GMOs AGAIN: NEW STUDIES, GROWING BOYCOTTS, AND …
Well...they're at it again, the lovely folks at Duponzanto and Mon(ster)santo and all the other wonderful folks in agribusiness promoting the joys of GMOs. Let's start here:
Now I have covered the Bt toxin story here previously, and how the wonderfully mercantilist revolving door between the corporate world and the FDA enabled these muck-peddlers to "buy the science" and "reassure" everyone that their products were safe. Except, as the article reminds us,
"The agency meant to protect consumers and the world’s largest genetically modified food producer swore that the Bt toxin that is produced inside the plant would be completely destroyed in the human digestive system and would have no impact whatsoever on consumers. But not only were they wrong in that Bt does produce resistant “super-pests,” researchers are discovering that it can have devastating effects on human health."
The problem being, as we noted previously, that the toxin is showing up in humans:
"When testing the blood of both pregnant and non-pregnant women at a hospital in Quebec, this dangerous toxin was found in 93 percent of the pregnant women and 80 percent of the umbilical blood in their babies, as well as 67 percent of non-pregnant women."
"Scientists believe that it could lead to a number of problems within the digestive tract as well as autoimmune diseases, learning disorders in children and food allergies – and as the Huffington Post article notes, all of these same health problems are on the rise."
GMOs and autoimmune diseases? I don't even want to go there, but I'll bet your imagination is thinking many of the same things mine is.
So in the face of this wanton disregard for the human effect and cost of GMOs on the part of Duponzanto and the corrupt anti-people federal government, it is small wonder that people are taking matters into their own hands at the corporate and local level. Consider these two stories (courtesy of Ms. P.H. and other readers of this site):
This comes in the wake of the gentically engineered salmon story that I blogged about some weeks back. Let's look at an aspect of this article that encapsulates the cultural problem. Consider these statements:
"While Holvey said the “jury is out” on whether genetically engineered foods are safe to eat, a scientist from the University of California-Davis disagreed.
“'The science is not out on the safety of genetically engineered food. The science is definitely in,' said Dr. Alison L. Van Eenennaam, who specializes in Animal Genomics and Biotechnology at the University of California-Davis."
With due respect to the scientismist Dr. Eebennaam, the science is not in on GMOs, as any number of studies we have referred to here indicate, and which other sites have referenced, and have noted. What is "in" is the attitude of the scientismist: we are all supposed to bow to the corporate will and "authoritative pronouncements" of their hired scientific magisterium, which is just as fallible now as it was in the case of Robert Cardinal Bellarmine and Galileo. In short, people must have the right to make their own informed choices, and that requires labeling. Or to put that in plain English that even a bunch of scientists will understand, (1) I don't trust your studies particularly if funded by the US government or Mon(ster)santo, (2) I do trust the studies and others that have indicated health risks, and I do so by way of a worse case scenario that it is better to be safe than sorry; (3) You can issue encyclical after encyclical on what the "correct" scientific opinion is" from the FDA or this or that "university professor" with a string of letters after their name, and I will still protest my right to be informed about what I am eating, and whenever I am able, I will not eat Duponzanto or Mon(ster)santo products. If after 100 years or so we discover that the encyclicals are correct, then two cheers for Mon(ster)santo... but I suspect they wouldn't be marshaling such tremendous resources if they themselves were not suspicious of their own "products".
Period. End of discussion. It's my life, not Mon (ster)santo's, not the US government's, and certainly not the FDA's or any scientist's, notwithstanding any dogmatic pronouncements to the contrary.
And like it or not, there are others who appear to have the same philosophy:
My only regret in reading this article is that I am not in an area serviced by Whole Foods, Trader Joe's or Aldi. But the message is the same: We don't care about your "established" science, because first of all, it isn't established, and second of all, we do have the right to know what we're eating and to make our own choices. The other problem highlighted by these articles besides the scientismist problem of "bought and paid for science" and "bow to our superior knowledge and accept the choices we make for you" is that of the nearly complete collapse of the ability of any branch of the federal government to act in the interest of the average citizen rather than the banksters, Wall Street, agribusiness, or, in short, the corporatocracy that really rules this country. It's the Dummycrook-Pelosi approach to government: "Let's pass this bill in the middle of the night behind closed doors so we can find out what's in it," which in this case translates to "here, eat this for 30 years so we can find out what's in it and what it does to us, (and no, if it's bad, we won't cover it under Medicare because we've gutted that)."
And for all the Republithugs out there, just remember, your party under GHW Bush gave us the doctrine of "substantial equivalence" which has allowed GMOs to be marketed without labelling, since it was argued there was "substantial equivalence" between it and normal seeds and food, all the while it also allowed these companies to patent their products. A mercantilist case of having your seeds, eating them too, and charging farmers in India outlandish royalties.
The whole approach over the issue reminds me of previous affairs and pronouncements... BCCI was just a fluke of a few rogue elements in banking and intelligence. So was the Savings and Loan scandal. Nugan Hand. Waco was "for the children". Oklahoma City was a fertilizer bomb. 9/11 was airplanes and Arab terrorists and nothing more. It was a lone assassin with a bullet that managed to hit President Kennedy and Governor Connally and to emerge on a stretcher in nearly pristine condition after having gone through several bones having been fired as the third shot in 6.7 second from a misaligned telescopically-sited Italian 6.5mm bolt action Mannlicher Carcano.
The Science Is In. Our computer models have now proven it.
No thanks, Queen Nancy. No thanks, King George.
See you on the flip side.
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.