Vicki Keller of the Health Seeker blog sent me a link to an interesting documentary about genetically modified foods and the possible negative effects they’re having on our health. The filmmaker is putting the film, Genetic Roulette, on YouTube for free viewing for one week only. So if you want to see it, now’s your chance. Let me know what you think.
If you enjoy my posts, please consider a small donation to the Fat Head Kids GoFundMe campaign.
As soon as I heard “Monsanto”, I was already pissed.
As anyone who reads my blogs knows, I’m not one who believes big corporations are inherently evil. But Monsanto definitely is an evil corporation. The way they beat up on farmers is proof enough.
I watched as much as I could stand. It’s enough to scare you sh*tless.
The most effective cure for the problem is not politically correct.
As soon as I heard “Monsanto”, I was already pissed.
As anyone who reads my blogs knows, I’m not one who believes big corporations are inherently evil. But Monsanto definitely is an evil corporation. The way they beat up on farmers is proof enough.
I watched as much as I could stand. It’s enough to scare you sh*tless.
The most effective cure for the problem is not politically correct.
Having slept on it, I have modified my opinion slightly.
Correlation is not causation. (Repeat ad nauseum)
I’m convinced that GMO is a basically uncontrolled, dangerous experiment being run by agribusiness (mainly Monsanto) at our expense, and that Monsanto is in roughly the same league as the tobacco companies circa 1950-1990. But is GMO responsible for all of the problems seen in this video?
Dr. Wm. Davis is of the opinion that wheat is the primary cause of nearly every modern disease. While I think that he may be overstating his case, he is essentially correct — and my own n=1 testing has verified that wheat is really bad stuff. And it’s not even GMO, if you use a sufficiently narrow and perverted definition of the term.
I suspect that there are several (related) causes of the various ills listed in “Genetic Roulette.” GMO and wheat are definitely ungood, but other factors include the widespread use of industrial seed oil lubricants as “food” and the addition of sugar, especially HFCS, to nearly everything that comes in a can, box, or bag.
Then there are prominent quacks (Ornish, McDougall, et. al.) who have convinced a substantial segment of the population that natural foods are bad and have to be avoided.
All of these things combine to produce the observed ills.
So, let’s go after GMO crap. But don’t stop there.
My thoughts exactly. When the filmmaker linked the introduction of GM crops to the rise of several diseases on a timeline, my first thought was that we could have put the introduction of HFCS on the same timeline … or the introduction of USDA dietary guidelines … etc. I don’t think it’s good to put “foods” in our bodies that never existed in nature, but we don’t want to make the mistake of blaming GM crops for all of our ills.
BEST documentary I have seen on the subject! Should be seen by EVERY US citizen! More needs to be done to education the population so this can come to an end.
I saw this a few weeks ago and sent it to my whole family. I’m hoping this film helps pass Prop 37 here in California so that the GMOs get labeled. Unfortunately, I don’t think it covers animals that are fed GMOs. There should be labeling laws that let people know what exactly animals are fed before slaughter. Couple that with knowledge of a natural diet for a particular animal and I think we would be able to make better choices for ourselves when buying food.
Awesome–I sure as heck wished it were law to label GMO. People have an illusion for choice here, it seems. I’d rather be here than in a lot of other countries, but that doesn’t negate the problems that we have.
That was the scariest documentary I’ve ever seen. I knew GMO was bad, but I didn’t realize just how bad it was. Thanks for the link, Tom, and thanks to the filmmaker for putting it up for everyone to see. I think I’m going to try buying more organic/grass-fed foods from now.
One thing that really struck me, though, was that BT caused so many problems. As an organic gardener, I know that BT spray is classified as an organic pesticide, and many organic gardeners/farmers use it. I avoid using anything on my produce and instead cover my plants and hand pick pests. So I guess the question is, is spraying BT anywhere near as bad as genetically modifying a plant to have BT in it? I’ve heard rumors that BT spray kills the beneficial microorganisms in the soil, but I haven’t heard much about its affects on humans. Wow, that’s something to think about!
