Genetically modified foods & codex alimentarius

[Cognitivedissonance]

Natural Solutions Foundation
The Voice of Global Food and Health Freedom™
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
Permalink: http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=6871

BAN ALL GMOs NOW! http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2049

FACT: Genetically Modified Plants and animals (GMOs) contain foreign DNA whose impact is not subject to safety evaluation by the FDA or any other government agency
FACT: GMOs contain genetic markers which confer antibiotic resistance to the GMO AND to the environment, helping to create the new plague, antibiotic resistant “super bugs” in animals, humans and the environment
FACT: The FDA, supposedly our health watchdog for foods and drugs, regularly bases its approvals not on scientific data, but on personal conflicts of interest which are permitted under current rules.
FACT: The FDA is not permitted to examine safety data after initial, company-generated preliminary indication that a GMO is safe
FACT: Acknowledging consumer revulsion at the thought of eating GMOs, the FDA forbids labeling items, or ingredients, as GMO “to prevent consumers from making an error since FDA regards all GMOs as “substantially equivalent” to unmodified foods
FACT: There is no scientific basis for the concept of “substantially equivalent”
FACT: Every single independent scientific analysis of GMO impact on health, immune function, allergic status, fertility, organ function and status, reproductive impact or any other function shows that GMOs impair fertility, organ function, fetal and neonatal survival, immune function and a host of other parameters
FACT: GMO genetic material infects the DNA of other plants and animals, animals (including humans) who ingest it and the bacteria on which animals depend for life support both in their guts and in the rest of the biosphere
FACT: The US Department of Agriculture has stated that it does not know where, or what, more than 95% of the GMO field trials being conducted are.
FACT: Bayer Crop Sciences, responsible for contamination of almost all rice fields in the US with GMO rice, has stated that it is not possible to contain GMO DNA from invading other fields and organisms.
FACT: GMO genes dominate natural ones and insert themselves into native DNA in wild and unpredictable ways so that novel proteins are produced whose impact is nearly totally unknown
FACT: Once GMOs contaminate native DNA, there is no known way to remove it
FACT: Virtually all GMO plants are modified to tolerate high levels of the toxic chemicals which their modifiers manufacture, increasing the use of these chemicals up to 400% and leading to super bugs and super weeds which are highly destructive to the environment and to crops
FACT: The same companies which modify foods and other organisms and make the chemicals they have been made resistant to also make drugs to treat the diseases that follow from them
FACT: GMO-related agrochemicals (such as very high doses of BT from BT corn) contaminate the ecosystem months to years after the crop has been harvested

Even politicians, generally some of the most obtuse and self-interested people on the planet, had a belly full of GMOs today. Democrats in the House and the Senate both urged the FDA to reject their approval of genetically modified salmon, hatched in the US and nurtured offshore. Even the members of the US Congress, generally so Big Biotech compliant, noted that the review process the FDA followed was flawed. What a “flawed process” means is that a dangerous drug (or, in this case, Frankenfood) would be put into the market. Only later would the dangers be noted and the product removed, in the case of a drug. But drugs are labeled while FDA-approved Frankenfood is never labeled. Thus, the cancer, infertility, loss of babies and other preventable tragedies it can cause will never be identified, allowing the contaminators to continue their deceptive campaign to convince us that, sick and dying as we are from our food, the US food supply is the safest in the world.

On the contrary, with every new DNA-modified food, our food supply becomes more deadly. Aunt Gertrude’s cancer? Was that from GMOs? How about the baby the Polly and Henry lost last year? The Lupus that has crippled Elizabeth? Who knows if they are unlabeled? And if they are permitted, in the face of evidence that they are dangerous, the question must be asked “WHY?”

The answer is both simple – “Greed”, and complex – “Genocide”

Take your pick. Protect us from greed, protect us from genocide. Either way, ban GMOs now and take back clean, unadulterated food while we still can.

http://drrimatruthreports.com/tag/genetically-modified-organisms/

@DuctTape @Desert Flower

 

[Cognitivedissonance]

• Consumer Protection? Unfortunately Not
  The first step to understanding Codex Alimentarius is to realize that it has absolutely nothing to do with “consumer protection”. That’s propaganda for the sake of getting people and Congress to yield to its implementation.

• Says Who?
  Rima E. Laibow, M.D. is a successful natural medicine physician who graduated from Albert Einstein College of Medicine in 1970. Dr. Laibow has studied more than 16,000 pages of Codex Alimentarius documentation. Her conclusion? Codex Alimentarius is a very serious threat to health freedom. We must take it seriously.

• Meaning of Name and History of Organization
  “Codex Alimentarius” means “food rules” in Latin. The organization was born in 1962 when the UN established the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) as a “Trade Commission”. It was created to regulate, and thus control, every aspect of how food and nutritional supplements are produced and sold to the consumer. It is solely about trade and the profits of multi-national corporations.

