Because Genetically modified crops risk widespread ruin,
they should not be permitted without far greater scientific knowledge,
for which the burden of proof falls on those proposing GMOs, not those opposing,
say experts in risk and ruin.
Risk management or mitigation may work for localized harm,
but GMOs risk widespread systemic damage, which is ruin, and to prevent that
the precautionary principal is needed:
if an action or policy has a suspected risk
of causing severe harm to the public domain (such as
general health or the environment), and in the absence
of scientific near-certainty about the safety of the action,
the burden of proof about absence of harm falls on those
proposing the action.
Research, including studies presented at the conference in Istanbul,
is showing that organic agriculture can deliver reliably high yields
”and that organic fields thrive in the face of disaster and
duress, where chemical-reliant crops falter. Organic fields, for
example, fare significantly better than chemically managed ones in
the face of extreme weather, such as droughts or floods.
Dr. Pat Duncan, director of the Georgia Center for Aquaculture Development,
Fort Valley State University,
Fort Valley, GA, will explain aquaculture.
Safe local food movements are no longer a passing fad as consumers
avoid the dangers and fears associated with processed industrialized
food. Any number of associated causes drives concerns about GMO
plants, pesticides, and other chemicals. With many options and
systems designs available for cost effective ways of safe food
production, one system with unique opportunities is aquaponics.
As with most food production systems, there are twists and turns on
systems and designs to approach the development and management of an
aquaponics system. Ranging from small do-it-yourself systems to
elaborate automated commercial designs, each of these systems
requires Continue reading →
With GM crops come herbicides, which breed resistant weeds.
This has happened in about a decade for the worse mutants.
We can reverse the problem by reversing the spraying,
using plowing, cultivation, and crop rotation instead.
How do we prove to customers that our products are free of
genetically modified ingredients? while many homesteaders choose to
be not certified or certified naturally grown, consumers are
becoming more concerned with GMOs. We will offer practical tips for
insuring consumers, as well as how to on certifications & non-GMO
Likely effects of dousing
90+% of all corn, soybeans, peanuts, and cotton grown in Georgia
in Roundup and other toxic chemicals,
often drifting onto other people’s land, schools, shops,
It’s not that hard to grow the same crops without those poisons
and without the toxic seeds that require them;
not that hard and more profitable.
Yes, I know Jeffrey M. Smith is not a biological scientist
or medical doctor.
But many of the sources he cites are.
The IRT release also indicated that glyphosate, a weed killer sold
under the brand name ‘Roundup’ was also found to have a negative
effect on intestinal bacteria. GMO crops contain high levels of the
toxin at harvest.
“Even with minimal exposure, glyphosate can significantly
reduce the population of beneficial gut bacteria and promote the
overgrowth of harmful strains,” the report found.
14 year old Rachel Parent destroys a pro-Monsanto-GMO TV host
on every point, from science to his ad hominem attacks against her.
He twists, he turns, he avoids admitting when he’s defeated, and he loses
No summary can do this justice.
Meet Rachel Parent, a 14 year old activist, who knows her stuff!
This brave girl should serve as a role model for all teens. If 10
percent of children had this girl’s drive and knowledge, we wouldn’t
even be having this debate right now.
In this video Ms. Parent braves the establishment hack, Kevin
O’Leary, and does outstanding. O’Leary hammers out the industry
talking points like the good shill he is and Ms. Parent slams each
and every one. Bravo Rachel Parent, thanks for doing what you do.
The biotechnology industry has pulled a fast one with regards to the
legitimacy of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). Straddling both
sides of the fence, multinational corporations like Monsanto
continually claim that their GM monstrosities are “substantially
equivalent” to natural crops when it comes to their safety. And yet
at the very same time, this ilk also insists that its products are
uniquely different from natural crops when it comes to enforcing its
patents, a clearly hypocritical and duplicitous stance that proves
the illegitimacy of the entire GMO business model.
The Agriculture Department has approved a label for meat and liquid
egg products that includes a claim about the absence of genetically
It is the first time that the department, which regulates meat and
poultry processing, has approved a non-G.M.O. label claim, which
attests that meat certified by the Non-GMO Project came from animals
that never ate feed containing genetically engineered ingredients
like corn, soy and alfalfa.
…consuming genetically modified (GM) corn or soybeans leads to significant
organ disruptions in rats and mice, particularly in livers and kidneys.
…9% of the measured parameters, including
blood and urine biochemistry, organ weights, and microscopic analyses
(histopathology), were significantly disrupted in the GM-fed animals. The
kidneys of males fared the worst, with 43.5% of all the changes. The liver
of females followed, with 30.8%. The report, published in Environmental
Sciences Europe on March 1, 2011, confirms that “several convergent
data appear to indicate liver and kidney problems as end points of GMO
diet effects.” The authors point out that livers and kidneys “are
the major reactive organs” in cases of chronic food toxicity.
And these were the corn and soybeans that people eat.