertisement. In reality, no product claims are made in the articles, and no COVID-19 claims are made on any product pages found at the Mercola Market.

So, just what sort of intentional misrepresentation is going on here? What kind of legal charlatan would do something so reckless? It just so happens CSPI is the right charlatan for this con-job.

Two Decades of Health Journalism Are at Stake

For the last 23 years, I’ve fought against putting neurotoxic fluoride in water. I was one of the first doctors to alert the world about the dangers of Vioxx, which killed more than 60,000 patients before it was finally withdrawn from the market. I’ve campaigned against GMO’s and toxic agrichemicals, funding the original signature gathering to get GMO labeling in California in 2012.

For over a decade, I’ve funded the battle to end the use of mercury dental fillings worldwide. I’ve warned against the overuse of antibiotics in human medicine and the dangers of consuming them in CAFO meats.

I’ve funded research and was one of the first physician journalists to bring major awareness to the hazards of vitamin D deficiency. I’m now rallying public awareness of the importance to optimize vitamin D to minimize COVID-19 risks.

This public health advocacy has created an army of well-funded adversaries. They’ve attacked me using expensive PR groups and mass media, captured federal regulatory agencies and pharmaceutical front groups in an attempt to silence and discredit me.

Never before have Americans been exposed to such a coordinated assortment of lies and censorship. The brainwashing, social media surveillance, coercion and destruction of dissenters are accelerating. For a comprehensive overview of this New World Order, an empire built and run by billionaires, see my “Ghost in the Machine” article series.

CSPI Is Bankrolled by Billionaires With Their Own Agenda

Who bankrolls CSPI? Major hint, the general public plays a very tiny role in their funding. According to Influence Watch:5

“In 2017 CSPI’s received 37.6% ($5.3 million) of its revenue from membership dues and subscriptions to its Nutrition Action Healthletter. CSPI also took in 35.6% ($5 million) of its funding from contributions, and 15% ($2.2 million) of its revenue from foundational grants.

A number of foundations have given money to CSPI, among them the Rockefeller Family Fund, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, the Tides Foundation, the Public Welfare Foundation, Pew Charitable Trusts, and Bloomberg Philanthropies.”

CSPI has also partnered with Bill Gates’ agrichemical PR group, the Cornell Alliance for Science. In fact, Greg Jaffe, who heads up CSPI’s Biotechnology Project, is also the Alliance for Science associate director of legal affairs.6

CSPI Promoted GMOs and Trans Fat

For years, CSPI fought against your right to know the truth about genetically modified organisms(GMOs) in your food, saying GMO labels would be “misleading.”7

Apparently, they think GMO soy and corn drenched in toxic pesticides are in the public’s best interest, and they see no problem with synthetic fertilizer runoff poisoning fresh water supplies, or draining aquifers for irrigation.

Ironically, the top human ingredients from the genetically engineered products are high fructose corn syrup and vegetable oil. CSPI should likely change the name of the ‘Nutrition Action’ newsletter that competes with my own.

As if that isn’t enough, starting in the late 1980s, CSPI championed harmful trans fats,8 a tragically misguided yet thoroughly effective campaign that resulted in epidemic levels of heart disease. In fact, they celebrated their victory of converting Americans away from healthy saturated fats to trans fats, calling it “a great boon to Americans’ arteries.”9

It was largely the result of CSPI’s campaign that fast-food restaurants replaced beef tallow, palm oil and coconut oil with partially hydrogenated vegetable oils, which are high in synthetic trans fats linked to heart disease and other chronic diseases.

As late as 1988, CSPI praised trans fats, saying

“there is little good evidence that trans fats cause any more harm than other fats” and that “much of the anxiety over trans fats stems from their reputation as ‘unnatural.’”10

CSPI is also heavily funded by the American Heart Association,11 a group that in 1948 received a gift of $1.75 million from Procter & Gamble,12 the makers of Crisco, the top trans fat sold for decades. The cash bonanza, thanks to a radio contest, gave the 24-year-old AHA a solid footing to buy its way into America as one of the country’s most influential health organizations from then, on.

