GMO
 Dying Animals , Monsanto Super Weeds , Drug-Resistant Malaria , Deadly Flooding
Dirty Tactics and Lies from the No on 37 Campaign Story at-a-glance The processed food and chemical companies (see list) have paid over $40 million to hide the science experiment that is genetically engineered foods. In mailers and online ads, they've bombarded voters with lies to shut down the American's right to know what they’re eating An aggressive attack on Dr. Joseph Mercola was sent to millions of California voters Current polls show that the Yes On 37 campaign still narrowly leads in the polls 44 percent to 42 percent. But the chemical companies that dominate our food industry are buying votes by spreading lies costing tens of millions of dollars If you live in California, vote YES for labeling them like over 50 other countries around the world, including Russia and China, have already done. If you know anyone who lives there, please urge them to cast their vote in support of labeling
1. Speak out publicly in favor of the pending GMO Labeling Ballot Initiative (I-522) in Washington State in 2013, as well as the pending GMO labeling bills coming up in Vermont and other states. 2. Contribute as much or more money to the Yes on I-522 Campaign in Washington than their parent corporations spent to defeat Prop 37 in California. Prop 37 was narrowly defeated, by dirty money and dirty tricks. But it spawned a huge, national consumer movement that is fired up and more determined than ever to fight this battle until we win the right to know if our food has been genetically modified. We're already collecting signatures in Washington State, talking to legislators in Vermont and Connecticut. A 30-state coalition is formulating a plan to collaborate on GMO-labeling laws and initiatives. You are a part of this movement, and today we're calling on you, on the millions of consumers who were outraged by the NO on 37's dirty campaign, to send a clear message to the traitor brands who helped kill Prop 37, in the only language they understand: lost profits and lower sales. I refuse to purchase any of my favorite brands owned by parent companies that contributed to the $46 million that helped defeat Prop 37, the California Right to Know GMO Labeling initiative If any of these brands want to regain my trust and get off the nationwide boycott list, they will have to do two things: (1) Speak out publicly in favor of state efforts to label genetically engineered food. (2) Contribute as much money to Label-It Washington's Initiative 522 campaign as their brand's parent corporation donated to the No on 37 campaign in California. I will also call these brands' customer hotlines, and post messages to their facebook pages, demanding that they support my right to know, or lose me permanently as a customer. These companies make billions of dollars selling organic and "natural" brands, yet they spent millions to defeat Prop 37. Here's a list of the 10 companies I am boycotting, and their organic and "natural" brands.
Will
Those Sneaky GMO Amendments Pass Because of an Underhanded
Maneuver? As we reported a few weeks ago, these amendments represent a sneaky, behind-closed-doors attempt to make GMO foods immune from court review. Now we have learned of an even sneakier, even more questionable legislative maneuver that might get them passed. The usual procedure for passing bills in Congress is for the House to pass its version and the Senate to pass its version. The two bills are reconciled by a joint conference committee, and then both chambers pass the final bill. The Senate has already passed its version of the Farm Bill, the comprehensive omnibus bill that is the primary agricultural and food policy tool of the federal government for the next four or five years. The House version, which includes the sneaky pro-GMO amendments, has run into trouble. We have learned that the House Rules Committee has scheduled a hearing today (Tuesday, July 31) on a one-year extension of the 2008 Farm Bill—a Continuing Resolution, or CR. If passed in the House (it will very likely fail in the Senate), this will trigger a conference committee. But here’s the dirty trick: the conference committee won’t be reconciling the Senate bill with the House’s CR. Instead, it will reconcile the Senate bill that passed, with the House bill (including the bad amendments) that was never brought before the full House, much less passed by the House! If this illegitimate procedure is followed, the terrible GMO amendments could get into the final bill. Once this bill is final, it will be too late to strip out the amendments. The bill will pass. There are a few pieces of legislation that are considered “must pass,” usually appropriations bills. Riders are often tacked onto these often unrelated bills in the hopes they’ll be approved without any fuss, since the main bill is essentially assured to pass. This year, the powerful (and exceedingly well-funded) biotechnology industry inserted three pro-GMO amendments—two into the Farm Bill, and one into the Agriculture Appropriations Bill. These riders are