I remember when BT was developed (mid-1980s, I believe), it was hailed as the organic replacement for toxic pesticides. I’m not so sure a product that causes an insect’s stomach to burst is something I want on my food.
So GMO is the statin of agriculture.
As much I believe you’re right about the science regarding cholesterol, fat, and carbohydrates and their relationship to obesity and diabetes, I believe you’re treading on thin scientific ice when you attack GM foods.
I think if you look at the science of GM foods, particularly the science that attacks GM foods as being poisonous you’ll find that most of the science is as badly done. I would lump most of the anti-GM crowd into the same group as the anti vaccine group. People who are trying to bend science to their own preconceived notions as to what is healthy.
You have a powerful brand, that is backed by good science, I don’t want to see you harm your brand by promoting science that isn’t as solid as the science concerning the link between carbohydrates, diabetes, and obesity.
Regards,
Joe Dokes
I haven’t looked into the science, so I don’t know how solid it is. I think the documentary raises several important issues that are worth discussing. I certainly don’t trust the FDA’s judgment on which foods are potentially harmful and which aren’t.
Scary stuff. More good reasons to avoid grains and legumes, and more good reasons to eat real that produced as locally as possible by people we know and trust. Grow it yourself, buy organic, or buy from a farmer’s market after talking to the farmer about your concerns.
And, although the focus of Genetic Roulette is gene splicing, as Dr. William Davis points out, the genetic modifications that are accomplished through chemical and radiological mutation are just as dangerous–if not more so–because they’re completely random.
Having slept on it, I have modified my opinion slightly.
Correlation is not causation. (Repeat ad nauseum)
I’m convinced that GMO is a basically uncontrolled, dangerous experiment being run by agribusiness (mainly Monsanto) at our expense, and that Monsanto is in roughly the same league as the tobacco companies circa 1950-1990. But is GMO responsible for all of the problems seen in this video?
Dr. Wm. Davis is of the opinion that wheat is the primary cause of nearly every modern disease. While I think that he may be overstating his case, he is essentially correct — and my own n=1 testing has verified that wheat is really bad stuff. And it’s not even GMO, if you use a sufficiently narrow and perverted definition of the term.
I suspect that there are several (related) causes of the various ills listed in “Genetic Roulette.” GMO and wheat are definitely ungood, but other factors include the widespread use of industrial seed oil lubricants as “food” and the addition of sugar, especially HFCS, to nearly everything that comes in a can, box, or bag.
Then there are prominent quacks (Ornish, McDougall, et. al.) who have convinced a substantial segment of the population that natural foods are bad and have to be avoided.
All of these things combine to produce the observed ills.
So, let’s go after GMO crap. But don’t stop there.
My thoughts exactly. When the filmmaker linked the introduction of GM crops to the rise of several diseases on a timeline, my first thought was that we could have put the introduction of HFCS on the same timeline … or the introduction of USDA dietary guidelines … etc. I don’t think it’s good to put “foods” in our bodies that never existed in nature, but we don’t want to make the mistake of blaming GM crops for all of our ills.
Hmm… At 25:00, Jeffrey M. Smith describes how Roundup (glyphosate) works. Unfortunately, he’s completely wrong. Paraphrasing his description: it weakens the plant’s defenses so soil-borne diseases can kill it. The fact is that glyphosate works by inhibiting an enzyme that plants use to synthesize certain amino acids. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate)
Just started watching. So far, it’s pretty blatant scare-tactics without any real science. TONS of correlation and speculation without evidence.
“They’re taking spider genes and putting it in goats to get spider silk out of their milk! They’re taking cow genes and putting it in pigs to get pigs with cow hides! They’re making herbicide-resistant and pesticide-producing crops!”
The juxtaposition of the first two (which have *nothing* to do with food), and the last, is an attempt to convey the scariness of the first two with the not-quite-as-scary latter.
“Diseases are going up. GMOs are going up. Coincidence…?” (ugh. really? That’s what we’re resorting to?)
