Monsanto, Roundup Ready and Bill gates

Occupy plans to shut down Monsato

http://occupy-monsanto.com/genetic-crimes-unit/

http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/51-2012/14194-occupy-plans-to-qshut-downq-monsanto




One of the most important legacies of the Occupy movement has been the sustained, focused campaigns that have emerged from the broad, diffuse protests that captured the world’s attention last fall. Occupy the SEC has kept up the pressure for the Volcker Rule, while Occupy Colleges is determined to end the student debt crisis.

Another powerful example is the expanding network known as Occupy Monsanto, which has emerged over the past eight months staging numerous protests at companies connected to the global trade of genetically engineered foods, known as GMOs.

(GMO foods are organisms which have had specific changes introduced to their DNA using genetic engineering techniques. The plants produced by Monsanto’s seeds are designed to be treated with toxic herbicides and pesticides, chemicals which have been suspected to increase allergies and have been linked to decreased fertility, asthma, organ failure and even, possibly, cancer. The jury is still out, but Occupy Monsanto sensibly argues that vegetables are fine the way nature intended them, and that Monsanto is devoting far more research to the financial metrics of GMOs than to the health implications.)

Trying to sustain its focus, Occupy Monsanto recently announced that it will organize a full week of protests in St. Louis, home of the Monsanto Corporation, on the anniversary of OWS, September 17, 2012. The protests, based on the idea that Monsanto’s push to control agriculture poses a great threat not only to consumers in the United States but to farmers and communities throughout Latin America, Africa, and Asia, will call on US legislators to mandate the labeling of GMO food, so consumers can decide whether to ingest these products or not.

Occupy Monsanto aims to aggressively confront and expose the industrial agriculture system head-on. “There is something wrong when a chemical manufacturer, the same company who made Agent Orange, controls the US food supply,” said activist Jaye Crawford.

The Corporate Takeover of Science and the Destruction of Freedom
By Colin Todhunter
Global Research, September 17, 2012

When rich companies with politically-connected lobbyists fund their own research and distort outcomes for their own ends, we are in serious trouble. Due to the corporate takeover of science, our choices, rights and freedoms are currently in the process of being destroyed.

In a genuine ‘age of reason,’ science would assist in providing clear answers to issues, and the public would be able to engage in open, honest debate over the rights and wrongs of policies. Instead, corporate interests have used their junk science, lobbyists, presence within the heart of governments and PR machines to muddy the waters and sometimes engage in fear-mongering so that public debate has too often become distorted and campaigns of deliberate misinformation have become commonplace.

‘Scientific’ debate is now often played out in full public glare and acrimony has become the norm, particularly when someone’s huge profits are threatened. Corporate greed leads to debate being stifled whereby scientists and various groups who do not support particular corporate stances are made to look like they are the ones who are pushing dogma based on self-interest and not the other war around.

No wonder, therefore, that the public is sometimes left feeling confused. Even when the weight of credible scientific evidence is overwhelming, powerful companies and interest groups are highly skilled in creating ambiguity and controversy through their spin machines. Think back to how the tobacco companies set out to fool the public for decades. Of course, having access to huge funds helps.

ExxonMobil gave $2.9m to US groups that were set up to misinform the public about climate change, and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) reportedly offered scientists money to publish articles critical of the International Panel on Climate Change’s 2007 climate change study. The AEI had received more than $1.6m from Exxon. A couple of years ago, the American Petroleum Institute, which includes ExxonMobil, Shell and BP, had encouraged its members to send employees to rallies against a climate change Bill that required large utilities to use greater renewable energy sources.

Whatever the merits concerning the evidence about climate change, the aim of such campaigns is to deceive the public by giving the impression of serious doubt coupled with popular dissent over proposed policies. Money talks. The public listens.

Another well-worn tactic used to sway public opinion involves big companies trying to whip up the belief there is some kind of conspiracy or unscrupulous group that is working against them and, by implication, the population in general. For instance, those who say that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) pose a danger to health or the environment, are dismissed as having an ideological axe to grind against those corporations that want to rake in massive profits.

‘Experts’ from well-funded corporate backed think-tanks are often wheeled onto our screens to put forward points of view based on methodologically unsound junk science. Science has become a football to be kicked around and a victim of corporations that have scant regard for the public interest.

If corporate ideology fails, however, it’s always nice to know that there is good old fashioned bullying to rely on. For example, a WikiLeaks cable highlighted how GMOs were being forced into European nations by the US ambassador to France who plotted with other US officials to create a ‘retaliatory target list’ of anyone who tried to regulate GMOs.

Food, crops and cancer

The corporate takeover of science has led to many terrible but highly profitable practices. The issue goes far beyond the advertising industry referring to dodgy science to con the public into buying an anti-aging cream, a fat reducing food supplement or a wonder-beauty product. Think of US-based agribusiness concerns, their aim to control the food supply and the 250,000 plus suicides by indebted Indian farmers who were duped or coerced to buy expensive seeds year after year from one centralised corporate entity.

Backed up by their selective scientific findings, dodgy research, political contacts and spin machines, powerful corporations have placed at their mercy farmers who are no longer able to grow their own crops and harvest their own seeds. Convincing farmers to ditch centuries’ old tried and tested methods of crop production might be good for the profit and loss margins on a spreadsheet, but accounts for little when it results in death or fear of the future.

read on:http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-corporate-takeover-of-science-and-the-destruction-of-freedom/


Love Always
mudra

11 YRS OLD EXPOSES MONSANTO AND TELLS MONSANTO WHERE THEY CAN SHOVE IT .. BRAVE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nndEZBQ9bds


Love Always
mudra

mudra wrote:11 YRS OLD EXPOSES MONSANTO AND TELLS MONSANTO WHERE THEY CAN SHOVE IT .. BRAVE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nndEZBQ9bds


Love Always
mudra

The way forward.

The Evil of Monsanto.

Thanks Mitt.

In the light of the article I posted above regarding politically-connected lobbyists funding their own research and distorting outcomes for their own ends

No one is going to make me believe that unaltered food as produced directly from Mother Earth is hardly different than the conventional pesticied fed and biologically altered food the industrial era is producing today.
I know the difference from having experienced it myself.
But what about those that don't know much about this and would take these so called " Scientific " studies for granted.The biases that are taken here need to be brought to awareness.

Organic Vs Conventional: Bogus Study Says 'No Difference'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BuOyuEJ4RA


Love Always
mudra

Mystery of the disappearing bees: Solved!

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/04/09/mystery-of-the-disappearing-bees-solved/

Until recently, the evidence was inconclusive on the cause of the mysterious “colony collapse disorder” (CCD) that threatens the future of beekeeping worldwide. But three new studies point an accusing finger at a culprit that many have suspected all along, a class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids.

In the U.S. alone, these pesticides, produced primarily by the German chemical giant Bayer and known as “neonics” for short, coat a massive 142 million acres of corn, wheat, soy and cotton seeds. They are also a common ingredient in home gardening products.

Research published last month in the prestigious journal Science shows that neonics are absorbed by the plants’ vascular system and contaminate the pollen and nectar that bees encounter on their rounds. They are a nerve poison that disorient their insect victims and appear to damage the homing ability of bees, which may help to account for their mysterious failure to make it back to the hive.

Another study published in the American Chemical Society’s Environmental Science and Technology journal implicated neonic-containing dust released into the air at planting time with “lethal effects compatible with colony losses phenomena observed by beekeepers.”

Purdue University entomologists observed bees at infected hives exhibiting tremors, uncoordinated movement and convulsions, all signs of acute insecticide poisoning. And yet another study conducted by scientists at the Harvard School of Public Health actually re-created colony collapse disorder in several honeybee hives simply by administering small doses of a popular neonic, imidacloprid.

But scientists believe that exposure to toxic pesticides is only one factor that has led to the decline of honey bees in recent years. The destruction and fragmentation of bee habitats, as a result of land development and the spread of monoculture agriculture, deprives pollinators of their diverse natural food supply. This has already led to the extinction of a number of wild bee species. The planting of genetically modified organism (GMO) crops – some of which now contain toxic insecticides within their genetic structure – may also be responsible for poisoning bees and weakening their immune systems.

Genetic Roulette


http://geneticroulettemovie.com/

Study linking GM maize to cancer is attacked

http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/51-2012/14245-study-linking-gm-maize-to-cancer-must-be-taken-seriously-by-regulators

Study linking GM maize to cancer must be taken seriously by regulators
John Vidal
The Guardian, 28 September 2012
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/28/study-gm-maize-cancer

*Trial suggesting a GM maize strain causes cancer has attracted a torrent of abuse, but it cannot be swept under the carpet

Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini, professor of molecular biology at Caen university in France, knows how to inflame the GM industry and its friends. For seven years he and his team have questioned the safety standards applied to varieties of GM maize and tried to re-analyse industry-funded studies presented to governments.

The GM industry has traditionally reacted furiously and personally. Séralini has been widely insulted and smeared and last year, in some desperation, he sued Marc Fellous, president of the French Association of Plant Biotechnology, for defamation, and won (although he was only awarded a nominal €1 in damages).

But last week, Seralini brought the whole scientific and corporate establishment crashing down on his head. In a peer-reviewed US journal, Food and Chemical Toxicology, he reported the results of a €3.2m study. Fed a diet of Monsanto's Roundup-tolerant GM maize NK603 for two years, or exposed to Roundup over the same period, rats developed higher levels of cancers and died earlier than controls. Séralini suggested that the results could be explained by the endocrine-disrupting effects of Roundup, and overexpression of the transgene in the GMO.

This was scientific dynamite. It was the first time that maize containing these specific genes had been tested on rats over two years - nearly their full lifespan - as opposed to the 90-day trials demanded by regulators. Around a dozen long-term studies of different GM crops have failed to find similar effects. Séralini's study also looked at the toxicity of the Roundup herbicide when fed directly to rats.

If the study stood up, then the consistent arguments of the industry that its GM maize is safe might be fatally undermined, with immense political, financial and social consequences.

But barely had the paper surfaced than it was attracting heavyweight academic criticism.

Commentators variously claimed the study to be "biased", "poorly performed", "bogus", "fraudulent", "sub-standard", "sloppy agenda-based science", "inadequate", and "unsatisfactory". Séralini was said to have "sought harm" for the rats, the experiment was dismissed as "inhumane" and the research group was called "partisan". France was outed as "the most anti-science country in anti-science Europe" and vociferous GM supporters such as Mark Lynas urged people to sign a petition demanding full disclosure of the data (only a few hundred have).

Meanwhile, GM opponents were said to be the "climate skeptics of the left", Séralini and his scientists were labelled "crafty activists" and "anti-science" and the group that funded the study was accused of "polluting science communication" by asking for an embargo on the paper.

Séralini and the other authors of the study responded that they were surprised at the "violence" of their critics.

But it was a triumph for the scientific and corporate establishment which has used similar tactics to crush other scientists like Arpad Pusztai of the Rowett Institute in Scotland, who was sacked after his research suggested GM potatoes damaged the stomach lining and immune system of rats, and David Quist and Ignacio Chapela, who studied the flow of genes from illegally planted GM maize to Mexican wild maize. But now that the dust is settling, let's look at some of the criticisms and Seralini's responses.

Genetic Roulette (FULL Movie)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VTtX6MnEiI


Love Always
mudra

I called Monsanto, You Won't Believe It
One day I wanted to know if it was safe to use Round Up around my home, pets and family, so my girlfriend Stardust decided to call Monsanto direct, You will not believe you she heard. We recorded it for all of you out there.
SOURCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxBHYU1DMUI

Nicely done. Well done that person.

The Campaign To Label GMO's In Ontario

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHoMJERYczo


Love Always
mudra

How To Avoid GMOs 101 : Resources for You

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-BEtd5oSrA



Proposition 37 is still on the table and there is still lots of anti-prop propaganda going on but there are also a lot of resources available to those of us who want to avoid GMOs.

Here are some of them and I also have a list on my blog. I hope this helps. Say NO to GMOs!

Proposition 37 in the (corporate-owned) news
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/10/08/4893227/no-on-prop-37-in-case-you-missed.html

PLU codes:
http://www.snopes.com/food/prepare/produce.asp

The Non-GMO Project:
http://www.nongmoproject.org/

Label It Yourself facebook group:
https://www.facebook.com/LabelitYourself

Love Always
mudra

mudra wrote:The Campaign To Label GMO's In Ontario

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHoMJERYczo


Love Always
mudra

Interesting video from Mr Dicks and friends.

The forthcoming vote vote in Calafornia looks likley to be in favour of mandatory labelling of GMO's

Indications are that Proposition 37, Mandatory Labeling of Genetically Engineered Food, is on track to be approved by the voters of California this November. The initiative currently holds a large lead in a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll. From the LA Times:

With less than six weeks until election day, Proposition 37 is supported by 61% of registered voters and opposed by 25%, according to a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll. An additional 14% were undecided or refused to answer.

The poll showed broad support among voter groups, but the interviews took place before Tuesday’s start of a major television advertising blitz by opponents aimed at changing voters’ minds on the issue.

So far, the opposition campaign has raised more than $32.5 million, collected mostly from businesses affected by the measure.

The negative ad blitz could reduce support, but it currently holds such a large lead that it will be an uphill battle for the opposition to defeat it in what little time remains. While there are technically 40 days until the election, roughly half of voters in the state will have cast there ballot well before November 6th. This should be a real test if big corporate campaign spending can really move opinions on an issue.

This initiative is one of the few statewide ballot measures this November that could have national ramifications. If this initiative is approved, it may not be financially viable for companies to produce both national and California-specific packaging. It could indirectly force many food companies to label the presence of GM ingredients across the country. At the very least, if this initiative wins it could encourage other states to follow suit.

http://elections.firedoglake.com/2012/09/27/gm-food-labeling-likely-to-be-approved-in-california/


The guy being interviewed in this video also talks about the recent case of Whole Foods selling non labelled GMOs. A video was made exposing this but has been put up on the natural news website for all to enjoy..

http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=484FC93C887B206A895A116C0A3469E3

http://www.collapsenet.com/free-resources/collapsenet-public-access/news-alerts/item/9162-youtube-censors-video-exposing-whole-foods-on-gmos-video


Thanks for the updates Mudras.
Hopefully soon, all Americans will have the chance to to vote for mandatory labeling of GMO food tightening the noose around Monsanto's ugly neck.

just wondering if it applies to meat too, or it is too fascistic to control others what to eat.
just wondering, just wondering.
wondering devakas

:)

EU sides with Monsanto in 'GMO Cancer Corn' word war

Published: 05 October, 2012

The European Food Safety Authority has rejected a controversial study by French scientists linking GM corn to cancer. Many in Europe are already calling for stricter controls on GMOs, as farmers weigh the lucrative crops against health concerns.

In September, French scientists from the University of Caen released a study claiming that rats fed on a diet containing NK603 – a corn seed variety made tolerant to amounts of Monsanto's Roundup weed-killer – or given water mixed with the product at levels permitted in the United States died earlier than those on a standard diet.

The study elicited calls for stricter controls on already unpopular genetically modified (GM) crops in Europe. France had already issued a temporary ban on another Monsanto corn seed (MON810) in May due to a similar study.

However, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) claimed the study lacked enough specific information on Friday, and asked the scientists who conducted it to provide more details on their testing methods. The move adds to the constant back and forth in the debate over genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

The "design, reporting and analysis of the study … are inadequate," the EFSA said in its review, concluding that it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound."

The EFSA took issue with the type of rat used in the study, specifically the albino Sprague-Dawley strain of rat. Sprague-Dawley rats have a tendency to develop cancers naturally over the course of their two-year life span, which was also the duration of the study.
"This means the observed frequency of tumors is influenced by the natural incidence of tumors typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors," the EFSA said.

Gilles-Eric Seralini, the French researcher who conducted the study with his colleagues and published the results in the journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology in London was incredulous at the EFSA’s decision, and stated that he would not release any more information to the EFSA unless it provided justification for its conclusion.

"It is absolutely scandalous that [the EFSA] keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation [of NK603],” he said.
"In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini said in an AFP report.

....

Director of corporate communications for Monsanto, Phil Angell, summed up his company’s take on the issue in a report by food author Michael Pollan for New York Times Magazine in 1998: "Monsanto should not have to vouch for the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA's job."

read on: http://rt.com/news/corn-study-gm-french-711

Love Always
mudra

Combatting Monsanto
Grassroots resistance to the corporate power of agribusiness in the era of the ‘green economy’ and a changing climate

Love Always
mudra

Excellent site for updates regarding GMO in Europe imo. See link below.



GMO-free Regions by Country



http://www.gmo-free-regions.org/gmo-free-regions.html

Love Always
mudra

The Biosafety Scanner software is a useful evaluation tool for the management and control of GMOs in crop production, with particular reference to international commerce.

http://en.biosafetyscanner.org/index.php

There are also updated News at the bottom of the page.

Use it and share it . It's free



Love Always
mudra

Feds help GMO salmon swim upstream
By Clare Leschin-Hoar


AquaBounty Technology’s genetically modified salmon just got a hefty financial boost from the USDA: On Monday, the agency awarded the Massachusetts-based company $494,000 to study technologies that would render the genetically tweaked fish sterile. This would reduce the likelihood they could reproduce with wild salmon, should any escape into the wild — a scenario that has many environmentalists concerned.

The Atlantic salmon, which is branded with the name AquAdvantage, has been genetically altered with a growth-hormone gene from a Chinook salmon and a “genetic on-switch” gene from an ocean pout that will allow the fish to grow all year round, reaching market size much faster than traditional salmon.

In mid-2010, AquaBounty’s salmon appeared to be on the fast-track for approval by the FDA, which would have made it the first genetically modified animal approved for human consumption. But the process has since been stalled. Lawmakers in states like California and Alaska have been actively introducing legislation that requires the fish to be labeled as a GMO product or to prohibit its production entirely. Then, this June, the House of Representatives voted to prohibit the FDA from using funds for approval of the salmon.

The same bill the House voted on (an Agriculture Appropriations amendment) is currently stalled in the Senate. Now the USDA grant is raising eyebrows. Upon FDA approval, the company would sell salmon eggs to aquaculture operations looking to farm the fish.

AquaBounty points out that FDA approval requires that eggs only be sold to contained inland facilities that are approved and subject to subsequent inspection by the agency, and says there is no danger of escape. But industry watchers, like Ocean Conservancy’s aquaculture program director George Leonard are concerned nonetheless.

“They have done no quantitative risk and failure analysis,” says Leonard. “It is true that net pens aren’t in the immediate future, but clearly there will be pressure to farm them there. There is an entire industry infrastructure that could accommodate these fish. If eggs are sold to other countries, which must certainly be part of the business plan, there is no guarantee that they will follow the same guidelines as the FDA.”

In fact, the fish are already being shipped to Panama and Canada’s Prince Edward Island for grow out.

read on: http://grist.org/food/2011-09-29-feds-help-gmo-salmon-swim-upstream/

Love Always
mudra

Patent for a pig

As a powerful corporate giant attempts to patent living genetic material, this film asks what the consequences are for mankind. (Time 42:46)
A film about Monsanto’s patents on life and the devastating effects of Bt corn on pigs’ fertility.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX9V5OJPEAA


Love Always
mudra

THE GENETICALLY ENGINEERED SALMON THAT COULD SOON RUN WILD

AquaBounty salmon, the unreported disaster at a Panama grow-out facility, and the Georgian libertarian who took control of the fish farm and may soon move it outside the watch of the Food & Drug Administration. Meet what could soon be the first GE animal allowed for human consumption.

n August 2008, heavy rain fell in western Panama, damaging a fish farm by a trout stream that flows out of Parque Nacional Volcan Baru. The fish inside were Atlantic salmon genetically engineered to grow faster than typical farmed salmon—twice as fast, according to its producer AquaBounty Technologies.

The fish, called AquAdvantage salmon, were created at a facility on Canada's Prince Edward Island when milt from GE males fertilized eggs of non-GE Atlantic Salmon. The fertilized eggs were transferred to the Panama grow-out center near the headwaters of the Rio Caldera, about 60 miles from the Pacific. AquaBounty intends to sell these eggs to other fish farms.

Although the AquAdvantage salmon is produced in Canada and grown elsewhere, the operation is under Food & Drug Administration (FDA) regulation because the United States is the intended market. If approved, the AquAdvantage salmon would be the first GE animal allowed for human consumption. This has made the fish’s approval process especially contentious, and caused it to drag on since 1996, when the application was first filed.

In 2008, the company was raising its first commercial-sized batch of fish even though it had yet to receive permission to sell them. AquaBounty believed FDA approval was imminent, and planned to use these fish for test-marketing and PR work when they reached full size. That plan was derailed by “an unusually severe storm” in Panama, as AquaBounty revealed in an August 15, 2008, memo to investors recently uncovered by the consumer protection group Food & Water Watch.

According to the letter, damage from this storm caused the water inlet system to fail during the night: “[A]ll of these fish were lost. It was intended that the fish, subject to regulatory approval, would be marketed during the first half of 2009.”

Nearly four years later, that approval has not come, and the FDA has yet to publicly acknowledge the incident. Representatives of the agency have told me that they can’t answer any questions regarding the application because it’s still pending.

read on: http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/science/Genetically-Engineered-Salmon-Running-Wild.html?page=all

Love Always
mudra

Something fishy - the facts about GM animals

read also here: http://www.foeeurope.org/pave-way-gm-animals-040712

Love Always
mudra