wide-ranging and could change the face of the federal regulatory framework for genetically modified organisms. Only a large and powerful grassroots effort can compete against these riders. This is the first time the GMO industry has ever asked Congress for everything it wanted. (We like to joke that they came just shy of asking for a magical unicorn!) The good news is that they showed their hand, so we now know exactly what they want and our allies in Congress know exactly what to watch out for. The aforementioned Farm Bill riders would outlaw any EPA review of a genetically engineered crop under the Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act. This terrible legislation would ensure that no agency other than the USDA (which is decidedly pro-GMOs) will be allowed to provide analysis of the impacts of GMO crops. Further, the riders also establish extremely short deadlines for approval of GMOs. If the crops are not reviewed and approved within the extremely short timeline, they would default to immediate approval and commercialization. Here’s where we stand now:
Don’t let these riders sneak in through the back door without being debated and passed by the House! Please contact your representatives immediately and voice your objection to this rider. Take Action Now! In addition, a third rider—the one attached to the Agricultural Appropriations bill—would, as we noted earlier this month, strip federal courts of the authority to halt the planting of genetically engineered crops while the USDA is still assessing their environmental hazards. If this language stands, it will completely undermine the judicial review process, and will encourage the unchecked deregulation of GE crops despite terrible environmental and health effects. Here’s where we stand now:
Urgent action is still
needed—it’s possible they’ll consider the
appropriations bill this week before they recess, so please
send your messages today! However, after our meetings on
Capitol Hill it appears that the Agriculture Appropriations
bill will likely be dropped into a new omnibus spending bill
to be considered after the recess, in which case it is
unlikely the GMO rider language will be included. Unlikely,
but not impossible—so please contact your congressional
representative right away. Move over frankenfish, frankensoy, frankencorn, frankentomatoes and frankencotton. The Frankenapple – or Arctic Apple – is genetically modified to never brown, but the side effects are unknown. Meet frankenapple, a new genetically modified “food”. This genetically modified apple contains a synthetic gene that prevents it from browning or bruising. Even after you bite it or slice it. The Canadian manufacturer behind it claims it gets rid of the “yuck” factor (their words, not mine) associated with the browning of apples. And they hope it will keep you from throwing it away before it goes bad because it will still look pleasing to the eye. But the manufacturers are missing something important here. Apples – real apples – brown for a reason. They contain an enzyme called polyphenol oxidase, that causes them to brown once they’re exposed to oxygen and is a sign that the apple is starting to spoil. But if your apple didn’t brown, you’d have no way of knowing when it’s starting to rot. Are these manufacturers really in the business of having us eat a rotten apple just to make a buck? Tinkering with Mother Nature also has other consequences: Toxicity. Arctic Apple insists they only changed one part of the apple’s DNA. But that doesn’t mean other things weren’t compromised in the process. A former Monsanto employee working on GMO (GMO stands for Genetically Modified Organism) cotton discovered other proteins – besides the ones they wanted altered – had been changed in the DNA of cotton. And these new proteins could be toxic to human and animals. It was such a dangerous risk; he insisted livestock stop eating it immediately. We don’t know the long-term effects. There have been absolutely no long-term studies conducted on the Arctic Apple, or any GMO food for that matter. But what we do know from some of the short-term studies conducted is that GMOs have been linked to a variety of different ailments like: infertility, miscarriages, high infant mortality rates, birth defects, kidney disease and severe allergic reactions. Contaminating the real crops. Farmers – especially organic farmers – are concerned that the seeds and genes from the new apples will spread to their untainted crops. Even though pollen may not drift too far in the air… it’s carried by bees to pollinate the crops. Once the altered DNA is there, there’s no way to stop or control the contamination and finding a totally natural apple could be a thing of the past. Nature is designed to give us the nutrients we need to live and prosper in health, but with this dabbling, there’s no way to know. That’s why it's important for you to be armed with the information you need to avoid them. The following is a 3-step plan to help you keep eating real food instead of some science experiment. It consists of easy-to-follow ways to know what you and your family are eating and how you can help keep these “frankenfoods” from ending up on your dinner table. 1. Stay away from processed foods when possible. A good rule of thumb is to shop the perimeters of the store. Chances are if it’s in a box, a bag, or can, it likely contains some form of a GMO. For more ways to avoid