If that were not enough, today the AHA is funded in part by pharmaceutical companies making statins that fight the damage caused by trans fat,13,14 such as Pfizer, maker of Lipitor, which in 2011 was the world’s top-selling drug.15 In 2018-2019, Pfizer gifted the AHA with a hefty $824,595. Novartis, which also makes statins, gave the AHA a whopping $3.4 million that same year.

And, back to where we started with CSPI, in its 2018 Form 990 the AHA reports that it gave CSPI $49,500 in cash.16This, despite the fact that in 2003 CSPI published a report on lifting the veil of secrecy on how agencies like itself are funded — at the time, proudly declaring that CSPI doesn’t accept industry funding.17

I guess they think you don’t have to count it as industry money if you’re accepting that money from a major nonprofit that got its money from corporate and industry dollars. You can’t make this stuff up — it is hard to come up with groups that have had a more devastating impact on Americans’ health than the AHA — and CSPI is partly funded by it.

Which Side Is CSPI On?

In 2003, the Weston A. Price Foundation rightfully questioned whether CSPI might actually be promoting the interests of the soy industry rather than public health:18

“It is impossible to measure the hazards and grief … the leaders of the major nutrition ‘activist’ consumer organization have inflicted on many millions of an unknowing public — because CSPI’s campaign was wildly successful.

Thanks to CSPI, healthy traditional fats have almost completely disappeared from the food supply, replaced by manufactured trans fats known to cause many diseases.

By 1990, most fast food chains had switched to partially hydrogenated vegetable oil. In 1982, a McDonald’s meal of chicken McNuggets, large order of fries and a Danish or pie contained 2.4 grams of trans fat, out of a total of 54 grams of fat. In 1992, that same meal contained 19.2 grams trans fats, a 700 percent increase …

Who benefits? Soy, or course. Eighty percent of all partially hydrogenated oil used in processed foods in the US comes from soy, as does 70 percent of all liquid oil.

CSPI claims that its [financial] support comes from subscribers to its Nutrition Action newsletter … but in fact, in CSPI’s January 1991 newsletter, Jacobson notes that ‘our effort was ultimately joined … by the American Soybean Association.’”

CSPI Deceptively Erased Its Deadly History

Today, you’ll have to dig deep to unearth CSPI’s deadly campaign. In an act of deception, they erased it from their history to make people believe they’ve been doing the right thing all along. Notice how their historical timeline19 of trans fat starts at 1993 — the year CSPI realized the jig was up and they had to support the elimination of trans fat.

As reported in my 2015 article, “Did CSPI Kill Millions by Recommending Trans Fats?” CSPI rigorously campaigned for trans fat prior to 1993, resulting in an avalanche of ill health. (Should I mention that in December 1993 the AHA wrote in the journal Circulation that they didn’t believe Americans consumed enough trans fat to have a major effect on their LDL and HDL levels?20)

Post 1993, CSPI spent the next two decades raising funds to lobby against the very same trans fat they’d once promoted. Perhaps CSPI is just angry because I won’t let them get away with hiding their deadly history.

For years, CSPI has worked “in the public’s interest” in name only. Now, they’re attacking your right to be informed about the potential benefits of nutritional supplements and how you can bolster your immune system, thus minimizing your risk of COVID-19 and other infections.

My articles report published science. There’s scientific support for discussing the benefits of certain nutrients and inexpensive treatments against COVID-19 and other viral illnesses. It’s not pure speculation, it’s not fake news and it’s not a danger to public health, as CSPI would like everyone to believe.

It Is Time to Expose CSPI’s Lies

CSPI’s campaign in the 80’s switched Americans onto heart disease causing trans fats. CSPI fought against your right to know GMO’s, and is partnered with Bill Gates’ agrichemical PR group – Alliance for Science. CPSI wants vitamins and supplements banned, and is trying to bring an end to the mercola.com website.

Please share the truth about this dangerous group that is bankrolled by billionaires. Email, tweet, text and share by any method possible and help expose the CSPI lies.

Read the full article at Mercola.com.

from: https://healthimpactnews.com/2020/deep-state-trying-to-take-down-mercola-com-and-2-decades-of-alternative-health-information/

Pre-Packaged Foods & Health

Posted on by
 80% of Pre-Packaged Foods in America Are Banned in Other Countries
By | Shine Food – M

If you or your kids enjoy pre-packaged convenience foods commonly found in grocery stores across the U.S. such as Froot Loops, Swanson dinners, Mountain Dew, and frozen potato and bread products, you may think twice before purchasing them after hearing what they contain: dangerous chemicals that other countries around the globe have deemed toxic to the point that they’re illegal, and companies are fined hundreds of thousands of dollars for including them in food products.

In a new book Rich Food, Poor Food, authors Mira and Jason Calton provide a list of what they term “Banned Bad Boys” – ingredients commonly used in up to 80% of all American convenience food that have been banned by other countries, with information about which countries banned each substance and why.

 And though it might not surprise you to hear that Olestra – commonly used in low/no-fat snack foods and known to cause serious gastrointestinal issues for those who consume it (understatement) – is on that list, having been banned in both the United Kingdom and Canada, you may be shocked to hear that Mountain Dew, Fresca and Squirt all contain brominated vegetable oil, a substance that has been banned in more than 100 countries “because it has been linked to basically every form of thyroid disease – from cancer to autoimmune diseases – known to man.”

Related: The 25 healthiest foods for under $1

 Way to go, FDA! Woot!

 You might also be upset to hear that the food coloring used to make your kid’s delicious Mac & Cheese dinner visually appealing – yellow #5 and yellow #6, namely – is made from coal tar, which among other things is an active ingredient in lice shampoo and has been linked to allergies, ADHD, and cancer in animals. And gaaaaah.

 Then there’s azodicarbonamide – commonly found in frozen dinners and frozen potato and bread products – which is used make things like bleach and foamed plastics like those found in yoga mats (tasty!). Azodicarbonamide has been banned in most European countries because it’s known to induce asthma, and is in fact deemed so dangerous that in Singapore its use carries a hefty $500,00 fine and up to 15 years in prison.

Yet, according to the FDA, it’s SO TOTALLY FINE for us to keep shoveling it into our kid’s faceholes: “[Azodicarbonamide] is approved to be a bleaching agent in cereal flour and is permitted for direct addition to food for human consumption.”

Oooookay then.

Finally, there’s butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) and butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) – found in Post, Kelloggs and Quaker brand cereals – which is made from petroleum and is a known cancer-causing agent. It’s been banned in England and Japan, but those of us in the U.S. can keep right on serving up to our children for breakfast, because AMMURICA. And FREEDOMZ.

 Anyone else find all of this, ohhhh I don’t know, more than a tad bit disturbing? I’m not ashamed to say I have love for the blue box Mac & Cheese, and to think that chemicals known and recognized world-wide as completely toxic are included in that – a product openly marketed as being a meal FOR KIDS – makes me more than a little ragey. I mean, those chemicals can’t be what makes it taste so good, right? So can’t we, umm, just use something else instead? (PLEEEASE DON’T MAKE ME GIVE UP THE MAC & CHEESE, PLEEEASE.) Sigh.

-By Tracey Gaughran-Perez

from:    http://shine.yahoo.com/shine-food/80-pre-packaged-foods-america-banned-other-countries-135100604.html

More on GMO’s

Posted on by

FDA Approves GMO Flu Vaccine With Reprogrammed Insect Virus

Posted: June 11th, 2013 ˑ Filled under: Science, Social Platform ˑ  0 Comments and 0 Reactions

FDA_13

A new vaccine for influenza has hit the market, and it is the first ever to contain genetically-modified (GM) proteins derived from insect cells. According to reports, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved the vaccine, known as Flublok, which contains recombinant DNA technology and an insect virus known as baculovirus that is purported to help facilitate the more rapid production of vaccines.

According to Flublok’s package insert, the vaccine is trivalent, which means it contains GM proteins from three different flu strains. The vaccine’s manufacturer, Protein Sciences Corporation (PSC), explains that Flublok is produced by extracting cells from the fall armyworm, a type of caterpillar, and genetically altering them to produce large amounts of hemagglutinin, a flu virus protein that enables the flu virus itself to enter the body quickly.

So rather than have to produce vaccines the “traditional” way using egg cultures, vaccine manufacturers will now have the ability to rapidly produce large batches of flu virus protein using GMOs, which is sure to increase profits for the vaccine industry. But it is also sure to lead to all sorts of serious side effects, including the deadly nerve disease Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GSB), which is listed on the shot as a potential side effect.

