If the U.S. has its way, and it usually does when it comes to Codex Alimentarius, GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) will not be labeled, even though there is significant scientific evidence to warrant a moratorium on the use of GMOs. Severe health problems are already evident with the use of GMOs. Incidentally, the U.S. is the only country in the world where unlabeled use of GMOs is permitted.
See Dr. Laibow’s recent hard-hitting video expose of Codex pretensions:
(VIDEO) Report from Codex Commission Meeting - Rome 2009
Consider this alarming statement:
“Some genetically-manipulated crops are changed so that they produce their own high levels of pesticides. For example, genetically-manipulated ‘Bt’ crops have been shown to emit very high levels of toxins.”
This statement is from a study about plants that have been genetically manipulated to produce Bt toxin, a bacterial toxin used as pesticide in GMO crops. Such genetically modified plants result in at least 1000 times more Bt toxin per acre than a heavy application of Bt sprayed directly on the plants does. Consumption of plants with the “Bt gene” (such as non-organic corn and corn-based sweeteners) may lead to serious health problems after long-term ingestion. High concentrations of Bt are also toxic to beneficial insects and, through them, birds and the rest of the ecosystem suffer.
Other hazards related to crops manipulated to produce their own pesticides are discussed in more detail by Dr. Joseph Cummins, Professor of Genetics, in “Plant-Pesticides in GE-food: A Potential Health Risk”. Even if the genetically-manipulated plant does not produce its own pesticides, it has been shown conclusively in scientific research that the herbicides used on some of these non-organic, genetically-manipulated plants (e.g., soy, canola, corn) are extremely toxic and can cause birth defects. The genetic manipulations themselves produce toxins and lead to serious health hazards when consumed over time, including birth defects, intestinal lesions and other major health challenges.
GMOs Harm American Exports
American food exports are viewed with suspicion by countries leery of GMO foods. In order to overcome this, the U.S. is demanding global unlabeled use of GMOs such as the current unlabeled use of GMOs in the U.S. If Codex yields to U.S. pressure, as it usually does, dangerous GMO food will make its way around the world. Currently, many nations are resisting the U.S. on this and rejecting U.S. exports for that reason. Even countries in the midst of famine like Nigeria have rejected U.S. GMO food.
GMOs Increase Sales of Pesticides
The official line of the biotechnical industry is that GMOs “reduce reliance on pesticides”, either because they make their own pesicides (e.g., Bt toxins) or because they are resistant to pests. The reality is far different, however. Plants which are resistant to the highly toxic herbicide glyphosate (Roundup®) give farmers permission to saturate their fields with it, because the crop itself (now being genetically modified) is not impacted, while competing weeds are.
This may sound like a good idea (get the weeds instead of the crop).
But it simply means that more pesticides will be used, as the farmer doesn’t have to be careful about spraying too much lest the crop be killed. Hence, plants which produce their own pesticide would actually lead farmers to making heavier use of pesticides and herbicides!
For example, as Charles Benbook of the “Northwest Science and Environmental Policy Center” notes:
“In Alabama, another high Bt-cotton adoption state (62% acres planted), BBW insecticide applications almost doubled from 1997 to 2000. Moreover, there was a clear shift in Alabama toward very toxic, broad-spectrum materials. Similar dramatic changes have occurred in Mississippi cotton insect pest management. In the first half of the 1990s, cotton farmers made eight to nine applications per acre targeting the BBW complex, with the highly-toxic OP methyl parathion accounting for over 40% of acre-treatments and pounds applied.”
Forced-GMO Farming Already Reality in Iraq
Farmers in Iraq, as an example of what a Codex-food future would look like in America, must purchase their seeds from Monsanto® and are forbidden from retaining seed crops under the new Iraqi patent laws. If farmers retain seeds from their own farm, they face heavy fines. And they are forced to use pesticide products sold to them by American corporations (such as Roundup® by Monsanto®).
GMOs Create Dangerous New Weeds
Many GMOs have been genetically engineered so that seeds will not germinate without the use of specific pesticides and herbicides. This means that specific pesticides and herbicides must be bought before the seeds will germinate. Mounting scientific evidence makes it clear that birth defects, chemical sensitivity, chronic fatigue syndrome, asthma, severe allergies and a host of other conditions may be either enhanced or caused by increased pesticide exposure (which these crops and the surrounding fields require).
GMOs themselves are far from scientifically established as safe for either the planet or its people by objective, non-industry scientists.
Genetic drift, the wind-borne spread of GMO genetic material, is recognized as a major threat to the biological integrity of the entire earth. In fact, the creation of “superweeds” as a result of cross-pollination with GMO crops has now been confirmed in the UK, Canada and elsewhere.
Because of its support for unlabelled GMO products, Codex Alimentarius would make it more lucrative to use GMOs in foods, and thus, increase the spread of GMOs through uncontrolled genetic drift of altered DNA via pollen and wind.
GMOs Not Tested For Human Safety Before Release
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are quickly and easily released into the food supply.
Biotechnology manufacturers work in voluntary consultation with the FDA, USDA, or EPA, depending on the type of product being developed, to test the safety of new genetically modified products (Cockburn, 2002).
The concept of “Substantial Equivalence” is used to determine if there are any apparent differences between the genetically modified crop and its traditional counterpart, which is generally regarded as safe. Any differences identified are then tested by the developer using a variety of in vitro (test tube) and in vivo (animal) studies to evaluate their safety. Once the manufacturer has completed the consultation process with the government agency the product is considered safe for consumption and approved for the market. Although regulators do monitor for GMOs that are not approved for human consumption, no exposure limits are set by regulators and no attempts are made to monitor post market consumer exposures.
No clinical testing is required before GMOs are released for human use.
Codex Alimentarius says “let’s make the world even more GMO friendly”.
FrankenScience: Human Liver Genes in Rice
If unlabeled use of GMOs is ratified by Codex Alimentarius, the entire world will have the same unsafe food conditions that we do here in the U.S.. Since GMOs don’t have to be labeled in the U.S. you might be eating rice with a human liver gene stuck in it, or perhaps a medication with your food (“Medical Milk” or vaccine gene). These are some of the grizzly things genetic engineering is doing to our food.
Who wants to eat a drug or a human liver enzyme with their rice?
Genetically Modified Organisms are sometimes called “Frankenfoods”. Eating them exposes people to long and short term health hazards like allergic reactions (including death) and auto-immune diseases . There have also been reports of gradual organ damage and immune system damage while the highly virulent virus used in the genetic manipulation “may recombine with latent or infecting viruses within the host or beyond and give rise to new super-viruses”.
“Some genetically-manipulated crops are changed so that they produce their own high levels of pesticides. For example, genetically-manipulated ‘Bt’ crops have been shown to emit very high levels of toxins.”
This statement is from a study about plants that have been genetically manipulated to produce Bt toxin, a bacterial toxin used as pesticide in GMO crops. Such genetically modified plants result in at least 1000 times more Bt toxin per acre than a heavy application of Bt sprayed directly on the plants does. Consumption of plants with the “Bt gene” (such as non-organic corn and corn-based sweeteners) may lead to serious health problems after long-term ingestion. High concentrations of Bt are also toxic to beneficial insects and, through them, birds and the rest of the ecosystem suffer.
Other hazards related to crops manipulated to produce their own pesticides are discussed in more detail by Dr. Joseph Cummins, Professor of Genetics, in “Plant-Pesticides in GE-food: A Potential Health Risk”. Even if the genetically-manipulated plant does not produce its own pesticides, it has been shown conclusively in scientific research that the herbicides used on some of these non-organic, genetically-manipulated plants (e.g., soy, canola, corn) are extremely toxic and can cause birth defects. The genetic manipulations themselves produce toxins and lead to serious health hazards when consumed over time, including birth defects, intestinal lesions and other major health challenges.
GMOs Harm American Exports
American food exports are viewed with suspicion by countries leery of GMO foods. In order to overcome this, the U.S. is demanding global unlabeled use of GMOs such as the current unlabeled use of GMOs in the U.S. If Codex yields to U.S. pressure, as it usually does, dangerous GMO food will make its way around the world. Currently, many nations are resisting the U.S. on this and rejecting U.S. exports for that reason. Even countries in the midst of famine like Nigeria have rejected U.S. GMO food.
GMOs Increase Sales of Pesticides
The official line of the biotechnical industry is that GMOs “reduce reliance on pesticides”, either because they make their own pesicides (e.g., Bt toxins) or because they are resistant to pests. The reality is far different, however. Plants which are resistant to the highly toxic herbicide glyphosate (Roundup®) give farmers permission to saturate their fields with it, because the crop itself (now being genetically modified) is not impacted, while competing weeds are.
This may sound like a good idea (get the weeds instead of the crop).
But it simply means that more pesticides will be used, as the farmer doesn’t have to be careful about spraying too much lest the crop be killed. Hence, plants which produce their own pesticide would actually lead farmers to making heavier use of pesticides and herbicides!
For example, as Charles Benbook of the “Northwest Science and Environmental Policy Center” notes:
“In Alabama, another high Bt-cotton adoption state (62% acres planted), BBW insecticide applications almost doubled from 1997 to 2000. Moreover, there was a clear shift in Alabama toward very toxic, broad-spectrum materials. Similar dramatic changes have occurred in Mississippi cotton insect pest management. In the first half of the 1990s, cotton farmers made eight to nine applications per acre targeting the BBW complex, with the highly-toxic OP methyl parathion accounting for over 40% of acre-treatments and pounds applied.”
Forced-GMO Farming Already Reality in Iraq
Farmers in Iraq, as an example of what a Codex-food future would look like in America, must purchase their seeds from Monsanto® and are forbidden from retaining seed crops under the new Iraqi patent laws. If farmers retain seeds from their own farm, they face heavy fines. And they are forced to use pesticide products sold to them by American corporations (such as Roundup® by Monsanto®).
GMOs Create Dangerous New Weeds
Many GMOs have been genetically engineered so that seeds will not germinate without the use of specific pesticides and herbicides. This means that specific pesticides and herbicides must be bought before the seeds will germinate. Mounting scientific evidence makes it clear that birth defects, chemical sensitivity, chronic fatigue syndrome, asthma, severe allergies and a host of other conditions may be either enhanced or caused by increased pesticide exposure (which these crops and the surrounding fields require).
GMOs themselves are far from scientifically established as safe for either the planet or its people by objective, non-industry scientists.
Genetic drift, the wind-borne spread of GMO genetic material, is recognized as a major threat to the biological integrity of the entire earth. In fact, the creation of “superweeds” as a result of cross-pollination with GMO crops has now been confirmed in the UK, Canada and elsewhere.
Because of its support for unlabelled GMO products, Codex Alimentarius would make it more lucrative to use GMOs in foods, and thus, increase the spread of GMOs through uncontrolled genetic drift of altered DNA via pollen and wind.
GMOs Not Tested For Human Safety Before Release
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are quickly and easily released into the food supply.
Biotechnology manufacturers work in voluntary consultation with the FDA, USDA, or EPA, depending on the type of product being developed, to test the safety of new genetically modified products (Cockburn, 2002).
The concept of “Substantial Equivalence” is used to determine if there are any apparent differences between the genetically modified crop and its traditional counterpart, which is generally regarded as safe. Any differences identified are then tested by the developer using a variety of in vitro (test tube) and in vivo (animal) studies to evaluate their safety. Once the manufacturer has completed the consultation process with the government agency the product is considered safe for consumption and approved for the market. Although regulators do monitor for GMOs that are not approved for human consumption, no exposure limits are set by regulators and no attempts are made to monitor post market consumer exposures.
No clinical testing is required before GMOs are released for human use.
Codex Alimentarius says “let’s make the world even more GMO friendly”.
FrankenScience: Human Liver Genes in Rice
If unlabeled use of GMOs is ratified by Codex Alimentarius, the entire world will have the same unsafe food conditions that we do here in the U.S.. Since GMOs don’t have to be labeled in the U.S. you might be eating rice with a human liver gene stuck in it, or perhaps a medication with your food (“Medical Milk” or vaccine gene). These are some of the grizzly things genetic engineering is doing to our food.
Who wants to eat a drug or a human liver enzyme with their rice?
Genetically Modified Organisms are sometimes called “Frankenfoods”. Eating them exposes people to long and short term health hazards like allergic reactions (including death) and auto-immune diseases . There have also been reports of gradual organ damage and immune system damage while the highly virulent virus used in the genetic manipulation “may recombine with latent or infecting viruses within the host or beyond and give rise to new super-viruses”.
Biotechnology Industry Has Close Ties to Codex
One of the industries that has close ties to Codex Alimentarius is the biotechnology industry. This sheds light on why Codex Alimentarius is poised to allow GMOs to be added to our foods without labelling, with disregard for the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing to the dangers of unleashing this immature technology upon the world.
--------------------------
Keep up with GMO developments by joining the No GMOs forum at: http://groups.yahoo.com/
--------------------------
http://
Keep up with GMO developments by joining the No GMOs forum at: http://groups.yahoo.com/
--------------------------
http://
I'm scared!!!
ReplyDelete