these “frankenfoods,” you can pick up a copy of a
special report "How The Feds Set Frankenstein Free On The
Farm: Terrorizing Farmers, Making Us Sick" by
clicking
here
Radioactive
Fertilizer—The Surprising Primary Cause of Lung Cancer
in Smokers It’s well-recognized that smoking cigarettes can cause lung cancer, but it may come as a surprise to find out that the most likely culprit is not a chemical additive, but a radioactive element found in phosphate fertilizers Research suggests that polonium-210, a radioactive element that is also chemically toxic, causes the most lung damage. Polonium is the only component of cigarette smoke shown to produce cancer in laboratory animals According to previous research, smoking 1 1/2 packs of cigarettes per day can expose your bronchial epithelium to a radiation dose equivalent to a radiation dose to your skin from 300 chest x-rays per year According to a recent study, American meat products and dairy may expose your organs to radiation doses that are equivalent to the dose received by smokers via cigarette smoke By Dr. Mercola It’s well-recognized that smoking cigarettes can cause lung cancer. What isn’t clear is exactly what it is in the cigarette or its smoke that causes it. Interestingly, while it may seem obvious that added chemicals would be prime culprits, research suggests it may be something else entirely. This “something else” in turn could also have potential ramifications for our food supply, and might be an indicator of potential carcinogenicity in genetically engineered foods as well as tobacco, although there’s no evidence of such a link as of yet. The factor I’m talking about is polonium-210—a highly radioactive element1 that releases alpha particles as it decays. It’s also chemically toxic.2 While alpha particles cannot penetrate deeply into your body, they can cause serious damage to cells they do come into contact with. While naturally present in small amounts in the environment, one of the primary sources of exposure is via calcium phosphate fertilizers, used on tobacco fields and food crops respectively. The Hidden Threat of Radioactive Fertilizer Contamination Research suggests that it’s the radiation from these fertilizers that appear to cause the most lung damage, and are the primary cause of cancer in smokers.3, 4, 5 In fact, polonium is the only component of cigarette smoke shown to produce cancer in laboratory animals.6 As noted in a 2009 study:7 “In a person smoking 1 1/2 packs of cigarettes per day, the radiation dose to the bronchial epithelium in areas of bifurcation is 8000 mrem per year -- the equivalent of the dose to the skin from 300 x-ray films of the chest per year.” According to a 2011 report published in the journal Nicotine and Tobacco Research,8 secret internal documents obtained from the major tobacco industries in 1998 reveal that the industry was well aware of the presence of this radioactive element in cigarettes as early as 1959. “Acid wash was discovered in 1980 to be highly effectively in removing polonium-210 from the tobacco leaves; however, the industry avoided its use for concerns that acid media would ionize nicotine converting it into a poorly absorbable form into the brain of smokers thus depriving them of the much sought after instant ‘nicotine kick’ sensation,” the researchers noted. The report concluded that “the evidence of lung cancer risk caused by cigarette smoke radioactivity is compelling enough to warrant its removal.” Now, if tobacco leaves become a source of cancer-causing radioactivity due to the fertilizers used, what about food grown with these phosphate fertilizers? Remarkably, according to a report by the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research,9 American meat products and dairy may expose your organs to radiation doses that are equivalent to the dose received by smokers via cigarette smoke. I bet that might come as a huge shock to you. Fluoridated Water—Another Hidden Source of Radioactive Polonium You can also consume polonium by drinking fluoridated water, courtesy of the fluorosilicic acid used. While pharmaceutical grade fluoride is a harmful-enough drug, this is not the type of fluoride being added to drinking water. If it was, at least then it would be a pure, uncontaminated form. Rather the fluoride that is typically used to fluoridate local water supplies is a frequently contaminated chemical byproduct created during the phosphate fertilizer manufacturing process. It’s a concentrated, highly toxic chemical riddled with hazardous impurities, making it extremely expensive to safely dispose of when not sold for profit as a water additive. Uranium and radium are two known carcinogens found in fluorosilicic acid used for water fluoridation, and polonium-210 is one of two decay products of uranium. Furthermore, polonium decays into stable lead-206, which also has significant health risks—especially in children—and research has indeed shown that drinking fluoridated water increases lead absorption in your body. Back in 1983, the Deputy Administrator of the EPA Office of Water, Rebecca Hanmer, summarized and defended the EPA’s policy on adding toxic fluoride to drinking water in the following manner,10 which is quite telling once you know where the fluoride comes from, and the origins of the idea behind water fluoridation as a public health policy: "In regard to the use of fluosilicic (fluorosilicic) acid as a source of fluoride for fluoridation, this agency regards such use as an ideal environmental solution to a long-standing problem. By recovering by-product fluosilicic acid from fertilizer manufacturing, water and air pollution are minimized, and water utilities have a low-cost source of fluoride available to them." [Emphasis mine] How Polonium Affects Your Body But let’s get back to phosphate fertilizers and its use on tobacco and food crops... According to the report in Nicotine and Tobacco Research,11 radioactivity in tobacco comes from two sources: the atmosphere and uptake through soil rich in calcium phosphate fertilizer contaminated with polonium phosphates. In 1995, the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research12 stated that: “It has been known for many years that phosphate fertilizer ore contains 50~150 parts per million (ppm) of natural Uranium, and hence its radioactive decay products [i.e. polonium and radon], when compared to most other soil and rocks - which average 1 or 2 ppm.” A CNN article13 from last year addressed the health effects of polonium when the radioactive element was being investigated as a potential cause in the death of Yasser Arafat, the former leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization. According to their report: “If you ingest polonium-210, about 50 percent to 90 percent of the substance will exit the body through feces, according to a fact sheet from Argonne National Laboratory. What is left will enter the bloodstream. About 45 percent of polonium ingested gets into the spleen, kidneys and liver, and 10 percent is deposited in the bone marrow. Radiation poisoning from polonium-210 looks like the end stage of cancer... Liver and kidney damage ensue, along with extreme nausea and severe headaches. Victims often experience vomiting, diarrhea and hair loss. The alpha particles emitted from the decaying substance get absorbed in the body, which is what causes harm.” Phosphate Fertilizers Also Used in GMO Agriculture Phosphate fertilizers linked to lung cancer in smokers, via the route of inhaling the smoke from contaminated tobacco leaves, are also used on food crops. Granted, food-borne polonium may be absorbed and react differently in your body than that in tobacco smoke. Still, as stated by the International Atomic Energy Agency,14 internal exposure, which is more or less the only dangerous form, does occur primarily through food, water, and inhaling contaminated air. So it’s possible that you might be exposed to greater levels of this (and other) radioactive elements than was previously thought, through the aggressive use of phosphate fertilizers in food production. While we may not be able to estimate the potential cancer risk from contaminated foods, and GMOs in particular, research has shown that dietary calcium phosphate has a detrimental effect on your gut health. According to a 2002 study in the Journal of Nutrition:15 “Most Gram-positive bacteria are susceptible to the bactericidal action of fatty acids and bile acids. Because dietary calcium phosphate (CaP(i)) lowers the intestinal concentration of these antimicrobial agents, high CaP(i) intake may enhance intestinal colonization of Gram-positive pathogens and the subsequent pathogenesis.” Interestingly, the adverse effect of dietary calcium phosphate was found to be dependent on the type of dietary fat consumed. In rats given diets containing corn oil, the calcium phosphate stimulated colonization of pathogenic bacteria, whereas this adverse effect was not found in animals given a diet with milk fat. There are many drawbacks to conventional fertilizers, and radioactive food can perhaps be added to that list (with or without radioactive fallout from Japan, which is a whole other story). While modern agricultural methods may appear to be the most cost effective and efficient strategy at first glance, it quickly becomes one of the most costly ways to produce food once you take into account the environmental and human health consequences. There Are Better Alternatives Modern fertilizer consists of varying amounts of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K). But both phosphorus and potassium, neither of which can be synthesized, are becoming increasingly sparse.16 According to the Swedish-run Global Phosphorus Research Initiative,17 we could hit “peak phosphorus” as early as 2030. Without these fertilizer ingredients, the