“If Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) has occurred within six weeks of receipt of a prior influenza vaccine, the decision to give Flublock should be based on careful consideration of the potential benefits and risks,” explains a section of the vaccine’s literature entitled “Warnings and Precautions.” Other potential side effects include allergic reactions, respiratory infections, headaches, fatigue, altered immunocompetence, rhinorrhea, and myalgia.

According to clinical data provided by PSC in Flublok’s package insert, two study participants actually died during trials of the vaccine. But the company still insists Flublok is safe and effective, and that it is about 45 percent effective against all strains of influenza in circulation, rather than just one or two strains.

FDA also approves flu vaccine containing dog kidney cells

Back in November, the FDA also approved a new flu vaccine known as Flucelvax that is actually made using dog kidney cells. A product of pharmaceutical giant Novartis, Flucelvax also does away with the egg cultures, and can similarly be produced much more rapidly than traditional flu vaccines, which means vaccine companies can have it ready and waiting should the federal government declare a pandemic.

Like Flublok, Flucelvax was made possible because of a $1 billion, taxpayer-funded grant given by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to the vaccine industry back in 2006 to develop new manufacturing methods for vaccines. The ultimate goal is to be able to quickly manufacture hundreds of millions of vaccines for rapid distribution.

Meanwhile, there are reportedly two other GMO flu vaccines currently under development. One of them, which is being produced by Novavax, will utilize “bits of genetic material grown in caterpillar cells called ‘virus-like particles’ that mimic a flu virus,” according to Reuters.

from:    http://topinfopost.com/2013/06/11/fda-approves-gmo-flu-vaccine-with-reprogrammed-insect-virus

Bill Gates Do-Goodnik or Just Another Agenda?

Posted on by

Bill Gates: One of the World’s Most Destructive Do-Gooders?

Posted By Dr. Mercola | March 04 2012 | 92,532 views

Story at-a-glance

  • Microsoft founder, Bill Gates, aims to end world hunger by growing more genetically engineered food crops—a philanthropic plan that may be gullible at best, and destructive at worst, both to the environment and humanity
  • Monsanto and other biotech companies have collaborated with the Gates Foundation via the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) to promote the use of genetically modified (GM) crops in Africa
  • Gates supports the use of Golden Rice, which has been genetically modified to produce beta-carotene that your body can convert to vitamin A. It’s promoted as a way to alleviate vitamin A deficiency, which is common in developing countries. However, beta carotene is fat soluble, and many third-world inhabitants eat a very low-fat diet, which would seriously impede or block the conversion.
  • According to one study, a woman would have to consume 16 pounds of Golden Rice per day to get the recommended amount of vitamin A; a child would have to eat 12 pounds, raising serious doubts about the usefulness of this invention

 

By Dr. Mercola

Above, ABC’s “Nightline,” Bill Weir talks with Microsoft founder Bill Gates about his charitable endeavors.

Gates’ latest plan is to try to end world hunger by growing more genetically modified (GM) crops.

He’s already invested $27 million into Monsanto Company—leading some countries to reject his charity due to the high risks, such as:

  • New disease vectors
  • Mutated pesticide-resistant insects
  • Resistant “superweeds”
  • Contamination of surrounding non-GM crops

We already know how deeply entrenched the U.S. government has become with Monsanto.

For a visual illustration of their ‘revolving-door-relationship’ with the governmental regulatory agencies, see the graph toward the bottom of this article.

It is this type of government infiltration that allowed genetically engineered alfalfa to be approvedwithout any restrictions at all, despite the protests of the organic community and public comments from a quarter of a million concerned citizens.

In Bill Gates, Monsanto also has one of the wealthiest and most influential “philanthropists” supporting their agenda and spreading misleading propaganda about their products.

In recent years, it has become disappointingly clear that Gates may be leading the pack as one of the most destructive “do-gooders” on the planet… His views on what is required to make a difference in poverty- and disease-stricken third world nations are short-sighted and misinformed at best. A recent article in the Seattle Times1 joins me in arguing that Bill Gates’ support of genetically modified (GM) crops as a solution for world hunger is based on unsound science. A team of 900 scientists funded by the World Bank and United Nations, investigated the matter over the course of three years, and determined that the use of GM crops is simply NOT a meaningful solution to the complex situation of world hunger.

