Non-Profit Trusted Source of Non-Commercial Health Information
The Original Voice of the American Academy of Anti-Aging, Preventative, and Regenerative Medicine
logo logo
Home » Environment » Toxins

GMO Industry Harassment Tactics against Researchers Exposed. Strong Correlation between GM-food Consumption and the Deterioration of health in the US.

By hkugler at Dec. 1, 2014, 8:18 p.m., 20787 hits

Once upon a time there was real science, documented and confirmed with publications in prestigious journals. When, in health-related fields, we leaned about the master DNA/RNA and it’s telomeres, how the endocrine system connects it all, and embryonic stem cells, there were only Ooohs, and Aaahs, and we felt privileged when getting a glimpse at God’s ingenuity and logic that allowed a mere 4 letters (the 4 bases, guanine (G), adenine (A), thymine (T), cytosine (C), reoccurring in specific patterns) to describe all living things.

Then industry, when it didn’t like published risk-finding data, triggered orchestrated campaigns of harassment against the scientists. Examples from just the last few years include Ignacio Chapela, a then untenured Assistant Professor at Berkeley, whose paper on GM contamination of maize in Mexico (Quist and Chapela, 2001) sparked an intensive internet-based campaign to discredit him. This campaign was reportedly masterminded by the Bivings Group, a public relations firm specializing in viral marketing – and frequently hired by Monsanto. The distinguished career of biochemist Arpad Pusztai, came to an effective end when he attempted to report his contradictory findings on GM potatoes Delborne, 2008. Even threats of physical violence have been used, most recently against Andres Carrasco, Professor of Molecular Embryology at the University of Buenos Aires, whose research (Paganelli et al. 2010) identified health risks from glyphosate.
But this is really nothing new. Here in the US Berkeley professor Peter Duesberg, formerly Max Planck Institute, Germany, discoverer of oncogenes, was maligned when he dared to expose the pseudo-science of HIV/AIDS and which - obviously THE major reason for being attacked - also threatened the multi-billion antiviral drug business.

Much of the dirty – special interest-dictated – business became obvious again when prof. Giles Seralini of Caen University, France, published the results of GMO-fed animals, and observed organ malfunctions, tumors, and cancers: view the original pictures at http://www.DrHans.org .

“BUT” - - the opposition will proclaim - - “this paper was retracted.” Yes, BUT not by the author.“ One year after publication a new editor at the journal retracted the paper, claiming complaints about irregularities – from using the wrong animals, to mistakes about the length of the study, and more.

After a lengthy and rigorous review, none of the complaints were confirmed - - no mistakes, no wrong animals used; the same animals had been used by Monsanto (from where much of the complaints originated), and when, in a last ditch attempt, the Monsanto people - - those whose consciousness is apparently unaffected when thousands of farmers in India committed suicide (due to financial distress, caused by GM crop failures) expressed concern regarding the ethical treatment of laboratory animals, everybody had only one major question on their minds:

So, what was going on here?

The answer came with the disclosure that the new editor came from the GMO industry.

“PHONY?” - - we, totally, agree! And hundreds of scientists signed an “open letter,” supporting the paper’s author, Dr. Seralini of Caen University in France. Read the open letter, and you’ll see where truly questionable ethics originated - - - with the GMO industry: http://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/seralini-and-science-nk603-rat-study-roundup .

In a last-ditch effort the GMO people complained that the laboratory animals used were cancer-prone. Response: What do they think people are, cancer-prone, or cancer-resistant?

Animal studies are done in several general stages - - like our longevity studies, performed as Roosevelt U, Chicago, where we achieved average life-span increases of nearly 100% - - to a) get a general feeling about the modalities involved, b) more focused on the modalities involved, and, finally, c) precise studies, following established guidelines, to confirm previous findings. Find more about anti-aging research, longevity studies, telomeres, and sytem cells at http://www.DrHansKugler.com , and in (e-book) “LIFE-Long Health: learn how to Control your Genes to stay Young with Age”, now available as health education project for only $ 1.99. How to order, go to http://www.DrHans.org .

Despite the fact that no mistakes had been made, did the (GMO) editor re-instate Seralini’s paper? No! Most likely because, under those conditions, a paper had little chance of passing because it would have to go through an especially rigorous review process, just so that nobody could object to it if it passed.
But professor Seralini is not the kind of guy who’d give up. When none of the complaints were confirmed, and it became obvious that the GMO industry planted them, the work was re-published in “Environment Sciences Europe;” it includes up-dates and data in response to the previous witch-hunt http://www.enveurope.com/content/26/1/14 .

But the story doesn’t end here, with a victory for true science! Further discoveries about GMOs are scary as hell. Here are just a few new research findings:

Monsanto's Herbicide Linked to Fatal Kidney Disease Epidemic: http://truth-out.org/news/item/24876-monsantos-herbicide-linked-to-fatal-kidney-disease-epidemic-will-ckdu-topple-monsanto

Persistence of plant DNA sequences in the blood of dairy cows fed with genetically modified (Bt176) and conventional corn silage. J Agric Food Chem. 2009 Jan 28;57(2):509-16. Bertheau Y, Helbling JC, Fortabat MN, Makhzami S, Sotinel I, Audéon C, Nignol AC, Kobilinsky A, Petit L, Fach P, Brunschwig P, Duhem K, Martin P.

Responding to claims from the GM industry and some journalists, and commentators that there is a “scientific consensus” that GM foods and crops were generally found safe for human and animal health and the environment, scientists responded, calling these claims “misleading”, adding, “This claimed consensus on GMO safety does not exist.” - - - http://www.independentsciencenews.org/news/no-scientific-consensus-on-safety-of-genetically-modified-organisms

As probably everybody knows by now, Russia - just a few weeks ago - - banned all GMOs. http://www.worldhealth.net/forum/thread/100412/russia-bans-all-gmos-joins-the-ever-g/?page=1#post-100412 )

Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene on Commercial GMO Crops. How should a regulatory agency announce they have discovered something potentially very important about the safety of products they have been approving for over twenty years? http://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/regulators-discover-a-hidden-viral-gene-in-commercial-gmo-crops

More dirty Monsanto Smear Tactics exposed: The Goodman Affair: Monsanto targets the heart of science: http://www.independentsciencenews.org/science-media/the-goodman-affair-monsanto-targets-the-heart-of-science

Roundup damages sperm. An acute exposure to glyphosate-based herbicide alters aromatase levels in testis and sperm nuclear quality. Estelle Cassault-Meyer, Steeve Gress, Gilles-Éric Séralini, Isabelle Galeraud-Denis, Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology. Volume 38, Issue 1, July 2014, pp. 131–140
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1382668914001227

NORWEGIAN GOVT STUDY: “No scientific evidence of GMO food safety” - - and MUCH more.
http://www.worldhealth.net/forum/thread/100919/norwegian-govt-study-no-scientific-evi/?page=1#post-100919
This was immediately followed by other countries banning GMOs: Greece, Scotland, Latvia, Germany; in total 26 countries.

In the light of all these findings about the risks of GMOs, how can it be that - - like in California, and Oregon - - so many people were so ignorant to vote against their own right to know what is in their foods? Sadly enough, science education in America is lacking; so it s easier for true BS-sers to pull one over on them with bogus and “El Toro Poo Poo” arguments.
The same approach has been applied by the special – oil, coal, gas – interest in respect to Climate Change. GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL; so real that the carbon industry has spent $ 543 million over the past years to plant BOGUS arguments, and blow smoke up your YOU KNOW WHAT to confuse the issues, and prevent you from thinking NON-CARBON US CLEAN ENERGY PROJECTS. http://drexel.edu/now/news-media/releases/archive/2013/December/Climate-Change .

Since there is much interest in our last post - - Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America - - we kept the text:

Journal of Organic Systems, 9(2), 2014. ORIGINAL PAPER
Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America.
Nancy L. Swanson, Andre Leu, Jon Abrahamson and Bradley Wallet
Abacus Enterprises, Lummi Island, WA, USA
International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements, Bonn, Germany
Abacus Enterprises, Lummi Island, WA, USA
Crustal Imaging Facility, Conoco Phillips School of Geology and Geophysics, University of Oklahoma, USA * Corresponding author: andreleu.al@gmail.com

Abstract
A huge increase in the incidence and prevalence of chronic diseases has been reported in the United States (US) over the last 20 years. Similar increases have been seen globally. The herbicide glyphosate was introduced in 1974 and its use is accelerating with the advent of herbicide-tolerant genetically engineered (GE) crops. Evidence is mounting that glyphosate interferes with many metabolic processes in plants and animals and glyphosate residues have been detected in both. Glyphosate disrupts the endocrine system and the balance of gut bacteria, it damages DNA and is a driver of mutations that lead to cancer. In the present study, US government databases were searched for GE crop data, glyphosate application data and disease epidemiological data. Correlation analyses were then performed on a total of 22 diseases in these time-series data sets. The Pearson correlation coefficients are highly significant between glyphosate applications and hypertension, stroke, diabetes prevalence, diabetes incidence, obesity, lipoprotein metabolism disorder, Alzheimer’s, senile dementia, Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis, autism , inflammatory bowel disease, intestinal infections, end stage renal disease, acute kidney failure,
cancers of the thyroid, liver, bladder, pancreas, kidney, and myeloid leukaemia.

The Pearson correlation coefficients are highly significant between the percentage of GE corn and soy planted in the US and hypertension, stroke, diabetes prevalence, diabetes incidence, obesity, lipoprotein metabolism disorder, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, multiple sclerosis, hepatitis C, end stage renal disease, acute kidney failure, cancers of the thyroid, liver, bladder, pancreas, kidney, and myeloid leukaemia. The significance and strength of the correlations show that the effects
of glyphosate and GE crops on human health should be further investigated

URL for the full paper:
http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/92/JOS_Volume-9_Number-2_Nov_2014-Swanson-et-al.pdf

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2014-12-01 20:16:23 —

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2014-12-01 20:46:21 —

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2014-12-02 13:58:50 —

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2014-12-02 14:32:49 —

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2015-09-27 22:25:08 —

 
Posts [ 2 ] | Last post Dec. 1, 2014, 8:18 p.m.
#1 - Nov. 25, 2014, 1:26 p.m.
Hans J. Kugler, PhD

When the slimy GMO industry tactics - - retraction of the Seralini paper (showing organ-malfunctions, cancer, tumors, in animals fed GMO corn) by an editor who came from the GMO industry - - became obvious again, scientists aired their experiences in an open letter that was published in Independentsciencenews.

Here we present a few of the quotes; reading them will make it clear what scientists around the world think/believe:

Excerpts from the open letter:
http://www.independentsciencenews.org/sections/biotechnology

“- - - Seralini et al. (2012) extends the work of other studies demonstrating toxicity and/or endocrine-based impacts of Roundup (Gaivão et al., 2012; Kelly et al., 2010; Paganelli et al).”

“- - - fundamental challenges faced by science in a world increasingly dominated by corporate influence. al., 2010; Romano et al., 2012), as reviewed by Antoniou et al. (2010).”
History of Attacks on Risk-finding Studies. Seralini and colleagues are just the latest in a series of researchers whose findings have triggered orchestrated campaigns of harassment. Examples from just the last few years include Ignacio Chapela, a then untenured Assistant Professor at Berkeley, whose paper on GM contamination of maize in Mexico (Quist and Chapela, 2001) sparked an intensive internet-based campaign to discredit him. This campaign was reportedly masterminded by the Bivings Group, a public relations firm specializing in viral marketing – and frequently hired by Monsanto (The distinguished career of biochemist Arpad Pusztai, came to an effective end when he attempted to report his contradictory findings on GM potatoes Delborne, 2008).

“- - Even threats of physical violence have been used, most recently against Andres Carrasco, Professor of Molecular Embryology at the University of Buenos Aires, whose research (Paganelli et al. 2010) identified health risks from glyphosate, - - “.

“The Role of the Science Media. An important but often unnoticed aspect of this intimidation is that it frequently occurs in concert with the science media (Ermakova, 2007; Heinemann and Traavik, 2007; Latham and Wilson, 2007.”
Misleading Media Reporting. “A key pattern with risk-finding studies is that the criticisms voiced in the media are often red herrings, misleading, or untruthful. Thus, the use of common methodologies was portrayed as indicative of shoddy science when used by Seralini et al. (2012) but not when used by industry (see refs above and Science Media Centre, 2012).”

“The use of red herring arguments appears intended to sow doubt and confusion among non-experts. For example, Tom Sanders of Kings College, London was quoted as saying: “This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumors particularly when food intake is not restricted” (Hirschler and Kelland, 2012 ).”

“The Science Media Centre has a long history of quelling GMO controversies and its funders include numerous companies that produce GMOs and pesticides.”

“Regulators, such as EFSA (the European Food Safety Authority) in Europe and the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and FDA (Food and Drug Administration) in the US, have enshrined protocols with little or no potential to detect adverse consequences of G current regulatory protocols are simplistic and assumptions-based (RSC, 2001), which by design, will miss most gene expression changes – apart from the target trait - induced by the process of transgene insertion” (Heinemann et al., 2011; Schubert, 2002).

“- - - well-conducted feeding trials are one of the best ways of detecting such unpredictable changes. Yet feeding trials are not mandatory for regulatory approval, and the scientific credibility of those which have been published to date has been challenged” (Domingo, 2007; Pusztai et al., 2003; Spiroux de Vendômois et al., 2009).

“Governments have become habituated to using science as a political football.”

“- - in a study conducted by the Royal Society of Canada at the request of the Canadian government, numerous weaknesses of GM regulation in Canada were identified (RSC, 2001). The failure of the Canadian government to meaningfully respond to the many recommended changes was detailed by Andree (2006). Similarly, the expert recommendations of the international IAASTD report, produced by 400 researchers over 6 years, that GMOs are unsuited to the task of advancing global agriculture have been resolutely ignored by policymakers. Thus, while proclaiming evidence-based decision-making, governments frequently use science solely when it suits them.”

“If instead, the starting point of a scientific product assessment is an approval process rigged in favor of the applicant, backed up by systematic suppression of independent scientists working in the public interest, then there can never be an honest, rational or scientific debate.” MOs (Schubert, 2002; Freese and Schubert, 2004; Pelletier, 2005).


— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2014-11-25 15:12:08 —

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2014-12-01 20:57:53 —

#2 - Dec. 1, 2014, 8:18 p.m.
Hans J. Kugler, PhD

Apparently a number of readers believed that the pictures of the GMO-treated animals were not presented n the re-published Seralini paper.
Not so!
Just click on this http://www.enveurope.com/content/26/1/14/figure/F5 - - GMO-corn-fed animals.

This battle for our health freedoms is now continuing on TWO fronts: GMOs, and what many of us believe to be total special-interest dominated screw-ups - - Chemtrails, spraying toxic Aluminum, Barium, and Strontium into high levels of the atmosphere to block sun energy from reaching earth (which, in the evaluation of informed scientists is ineffective, hazardous to human and plant health, and only done to protect carbon industry profits).
Years ago - around 1973 - in our fight for health freedoms, the National Health Federation, under Kurt Donsbach, followed by the late Maureen Salaman, played a key role. Under my presidency we worked hard to recover financially; I was successful, but couldn't have done it without the help of Scott Tips (now president). Check out http://www.thenhf.com .

Life used to be simple and straightforward. In every field of interest - - nutrition, lifestyle, health and disease, environment - - findings of peer-reviewed scientific studies pointed us in the right direction, and we adjusted accordingly.
But, sadly enough, much of this has changed, and keeps changing for the worse. Due to the influence of special interests - $$$ - “we the people” is getting replaced by “we the special interests,” and honest scientific findings are maligned when they affect special interest’s profits.

And the special interest disease keeps spreading; now into the field of Climate-Change. Covert Government programs - - Geoengineering, spraying of mega-tons of toxic, endocrine-disrupting, disease-causing, chemicals into high levels of the atmosphere to manage solar radiation - - is, so obviously, under the influence of oil, coal, and gas interests(6). And this fraud is paid for with your tax dollars, at the rate of $ 10 -15 Billion/year (minimum), while ingenious US energy discoveries - facts suggest - are being delayed in favor of carbon profits.

This environmental emergency is as real as it can get.
Governments need to bring this message to their people with a Doomsday warning issued by governments globally; several scientists agreed that this would be the equivalent of the time when the US was forced to enter WWII. At that point the entire country was mobilized; car companies changed to make tanks, any company related to aviation mobilized to make bombers and fighter airplanes, ship-builders converted transport ships to destroyers and built - - with US ingenuity - - airplane carriers, U-boats and PT-boats, and the entire nation – - Democrats and Republicans alike, stood side-by-side (WOW, what an amazing concept) and supported the effort. Imagine such an effort on a global basis!
Just Google “carbon-free energy,” and you’ll find numerous technologies that could be put into action quickly; Ocean wave energy is free, well researched, and could supply electricity up and down the E. – and W-coasts. As per RMI – Rocky Mountain Institute – practicing conservation would reduce CO2 by 30%; visit their web-site, and be amazed about the genius ideas being discovered every day. Applying solar and hydrogen technology, as per “SHIFT HAPPENS” Harvard prof. Dan Nocera, could run the entire US with enough solar electricity and water, while moving the US back into a top position in the world.

Please support our DEMAND for an open discussion - http://www.expertclick.com/NRWire/Releasedetails.aspx?id=61213 and help us with a Donation. IAAM is a California 501-c-3 nonprofit health education, research, organization. We pay no salaries. Donations are tax-deductible:
IAAM
218 Ave. B
Redondo Beach, CA 90277 - - - - God bless!



— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2014-12-01 22:52:34 —

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2014-12-01 23:04:40 —