entire world would quickly be in trouble—lest we change our ways, that is. And there are more than a few good reasons for making a U-turn back toward time-tested biological growing methods. Calcium phosphate, mined primarily in the Western Sahara, typically contains polonium and that’s the type of NPK fertilizer typically used on tobacco fields. Ammonium phosphate is typically used in the growing of GMO crops, and as mentioned earlier, the toxic byproduct from that process is fluorosilicic acid, used for water fluoridation. Now, it’s possible that ammonium phosphate has very little polonium, since it tends to end up in the fluoride (and hence drinking water around the US). But it all has to end up somewhere... As I’ve started writing about lately, biological agriculture can be profoundly efficient, out-performing virtually any conventional farming strategy, including genetic engineering. I’ve been implementing organic, biological farming strategies in my own garden, and the leaves on some of my plants, like fruit trees (limes, figs, mango, orange, tangerine, cherries, peach, plum, and banana), have a number of leaves that are literally 300 to 400 percent bigger than the typical leaf of these plants. You wouldn’t even imagine that a leaf could grow this big—all without ANY chemicals, just using strategies that optimize soil health, such as using rock dust powders, compost teas and biochar. These strategies seem to maximize the hidden genetic potential of the plants. Sustainable Soil Science to the Rescue Earlier this year, I interviewed Dr. Elaine Ingham, an internationally recognized expert on the benefits of sustainable soil science. I also visited her at her new position at the Rodale Institute in Pennsylvania. According to Dr. Ingham and other soil experts, a key component of successful agriculture lies in having the right helper organisms in the soil; beneficial species of bacteria, fungi, protozoa, beneficial nematodes (not the weedfeeders), microarthropods, and earthworms—all of which contribute to plant growth in a number of different ways. Nutrient cycling is another major issue. According to Dr. Ingham, there’s no soil on Earth that lacks the nutrients to grow a plant. She believes the concept that your soil is deficient and needs added phosphorus or nitrogen, etc. in order to grow plants is seriously flawed, and largely orchestrated by the chemical companies, because it’s based on looking at the soluble, inorganic nutrients that are partly present in your soil. The real nutrition your plants require is actually derived from microorganisms in the soil. These organisms take the mineral material that’s in your soil and convert it into a plant-available form. Without these bioorganisms, your plants cannot get the nutrients they need. So what you need is not more chemical soil additives, what you need is the proper balance of beneficial soil organisms. According to Dr. Ingham: “It’s very necessary to have these organisms. They will supply your plant with precisely the right balances of all the nutrients the plant requires. When you start to realize that one of the major roles and functions of life in the soil is to provide nutrients to the plants in the proper forms, then we don’t need inorganic fertilizers. We certainly don’t have to have genetically engineered plants or to utilize inorganic fertilizers if we get this proper biology back in the soil. Interestingly enough, you can use a starter culture to boost the fermentation and generation of beneficial bacteria much in the same way you can boost the probiotics in your fermented vegetables. For compost, this strategy is used if you want to compost very rapidly. In that case, you can use a starter to inoculate the specific sets of organisms that you need to encourage in that compost. For optimal physical health, you need plant foods to contain the full set of nutrients that will allow the plant to grow in a healthy fashion, because that’s the proper balance of nutrients for us human beings as well. Dr. Ingham has written several books on this topic, including The Field Guide for Actively Aerated Compost Tea, and The Compost Tea Brewing Manual. Who Would Have Guessed... With all the thousands of chemical additives in cigarettes, it’s pretty staggering to consider that potentially the most carcinogenic ingredient in a cigarette appears to be contamination from the fertilizer used to grow the tobacco. It’s even more disconcerting to consider that this contaminant can also be found in fluoridated drinking water and potentially genetically engineered and conventionally grown foods as well. From my point of view, this is simply one more reason to switch to a whole food organic diet, ideally grown locally to ensure maximum freshness. Here are some great resources to obtain wholesome food that supports not only you but also the environment: 1.
Alternative
Farming Systems Information
Center,
2.
Farmers'
Markets
3.
Local
Harvest 4.
Eat
Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy
Animals
5.
Community
Involved in Sustaining Agriculture
(CISA)
6.
FoodRoutes
|