Instead, the scientists suggested that “agro-ecological” methods would provide the most viable means to ensure global food security, including the use of traditional seed varieties and local farming practices already adapted to the local ecology.

“Philanthropy is the Enemy of Justice”

In a recent article with the same headline, “Philanthropy is the Enemy of Justice”, Robert Newman criticizes2 the choice of Bill Gates as the designated “voice” of the world’s poor at the World Economic Forum, held in January.

“Am I saying that philanthropy has never done good? No, it has achieved many wonderful things… But beware the havoc that power without oversight and democratic control can wreak,” Newman writes.

“The biotech agriculture that Lord Sainsbury was unable to push through democratically he can now implement unilaterally, through his Gatsby Foundation. We are told that Gatsby’s biotech project aims to provide food security for the global south. But if you listen to southern groups such as the Karnataka State Farmers of India, food security is precisely the reason they campaign against GM, because biotech crops are monocrops which are more vulnerable to disease and so need lashings of petrochemical pesticides, insecticides and fungicides – none of them cheap – and whose ruinous costs will rise with the price of oil, bankrupting small family farms first. Crop diseases mutate, meanwhile, and all the chemical inputs in the world can’t stop disease wiping out whole harvests of genetically engineered single strands.

Both the Gatsby and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundations are keen to get deeper into agriculture, especially in Africa. But top-down nostrums for the rural poor don’t end well.”

I agree. Donating patented seeds, which takes away the farmers’ sovereignty, is not the way to save the third-world poor. As reported by Netline last year3, Monsanto and other biotech companies have collaborated with the Gates Foundation via the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) to promote the use of genetically modified (GM) crops in Africa. The Gates Foundation has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to AGRA, and in 2006 Robert Horsch was hired for the AGRA project. Horsch was a Monsanto executive for 25 years. In a nutshell, the project may be sold under the banner of altruism and ‘sustainability’, but in reality it’s anything but. It’s just a multi-billion dollar enterprise to transform Africa into a GM-crop-friendly continent.

Conflicts of Interest Abound

Gates’ philanthropic methods came under scrutiny back in August 2010, when it was discovered that The Gates Foundation had purchased 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock; dramatically increasing its previous holdings—and hence its financial conflicts of interest—in the biotech firm. AGRA-Watch commented on the ties stating4:

“The Foundation’s direct investment in Monsanto is problematic on two primary levels,” said Dr. Phil Bereano, University of Washington Professor Emeritus and recognized expert on genetic engineering.

“First, Monsanto has a history of blatant disregard for the interests and well-being of small farmers around the world, as well as an appalling environmental track record. The strong connections to Monsanto cast serious doubt on the Foundation’s heavy funding of agricultural development in Africa and purported goal of alleviating poverty and hunger among small-scale farmers. Second, this investment represents an enormous conflict of interests.”

It would be naive to think that all these philanthropic collaborations are designed to solve any problem besides how to help Monsanto monopolize the world’s food supply with expensive patented GM seeds, and the herbicides to go with them.

to read more and find out more, go to:   http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/03/04/clueless-fabrication-on-gmo.aspx?e_cid=20120304_SNL_Art_1

GM Mosquitoes, GMO Foods, Health, etc.

Posted on by

Refuse to Eat These Foods – They Could Destroy Your Reproductive Organs

Posted By Dr. Mercola | January 10 2012 | 274,282 views

Story at-a-glance

  • Avoid genetically engineered (GE) corn and soy, which have already been shown to reduce fertility in animals
  • Private firm plans release of genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes into the environment of the Florida Keys, sometime this month
  • In an effort to reduce the mosquito population, the mosquitoes are genetically modified with a gene designed to kill them unless given an antibiotic known as tetracycline. Offspring of the GM mosquitoes will thus die before reaching adulthood
  • Genetic engineering (GE) of both plants and animals is in full swing. As a result, virtually ALL processed foods and beverages contain at least one genetically engineered ingredient. Animal-based foods are also affected, such as meat and eggs, as conventionally-raised livestock are typically fed GE feed; the toxins of which tend to bioaccumulate in the animal
  • What will happen when we increasingly begin to replace natural-born life forms with genetically engineered versions? Based on the best evidence available, that the end result is bound to be less than ideal for human survival
  • Animal studies have linked GE crops to a wide variety of health problems, from abnormal immune responses and organ disruptions to reproductive problems in both males and females. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, used in large doses on GE RoundupReady crops, has also been linked to fertility problems in male and female rats, along with a 35 percent drop in testosterone levels at otherwise non-toxic glyphosate levels

 

By Dr. Mercola

Genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes could be released into the U.S. environment as early as January 2012.

A private firm is planning to initiate the release of the GM mosquitoes in the Florida Keys.

The first GM mosquito release took place in the Cayman Islands in 2009, and the second in Malaysia in 2010.

Now, residents of the Florida Keys, like those of the Cayman Islands and Malaysia, will be subjected to these genetically manipulated insects, without having any say in the matter.

Natural Society reports:

“The mosquitoes are genetically modified with a gene designed to kill them unless given an antibiotic known as tetracycline.

Offspring of the GM mosquitoes will receive this same lethal gene which will kill the offspring before it can ever reach adulthood.

As more genetically modified mosquitoes mate with wild mosquitoes, the idea is that more and more offspring will be produced with the lethal gene, thereby reducing the mosquito population.

Of course the risks these mosquitoes post … are highly unknown …

With the release of genetically modified insects could come the downfall of both local and global ecosystems …”

While the biotech industry remains steadfast in their official stance that genetically engineered foods and animals are safe and provide valuable benefits, realityis telling us otherwise…

Genetic Engineering of Plants and Animals is in Full Swing

Unfortunately, many people are still completely in the dark about the genetic engineering taking place, both in plants and animals.

I’ve written numerous articles about the health dangers of genetically engineered (GE) foods, and while I’ve not covered the issue of genetically modified animals to any great extent, this too is taking place. For example, sheep that are 15 percent human have already been developed in an effort to create spare parts for organ transplants, and goats have been engineered to deliver spider silk in their milk.

Cows have also been genetically engineered to create something more akin to human breast milk, in an effort to make cows milk more nutritious…The list goes on, but you probably get the gist.

While the rationale behind all of these experiments appears altruistic, the fact of the matter is that we’re playing with and artificially altering carefully balanced systems. And when we do so, unexpected ramifications are virtually guaranteed to occur, because we simply do not understand all there is to know as of yet…

As for the release of genetically engineered “suicide” mosquitoes, what will happen to the local ecosystem when the mosquito population decreases or is eliminated entirely? While you and I may abhor mosquitoes, and while they do carry diseases like dengue fever and malaria, they are also primarily a food source for other life forms… Taking the myopic view that we simply want to eradicate a disease-carrying insect is dangerous in the extreme once you start to contemplate the impact it may have on the entire food chain, from the bottom to the top!

What exactly will happen when we increasingly begin to replace natural-born life forms with genetically engineered versions?

The truth is, we don’t know! But we can make educated guesses, based on the best evidence available, that the end result will likely be less than ideal for human survival… It may seem obvious that no one would trade financial gains for the extermination of all life on earth, but that is in essence the path we’ve set ourselves on, with the ever-expanding array of genetically modified seeds and animals.

Genetically Modified Foods Already Linked to Reduced Fertility

Genetically engineered (GE) corn- and soy have already been shown to reduce fertility in animals, and glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s weed killer Roundup, which is heavily used on GE crops, has also been shown to alter fertility.

For example, female rats fed GE (Roundup Ready) soy for 15 months showed significant changes in their uterus and reproductive cycle, compared to rats fed organic soy or those raised without soy. According to researchers, if women experience similar changes in the uterus lining and altered hormonal levels, it might increase the risk of retrograde menstruation, in which menstrual discharge travels backwards into your body rather than through your uterus. This can cause a disease known as endometriosis, which may lead to infertility.

The disorder can also produce pelvic and leg pain, gastrointestinal problems, chronic fatigue, and a wide variety of other symptoms.Genetically modified soybeans are called Roundup Ready.

