Archive for July, 2013

Posted by:  | on July 20, 2013  http://www.theorganicprepper.ca/the10-gmo-myths-that-monsanto-wants-you-to-believe-07202013

Monsanto and their biotech buddies would have you believe that they are super-heroes, set on saving hungry children from starvation wearing a dazzling fake-green cape. In fact, in a recent attack on activists, Monsanto’s CEO Hugh Grant said that because critics “can afford” organic food, we don’t care about the plight of those who can’t afford it. “There is this strange kind of reverse elitism: If I’m going to do this, then everything else shouldn’t exist,” said Grant. “There is space in the supermarket shelf for all of us.”

Even Monsanto’s website is on the defense, with page after page attempting to justify what the biotech industry is doing to our food supply. It must be true if even leading “philanthropists” (and I use this term loosely) like Bill and Melinda Gates are behind the distribution of Monsanto crops across the globe. Right?

Actually, it’s all about the public’s perception. The push for acceptance of GMO foods has, thus far, been all about which team has the most money. Monsanto and their ilk can afford more television ads and more PR than anti-GMO activists can. Because the biotech companies, Big Food, and Big Agri can pay to spread their message, many people are convinced by their pure propaganda that GMOs are a necessary evil if the Third World is to avoid millions of slow, agonizing deaths by starvation. Because biotech is able to afford to blanket the media with their perspective, their view point is accepted as the correct one because that is the only perspective that many people ever hear. But just because they shout the loudest, that doesn’t make it true. (more…)


Read Full Post »

One in every 88 kids in the United States is diagnosed with autism, a neurological disease with unknown causes.

A Mom ,Jill Escher’s dogged quest to unravel why two of her children are autistic has drawn the attention of scientists, and may ultimately lead to a greater understanding of how prescription drugs – and perhaps chemicals in the environment – may secretly and subtly harm the health of generations to come.


Read Full Post »

Mercury, Vaccines, and Autism One Controversy, Three Histories

Am J Public Health. 2008 February; 98(2): 244–253.doi:  10.2105/AJPH.2007.113159  PMCID: PMC2376879

Abstract The controversy regarding the once widely used mercury-containing preservative thimerosal in childhood vaccines has raised many historical questions that have not been adequately explored.
Why was this preservative incorporated in the first place? Was there any real evidence that it caused harm? And how did thimerosal become linked in the public mind to the “autism epidemic”?

I examine the origins of the thimerosal controversy and their legacy for the debate that has followed. More specifically, I explore the parallel histories of three factors that converged to create the crisis: vaccine preservatives, mercury poisoning, and autism.

An understanding of this history provides important lessons for physicians and policymakers seeking to preserve the public’s trust in the nation’s vaccine system. (more…)

Read Full Post »

THURSDAY, JUN 27, 2013 08:25 AM EDT  New research reveals that plant breeding, not genetic engineering, is responsible for yield increases in US crops BY  http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27829.cfm


 The World Food Prize committee’s got a bit of egg on its face—genetically engineered egg. They just awarded the World Food Prize to three scientists, including one from Syngenta and one from Monsanto, who invented genetic engineering because, they say, the technology increases crop yields and decreases pesticide use. (Perhaps not coincidentally, Monsanto and Syngenta are major sponsors of the World Food Prize, along with a third biotech giant, Dupont Pioneer.)

Monsanto makes the same case on its website, saying, “Since the advent of biotechnology, there have been a number of claims from anti-biotechnology activists that genetically modified (GM) crops don’t increase yields. Some have claimed that GM crops actually have lower yields than non-GM crops… GM crops generally have higher yields due to both breeding and biotechnology.”

But that’s not actually the case. A new peer-reviewed study published in the International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability examined those claims and found that conventional plant breeding, not genetic engineering, is responsible for yield increases in major U.S. crops. Additionally, GM crops, also known as genetically engineered (GE) crops, can’t even take credit for reductions in pesticide use. The study’s lead author, Jack Heinemann, is not an anti-biotechnology activist, as Monsanto might want you to believe. “I’m a genetic engineer. But there is a different between being a genetic engineer and selling a product that is genetically engineered,” he states. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Cancer is a Preventable Disease that Requires Major Lifestyle Changes

Abstract This year, more than 1 million Americans and more than 10 million people worldwide are expected to be diagnosed with cancer, a disease commonly believed to be preventable. Only 5–10% of all cancer cases can be attributed to genetic defects, whereas the remaining 90–95% have their roots in the environment and lifestyle. The lifestyle factors include cigarette smoking, diet (fried foods, red meat), alcohol, sun exposure, environmental pollutants, infections, stress, obesity, and physical inactivity. The evidence indicates that of all cancer-related deaths, almost 25–30% are due to tobacco, as many as 30–35% are linked to diet, about 15–20% are due to infections, and the remaining percentage are due to other factors like radiation, stress, physical activity, environmental pollutants etc. Therefore, cancer prevention requires smoking cessation, increased ingestion of fruits and vegetables, moderate use of alcohol, caloric restriction, exercise, avoidance of direct exposure to sunlight, minimal meat consumption, use of whole grains, use of vaccinations, and regular check-ups. In this review, we present evidence that inflammation is the link between the agents/factors that cause cancer and the agents that prevent it. In addition, we provide evidence that cancer is a preventable disease that requires major lifestyle changes.

Key Words: cancer, environmental risk factors, genetic risk factors, prevention (more…)

Read Full Post »


With the help of every one of you we SHUTDOWN SONGS and we are safe from a accident during the operation of this plant, and they are not producing more nuclear waste each day. But we are not safe from a accident involving the nuclear waste and will not until it is moved out this dangerous area. This type of high-level nuclear waste cannot be left in an earthquake and tsunami zone here on California’s coast.

Did you know that SCE has collected two and a half billion dollars to decommission San Onofre from ratepayers, and they are asking for another $2 billion from ratepayers.  Did you know that SCE will get paid from the Department of Energy as well to store the  nuclear waste on site for who knows how long & how much?? If they take the 60 years they want to decommission you know they will come back and ask for never more money from ratepayers and the DOE. Now you can see why this was a financial decision on their part. Bottom line they will make more money this way. Are starting to see the real cost of nuclear power, and we have not even started talking about the real problem which the amount of nuclear waste on site, and do we want a nuclear waste dump at San Onofre for the future of California?

The most important reason to shutdown your local nuke plant is you stop the production of more nuclear waste. But wow, if you think shutting one down is hard wait until you start to see what is left there, and the amount of work to be done. But with that said we have to SHUT THEM ALL DOWN as soon as possible because the amount of waste is out of control in every since of the word. NO MORE NUKES FOR AMERICA must be our goal.

Did you shutdown San Onofre so people in SoCal would be safe? Then are really going to stop working now & let it become a nuclear waste dump for God knows how long? Or did you work so hard to shutdown San Onofre so that our communities will truly be safe for the future?  Did I mention that nuclear waste is most dangerous as it cools for the first 100 years. Truly safe to me means decommissioning in a secure & timely manner (10 yrs as Arine Gundersen says is possible) & removal of all nuclear waste and complete cleanup of the site. That is why I worked to help close San Onofre, and that is why we will need your support as we work for a complete cleanup of the San Onofre nuclear plant for the safety of all California’s.


Read Full Post »

Health and Your Environment

There is nothing more important to the health of you and your family than the food you eat and sometimes you have to decide for yourself about making food decisions

One thing worth noting- there is nothing in the scientific literature that states our food was meant to contain a herbicide as a constituent.

As herbicides are designed to kill plants one would not expect to find herbicides in the food we consume. However recently with the development of GMO plants by companies such as Monsanto, certain plants such as soy and others are herbicide tolerant so rather than the herbicide killing the plant the chemical herbicide collects in the plant…  and then we eat it

Is that a problem ?  The EPA does not apparently think so and in the Federal Register of May 2, 2012 (77 FR 25954) (FRL-9346-1 referencing a summary of the petition prepared by the registrant, Monsanto, the EPA agreed to increase the tolerances for this herbicide in our food.“Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has modified the levels at which tolerances are being established for some commodities as well as the crops for which tolerances are being established. http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

 The EPA by increasing  the Tolerances to Glyphosate therefore is agreeing that Herbicides which kill plants are safe to be in our  food supply without an impartial study of adverse health effects

However a recent peer reviewed and published research questions the relative safety of consuming herbicides in our food . In a research paper entitles Glyphosate’s Suppression of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and Amino Acid Biosynthesis by the Gut Microbiome: Pathways to Modern Diseases published May 9th, 2013  in the prestigious journal Entropy by Anthony Samsel, Independent Scientist and Consultant Stephanie Seneff, Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, MIT (http://www.cornucopia.org/2013/05/glyphosates-suppression-of-cytochrome-p450-enzymes-and-amino-acid-biosynthesis-by-the-gut-microbiome-pathways-to-modern-diseases/

The scientists write in the abstract “ Glyphosate is the most popular herbicide used worldwide. The industry asserts it is minimally toxic to humans, but here we argue otherwise. Residues are found in the main foods of the Western diet, comprised primarily of sugar, corn, soy and wheat. Glyphosate’s inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes is an overlooked component of its toxicity to mammal. Glyphosate enhances the damaging effects of other food borne chemical residues and environmental toxins.

Based on the uncertainty of such conflicting published science between the industry ( Monsanto) the EPA and the peer reviewed science it is probably prudent to Read your Food Labels before purchase and if at all possible ask for GMO Free Foods and Glysophate FREE foods at your supermarket.

It is important that our foods  be properly labeled to warn consumers.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »