You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, <a href="/profile.php?mode=register">join our community today</a>!
This is a huge issue and a great concern of mine. Many foods that find their way to our tables have been genetically engineered and many studies on the harmful affects of these foods are incomplete or non existent.
We feel this is something we all should be aware of and here are important links:
Austrian Government Study Confirms Genetically Modified (GM) Crops Threaten Human Fertility and Health Safety
Advocates Call for Immediate Ban of All GM Foods and GM Crops
IMMEDIATE RELEASE (November 13, 2008)
(Los Angeles, CA.) - A long-term feeding study commissioned by the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety, managed by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Health, Family and Youth, and carried out by Veterinary University Vienna, confirms genetically modified (GM) corn seriously affects reproductive health in mice. Non-GMO advocates, who have warned about this infertility link along with other health risks, now seek an immediate ban of all GM foods and GM crops to protect the health of humankind and the fertility of women around the world.
Feeding mice with genetically modified corn developed by the US-based Monsanto Corporation led to lower fertility and body weight, according to the study conducted by the University of Veterinary Medicine in Vienna. Lead author of the study Professor Zentek said, there was a direct link between the decrease in fertility and the GM diet, and that mice fed with non-GE corn reproduced more efficiently.
In the study, Austrian scientists performed several long-term feeding trials over 20 weeks with laboratory mice fed a diet containing 33% of a GM variety (NK 603 x MON 810), or a closely related non-GE variety used in many countries. Statistically significant litter size and pup weight decreases were found in the third and fourth litters in the GM-fed mice, compared to the control group.
The corn is genetically modified with genes that produce a pesticidal toxin, as well as genes that allow it to survive applications of Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup.
A book by author Jeffrey M. Smith, Genetic Roulette, distributed to members of congress last year, documents 65 serious health risks of GM products, including similar fertility problems with GM soy and GM corn: Offspring of rats fed GM soy showed a five-fold increase in mortality, lower birth weights, and the inability to reproduce. Male mice fed GM soy had damaged young sperm cells. The embryo offspring of GM soy-fed mice had altered DNA functioning. Several US farmers reported sterility or fertility problems among pigs and cows fed on GM corn varieties. Additionally, over the last two months, investigators in India have documented fertility problems, abortions, premature births, and other serious health issues, including deaths, among buffaloes fed GM cottonseed products.
The principle GM crops are soy, corn, cottonseed and canola. GM sugar from sugar beets will also be introduced before year’s end.
Mr. Smith, who is also the Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology says, “GM foods are likely responsible for several negative health trends in the US. The government must impose an immediate ban on these dangerous crops.” He says, “Consumers don’t need to wait for governmental action. They can download a free Non-GMO Shopping Guide at www.HealthierEating.org.”
Monsanto press offices in the UK and USA were unable to provide a comment on the findings for journalists yesterday.
The Institute for Responsible Technology’s Campaign for Healthier Eating in America mobilizes citizens, organizations, businesses, and the media, to achieve the tipping point of consumer rejection of genetically modified foods.
The Institute educates people about the documented health risks of GMOs and provides them with healthier non-GMO product choices.
The Institute also informs policy makers and the public around the world about the impacts of GMOs on health, environment, the economy, and agriculture, and the problems associated with current research, regulation, corporate practices, and reporting.
Institute For Responsible Technology Media Contact: NJ Jaeger Expert Contact: Jeffrey M. Smith Email: [email protected] Phone: +1-310-377-0915
Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety Corporate Communication: Univ.-Doz. Ingrid Kiefer Tel: +43 50 555-25000; E-Mail: [email protected]
As NaturalNews readers already know, corporations and universities right now claim intellectual property ownership over roughly twenty percent of your genetic code. This absurdity has occurred due to bizarre operations of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office which has handed corporations intellectual property monopolies over everything ranging from human genes to animals and seeds. Monsanto's "ownership" of genetically modified seed crops, for example, was only made possible by the patent office's willingness to grant the corporation intellectual property ownership over seeds.
I have long argued that granting patents on seeds, genes and medicines is a violation of natural law. In 2007, for example, I wrote an article entitled " Corporate Greed, Intellectual Property Laws and the Destruction of Human Civilization" (http://www.naturalnews.com/022096.html) in which I argued that the granting of such patents is a threat to not just human freedom but also the future of life on earth.
What happens when corporations, for example, wish to start collecting royalties on the human genes that you are copying when you reproduce by having children? The mere act of conceiving a child makes you a patent law violator... a criminal engaged in genetic piracy under U.S. law. This may sound patently absurd, if you'll excuse the expression, but it is precisely what has been held as true under current U.S. patent law.
You can't patent things created by Mother Nature Fortunately, things are beginning to shift. Earlier this week, a federal judge struck down patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. These are the genes used by many doctors to attempt to predict breast cancer risk. Of course, the very idea that genes alone can determine your cancer risk is provably false, but that's another story altogether. For the point of this story, just keep in mind that lots of women have their DNA tested for the presence of these BRCA genes in order to (they think) determine their breast cancer risk.
But one corporation called Myriad Genetics holds seven patents on these genes. Although the patents are shrouded in lawyer's language, this company essentially claims to own these genes as if it had invented them! Furthermore, this company held that the mere act of testing for these genes was a violation of their patents.
Now, a more sensible person might instantly recognize that your genes existed long before Myriad Genetics came around. Depending on your frame of belief, your genes were either created by God or by Mother Nature, and to grant monopoly IP ownership over those genes to a corporations seems absurd beyond all reason.
But no: This corporation and its lawyers argued with a straight face that they alone effectively owned your BRCA genes and that no one could even test for the presence of those genes without paying them a royalty!
United States District Court Judge Robert W. Sweet disagreed with the patents in his 152-page decision http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/p ... pinion.pdf which strikes down seven patents formerly belonging to Myriad Genetics. This victory was achieved, in part, by the American Civil Liberties Union which helped challenge the BRCA patents last year. The ACLU argued (quite correctly, in my view) that human genes are products of nature and should never be owned by Man.
As state in a NY Times article (source below), an ACLU lawyer explained it like this: "The human genome, like the structure of blood, air or water, was discovered, not created. There is an endless amount of information on genes that begs for further discovery, and gene patents put up unacceptable barriers to the free exchange of ideas."
Striking back at biotech
If this decision stands, the resulting consequences could be hugely damaging to the biotech and pharmaceutical industries, both of which depend on government-granted monopolies (patents) to lock in their corporate profits. Biotech companies have been ramping up research on gene-based diseases for a decade or more, hoping to cash in on the genetic monopolies that would guarantee them profits for all sorts of human diseases that they could tie to "genetic disorders."
The idea that "your genes made you sick" is a very seductive (and profitable) concept for the biotech and pharmaceutical industries because it implies that patients have no role in their own health. Genes determine your future, you're told, so eating right and taking nutritional supplements is useless, they insist. Because your genes have already determined what diseases you'll get, the only thing you can do is take their patented chemicals that target those genes or their symptoms. Merely being screened for these "diseases" earns these corporations a royalty, by the way, since they owns the patents on the genes themselves.
This "Great Lie" of the biotech industry, of course, depends entirely on being able to procure intellectual property monopolies over human genes. And that's why this week's decision by judge Sweet is sending shockwaves through the biotech industry. They are now concerned that they won't be able to attract investors to develop more gene-targeted "therapies" (yeah, right) because they will no longer be granted patent monopolies through which they can make obscene profits by scaring patients into expensive gene therapies.
The greed of the corporation knows no bounds
Biotech, pharmaceutical and agricultural corporations, you see, are some of the most arrogant and dangerous organizations on the planet. They believe that they alone have the right to monopolize your genes, your seeds, your food and your medicine. Anything that they don't control and profit from is attacked or destroyed. The FDA's pharma-inspired attacks on nutritional products is a great example of this monopoly profiteering in action. It's the same story with Monsanto's legal assaults on farmers who refuse to plant genetically modified seeds.
That's why these corporations will be lobbying hard to reverse this decision by judge Sweet, forcing a reversal that would lock in their monopoly ownership over genes, seeds and medicines. These corporations want to own the world and control everyone and everything in it. And while they can't necessarily own all the physical objects in the world, if they can achieve ownership over most of the intellectual property, they can come pretty close to ruling the world.
Think about it: If they own your genes, your food crops and your medicines, they effectively control virtually everything you depend on to stay alive. It's not out of the realm of possibility to suppose that in the near future, you will not be allowed to have a baby without paying royalties to the biotech corporations that "own" your human genes. Making a baby, after all, does involve copying your genes, you pirate!
That's why granting corporations over genes, seeds or medicines is so dangerous to the future of humanity: It concentrates power over the world into the hands of the few. If that sounds like Monsanto's corporate motto, that's because Monsanto is the perfect example of a company that literally seeks to control the entire world and everything in it, and if they can exploit U.S. patent law to assert that control over the people, they will almost certainly take every opportunity to do so.
Why corporations are inherently evil
Allow me to share something about large corporations. Corporations have people, money, lobbyists and lots of power. But corporations do not have morals or ethics or human compassion. Corporations are granted all of the rights of the People (free speech rights, for example) and yet they have none of the compassions or sensibilities of people. Corporations consistently endanger and even sacrifice human lives in order to maximize their profits.
Want examples? Union Carbide in Bhopal, India. See the horrifying pictures of "the children of Dow's Chemicals" here: http://www.bhopal.org
Or review the story of Enron and how that company turned off power plants in California, killing senior citizens in the high heat in order to make more money selling emergency electricity back to the State of California.
Or look at the drug companies that manufacture and push deadly cholesterol and heart drugs that are killing people, even while burying the clinical trial evidence that proves those drugs to be extremely dangerous.
The list of corporate crimes against humanity is far too long to cover right here, but if you want a good overview of the situation, pick up some books by author John Perkins who wrote Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. I recently interviewed John Perkins by phone and will be posting that here on NaturalNews in the near future.
Watch this interview with John Perkins:
The important point here is simply this: If you grant corporations intellectual property ownership over your genes, foods, seeds and medicines, they will use that power to enslave you.
That's what corporations do: They inherently seek to create high-profit monopolies that limit consumer choice and force consumers to pay monopoly prices for all their goods and services, all to the benefit of the corporate shareholders. This simple truth is, in fact, the entire point of having a corporation in the first place: To make as much money as possibly by any means possible within the law. So if patent law grants monopolies over human genes, then it's only a matter of time before corporations will exploit that to own and dominate human reproduction involving those genes!
Patent reform is crucial to freedom
This is why I believe that judge Sweet's decision to deny patent ownership over the BRCA genes was hugely important to the future of freedom for humankind. If these intellectual property monopolies are allowed to stand, they will only grow ever more powerful and dangerous to the freedoms of populations around the world. If they are not struck down, these corporate monopolies will inevitably result in the outright enslavement of humankind to the corporatocracy -- a situation that many would agree we are dangerously close to right now.
So watch this situation carefully. You can bet that behind closed doors, judge Sweet is right now being pressured and perhaps even threatened if he does not reverse his decision. Or members of a higher court are being lobbied to overturn it for him.
One thing I've learned in my years of being the editor for NaturalNews is that corporations will do anything -- absolutely ANYTHING -- to protect their profits. This includes doing things that are far outside U.S. law and that endanger the lives of individuals or groups of people who stand in the way of a particular corporate agenda. Individual freedom has no value whatsoever in the eyes of these corporations, especially if it interferes with their profits. So send some good vibes over to judge Sweet and ask that he be protected right now for having the courage to boldly state the obvious: Corporations should not own human genes!
And don't be surprised to see the corporations in the biotech industry pulling out all the stops to try to get this decision reversed. Their very future depends on dominating humankind through legal monopolies known as patents, and anyone who threatens that profit model will be targeted by the biotech industry in more ways than one.
(NaturalNews) Author's Note The number 8 at the beginning of a PLU is not being used to identify GMOs. This from a recent article by Jeffrey Smith posted late Feb 2010 in Huffington Post. The 8 was proposed but never followed up on. Until Smith's recent post, all other sources used by the author were claiming the 8 tag for GMOs was in effect.
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) states, "Genetically Modified foods have not been properly tested and pose a serious health risk. There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation." The AAEM also called for a moratorium on GMO's in food and for physicians to advise their patients to avoid GM foods. Since the massive invasion of GMO's into the food supply from 1996, chronic diseases and food allergies have doubled.
Now that President Obama has appointed Michael Taylor as Food Czar to his cabinet, the struggle is destined to become more difficult unless more consumers knowingly boycott GMO products. Michael Taylor was a vice president and chief lobbyist for Monsanto prior to his cabinet selection. Did you know that the stated aim of Monsanto is to own the patents for all the food crop seeds in the world? And now they're in the White House!
Why Avoid GMO Foods?
From anti-GMO activist and best selling author Jeffrey Smith's recent News With Views Internet article, "Doctors Warn: Avoid Genetically Modified Foods," "World renowned biologist Pushpa M. Bhargava goes one step further. After reviewing more than 600 scientific journals, he concludes that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are a major contributor to the sharply deteriorating health of Americans".
"Among the population, biologist David Schubert of the Salk Institute warns that 'children are the most likely to be adversely effected by toxins and other dietary problems' related to GM foods. He says without adequate studies, the children become 'the experimental animals.'"
In addition to you and your family's personal health risks, the whole human race is endangered as Monsanto pursues it's stated goal of owning the world's food supply. Genetic engineering alters genetic codes of the DNA in organism by splicing in other genes from other forms of life, including other plant forms, insects, bacteria and even viruses. This creates mutant organisms and dangerously mutating genes, solely for sociopathic commercial demands on different forms of produce.
These commercial demands never consider the negative effects on human and animal health, nor the future of the food chain. Pollen pollution from GMO crop fields has already infected formerly pristine crops on small farms and indigenous farming groups. This pollution can cause permanent genetic mutations. And when Monsanto officials determine where these pollen drift pollutions occur, they sue the farmers of the polluted crops for patent violations! So farmers who avoid GMO planting are at risk.
As a matter of fact, there are several documents recovered from lawsuits and from the Freedom of Information Act that show FDA scientists had even urged long term studies before releasing GMO products. This was back in the early 1990's when the genome biotechnology industry was coming out of the closet. So how were they over ruled?
Along came Michael Taylor from Monsanto, you know, the current Food Czar guy, taking a key position in the FDA to create policy regarding GMO foods. The policy he instated essentially decrees that it's all food; there is no difference from any other food, and if the biotech company that created the GM foods say they're safe that's good enough! That FDA policy for GM food remains the same to this day.
Recovered documents from the biotech companies and independent testing prove that the GMO firms not only do very little testing, but they also often test improperly, cheat on the testing, and lie about the results! This junk science and PR lying is what gets to the mainstream media and press, via the FDA or even from biotechnology press releases. Meanwhile, research that prove GMO dangers is suppressed.
How To Avoid GMO Foods
Avoid the big four, which has become five now: The highly genetically engineered crops are soy, corn, canola and cottonseed. Add sugar beets, which are now becoming GMO.
Most blended oils in North America contain canola and cottonseed oils. Use extra virgin olive oil instead. Avoid all soy products and oils as well. The healthy alternative is usually not so healthy after all, since most soy is GMO unless it is specifically labeled non-GMO.
Most corn is GMO. Items like corn flakes and corn chips are from GM corn. Corn based products, corn starch, corn oil, corn syrup, and high fructose corn syrup appear on the ingredients labels of many processed foods. Corn in various forms is prevalent in the vast fast food supply that dominates our culture.
GMO corn is fed to cattle and other livestock. If you eat beef, pork or fowl, you are probably a second hand consumer of GM corn. So dig a little deeper and buy grass or alfalfa fed or free range livestock meats only.
Sugar beets are added to the big four to make it five. Now more and more sugar beets are GMO. Sugar from sugar beets is less expensive than cane sugar for refined sugar; therefore, it is popular with food processing groups. So if you haven't stopped using sugar or products with refined sugar, you might want to reconsider now.
A handy guide for consumers are PLU codes that are labeled or stamped onto fruits and vegetables. PLU stands for Price Look Up. The PLU codes are for input into electronic cash registers to determine prices for bulk items, such as apples and cabbage. The codes identify exactly what the item is with its current pricing, while giving the consumer a handy tag for identifying GMO produce.
Each PLU code has five digits. If the first digit is a 9, the item is organic. If it is an 8, it is GMO! Conventionally grown produce has a 0 for the first digit, but usually the 0 is dropped. So most conventionally grown produce will actually have only 4 digits on the PLU tag if you don't see a 0 at the beginning. The 8 gives you the worst of two worlds, GMO and heavy chemical spraying!
Those are your three main categories. PLU codes do not usually appear on packaged produce or items such as string beans that are too small to label or stamp.
Obviously, buying organic and from local farmers is ideal. Forget convenience. Buy bulk and eschew packaged foods. So what if you have to soak legumes the night before cooking them. If you buy locally, through a local health food store or at a farmers' market, you can determine by direct communication how the crops were raised.
[The following passage is excerpted from "Commentary on Dangers of Genetically Modified Foods", By Edem Srem Sept. 2, 2009 GBC News]
The history of controlling the food industry in the world by the then American Government in 1973 under President Nixon started by introducing the "Food for Peace" programme which was led by Henry Kissinger, Nixon's Secretary of State and National Security Adviser.*
According to the New African Magazine, Kissinger controlled absolutely the US foreign policy and summarized his activities as "Control oil and you control nations, control food and you control the people". His idea of capturing the worldwide food industry started with the introduction of what was termed as the gene revolution. [End of article excerpt]
That gene revolution evolved to the biotechnology industry in food. Under Bush senior, biotechnology was given the deregulation green light possibly more than any other industry. Connect all these dots to Michael Taylor's revolving door passages from corporate (Monsanto) to government (FDA) and back again to Monsanto then tapped as Food Czar.
The picture becomes apparent: the thrust to completely control food world wide is being pursued by an alliance of USA government policy and multi-national agribusiness and food processing corporation ambition. Don't expect government to come to the rescue!
Grass Roots Activism Too Shut Down GMO Foods
The agenda for controlling the world food supply through patented GMO seeds has hit a few glitches, thanks to the word getting out and food consumer boycotts. Monsanto's target for accomplishing this was up years ago! But of course, they haven't given up.
Monsanto is a multi-national company that created PCB's, Agent Orange, Aspartame, rBGH, Terminator Seeds and Round Up weed killer, for which GMO crops were created to withstand its heavy spraying, creating more toxic chemical residue to the GM crops than even conventionally grown crops. Would they care about anything but their food fascism control agenda? With Food Czar Monsanto Mike in the White House, they have their point man in position.
What Jeffrey M. Smith, Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology and author of Seeds of Deception and Genetic Roulette proposes is that enough people get educated and boycott GMO products to diminish market demand. This can create a tipping point, where the balance of supply and demand shifts enough for the market place venues to drop GMO products.
He claims this has been achieved in the USA with rBGH or bovine growth hormones. And thanks to an honest scientist, Arpad Pusztai, who lost his lab funding for exposing GMO dangers in Scotland, the EU is GMO free.
The same link provided above for the GMO Shopping Guide leads to the Institute for Responsible Technology where Jeffrey Smith's powerful, live 84 minute power point presentation on the whole GMO situation is available free.
About the author Paul Fassa is dedicated to warning others about the current corruption of food and medicine and guiding others toward a direction for better health with no restrictions on health freedom. You can visit his blog at http://healthmaven.blogspot.com
(NaturalNews) A bombshell investigative video just released by Infowars.com has exposed what can only be called false and misleading advertising by Whole Foods. It all began when InfoWars reporters Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton visited Whole Foods last week to try to find out what customers thought about Whole Foods stores selling so many unlabeled genetically modified foods. That fact was recently admitted by Whole Foods in its own blog post.
As you can see in the video, some customers were shocked to discover that Whole Foods sells GMOs in their store. The majority of Whole Foods customers, it turned out, had no idea the company was selling GMO.
While talking with customers on camera, Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton were approached by a Whole Foods executive named Libba Letton. She handles investor relations with Whole Foods, and she's also in charge of food safety. In an on-camera interview, she admitted that Whole Foods stores do sell unlabeled GMOs, but her justification for that was that stores everywhere are selling unlabeled GMOs.
As she stated on camera (see video, below):
"Unless a store is all organic, every store in the country sells unlabeled genetically modified [foods]." - Libba Letton, Whole Foods Market Inc.
On the issue of GMOs, then, Whole Foods is no better than Safeway, or Kroger or even Wal-Mart.
But then Libba said something that will no doubt haunt her and the entire Whole Foods executive team for years to come:
"I don't think that Whole Foods does anything to try and make people think that we don't have food with GMOs in them," she said on camera.
"NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER!" Libba's statement is, as you'll see below, a blatant deception. Because as the Infowars video shows, Aaron and Melissa located a Whole Foods store in Austin with a giant logo emblazed on the side of the store. As you can see in the photo below, the logo declares: NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER.
So how can Whole Foods claim "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" when even the company's own top executives admit its stores are knowingly selling artificially engineered, genetically altered ingredients?
The answer, of course, is that Whole Foods is engaged in false advertising and misrepresentation.
Whole Foods is engaged in false advertising The definition of "false advertising" is:
...the crime or tort of publishing, broadcasting, or otherwise publicly distributing an advertisement that contains an untrue, misleading, or deceptive representation or statement which was made knowingly or recklessly and with the intent to promote the sale of property, goods, or services to the public.
A question, then: Is Whole Foods making untrue, misleading or deceptive statements with the intent to promote the sale of goods to the public?
Absolutely. Without question.
The claim emblazed on the front of the Whole Foods stores, as proven in this Infowars video, says, "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER." And yet the company openly admits to selling an entire array products in its stores which contain artificially-modified ingredients such as GM corn.
So how are artificially modified grains not artificial? It doesn't add up. The marketing claim is false.
GMOs are artificial You might wonder, "What's the definition of artificial?"
Here it is from Dictionary.com:
Artificial: made by human skill; produced by humans (opposed to natural)
And what, you might ask, is the definition of GMO?
Genetically modified organism: an organism or microorganism whose genetic material has been altered by means of genetic engineering.
"Altering" the DNA of an organism is, by definition, artificial (i.e. not natural). "Engineering" the DNA of seed is accomplished by human skill, hence it is "artificial" in the same vein as "artificial color" or "artificial flavor."
GMOs are, of course, blatantly artificial. No one can argue with a straight face that GMOs are "natural." The very definition of the term "modified" (in the context of GMOs) means modified by humans to create something that nature did not create on its own. Nature does not cross-pollinate humans, insects and plants, for example. But human genetic engineers do!
So Whole Foods' claim of "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" has no basis in fact. It is marketing deception, pure and simple. False advertising. Blatantly misleading. That Whole Foods' own food safety executive says, on camera, that "I don't think that Whole Foods does anything to try and make people think that we don't have food with GMOs in them" is pure bull. It's the kind of statement you might expect to hear from a Monsanto spokesperson, or from the TSA claiming "our radiation scanners are SAFE!"
What is the purpose of this deceptive marketing, you might ask? To trick customers, of course, into falsely believing Whole Foods sells nothing artificial.
No wonder so many customers and even Whole Foods employees are convinced that Whole Foods sells no GMO! This was revealed in a recent Organic Spies video that was banned by YouTube because it dared to engage in actual investigative journalism.
Whole Foods carries out false and misleading marketing The claim about "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" is part of a grand bait-and-switch scheme of consumer deception carried out by Whole Foods. Publicly, Whole Foods runs advertising and uses corporate messages that claim it sells absolutely nothing artificial, but once you're inside the store, a huge number of products on the shelves contain not only GMOs but also hidden forms of MSG, too. Just check the labels of foods sold by Whole Foods, and you'll see masses of products made with yeast extract and torula yeast -- both are hidden forms of MSG.
On its own web page, Whole Foods describes its "quality standards." Those standards include the following six points:
1) We carefully evaluate each and every product we sell.
2) We feature foods that are free of artificial preservatives, colors, flavors, sweeteners, and hydrogenated fats.
3) We are passionate about great tasting food and the pleasure of sharing it with others.
4) We are committed to foods that are fresh, wholesome and safe to eat.
5) We seek out and promote organically grown foods.
6) We provide food and nutritional products that support health and well-being.
If point #1 is true, then Whole Foods "carefully evaluates" products containing GMOs and then accepts them into the store anyway! The company is fully aware that it sells GMO ingredients, but doesn't seem to think this is a problem, even when GMOs are not labeled on its foods, thereby deceiving customers . How is this anything resembling honesty?
On point #4, the store says it is "committed" to foods that are "safe to eat." Is the company not aware of the recent French research showing rats fed a lifetime of GM corn developed massive, horrifying cancer tumors?
Importantly, that's the same Monsanto GM corn found in many products sold by Whole Foods!
If Whole Foods is committed to safe food, why is it still selling unlabeled GMOs throughout all its stores, especially when those same GMOs are seen as so dangerous around the world that they've been banned in numerous countries already?
Point #6 claims the company provides products that "support health and well-being." And that's true. Whole Foods does sell many high-quality nutritional products and certified organic food items. But that's not all they sell. They also sell products made largely with Monsanto's genetically modified corn and other GMOs. To say "we sell healthy products" while simultaneously selling products containing an unlabeled ingredient widely suspected of causing cancer is a kind of market sleight of hand. It's an effort to say here, watch what we're doing over here with organics but pay no attention to all the GMOs we're selling.
To put a giant logo on the side of the store claiming "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" while secretly selling unlabeled GMOs all across the store is nothing less than deceptive, misleading marketing. If Whole Foods were to be totally honest with customers, it would need to add point #7:
7) We sell unlabeled GMOs and we have no intention of ever telling you about them. When you shop at Whole Foods, it's sort of like a nutritional mine field. Good luck, customers, because you're on your own!
From a culture of hippies to a corporate culture of lying What really concerns me about Whole Foods and its false advertising is not merely the false advertising itself but that Whole Foods marketing executives think nothing of flatly lying right out in the open about GMOs. They apparently think their customers are so uninformed that they won't ever find out about all the GMOs sold there.
The Whole Foods investor relations executive, Libba Letton, says that GMOs are found everywhere, but only when pressed on the issue in front of a camera. Is that seriously her excuse for why Whole Foods sells GMOs, too? Because everyone else does? Really?
This argument is, once again, based on deception because all the other grocery stores across the country don't slap claims on the sides of their stores that say, "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER." Only Whole Foods makes such a bold claim on the side of its building. And the claim is not merely false, it is a claim made for the purpose of deceiving customers into purchasing something that isn't what they thought it was.
The claim is also knowingly untrue. This is a key element in court cases involving consumer fraud, by the way. Generally speaking, for a statement to be considered fraud, it must falsely state a material fact while also being known to be false by the person or entity making the claim. In addition, there must be intent on the part of the party committing fraud to deceive the consumer. In the case of Whole Foods, all three of the following conditions are true:
1) The statement "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" is a false statement of material fact.
2) Whole Foods executives are fully aware that this statement is false, as admitted by CEO John Mackey and others.
3) The false statement is made for the purpose of deceiving consumers into believing Whole Foods sells no artificial ingredients when, in fact, it does.
Furthermore, it is a simple matter for consumers who might be engaged in a lawsuit against Whole Foods to prove that they relied on this claim as source of information from which they made their purchasing decisions at Whole Foods. This adds weight to any claim of fraud.
As a result, there may be a case for a nationwide class action lawsuit against Whole Foods by consumers who were duped into thinking the stores do not sell GMOs. It will be interesting to see if such a lawsuit unfolds in the months ahead.
It will also be fascinating to see if Whole Foods continues to try to defend its lie about GMOs, or if it instead makes far-reaching changes to its marketing claims and labeling in an effort to actually tell the truth instead of deceiving customers about GMO.
Whole Foods CEO caught red handed in another online deception Whole Foods CEO John Mackey, of course, has a history of unethical deception. Back in 2007, as the Wall Street Journal reports:
For about eight years until last August, the company confirms, Mr. Mackey posted numerous messages on Yahoo Finance stock forums as Rahodeb. It's an anagram of Deborah, Mr. Mackey's wife's name. Rahodeb cheered Whole Foods' financial results, trumpeted his gains on the stock and bashed Wild Oats. Rahodeb even defended Mr. Mackey's haircut when another user poked fun at a photo in the annual report. "I like Mackey's haircut," Rahodeb said. "I think he looks cute!"
Mr. Mackey's online alter ego came to light in a document made public late Tuesday by the Federal Trade Commission in its lawsuit seeking to block the Wild Oats takeover on antitrust grounds. Submitted under seal when the suit was filed in June, the filing included a quotation from the Yahoo site. An FTC footnote said, "As here, Mr. Mackey often posted to Internet sites pseudonymously, often using the name Rahodeb."
When this information came to light, instead of admitting wrongdoing, John Mackey claimed the FTC released the information "to embarrass both me and Whole Foods." Oh, right, because it's the FTC's fault that Mackey was trying to bash his competition using a fake username in an online finance message board, leading up to Whole Foods trying to purchase Wild Oats.
Mackey even used his fake blogger name to -- get this -- admire himself! "While I'm not a 'Mackey groupie,' I do admire what the man has accomplished," he wrote about himself. (Seriously.)
As the WSJ also reports:
Rahodeb [John Mackey] filed his last post on the Yahoo message board. He said he had lost a bet with "hubris12000" about Whole Foods' stock performance, and the bet's terms required that he quit posting. He blamed the whims of the stock market for a 40% decline in the company's shares.
As Techdirt.com adds, "He even made predictions about the company's stock price, putting out extremely high estimates for its performance. It's not clear that what he did was necessarily illegal, but his posting seems unethical and highly foolish, at the very least. If nothing else, the company's stockholders should wonder about what the boss is doing with his time."
The greatest corporate lies of all time With its "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" claim, Whole Foods now joins the Hall of Fame of the greatest corporate lies of all time.
Other corporate lies in the Hall of Fame include:
"Better Living Through Chemistry" - DuPont, 1935 - 1982
"DDT is safe to use around humans" - Monsanto, 1944
"Nicotine is not addictive" - Big Tobacco executives, 1994
"Corexit is safe for aquatic life" - British Petroleum, 2010
"NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" - Whole Foods, 2012
You have to wonder: How is Whole Foods going to try to argue its way out of this monumental lie? Given that the company has already openly admitted to selling GMOs in its stores, it must now argue one of the following:
1) That GMOs are somehow not artificial -- an argument as absurd as claiming that DDT is "natural," too, and maybe Whole Foods should sell DDT in all its foods and offer a new beverage called Agent Orange Smoothie.
2) That the "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" claim somehow doesn't apply to the products it sells inside its stores. This, too, is patently absurd. The claim is emblazed on the side of the store, unmistakably visible to everyone who enters the store, and it exists for the purpose of claiming that the products inside the store contain nothing artificial. The sign obviously refers to items for sale inside the store.
For Whole Foods to claim "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" and then sell GMOs inside its store is the logical equivalent of a store claiming "NO PESTICIDES, EVER" but then selling masses of pesticide-laden foods in its store. The claim is a lie. It is deception. And it may even be the undoing of this company.
Are we witnessing the fall of Whole Foods? When I first began covering the Organic Spies video and the Whole Foods GMO fiasco, I had no idea how deep the culture of deception really went inside this company. Knowing that I know now, about how the CEO knowingly deceives people online, how the company knowingly makes false marketing claims, and how it sells masses of genetically modified ingredients in the products on its shelves without bothering to label them, I'm beginning to think we're actually witnessing the opening chapter of the implosion of Whole Foods.
I believe that once Whole Foods customers become fully informed of the fact that Whole Foods is selling foods containing Monsanto's genetically modified corn, many of them will stop shopping there altogether.
Whole Foods exists only because of the trust of its customers. Its customers are its greatest asset! And when that trust is revealed to have been betrayed, Whole Foods has nothing but empty buildings, angry ex-customers and tens of millions of dollars worth of food products marching toward an expiration date.
You can't force people to shop at Whole Foods, obviously. They do so voluntarily. And this voluntary action is based entirely on a level of trust that now appears to have been betrayed.
That's why I also think there's a good chance we will see a class action lawsuit formed against Whole Foods, and that such a lawsuit could involve billions of dollars worth of groceries people bought from Whole Foods, completely unaware they were buying GMOs.
How much money have you spent at Whole Foods? I've spent thousands of dollars there, for sure. Maybe tens of thousands. Years ago when I shopped there frequently, I had no idea Whole Foods was selling GMOs, either. Like many of you, I was deceived by Whole Foods, and because of that deception I unknowingly purchased products there that contained genetically modified organisms.
How many other customers have been tricked by Whole Foods into purchasing -- and consuming! -- GMOs?
Whole Foods, Half Truths The bottom line on this comes down to a simple question: If they're selling whole foods, why can't they tell the whole truth about them?
Is the company's new slogan: Whole Foods, Half Truths?
Why all the deception? Why not tell the truth? Why not come clean with customers?
That answers shouldn't be all that surprising: Selling GMO foods is highly profitable. In fact, processed foods made with GMOs are far more profitable than organic produce, for example, on which profit margins are very thin. I wouldn't be surprised if something like 35% of Whole Foods profits come from selling products containing genetically modified ingredients.
To ditch GMOs now would clobber the corporation's profits, and therefore also its share price. And as you well know, public companies are routinely far more interested in keeping their share prices high than they are in serving the human interests of their customers.
Whole Foods probably thinks it's going to make more money by continuing to sell GMOs, even while falsely claiming "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL, EVER" on its stores. But this may be a gross miscalculation. Because if Whole Foods doesn't come clean, it's customers are going to find out the truth about the situation sooner or later and Whole Foods may go down in history as the once-trusted grocer that betrayed its customers and subsequently lost huge market share.
Mark my words: What appears today on NaturalNews.com becomes common knowledge in 1 - 3 years. What we're writing about GMOs in 2012 will be widely known among health food consumers by 2013 - 2015.
That's why if Whole Foods doesn't get behind Proposition 37 with some serious financial support, I suspect it's going to be seen as allying with Monsanto, DuPont and Nestle rather than defending the interests of its own consumers.
Why I believe Whole Foods may have already sold us out Frankly, I believe Whole Foods may already be aligned with Monsanto. I suspect Whole Foods has long since sold out and actually has NO intention of labeling its products with their GMO content. Based on the behavior I've seen from this company and some (but not all of) its executives, I believe Whole Foods has turned to evil... joined the Dark Side, so to speak. And instead of telling the truth, it is engaged in a pattern of spin and excuse-making to try to deflect any blame from itself.
The one executive at Whole Foods who I think is honestly against all this GMO nonsense is co-president Walter Robb, an advocate of "conscious capitalism." I suspect that, in his heart, Walter Robb knows GMOs are wrong and destructive, and he'd like to see Whole Foods get out of the business of GMOs altogether. But he's fighting against a corporate culture that's a lot more interested in profit than in actually doing good in the world. Shareholders demand profits, after all, not integrity.
The core of so-called "conscious capitalism" is, of course, honest communication between a corporation and its customers. On that point, Whole Foods has slipped... badly. The company can no longer be described as practicing conscious capitalism. It has devolved into a for-profit scheme of withholding information from customers while trying to confuse people with bait-and-switch marketing tactics.
My guess is that if Whole Foods somehow finds the courage to do the right thing on Proposition 37 or GMO labeling, Walter Robb will be the internal force that makes it happen, even against the wishes of John Mackey who seems to be driven primarily by greed and profit.
I invite you to email co-president Walter Robb and encourage him, in polite terms, to help save Whole Foods in three ways:
1) Make a large donation to Proposition 37 in California. 2) Announce a timeline requirement for all foods sold through Whole Foods to be labeled with their GMO content. 3) Proactively educate Whole Foods employees and customers about the reality of genetically modified foods being sold throughout the stores.
Also contact Libba Letton and let her know what you think about "food safety" at Whole Foods Libba Letton lists her contact information openly and publicly on the Whole Foods website. Her areas of focus are "investor relations" and "food safety."
I encourage you to contact her and let her know what you think about Whole Foods deceiving consumers with the "NOTHING ARTIFICIAL" claim while selling GMOs in the store.
If you do email her, please be polite but firm. If you are a Whole Foods customer, you may wish to let her know that fact. Please do not be unprofessional or threatening in your emails, even if you are angry at Whole Foods. Remember that if you email Whole Foods, they will have your email address. You may wish to use a secondary email address for this purpose.
October 16th is "take your GMOs back to Whole Foods" day Next Tuesday, October 16th, join others in returning any GMO food items to Whole Foods and demanding a refund.
Which food items contain GMO? Almost everything made with corn that isn't certified organic.
Class action lawsuit against Whole Foods? If any law firms are interested in pursuing a class action lawsuit against Whole Foods for its misleading advertising and false claims, NaturalNews may be interested in helping you organize such an effort.
Call or email us if you wish to pursue this issue. We can help spread the word about a class action lawsuit and even distribute your phone number where people who believe they have been victimized by blatantly misleading marketing claims can call and file their complaints.
Young girl scout petitions for GMO-free cookies, setting example for children
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039455_Girl_ ... z2NLMUNyEe (NaturalNews) A young Orange County, California girl scout, Alicia Serratos, has started a Change.org petition to stop making Girl Scout cookies with GMO ingredients. Although the source article for this story had the petition signature count at 100, as of this writing on Sunday night, March 10, 2013, the signature count was 1,000.
You can add your signature here: http://www.change.org. Probably little will come of this petition, but it does make a statement which may gather momentum into a collective impact if others join in.
One signer on the petition remarked that HFCS and hydrogenated oils should be excluded from Girl Scout cookies as well as GMOs. Others threatened to no longer support Girl Scout cookie sale fund raising endeavors if this action is ignored.
This should be applied to Whole Foods A considerable buzz of self congratulation went around upon Whole Foods' announcement to label GMOs by 2018, five years from now. Why not ban them by end of 2013? After all, the name Whole Foods implies that GMOs aren't even carried by this largest of all health food store chains.
The whole notion of labeling is a distraction from the seriousness of GMOs. It focuses on a "consumer right to know" theme while the vast majority of American consumers don't know or care enough about what they eat to make a difference.
Conversely, European consumers are more food conscious and use the "precautionary principle" to hold off that which is not proven absolutely safe. So EU labeling has created that consumer tipping point to interfere with Monsanto's European invasion.
However, Monsanto and their ilk are playing rope-a-dope with the labeling efforts in this country of mostly junk food consumers. While burning energy and time fighting the good food fight for labeling, the biotech industry's scorched earth march continues with little interruption.
Praising Whole Foods' promise of labeling is another way of saying co-existence is possible with organic and GMO food crops. They are not.
Why labeling GMOs is not enough By the time Whole Foods or anywhere starts labeling GMO foods in this country, there may not be anymore organic food choices. They can be contaminated even while bearing the USDA certified organic label. The USDA organic certification process does not include GMO contamination.
Any farmer whose fields have been unknowingly contaminated by Monsanto will tell you that buffer zones to permit coexistence among non-GMO and GMO crops don't work. That's a coexistence failure in the fields.
What may be worse is seed contamination. Large scale seed providers for farmers are getting GMO seeds inadvertently mixed into non-GMO seeds, creating unwitting purchases of GMO seeds by organic and conventional farmers.
In a 2006 foodwatch article, the Canadian farmer who fought Monsanto successfully, Percy Schmeiser stated absolutely that "coexistence is not possible." He spoke about how Canada was initially snowed by Monsanto's PR claims about higher yields, higher nutrition, and less chemical pollution. Farmers learned the reality was exactly opposite on all counts.
Percy said, "What it really meant was control of the seed supply and more sales of chemicals by the company. Many of the farm organizations, including the National Farmers Union of Canada, are working hard against any further introduction of GMOs."
Therein lies the only solution folks. For every new species approved by our corrupt federal agencies for genetic engineering, there goes the integrity of that species. GMO apples will eventually lead to no organic apples.
So how does the effort to stop new GMOs from being introduced begin in an area where the federal government and judicial system is corrupted by Monsanto's minions? Locally, with farmers on the front lines - read here: http://www.naturalnews.com/038718_GMO_l ... _food.html
(NaturalNews) If you have stomach problems or gastrointestinal problems, a new study led by Dr. Judy Carman may help explain why: pigs fed a diet of genetically engineered soy and corn showed a 267% increase in severe stomach inflammation compared to those fed non-GMO diets. In males, the difference was even more pronounced: a 400% increase. (For the record, most autistic children are males, and nearly all of them have severe intestinal inflammation.)
The study was conducted on 168 young pigs on an authentic farm environment and was carried out over a 23-week period by eight researchers across Australia and the USA. The lead researcher, Dr. Judy Carman, is from the Institute of Health and Environmental Research in Kensington Park, Australia. The study has now been published in the Journal of Organic Systems, a peer-reviewed science journal.
The study is the first to show what appears to be a direct connection between the ingestion of GMO animal feed and measurable damage to the stomachs of those animals. Tests also showed abnormally high uterine weights of animals fed the GMO diets, raising further questions about the possibility of GMOs causing reproductive organ damage.
Proponents of corporate-dominated GMO plant science quickly attacked the study, announcing that in their own minds, there is no such thing as any evidence linking GMOs to biological harm in any animals whatsoever. And they are determined to continue to believe that, even if it means selectively ignoring the increasingly profound and undeniable tidal wave of scientific studies that repeatedly show GMOs to be linked with severe organ damage, cancer tumors and premature death.
"Adverse effects... toxic effects... clear evidence" The study was jointly announced by GM Watch and Sustainable Pulse.
Lead author of the study Dr. Judy Carman stated, "We found these adverse effects when we fed the animals a mixture of crops containing three GM genes and the GM proteins that these genes produce. Yet no food regulator anywhere in the world requires a safety assessment for the possible toxic effects of mixtures. Our results provide clear evidence that regulators need to safety assess GM crops containing mixtures of GM genes, regardless of whether those genes occur in the one GM plant or in a mixture of GM plants eaten in the same meal, even if regulators have already assessed GM plants containing single GM genes in the mixture."
Yet more evidence that GMOs damage mammals The study adds to the weight of scientific evidence from others studies which show that rats fed a diet of GMOs grow horrifying cancer tumors and suffer premature death.
A scientific study published last year concluded that eating genetically modified corn (GM corn) and consuming trace levels of Monsanto's Roundup chemical fertilizer was linked with rats developing shockingly large tumors, widespread organ damage, and premature death.
That study was also criticized by corporate GMO trolls who argued that scientists should not show pictures of rats with large cancer tumors caused by GMOs because the pictures scare consumers into being afraid of GMOs.
That study also found that rats fed GM corn suffered severe kidney damage as well as shockingly high rates of premature death.
Why weren't these studies done before GMOs were unleashed into the global food supply? The GMO biotech industry was able to escape any meaningful regulation of GMOs in the United States by (ridiculously) claiming GMOs were substantially no different from non-genetically engineered crops. "They're all the same!" we were told. And the USDA bought it.
So how did Monsanto patent its GM corn, then? You're not supposed to be able to patent something unless it's uniquely different. Thus, the very fact that Monsanto has acquired patents on its GMO crop varieties is proof that the company itself believes its seeds are different.
And what's different about Monsanto's GM corn? It produces a deadly insecticide grown right into every kernel. That insecticide, of course, is what kills insects that try to eat the crop. And how does it kill those insects? It fatally damages their digestive systems. That same insecticide stays inside the corn even as the crop is turned into animal feed... or corn chip snacks... or flaked corn breakfast cereal.
GMOs are unfit for human consumption This pig stomach inflammation study suddenly provides yet more credible evidence that GMOs are unfit for human consumption and may be causing severe damage to the digestive systems of both humans and mammals.
Naturally, the GMO industry and all its paid online trolls, on-the-take "scientists" and multi-million dollar P.R. machine will try to viciously attack this study from every angle. They absolutely hate real science when that science calls into question their poisonous, deadly seeds and genetic pollution.
That's why you won't read this news anywhere in the mainstream media -- the same media that utterly discredited itself a few weeks ago when it pretended the hugely successful global March Against Monsanto never even took place.
NOTE TO THE SELLOUT CORPORATE MEDIA: You have zero credibility remaining. Virtually no one believes what you print. Everyone knows you have sold out your editorial agenda to Big Pharma, Monsanto, weapons manufacturers and the surveillance state. The reason why alternative media like GM Watch and Natural News is rising while your own numbers keep plummeting is because we print the real news that really matters on liberty, food freedom, farm freedom, health freedom and self-reliance. Maybe if you stopped intentionally lying to your readers on a daily basis while censoring important news on grassroots liberty, you might see some readers return to your publication...
(NaturalNews) The Naked Juice company was sued in 2011, accused of using GMO ingredients and deceptively labeling its products, "all natural." As the Organic Consumers Association explains:
According to plaintiffs, Naked Juice used soy ingredients that are genetically engineered "by design or by contamination." (Naked Juice doesn't use certified organic or verified non-GMO soy.) Naked Juice intentionally used misleading language to give consumers "the false impression that the beverage's vitamin content is due to the nutritious fruits and juices, rather than added synthetic compounds." And the PepsiCo subsidiary contained a laundry list of synthetic chemicals, including calcium pantothenate (synthetically produced from formaldehyde).
PepsiCo, of course, is the owner of Naked Juice and also the same company that bankrolled the defeat of Prop 37 in California, the "Right to Know" GMO labeling campaign.
Starting today, you may now be eligible to receive up to $45 directly from PepsiCo. Any person who claims to have purchased Naked Juice -- even if they have NO PROOF of such a purchase -- can now participate in the class action claims and receive up to a $45 check as part of the settlement.
IMPORTANT: Share this story with others to spread this news so that as many people as possible legitimately claim their portion of this settlement!
I realize $45 isn't a lot of money, especially if you've probably spent far more than that on Naked Juice since 2007, the time window covered by this class action settlement. Nevertheless, if enough people participate in this class action claim, it will not only cost PepsiCo $9 million in payouts, it will also send a powerful message that consumers are fed up with being deceived about the products they purchase.
So Natural News is officially requesting that all readers who purchased Naked Juice in the last six years file a settlement claim and get your check for up to $45 from PepsiCo.
Please join me in sharing this story everywhere so that everyone who legitimately qualifies for this settlement participates and receives compensation from Naked Juice.
Please note that according to the legal documents posted on the settlement website, Naked Juice can still jerk everyone around on this and refuse to pay your claim if they believe your claim is false. If that happens to you, please let us know here at Natural News so that we can break the story about how Naked Juice is refusing to pay settlement claims (if this occurs, that is).
Also, for the record, in no way does Natural News encourage anyone to falsely file a claim if they never actually purchased Naked Juice products. Be honest but spread the word, too, because this settlement likely affects tens of millions of people in the U.S. alone!
I am frankly shocked this information is not making front page news right now. Monsanto will do anything to bury this story… and as of right now, it’s working. Not a single mainstream media outlet has covered this appalling new report that shows millions of people being poisoned by a chemical that does not belong in our food. This chemical is ending up in processed foods like Cheerios, Ritz Crackers, and Oreos and being consumed by humans across the world. The health of millions of people is on the line and this news must go mainstream! That’s why I’m calling on every single one of you who reads this post to share this breaking story now. The only way this injustice will be corrected is if enough of us stand up and demand that something be done to stop the poisoning of our food supply.
Share this shocking new report with everyone you know…. A FDA-registered food safety laboratory tested iconic American food for residues of the weed killer glyphosate (aka Monsanto’s Roundup) and found ALARMING amounts.
Just to give you an idea of how outrageous these amounts are, independent research shows that probable harm to human health begins at really low levels of exposure – at only 0.1 ppb of glyphosate. Many foods were found to have over 1,000 times this amount! Well above what regulators throughout the world consider “safe”.
Here is why we all should be concerned about eating glyphosate: Independent research links glyphosate to cancer (sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) and it has been deemed a probable human carcinogen by the World Health Organization’s team of international cancer experts. The childhood cancer rate is steadily rising and experts say that they don’t know why. Why are they not taking a closer look at these facts? Research also indicates that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor, which disrupts hormones and leads to reproductive problems, early onset puberty, obesity, diabetes, and some cancers. When it comes to endocrine disruptors, very small exposures are the most damaging, so “the dose makes the poison” mantra does not apply! Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum antibiotic killing the good bacteria in your gut. Poor gut health is linked to inflammation and a whole host of diseases. As GMOs laced with glyphosate are commonly fed to farm animals, this could very well be contributing to antibiotic-resistant bacteria. It binds with vital nutrients in the soil (like iron, calcium, manganese, zinc) and prevents plants for taking them up. Glyphosate is thereby making food less nutritious! Why is this weed killer in these foods? Even non-GMO and organic food! This chemical has gone so mainstream that glyphosate has infiltrated every facet of our environment – our water, air, soil.
Many GMOs were invented to be resistant to glyphosate – and since GMOs have been introduced the use of glyphosate has gone through the roof! It is now the world’s most widely used herbicide. Glyphosate is not just used on GMOs. Conventional (non-organic farmers) use Roundup as a drying agent on crops, such as oats and wheat. It can’t be simply washed off, as it is taken up into the plant itself. As the active ingredient in popular “Roundup” herbicide, millions of people are using this stuff around their homes, and it’s widely used at parks and other public spaces. So, that is why it’s not just GMO-filled junk food that is laced with glyphosate. It’s contaminating organic and non-GMO foods, and it’s even in our honey! The FDA quietly found it in almost every single sample of honey that they tested (from mass produced to organic mountain honey). The media has been essentially silent and barely anyone heard this news!
Even if you don’t personally eat the specific brands that were tested (I don’t), how many people are eating Cheerios and Ritz Crackers every day? A lot!
How many of your friends and family have their cabinets filled with these foods? These people need to know this information. There are still thousands of other brands and whole foods that have not been tested for glyphosate residues, so we can’t be so sure that our own organic, non-GMO, and unprocessed food is safe. Americans are effectively being forced to eat this poison until something is done to stop the rampant use of this chemical. Yes, I said poison.
Monsanto doesn’t want the public to know these findings for obvious reasons. They have our regulatory agencies in their back pocket to make sure they can continue to make a hefty profit while poisoning the masses. While there are now several manufacturers of glyphosate herbicides, Monsanto completely dominates the market and this is a best seller. They are raking in BILLIONS every year and certainly don’t want that to stop. They are clearly, without a doubt, using their prosperity to influence our government regulators. Why else would those entrusted to protect the public from harmful chemicals turn a blind eye to this?
Our public agencies are allowing corporations to poison Americans for profit. In 2013, the EPA massively increased the industry standard of what is considered a “safe” level of glyphosate on our food, in order to make enormous amounts seem A-OK. Instead of properly regulating, they effectively raised the “safe” level so that no one can blame the industry for poisoning us with unlawful amounts of chemicals. This is corruption at its finest. The EPA has a long and sordid history of doing whatever Monsanto wants and you have to ask yourself why this continues to happen and how we can make it stop.
The EPA continues to pander to Monsanto, as they keep postponing and dragging their feet to evaluate glyphosate’s link to cancer in humans. The industry is fighting tooth and nail to make sure that the EPA “evaluation” will be in their favor and is trying to control who will be on the panel. Why won’t the EPA do their job to make sure that the world’s most widely used herbicide isn’t causing us all to get cancer? Don’t you think this should be a top priority? It’s time for the EPA to put the public health above the corrupt desires of corporations.
When it comes to the FDA, they are not protecting the American public from glyphosate either. After announcing in February that they would FINALLY begin testing foods for glyphosate residues, they just decided to suspend their testing this week. Could it be that Monsanto didn’t like the results they started getting – especially since the FDA found glyphosate in foods that should be especially safe like BABY FOOD? Monsanto will do whatever it takes to keep that story out of the public eye.
Doesn’t the public deserve to know this information? It should be shouted from the rooftops! It is shameful that the American media has thus far failed to cover this breaking news, but WE HAVE THE POWER to make this information go viral. If you really want to stop the corruption perpetuated by Monsanto and the large chemical companies – this is how we shut them down!
CALL TO ACTION: Share this post with everyone you know. Tweet, share, and email this information to major media outlets and ask them to cover this story. Remember the best way to avoid glyphosate is by choosing certified organic foods because it is prohibited on organic crops. Although contamination is a real threat, the levels on organic foods are minimal compared to what’s been found on conventional foods. It’s been shown that people who eat organic foods have less glyphosate and other synthetic pesticides in their system.
The people of this country must be informed and this should be our top priority. Go, Food Babe Army, Go!