• Bolstering Profits of Pharmaceutical Industry
  The more natural health products people use, the fewer drugs they use. Millions are turning to natural health. Big Pharma fears this as it would diminish profits. Codex is designed to protect Big Pharma profits by eliminating natural health products and treatments. Health food stores and wellness companies would be hit hard.

• Codex Alimentarius is Unscientific
  Codex is unscientific because it classifies nutrients as toxins and uses “Risk Assessment” to set ultra low so-called “safe upper limits” for them. Risk Assessment is a branch of Toxicology, the science for assessing toxins. The proper science for assessing nutrients is Biochemistry. Codex does not use Biochemistry.

• Based on Tyrannical Napoleonic Legal Code
  Codex is based on the Napoleonic Code, dating back to Bonaparte. Under this code, anything not explicitly permitted is automatically forbidden. Under Common Law (our system), something does not have to be explicitly permitted to be legal. The tyrannical Napoleonic Code allows the banning of natural health options by default.

• Shrewdly, Slowly Raising Heat
  Codex will go into global effect on December 31, 2009, unless we, the People, take action and avert it. Right now, we are like a frog boiled slowly, the heat raised gradually so we won’t jump out of the water. The media is used to make us believe that Codex is about “consumer protection”. Part of the media strategy is to tarnish the image of natural health options, through for-hire studies.

• Beware Codex Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing
  One-time defenders of supplements and nutritional products, such as the National Nutritional Foods Association (NNFA) and Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), have fallen prey to new pharmaceutical members and are spreading disinformation saying that Codex is “consumer protection”. Their boards used to be run by health freedom fighters.

• VMG: Banning Our Supplements
  Codex is made up of many standards for every aspect of food. One of these standards was ratified (approved) in July 2005: the destructive Codex Alimentarius Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (VMG). The VMG can ban all high potency and clinically effective vitamins & minerals. For example, Vitamin C would be restricted to only a few milligrams per dose. Other nutrients, such as amino acids, are also under threat.

• DSHEA, Our Best Legal Defense
  The U.S. has a powerful legal tool for health freedom: the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act(DSHEA), passed in 1994 after massive grass-roots action. DSHEA scientifically classifies nutritional supplements as food and prevents dosage restrictions; Codex unscientifically classifies them as toxins and sets ultra-low doses. The VMG violates U.S. law because it violates DSHEA. We must unite to protect DSHEA, our best legal defense against Codex.

• Congressional Effort Underway to Undermine DSHEA
  The pharmaceutical industry works through irresponsible/corrupt politicians to do their bidding. The path to institute Codex in America is to “influence” Congress to pass laws friendly to drugs and unfriendly to nutritional supplements, so that slowly everyone comes to believe that nutrients are “dangerous”, and drugs are “proper medicine”. Susan Davis (D, CA) and other politicians are helping Big Pharma by supporting bills designed to destroy DSHEA.

• U.S. Government Illegally Supports Codex
  The U.S. Codex Office (the U.S. Codex “point of contact”) is unfortunately highly supportive of Codex. So is the rest of the government, including the pharmaceutical-friendly FDA. They should not be. DSHEA and other U.S. law means their support is in direct violation of the laws of the U.S.A.! They are breaking our laws and they know it.

• Let’s Enter Coordinal Relationships With Congress
  Congress has the power to keep America Codex-free. It can defeat bills designed to destroy DSHEA, support health freedom bills, and reprimand the U.S. Codex Office and the FDA. Using the Internet we can reach Congress directly to create a lobby of the people, for the people. Families of Congress would suffer too, if Codex is not averted.

• http://drrimatruthreports.com/codex-alimentarius/

• http://drrimatruthreports.com/in-depth-codex-alimentarius-information/

 

[Cognitivedissonance]

Rima E. Laibow, M.D. is a graduate of Albert Einstein College of Medicine (1970) who believes passionately in the right of Americans to choose their own health paths. She has practiced drug-free, natural medicine for 35 years by seeking the underlying cause of every illness and ailment and treating that root cause.

She believes in using nutrients and other natural options to find, define and treat the problems which underlie degenerative, chronic diseases and poor aging while supporting the immune and other crucial systems. She has enjoyed remarkable success with a wide assortment of cataclysmic problems.

Dr. Laibow is the Founding and past President of the NeuroTherapy Certification Board, which she helped establish, in order to strengthen and develop the field of NeuroBioFeedback and bring it into wide-spread use as a powerful, non-toxic tool for modern medicine.

Dr. Laibow is a renown speaker about the issues and facts concerning Codex Alimentarius, and The Globalist Genocidal Agenda.

 

[Cognitivedissonance]

… with EPA’s silent approval of Monsanto/Dow’s RNAi corn
Without much more than a whisper from the mainstream media, Monsanto’s newest Frankenfood has received full EPA approval and will be arriving on dinner plates by the end of the decade. The implications of this are harrowing, to say the least.

While you may not have made up your mind on the dangers of GMOs, you likely feel entitled to know when you’re consuming a food that is the product of laboratory research. For this reason, I am reporting on Monsanto’s latest food technology, unfortunately, already in the pipeline. And quite silently so. I write this with a certain degree of solemnity, if not also a tinge of regret, because, for three years, I have heard rumblings of Monsanto’s next project – RNA interference technology. It was actually the late Heidi Stevenson, my friend, colleague, and founder of the platform Gaia Health, who first alerted me to the dangers of RNA interference-based tinkering with our food supply when she reported on the near disastrous approval of GMO wheat using RNA interference technology in Australia. Thankfully a few brave scientists and informed public stood up and, together, averted the disaster. But since then, both the dangers and the breakneck speed of development of this technology have gone largely ignored, even among activists deep in the non-GMO movement. In order to truly appreciate the gravity of the situation, and why the EPA’s approval of RNAi corn intended for human consumption, is so concerning, it will first require a little background information on the fascinating topic of non-coding small RNAs, and their formidable relevance to our health.

How Non-Coding, Small RNAs Link Together The Entire Biosphere

One of the most important discoveries of our time is that all plants, including those we use for food and animal feed, contain a wide range of RNA molecules capable of inhibiting gene expression or translation. These non-coding RNA molecules neutralize targeted messenger RNA molecules (mRNAs), which prevents their translation into a protein, i.e. they “silence genes.”

Compelling research has surfaced suggesting that not only do these genome-regulating small RNA molecules exist in our foods, but that they are capable of surviving digestion, and being absorbed into our bodies fully intact where they alter, suppress or silence genes, post-transcriptionally. Moreover, some of these small RNAs — primarily microRNAs (miRNAs) and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) — are believed to be cross-kingdom mediators of genetic information, making it possible for RNAs in one species impacting many others through both their active and passive exposure to them.

Food therefore is essentially an epigenetic modifier of gene expression, making it a form of information, and not only a source of bodily building blocks and caloric energy, as conventionally understood. As such, any significant changes to food or feed staples within our food chain could have powerful impacts on the physiological fate of those consuming them, essentially rewriting the functionality of our genomic hardware via software like changes in RNA profiles. The entire biosphere, therefore, is held together in a web-like fashion through these molecular RNA messengers, lending a plausible mechanism to the biotic aspect of Lovelock and Margulis’ Gaia theory of Earth as a self-regulating, meta-organism. You can learn more by reading my article Genetic Dark Matter, Return of the Goddess, and the Post-Science Era.

Monsanto and Co Capitalizing on RNA interference Technology

While this discovery will have profound implications for the field of nutrition and medicine, it has also created enormous interest among biotech and agricultural firms, namely, Monsanto and Dow, looking to capitalize on the design of proprietary products using interference (RNAi) technology. In mid June, last month Monsanto received EPA approval for a type of corn genetically altered to produce an RNA-based pesticidal agent (aka, a plant-incorporated protectant (PIP)) which lethally targets a metabolic pathway within the corn rootworm, known within the industry as the “billion dollar bug.” Branded as Smartstax PRO, the newly minted GMO plant produces a small, double-stranded RNA known as DvSnf7 dsRNA which disrupts a critical gene within the rootworm, causing its death. This was added on top of four other “stacked” GMO traits, such as the ability to produce two other pesticidal proteins (Cry1A.105 and Cry2Ab2), as well as survive exposure to both glyphosate (aka Monsanto’s Roundup 2) and Glufosinate (aka Dow’s Libertylink), highly toxic herbicides. Roundup, for instance, has demonstrated carcinogenicity in the parts per trillion range. Yet, the EPA considers it perfectly safe for consumers to ingest many orders of magnitude higher concentrations than that, proving its function as a cheerleader and not a regulator of the industry that controls our food supply.

The Atlantic, one of the only mainstream news outlets to report on the topic, pointed out how surprisingly low key the approval process was:

“The EPA’s decision attracted little attention from the press or even from environmental groups that reliably come out against new genetically modified crops.”

Bill Freese, The Center for Food Safety’s science policy analyst, told the Atlantic he was caught off guard by EPA’s decision to only allow 15 days of public comment, and the fact that it did not post its decision to the Federal Register, as it customary, especially considering how unprecedented the use of a RNAi insecticide in a plant intended for human consumption is. Monsanto anticipates the new corn will be on the market by the end of the decade.

One would imagine that such revolutionary technology would require short and long-term (decades) of safety testing before licensure. Instead, as is often the case with big-ticket market agendas, the product is being rushed to market. There are already significant biases in place within the EPA and USDA in regard to nucleic acids – assumptions that exempt them from cautionary considerations. RNA is considered Generally Accepted As Safe (GRAS), but this is because it is defined and perceived only as a physical substance rather than as the powerful signaling/informational molecule it is. The EPA’s approval of RNAi food crops ignores the fact that it takes a multi-generational timescale to understand the influence of epigenetic modifiers on the genome of a species, much less the human species, whose timescale is orders of magnitude beyond animal models used to establish much of the risk/benefit data used in pre-approval evaluations. RNAi interference technology promises specificity — one RNAi molecule change equals one gene suppressed — but ignores the virtually infinite possibility of unintended, adverse effects in what are incomprehensibly complex biological systems. Indeed, researchers have warned that RNAi can not only profoundly affect gene expression, but that the changes it induces can permanently alter a species through inherited traits 1:

“Once a silencing effect is initiated, the effect may be inherited. The biochemistry of this process varies depending on the organism and remains an area of active research with many unknown aspects. Nevertheless, it is known for example that human cells can maintain the modifications necessary for TGS, creating actual or potential epigenetic inheritance within tissues and organisms (Hawkins et al., 2009). In some cases the dsRNA pathways induce RNA-dependent DNA methylation and chromatin changes (TGS) that persist through reproduction or cell division, and in other cases the cytoplasmic pathways remain active in descendents (Cogoni and Macino, 2000).”

GM Technology and Unintended Consequences

Indeed, critics of RNA interference technology make the point that RNAi technology aims to target the production of a specific protein by identifying the sequence in question. But two or more genes can have sequence homologies. This means, as applies to the use of RNA interference in medicine, a gene that is targeted to turn off a “disease-causing gene” could have a number of off-target effects, one of which would be turning off a gene that is essential to health and vitality.

This is, in fact, what happened October of last year, when Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, a leading developer of RNAi drugs, announced it had decided to discontinue revusiran, its lead drug candidate, after an excess of deaths occurred in the experimental drug group versus placebo. This sent shockwaves throughout the overly exuberant RNAi drug industry, reducing their stock 6% on average.

Criticisms of RNAi in the agricultural sector are long-standing among the highly informed. For instance, Jonathan Latham, Ph.D. and Allison Wilson, Ph.D., wrote a seminal paper on the topic over a decade ago titled “Off-target effects of plant transgenic RNAi: three mechanisms lead to distinct toxicological and environmental hazards,” wherein 3 of the primary safety concerns are addressed: 1) Off target effects leading to non-specific down-regulation of plant RNAs 2) Off target effects affecting non-target invertebrates feeding on plant material 3) potential effects on mammals. In mammals, long (>30 bp) perfectly duplexed RNAs (such as are typically produced by plant RNAi transgenes) are Pathogen Associated Molecular Patterns (PAMPS) and are consequently highly potent triggers of innate anti-viral defences. The effects of long dsRNAs on mammalian cellular functions are typically profound and extend to complete inhibition of protein translation and cell death. Nevertheless, the implications of such molecules in the mammalian diet have hardly been tested.

That’s quite a serious list of concerns. As you can see, concern #3 includes the possibility that these dsRNAs may lead to protein translation and cell death. Clearly if the EPA has declared Monsanto and Dow’s new RNAi corn safe for human consumption, they would need to prove this a non-issue.

Monsanto Falling On Their Own ‘Peer-Reviewed’ Sword

Surprisingly, Monsanto itself has produced one of the most damning papers on the topic yet. Several years ago I stumbled upon a study funded by Monsanto that raised a number of red flags for me. Titled, “Endogenous small RNAs in grain: Semi-quantification and sequence homology to human and animal genes,” researchers employed by Monsanto in their St. Louis, MO, laboratory analyzed the presence of endogenous small RNAs in common food and feed staples — soybeans, corn, rice — discovering that hundreds of these plant RNAs had a perfect 100% complementary match to human genes as well as other mammals.

Why is this significant? Endogenous small RNAs, such as small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) and microRNAs (miRNAs), are effector molecules of RNA interference (RNAi), which is a gene suppression mechanism found in plants, mammals, and other eukaryotes. The implication, therefore, of Monsanto’s finding is that plant RNAs — were they capable of surviving digestion and accumulating in target tissues to physiologically relevant concentrations — are capable of epigenetically silencing hundreds of genes within the human body. Below you will find a list of the RNA/gene matches between rice and the human genome:

Despite the abundance of perfect 100% complementarity matches listed above, Monsanto’s conclusion was a conveniently pollyannish dismissal of the safety implications of these findings, stating that:

“The abundance of endogenous small RNA molecules in grain from safely consumed food and feed crops such as soybean, corn, and rice and the homology of a number of these dietary small RNAs to human and animal genomes and transcriptomes establishes a history of safe consumption for dietary small RNAs.”

http://www.opensourcetruth.com/the-gmo-agenda-takes-a-menacing-leap-forward/