They contain a bacterial gene that allows the plants to survive a normally deadly dose of Roundup herbicide. Although the spray doesn’t kill the plant, its active ingredient, glyphosate, actually accumulates in the beans themselves, which are then consumed by livestock and humans. There is actually so much glyphosate in GE soybeans that when they were introduced, Europe had to increase their allowable residue levels 200-fold!

Glyphosate Poses Risk to Female Reproductive Health

Although there are only a handful of studies on the safety of GE soybeans, there is considerable evidence that glyphosate—especially in conjunction with the other ingredients in Roundup—wreaks havoc with the endocrine and reproductive systems.

Glyphosate throws off the delicate hormonal balance that governs the whole reproductive cycle. It interferes with aromatase, which produces estrogen, and it’s also highly toxic to the placenta in pregnant women. In a 2009 French study, scientists discovered that glyphosate can kill the cells in the outer layer of the human placenta (the trophoblast membrane), which in turn can kill the placenta. A mere 1/500th the amount needed to kill weeds was able to kill these cells! The amount is so small, according to the study’s authors, that the “residual levels to be expected, especially in food and feed derived from Roundup formulation-treated crops” could be enough to “cause cell damage and even [cell] death.”

If the endocrine function of the placenta is destroyed, then ovarian and endometrial function may also suffer, and the end result could be a miscarriage.

It’s important to remember that glyphosate can accumulate in your body, allowing its toxic effects to grow worse with repeated consumption of foods containing these Roundup Ready crops. Clearly, this may become a serious concern for the next generation, as most young children—girls and boys alike—growing up today are fed processed foods containing GE ingredients on a daily basis, year after year…

Glyphosate Affects Testosterone and Harms Male Reproductive Health Too

Last month, an animal study published in the journal Toxicology in Vitro, found that glyphosate induces necrosis and apoptosis (cell death) in rat testicular cells in vitro, and decreases testosterone production even at low exposure levels. The authors write:

“Roundup is being used increasingly in particular on genetically modified plants grown for food and feed that contain its residues. Here we tested glyphosate and its formulations on mature rat fresh testicular cells from 1 to 10,000 ppm, thus from the range in some human urine and in environment to agricultural levels.

We show that from 1 to 48 hours of Roundup exposure Leydig cells are damages. Within 24-48 hours this formulation is also toxic on the other cells, mainly by necrosis, by contrast to glyphosate alone, which is essentially toxic on Sertoli cells. Later it also induces apoptosis at higher doses in germ cells and in Sertoli/germ cells co-cultures.

At lower non toxic concentrations of Roundup and glyphosate (1ppm), the main endocrine disruption is a testosterone decrease by 35 percent. The pesticide has thus an endocrine impact at very low environmental doses, but only a high contamination appears to provoke an acute rat testicular toxicity. This does not anticipate the chronic toxicity which is insufficiently tested, and only with glyphosate in regulatory tests.”

GMOs Have Never Been Proven Safe, Nor Beneficial…

Last year, I interviewed Dr. Philip Bereano on the topic of genetic engineering. Dr. Bereano has spent the last 30 years investigating genetic engineering of crops, animals, and humans. His work led him to participate in the negotiation of two international treaties under the United Nations that dealt with issues relating to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In that interview, he shares his perspective on the complete lack of safety of GE foods, stating:

“First of all, we need to understand what we mean by the word safe. Actually, in terms of the academic literature, “safe” refers to “an acceptable level of risk.” It doesn’t refer to situations where there is no risk. Most of us drive in cars all the time and consider it to be safe even though we know that people are killed and injured in automobiles frequently. We have to understand that safe equals acceptable risk.

The problem with calling genetically engineered organisms safe is that there are no valid risk assessments being done on them. There is no research, really, being done into the health or environmental effects of a genetically engineered organism. Certainly no work that is published in the open peer-reviewed literature, or that isn’t proprietary. Corporations promoting these things claim that they have done research, but you can’t get any information on it because it’s all claimed to be proprietary.

Under what is known now as the precautionary principle—which is what your grandparents used to teach you about “looking before you leap”—the only prudent course of action is to NOT proceed with something which has potential risks and onlypotential benefits until you know a little bit more about it.”

I couldn’t agree more.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/10/genetically-modified-food-reduce-fertility.aspx?e_cid=20120115_SNL_MV_1to read more, go to: