Genetic engineering

The Natural Nurse And Dr. Z – The GI-MAP testing of the microbiota and implications for autoimmune disease management – 02.02.16

February 2, 2016

Ellen Kamhi, PhD RN, www.naturalnurse.com, interviews Dr. David M. Brady. Dr. Brady is a Connecticut and Vermont licensed naturopathic medical physician and certified clinical nutritionist and has been in clinical practice for 24 years. He is the vice provost of the Division of Health Sciences, director of the Human Nutrition Institute, and associate professor of clinical sciences at the University of Bridgeport. He is also the chief medical officer for Diagnostic Solutions Labs, LLC and Designs for Health, Inc., and practices at Whole Body Medicine in Fairfield, CT, specializing in functional and nutritional medicine. Dr. Brady works with Diagnostic Solutions Laboratory to develop and launch the first DNA/PCR molecular assay for GI pathogens performed on stool using an FDA-approved platform and methodology, the GI Microbial Assay Plus (GI-MAP). The pathogen targets include bacteria, parasites and another first for the market, viruses! This will help integrative and functional medicine physicians and providers determine the status of the gastrointestinal environment, which is critical in understanding why a patient may be experiencing various chronic conditions, with a particular eye towards autoimmune disorders. Contact: http://drdavidbrady.com/

Carey Gillam – The True Inside Story of How a College Professor Sells Out to Monsanto

February 1, 2016

Former University of Illinois food science professor Bruce Chassy is known for his academic gravitas. Now retired nearly four years, Chassy still writes and speaks often about food safety issues, identifying himself with the full weight of the decades of experience earned at the public university and as a researcher at the National Institutes of Health. Chassy tells audiences that before he retired in 2012, he worked “full time” doing research and teaching. What Chassy doesn’t talk much about is the other work he did while at the University of Illinois — promoting the interests of Monsanto Co., which has been trying to overcome mounting public concerns about the genetically engineered crops and chemicals the company sells. He also doesn’t talk much about the hundreds of thousands of dollars Monsanto donated to the university as Chassy was helping promote GMOs, or Monsanto’s secretive role in helping Chassy set up a nonprofit group and website to criticize individuals and organizations who raise questions about GMOs. Read

Bill Freese – New Study Finds Genetically Engineered Alfalfa Has Gone Wild, Exposing Failure of “Coexistence” Policy

January 20, 2016

A recent study by USDA scientists shows that genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa has gone wild, in a big way, in alfalfa-growing parts of the West.  This feral GE alfalfa may help explain a number of transgenic contamination episodes over the past few years that have cost American alfalfa growers and exporters millions of dollars in lost revenue.  And it also exposes the failure of USDA’s “coexistence” policy for GE and traditional crops. The U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA) has long maintained that genetically engineered (GE) crops can co-exist with traditional and organic agriculture.  According to this “co-existence” narrative, if neighboring GE and traditional farmers just sort things out among themselves and follow “best management practices,” transgenes will be confined to GE crops and the fields where they are planted. Read

Bill Freese – New study finds genetically engineered alfalfa has gone wild, exposing failure of “coexistence” policy

January 19, 2016

A recent study by USDA scientists shows that genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa has gone wild, in a big way, in alfalfa-growing parts of the West.  This feral GE alfalfa may help explain a number of transgenic contamination episodes over the past few years that have cost American alfalfa growers and exporters millions of dollars in lost revenue.  And it also exposes the failure of USDA’s “coexistence” policy for GE and traditional crops. The U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA) has long maintained that genetically engineered (GE) crops can co-exist with traditional and organic agriculture.  According to this “co-existence” narrative, if neighboring GE and traditional farmers just sort things out among themselves and follow “best management practices,” transgenes will be confined to GE crops and the fields where they are planted. Read

Claire Robinson – How GMO lobbyists taught me we’re winning

January 13, 2016

GMO promoters enthuse about how GM crops will be able to help the poor and hungry, far in the future, writes Claire Robinson. But they are silent about the currently-planted GM crops – 99% of them herbicide-tolerant or insecticidal. Could it be because opponents of the technology are being proved right at every turn? Insofar as reason and science are concerned, the GMO industry has lost. All they have is golden rice and gene editing. But they don’t even have those. Both have thus far failed to live up to their promises and are kept afloat largely by wishful thinking. Over the course of 2015, I became convinced we’re winning the GMO debate. Read

F. William Engdahl – Victory in Paris vs Monsanto GMO Cabal

January 4, 2016

There is a very positive news coming out of Paris, a city with more than her share of bad news lately. It’s a major legal victory for the voices of science and reason against the GMO Monsanto-led cabal. Its implications will be felt worldwide. If our world ever gets the will to rid the 21st Century Black Death plague masquerading under the name of Genetic Manipulation of Organisms or GMO, it will owe a huge debt of gratitude to the courageous work of Prof. Gilles-Eric Séralini and his extraordry team of dedicated scientists at CRIIGEN, the Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering, in France. In a world where industry’s corruption of scientists has almost become ordinary, the existence of a non-industry-funded team of scientists dedicated to producing research and independent information on genetic engineering and its impacts in biology, environment, agriculture, food, medicine, and public health, including the short, medium and long-term effects on human health and on the health of the entire living ecosystem, is, so far as I am aware, unique. Few are aware of their tireless and largely thankless work. Read

JEFFREY ST. CLAIR & ALEXANDER COCKBURN – A Secret History of the Monarch: How the Biotech Industry Conspired to Knock Off One of the World’s Rarest Butterflies

December 31, 2015

On May 20 1999, Nature magazine sounded what might have been the death knell of the biotech food industry. A short paper in the respected British science magazine by John Losey, an assistant professor of entomology at Cornell University, reported the ominous results of his laboratory study on the effects of pollen from genetically modified corn on the Monarch butterfly. Losey found that that Monarch caterpillars fed on milkweed leaves dusted with genetically modified corn pollen ate less, grew more slowly and suffered a higher mortality rate than those fed on leaves with normal pollen, or with no pollen at all. Nearly half of the GM pollen-fed caterpillars in the study died. The corn in question is “Bt” corn, modified by genetic engineers in corporate labs to produce Bacillus thuringiensis, a soil bacterium and natural pesticide that organic farmers have for years been spraying on crops, if and when threatened by insects. In contrast to the intermittent doses of the organic farmers, however, the GM variety exudes Bt all the time, at a level of toxicity 10 to 20 times that deployed by the organic sprayers and is distributed via wind-blown pollen. The target of this laboratory-bred plant is the dreaded European corn borer,

Colin Todhunter – The GMO Issue: False Claims, Pseudo Analysis And A Politically Motivated Agenda

December 28, 2015

Critics of GM promote pseudo-science, make false claims based on ignorance and are driven by politically motivated ideology. The actions of these affluent elitists effectively deny food to the hungry. They are therefore committing crimes against humanity. If you follow the GM issue, no doubt you’ve heard this kind of simplistic, tired and predictable diatribe before. A good deal of the debate surrounding GMOs involves attacking critics of the technology who voice genuine concerns and put forward valid arguments to back up their case. The attacks by the pro-GM lobby are nonsensical because there is sufficient, credible evidence that questions the safety, efficacy and the science used to promote GM, as well as the politics and practices used to get GMOs on the commercial market. This evidence has been validated many times before by peer-reviewed studies and official reports. Furthermore, many of the slick PR claims made by the pro-GM lobby have been deconstructed and found to be seriously wanting. Such evidence has been referred or linked on many occasions in my numerous previous articles, and I see no need to regurgitate this here. Read

GM Chicken Approved “For Medicinal Purposes”! Are Humans Next?

December 17, 2015

The floodgates are open for more genetically modified animals—possibly even humans. Last week saw the approval of another genetically modified animal— this time a chicken genetically altered to produce a drug in its eggs. The drug is designed to replace a faulty enzyme in people with a rare genetic condition that prevents the body from breaking down fatty molecules in cells. The genetically engineered (GE) chicken is not approved for human consumption, but it is the third so-called “farmaceutical” approved in the US market. Preceding the chicken was a GE goat that produces antithrombin, an anticoagulant, in its milk. Last year the FDA also approved a drug for treating hereditary angioedema that is produced by transgenic (GE) rabbits. Read

Julia Wright – Farmers would do better to understand the land than grow GM crops

December 10, 2015

Suppose your relationship is falling apart and you want to save it. To find the best counsellor, you might search online or ask your friends. It’s no different in agriculture. The rational response to any food or farming dilemma is to test and compare different options to see which is most effective as a solution. Except when it comes to genetic modification (GM). I have yet to hear of a research trial where a newly developed GM crop has been compared with other approaches to address the problem it claims to solve. If the goal was to identify the most effective solution, this would be very odd – but if the real goal is to find a use for the technology, it makes perfect sense. Here’s an example from my work in the subtropics (I better not name the country). In the 2000s, one region experienced several consecutive years of severe drought. The worst affected area saw over 3,000 wells dry up, and over 2,000 of its cattle lost. Many farmers were unable to sow their staple maize crop. The easy culprit was climate change, since temperatures had risen half a degree in recent years. What was less frequently pointed
1 2 3 7
Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com