Trying to make people freak out over plants producing insecticides is silly, as lots of plants we eat produce their own insecticides. Show me a problem with THAT insecticide.
TONS of “IF blah blah blah, then it MIGHT blah blah blah.” Um… okay? Show me evidence that it’s happening.
Some good comments on food sensitivities and gut permeability, but no evidence of a connection to GMOs (a mom claiming that her son got food allergies on a specific date does not count. Sorry. “THAT WAS THE DAY HE HAD RAW CORN.”)
“25-30 years ago, nobody was allergic to anything” REALLY? Wow.
Now, that said, I appreciate the discussion of the FDA being in Monsanto’s pocket, and the call for greater oversight of, research into, and labeling of GMO food, but the general fear-mongering over GMO crops themselves (again, without presenting actual evidence) is counter-productive at best.
As an expose of flaws in the system, it’s interesting and important, IMO, but as an attack on GMOs themselves, it’s weak and frustrating.
(Side note: I especially liked the guy talking in front of a microphone, as though he’s presenting to some sort of group, attempting to give him more credibility. Great tactic.)
Yup, the film resorts to some weak tactics here and there to make its case. Nonetheless, it also raises important issues that should be discussed.
It will be easier get a NonGMO label for real foods.
Also, out of curiosity, what’s your position on GMO’s as a libertarian?
It’s clear that the FDA isn’t doing their job. Does that mean that they should be abolished, and there shouldn’t be any government interference in this sort of thing, leaving the “invisible hand” of the market to protect the public from companies like Monsanto?
Or is the answer somewhere in-between that and what we have now?
It’s a tough issue to analyze from a libertarian standpoint because there really isn’t a free market in food production. On principle, I’d normally be against outlawing GM food production or forcing companies to slap a GM label on their foods. But our government subsidizes these crops, which gives them an artificial competitive advantage, declares them safe despite (at least according to the film) what their own staff scientists reported, punishes scientists who say there are problems with GM foods, beats up on small organic farmers who want to sell to a willing consumer base, and gives Monsanto the power (through the courts) to bully farmers into buying their seeds. (It’s stunning that a farmer can be sued for patent violation because Monsanto’s seeds blew onto his land and started growing. If anything, the farmer should be allowed to sue on the grounds that Monsanto’s seeds polluted his fields.) In at least one case, a state government tried (at Monsanto’s behest) to make it illegal for dairies to VOLUNTARILY label their milk as rBHT-free.
In other words, Monsanto is powerful largely because of government interference on their behalf. Given that situation, I’m not going to root for free-market forces to effect changes in a market that isn’t free in the first place. There is no invisible hand at work here. There’s a big ol’ fist, courtesy of the USDA, FDA, etc.
BEST documentary I have seen on the subject! Should be seen by EVERY US citizen! More needs to be done to education the population so this can come to an end.
Does this also mean Meat is GMO and not safe to eat? It seems like nothing is safe to consume any more. Also is this done mostly in America cause i live in Toronto.
I don’t know if there are potential health problems from eating meat from animals that ate GMO crops. The documentary was interesting and raises important issues, but we also need to take it with a grain of salt.
I saw this a few weeks ago and sent it to my whole family. I’m hoping this film helps pass Prop 37 here in California so that the GMOs get labeled. Unfortunately, I don’t think it covers animals that are fed GMOs. There should be labeling laws that let people know what exactly animals are fed before slaughter. Couple that with knowledge of a natural diet for a particular animal and I think we would be able to make better choices for ourselves when buying food.
I saw this film about two weeks ago. It shocked my senses. It is as if humans are being farmed by big AG and Pharma. They make us sick with their foods, then suck us into their drugs and send in swat teams when someone wants to drink raw milk or have organic co-ops. It is sick. I also saw this study released about two weeks ago in France that when rats are fed GM corn only, they grow big cancer tumors. Russia, based on this study banned all imports of GM crops. Any why is it if these things are so good, Monsanto bans GMO in their own canteen. The employees of Monsanto will not eat the stuff.
Link to France study in news: http://www.infowars.com/france-launches-major-investigation-into-gmos-following-tumor-study/
Also google for yourself the Russia ban on GMO, and Monsanto not allowing GMO in their canteen. Sick.
Afraid to eat.
What about the claim that is being made here in CA that forcing GMO labelling will hurt the small farmers? Doesn’t sound logical to me, but…I don’t want to vote for anything that is going to hurt small farmers and give large corps an advantage, but…I guess I have to read prop 37 very carefully before I vote! And will.
As to GMO in general, I avoid it on general principals, because I don’t like to support anything the evil Monsanto does. However, I agree with comments above that the science against GMO is weak. I prefer to consider each example on its own merits–or lack thereof.
I haven’t been following the issue in California, but I’m not sure how labels would hurt small farmers. It could be that the “it’ll hurt small farmers” line is coming from Big Ag.
Awesome–I sure as heck wished it were law to label GMO. People have an illusion for choice here, it seems. I’d rather be here than in a lot of other countries, but that doesn’t negate the problems that we have.
Good article to calm down the anti-science hysterics……..http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4112
I hope the paleo community avoids some of these anti-science pitfalls.
That was the scariest documentary I’ve ever seen. I knew GMO was bad, but I didn’t realize just how bad it was. Thanks for the link, Tom, and thanks to the filmmaker for putting it up for everyone to see. I think I’m going to try buying more organic/grass-fed foods from now.
One thing that really struck me, though, was that BT caused so many problems. As an organic gardener, I know that BT spray is classified as an organic pesticide, and many organic gardeners/farmers use it. I avoid using anything on my produce and instead cover my plants and hand pick pests. So I guess the question is, is spraying BT anywhere near as bad as genetically modifying a plant to have BT in it? I’ve heard rumors that BT spray kills the beneficial microorganisms in the soil, but I haven’t heard much about its affects on humans. Wow, that’s something to think about!
I remember when BT was developed (mid-1980s, I believe), it was hailed as the organic replacement for toxic pesticides. I’m not so sure a product that causes an insect’s stomach to burst is something I want on my food.
The problem is there should have been long-term studies done but the FDA didn’t require them even after their own FDA Scientists URGED them to before introducing them into the foods. They warned their superiors that the infant science of Genetic Engineering was inherently dangerous and they felt it could cause new diseases, resistance to antibiotics, hard to detect allergies, gene transfers to gut bacteria and nutritional problems. They did not adhere to their own scientists warnings and ignored them. I feel people should have to. Consent to such a ongoing human trial and have the option to opt out if they want. It is difficult because most people don’t know which foods are GMO and don’t realize they could be eating them. I don’t thin most consumers even know of the health risks of eating mutated DNA within their food and how it can turn on genes within a person and alter DNA function.
So GMO is the statin of agriculture.
As much I believe you’re right about the science regarding cholesterol, fat, and carbohydrates and their relationship to obesity and diabetes, I believe you’re treading on thin scientific ice when you attack GM foods.
I think if you look at the science of GM foods, particularly the science that attacks GM foods as being poisonous you’ll find that most of the science is as badly done. I would lump most of the anti-GM crowd into the same group as the anti vaccine group. People who are trying to bend science to their own preconceived notions as to what is healthy.
You have a powerful brand, that is backed by good science, I don’t want to see you harm your brand by promoting science that isn’t as solid as the science concerning the link between carbohydrates, diabetes, and obesity.
Regards,
Joe Dokes
I haven’t looked into the science, so I don’t know how solid it is. I think the documentary raises several important issues that are worth discussing. I certainly don’t trust the FDA’s judgment on which foods are potentially harmful and which aren’t.
Scary stuff. More good reasons to avoid grains and legumes, and more good reasons to eat real that produced as locally as possible by people we know and trust. Grow it yourself, buy organic, or buy from a farmer’s market after talking to the farmer about your concerns.
And, although the focus of Genetic Roulette is gene splicing, as Dr. William Davis points out, the genetic modifications that are accomplished through chemical and radiological mutation are just as dangerous–if not more so–because they’re completely random.
I’m convinced that if there ever is a real life outbreak of the T-Virus (of Resident Evil fame) then Monsanto will be the cause. If nothing else, having the company that was the primary manufacturer for Agent Orange fiddling with our food just *feels* like something that shouldn’t be allowed.
Now I have a better picture where my Irritable Bowel Syndrome and headaches are coming from. Ever since eliminating almost all monosodium glutamate and all wheat related food items, I have enjoyed about 95% of my days as headache free and IBS free. Before watching Genetic Roulette I had no real reason to suspect the damage GMO is causing to the crops and to the animals that eat the crops. After viewing Genetic Roulette, I’m stunned at how stupid it would be to take your chances and eat genetically modified freak foods. I am compelled to eliminate the GMO crap and see what happens to my health. I am starting to think that our food supply is liberally laced with poisons such as pesticides, herbicides, excitotoxins (ie, MSG, aspartame), questionable food perservatives, unusually high levels of hormones, and the new kingpin of poisons: GMO foods.
Ultimately, that’s what will drive GM foods out of the market: people refusing to buy them. Even if the labeling laws don’t pass, if enough people decide avoiding GM foods matters to them, food manufacturers will be scrambling to get the “Non-GMO” label on their products. That’s what happened with rBHT … consumers started refusing to buy milk that didn’t specify it was rBHT free.
Of course, that didn’t stop corrupt politicians from trying to circumvent this voluntary economic solution:
http://fooddemocracy.wordpress.com/2007/11/12/labeling-rbht-milk-consumers-wont-know-what-theyre-missing/
Hmm… At 25:00, Jeffrey M. Smith describes how Roundup (glyphosate) works. Unfortunately, he’s completely wrong. Paraphrasing his description: it weakens the plant’s defenses so soil-borne diseases can kill it. The fact is that glyphosate works by inhibiting an enzyme that plants use to synthesize certain amino acids. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate)
Just started watching. So far, it’s pretty blatant scare-tactics without any real science. TONS of correlation and speculation without evidence.
“They’re taking spider genes and putting it in goats to get spider silk out of their milk! They’re taking cow genes and putting it in pigs to get pigs with cow hides! They’re making herbicide-resistant and pesticide-producing crops!”
The juxtaposition of the first two (which have *nothing* to do with food), and the last, is an attempt to convey the scariness of the first two with the not-quite-as-scary latter.
“Diseases are going up. GMOs are going up. Coincidence…?” (ugh. really? That’s what we’re resorting to?)
Trying to make people freak out over plants producing insecticides is silly, as lots of plants we eat produce their own insecticides. Show me a problem with THAT insecticide.
TONS of “IF blah blah blah, then it MIGHT blah blah blah.” Um… okay? Show me evidence that it’s happening.
Some good comments on food sensitivities and gut permeability, but no evidence of a connection to GMOs (a mom claiming that her son got food allergies on a specific date does not count. Sorry. “THAT WAS THE DAY HE HAD RAW CORN.”)
“25-30 years ago, nobody was allergic to anything” REALLY? Wow.
Now, that said, I appreciate the discussion of the FDA being in Monsanto’s pocket, and the call for greater oversight of, research into, and labeling of GMO food, but the general fear-mongering over GMO crops themselves (again, without presenting actual evidence) is counter-productive at best.
As an expose of flaws in the system, it’s interesting and important, IMO, but as an attack on GMOs themselves, it’s weak and frustrating.
(Side note: I especially liked the guy talking in front of a microphone, as though he’s presenting to some sort of group, attempting to give him more credibility. Great tactic.)
Yup, the film resorts to some weak tactics here and there to make its case. Nonetheless, it also raises important issues that should be discussed.
It will be easier get a NonGMO label for real foods.
Also, out of curiosity, what’s your position on GMO’s as a libertarian?
It’s clear that the FDA isn’t doing their job. Does that mean that they should be abolished, and there shouldn’t be any government interference in this sort of thing, leaving the “invisible hand” of the market to protect the public from companies like Monsanto?
Or is the answer somewhere in-between that and what we have now?
It’s a tough issue to analyze from a libertarian standpoint because there really isn’t a free market in food production. On principle, I’d normally be against outlawing GM food production or forcing companies to slap a GM label on their foods. But our government subsidizes these crops, which gives them an artificial competitive advantage, declares them safe despite (at least according to the film) what their own staff scientists reported, punishes scientists who say there are problems with GM foods, beats up on small organic farmers who want to sell to a willing consumer base, and gives Monsanto the power (through the courts) to bully farmers into buying their seeds. (It’s stunning that a farmer can be sued for patent violation because Monsanto’s seeds blew onto his land and started growing. If anything, the farmer should be allowed to sue on the grounds that Monsanto’s seeds polluted his fields.) In at least one case, a state government tried (at Monsanto’s behest) to make it illegal for dairies to VOLUNTARILY label their milk as rBHT-free.
In other words, Monsanto is powerful largely because of government interference on their behalf. Given that situation, I’m not going to root for free-market forces to effect changes in a market that isn’t free in the first place. There is no invisible hand at work here. There’s a big ol’ fist, courtesy of the USDA, FDA, etc.
You know, from a paranoid conspiracy theorist standpoint, (Which I’m usually not, really.) maybe our government sees these fertility reducing, sickness inducing foods as a way to keep the population growth down. It also simultaneously promotes the agribusiness, pharmaceutical, medical, weight-loss and legal industries.
Eating is becoming so complicated any more that I almost want to pull a Tom Naughton and buy a small farm somewhere, so I can grow my own food.
Don’t forget about the disc golf too. You’ll need some form of amusement while watching the plants grow.
I’m not convinced that GMOs are all that bad. It seems today that literally everything can lead to cancer or other bad things, so why are GMOs so bad in comparison? GMOs are responsible to driving food costs down (which is good) by creating fast growing, disease immune, anti-pest plants that are basically immortal. If we stopped using those, food prices would skyrocket and bust a hole through the roof of the graph, and people are already paying in limbs and sexual favors to get food on the plate as it is. I believe they should be regulated, and certain practices should be outlawed, but removing them altogether would be silly.
We don’t know the health effects of GMO foods. That’s the issue. I’m not going to start jumping up and down and screaming that GMO foods are killing us after watching one documentary, but I agree with their point that the FDA shouldn’t have ignored its own scientists and declared those foods safe without actually knowing if they’re safe. Nor should our government (or any government) apply pressure on universities and other research centers to stifle scientists who say those foods aren’t safe. Nor should our government subsidize GMO crops or any other crops. Nor should our government beat up on small farmers who compete with the Big Ag concerns.
So I’d start by getting the government out of the equation.
Farmer’s speak out personally! Short video clip – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19594335
Labeling is a win for farmers and a win for consumers – GMO Farmer speaks out personally – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WOBiarf-bM&feature=youtu.be
Other countries already know if their food is GMO – Americans get GMO’s and they send non-GMO foods overseas – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB1xHFwSYIg
Tom, I agree with you pretty close to 100%, but there are some ironies about posting this here. (I largely agree with Justin Ross’s take on this).
First of all is the juxtaposition with the previous post, about Dr. Davis and Wheat Belly. As a libertarian, and a smart guy, you know that in the real world, the tradeoff is not between something and an ideal, but between it and the next best alternative.
As Dr. Davis details in Wheat Belly, it’s not like scientists weren’t modifying genes prior to the advent of GMO. Rather, they were doing so through massive doses of radiation and other mutagens to artificially induce random variety in plants. (This is, for example, how modern varieties of wheat were developed, and Dr. Davis makes a persuasive case about changes to the gluten proteins from this “nuke the genome” method contributing to the rise in celiac diseasde).
So all the fuss about GMO labeling and GMO being evil just creates additional incentive to go back to this less-scientific, far-less precise method.
Second, there’s the irony in the title of the documentary. It’s precisely the OLD random practices that are roulette — they’re completely random. You don’t know if there are changes, where those changes will be, whether they’ll be dominant or recessive, or what those changes are. It would take a gene sequencer to just to identify what the changes are, and a full haplotype map to even attempt to figure out how they’ll affect the overall organism.
Modern GMO, by contrast, focuses on specific genes and replaces them with other genes whose functions are largely, if not entirely known. They know where to look for the changes, and are actually engaging in science.
To go back to the radiation analogy that’s so apt for the old method of artificially inducing variety, the old way is like nuking a city, the new way is like using radiation to target a particular tumor in a particular person. You know what you’re doing, what you’re targeting, the dose is calibrated, and have a pretty good idea of what the results — both good and bad — will be. It’s a controlled experiment, not random chaos.
(As for the terrible bill in California, check out Jonathan Adler’s legal analysis of how it violates the First Amendment — http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/how-not-to-label-biotech-foods ; and see why the Natural Products association opposes the bill — http://www.npainfo.org/NPA/Advocacy/Get_the_Facts_about_Prop_37.aspx . If you take a look at the text, you’ll see that it really is incredibly poorly drafted, and is nothing but a giveaway for ambulance-chasing lawyers — for example, wine grapes sold as grapes or raisins or vinegar have to be listed as “genetically engineered” because they’re grafted on the rootstock of a different grape species.)
It’s a tricky issue. That’s why I wanted to post the documentary and start a discussion about it.
Here’s a quote from the article you linked that I consider the meat of the issue as far as the First Amendment goes:
“But so long as there is no difference in a product itself that could adversely affect the uninformed consumer, and no outright deception or fraud in its labeling, there is no reason for government intervention in labeling.”
Can GMO foods adversely affect the uninformed consumer? We don’t know, because the FDA doesn’t seem interested in finding out, and Monsanto sure as shootin’ isn’t interested in finding out. If a brewery sells cans of beer that actually have a bit of formaldehyde in them, I wouldn’t consider it a violation of the First Amendment to require them to put that on the label. I’d consider that a fair use of regulatory power to ensure that consumers are engaging in voluntary, informed exchanges.
The point that the science is weak is my point exactly! Do the studies and prove that Genetic Engineering food is safe to consume. We want them and the maker of Genetic Roulette would welcome them, in fact, we should demand them. DO THE STUDIES AND PROVE THE SAFETY.
One researcher wrote “It should be up to corporations to prove the safety of their products, not the burden of the public to prove harm”. “An open, scientific inquiry into the effects of GMO’s is the minimum we can demand — if the industry can stand behind their products, such an inquiry ought to be welcome.”
The documentary took what evidence we have and shows it the best it can because sadly, we don’t have the proof of safety. They want the science to be done, that’s their point.
It is really sad that we have not had long-term studies performed and a deceptive and dishonest company like Monsanto makes it extremely difficult to even conduct a study and hasn’t proven safety of their product on their dime either. The first long term study is the one mentioned above done in France. It took them a year to procure the feed to conduct the study because Monsanto doesn’t want us to know GMO’s are now showing to be toxic.
The Genetic Mutations that occur when creating a GMO seed has unpredictable reactions and studies show they cause your own DNA to turn on genetic expressions based on the GM food’s genetic programming. Watch this report on a medical journal cell research – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-IJikX1144
Agreed. I thought the documentary relied on some weak evidence as supposed proof that these foods are causing harm, but the foods also haven’t been proven safe, which is where I thought the film scored its strongest points. Something is wrong when the FDA says it’s up to Monsanto to assure the food is safe and Monsanto says that’s the FDA’s job.
GM Crops Farmer to Farmer – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEX654gN3c4
Watch GMO crops threaten livelihood of organic farmers – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MkH08772A4
Does this also mean Meat is GMO and not safe to eat? It seems like nothing is safe to consume any more. Also is this done mostly in America cause i live in Toronto.
I don’t know if there are potential health problems from eating meat from animals that ate GMO crops. The documentary was interesting and raises important issues, but we also need to take it with a grain of salt.
I saw this film about two weeks ago. It shocked my senses. It is as if humans are being farmed by big AG and Pharma. They make us sick with their foods, then suck us into their drugs and send in swat teams when someone wants to drink raw milk or have organic co-ops. It is sick. I also saw this study released about two weeks ago in France that when rats are fed GM corn only, they grow big cancer tumors. Russia, based on this study banned all imports of GM crops. Any why is it if these things are so good, Monsanto bans GMO in their own canteen. The employees of Monsanto will not eat the stuff.
Link to France study in news: http://www.infowars.com/france-launches-major-investigation-into-gmos-following-tumor-study/
Also google for yourself the Russia ban on GMO, and Monsanto not allowing GMO in their canteen. Sick.
Afraid to eat.
What about the claim that is being made here in CA that forcing GMO labelling will hurt the small farmers? Doesn’t sound logical to me, but…I don’t want to vote for anything that is going to hurt small farmers and give large corps an advantage, but…I guess I have to read prop 37 very carefully before I vote! And will.
As to GMO in general, I avoid it on general principals, because I don’t like to support anything the evil Monsanto does. However, I agree with comments above that the science against GMO is weak. I prefer to consider each example on its own merits–or lack thereof.
I haven’t been following the issue in California, but I’m not sure how labels would hurt small farmers. It could be that the “it’ll hurt small farmers” line is coming from Big Ag.
Good article to calm down the anti-science hysterics……..http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4112
I hope the paleo community avoids some of these anti-science pitfalls.
Look who is buying up all the seed companies. I wonder why Chemical companies want to own Natural (un-modified) Seed companies?
http://www.motherearthnews.com/uploadedFiles/articles/issues/2012-04-01/Seed%20Industry%20Structure%20Chart.pdf
The problem is there should have been long-term studies done but the FDA didn’t require them even after their own FDA Scientists URGED them to before introducing them into the foods. They warned their superiors that the infant science of Genetic Engineering was inherently dangerous and they felt it could cause new diseases, resistance to antibiotics, hard to detect allergies, gene transfers to gut bacteria and nutritional problems. They did not adhere to their own scientists warnings and ignored them. I feel people should have to. Consent to such a ongoing human trial and have the option to opt out if they want. It is difficult because most people don’t know which foods are GMO and don’t realize they could be eating them. I don’t thin most consumers even know of the health risks of eating mutated DNA within their food and how it can turn on genes within a person and alter DNA function.
What about meats with Preservative like Sodium Nitrates and Sodium Phosphates are those a concern as well. People consider it processed meat because of the added chemicals. I personally would go organic but i cant afford it.
I worry less about nitrates than I do about putting altered strands of DNA in my body.
Monsanto says its up to the Organic Farmer to ensure their farm does not become contaminated by their GMO patented seed and will sue farmers.
I guess the wind and pollentation doesn’t read the signs of which farm is Organic and which one isn’t. Who contaminated who? Who is the newest introduction to farming?
http://youtu.be/sx4Dud0othY
http://youtu.be/Ppumc3iavzI
http://youtu.be/wC3yteAC9nk
We are eating DNA which is information that is shown to trigger DNA signalling in our bodies turning on DNA within our bodies. It alters our Gut Bacteria.
It does enter our human bodies and in the umbilical cord of the unborn fetus shown in this study – http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/toxin-from-gm-crops-found-in-human-blood/1/137728.html
I watched the Gary Null documentary last night as well. I don’t know how extensive the damage from eating GMO foods is or isn’t, but I’d rather not roll the dice.
I’m convinced that if there ever is a real life outbreak of the T-Virus (of Resident Evil fame) then Monsanto will be the cause. If nothing else, having the company that was the primary manufacturer for Agent Orange fiddling with our food just *feels* like something that shouldn’t be allowed.