Perhaps this is a new program of birth control -- for the poor and the 3rd world.

The wealthy do not need to worry; they have their choice of foods.  If there isn't follow-up to the study, it'll be forgotten.  Population may start dropping and those in favor of lower numbers will have their wish big time.

Far fetched?  Modification does not have to lead to end-of-the-world scenarios.  But the ability to resist destructive environmental agents and withstand environmental trauma does suggest the ability to resist stomache acids as well . . .

by sometimes blinded (4 articles, 106 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 614 comments [51 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 8:18:08 AM

  (0+)

After all, 5,500,000,000 must go .... if you read Georgia's 'Stonehenge' inscription......

GM crops are simply one more of the many paths apparently utilized to the same end......  sayeth the 'conpsirator' .... 

Is there a purpose or is it simply 'greed' and 'stupidity' ....  

;-) 

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 10:49:54 AM

  (1+)

There are essentially only 2 known and proven ways to control population growth:

> Through increased mortality levels.

> Lowering birth rates through education and increased prosperity (as has been successfully proven many times in different countries).

The latter is not a desired method if the continuance of ignorance and poverty are required to maintain the current levels of control over a society.

Which method do you think the members of Monsanto's Board of Directors believe in? Here's a hint: All corn sent as "foreign aid" by this government is now GE.

by Steve Windisch (jibbguy) (17 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 360 comments [54 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:48:11 AM

  (1+)

Mr. Smith, who is also the Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology says, “GM foods are likely responsible for several negative health trends in the US."

Unfortunately this likelihood cannot be proven. Since the bureaucracy of federal testing and approval has always been grossly biased in favor of rapid commercialization, the resulting current ubiquitous presence of GM products in the food supply makes epidemiological studies impossible. Unfortunately, GE proponents make use of this fact to argue for the safety of such products. In doing so, they are obviously not constrained by standards of scientific integrity, which should prevent them from drawing positive conclusions in the complete absence of research and data.

by Jim Eldon (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 253 comments [15 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 11:23:53 AM

  (1+)

Mad cow may take awhile, but the Koreans don't want any of it.  GM crops are probably the same.

by John Hanks (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1760 comments [39 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 16, 2008 at 7:41:49 PM

  (0+)

I want to thank whoever submitted this article. It's very important. That the research is happening in Europe is significant for the following reason:

As a certified herbalist, I study the Pubmed website (government medical database) with some frequency. I have seen, repeatedly, that the AMerican studies are biased to a certain outcome particularly where pharmaceuticals and profits are concerned, whereas the European studies are typically and as an on-going pattern, much more full-disclosure. One radioactive iodine I looked up on Pubmed, for example, was noted by American studies to have only an occasional side-effect of leukemia (very serious!) and to be really safe considering how rare that effect *Supposedly* is. EVERY European study countered vociferously: DON"T USE THIS MEDICATION EXCEPT AS A VERY LAST RESORT, WHEN ALL OTHER RESOURCES HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED! IT"S VERY DANGEROUS AND THE CASES OF LEUKEMIA ARE WIDELY UNDER-REPORTED!!

Europe is on the pioneering frontier where herbal and nutritional studies are concerned, too. America has followed suit more recently. Chemical constituents of herbs and foods alike are identified and tested in clinical double blind studies, etc (yes this is true for herbs now too. It's no longer all about old wive's tales. Interestingly enough though, *most* even if not all of the "old wives tales" are being verified by the tests and scientific studies!)

So....this raises a question for me.

Is it estrogens which are being raised by the genetically modified organisms? If so this means, folks, drumroll....increased cancer rates as well as reproductive harm.

Let's not forget that hormones are inter-dependent: If one is whacked out, the others will follow in a chain reaction too.

LEt's please not forget PMS and depression as related to the female hormone cycle. What's likely to follow from imbalanced reproductive hormones, psychologically and in health areas not limited to reproduction, but far above and beyond (ie, cancer)?

My concern is that the mainstream health industry is likely to strike this down: Rightfully, they will say that one study alone is never enough proof of anything. That's true. Because studies can be biased. And that's why it's important to rely on a vast body of studies, each as "checks and balances" on the other, so to speak.

Further, I read the study linked above (I do speak German) and there is a qualifying statement at the end of it, in which the point is made that while the way laboratory mice are affected by this study is now known, what is not known and where there needs to be further proof is how other animals might be affected.

The medical establishment can easily refute this, unfortunately. But given what I have seen reading the Pubmed.gov website, I am much more inclined to trust the much less-biased and more full-disclosure European studies than I am the biased AMerican ones, which often are in the pocket of the pharmaceutical industries.

by Kathryn Smith (110 articles, 2 quicklinks, 43 diaries, 542 comments [23 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:39:15 AM

  (1+)

it's probably progesterone and not estrogen which is being raised to an out-of-balance level with the GMO's, juding by the description of this study. And it's the high estrogen levels which would mean increased cancer risk, not progesterone. However, that said, I still wonder and would want to know more details about what the findings were with the hormone levels. And I still have to assert that the concerns here concern much more than just reproductive harm alone. What happens to the depression levels as the female hormone cycle is disrupted? What happens to the suicide rate? What happens to secondary sex characteristics? Hmmmm.....seems to me that sometimes with our scientific and "Educated" work on the planet, at times (such as when goofing with genetics in our food or elsewhere) it is our wisdom which becomes our folly.

by Kathryn Smith (110 articles, 2 quicklinks, 43 diaries, 542 comments [23 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 7:38:08 AM

  (0+)

This company's mission is an affront to humanity and it should be terminated as soon as possible with absolutely no debate.  I would be remiss not to point out that this is a perfect example of capitalism gone mad. Under the guise of creating shareholder value, this company seeks to create a monopoly over life and sustenance.  By ruining the seeds of life, they threaten the very existence of mankind while providing a strong ROI.  GO WALL STREET

by kato krause (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 216 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:43:56 PM

  (1+)

Monsanto and their ilk, clearly threaten our very survival.

How dare our Health and Food agencies approve the untested use of GM Foods. 

They should be banned outright until they are proven safe based on numerous long term studies carried out by impartial scientists. 

by Rolland Miller (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 227 comments [78 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:59:21 PM

  (1+)

As I emailed Mr. Smith, but didn't get a response from him yet (Argentina was and is the NWO's test ground for massive GMO food production since the late 1980s and early 1990s):

Hi Jeff,

I always had an intuitive feeling that there was something very wrong with the 'petite' statue of many Argentinean women (a recent phenomenal) and thought that the GMO foods here had something to do with it.  They just do not look 'right'.

Your press release of yesterday seem to confirm my suspicion: http://www.responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/MediaCenter/ReleaseAustrianGovernmentStudy/index.cfm

I also suspect that a lot of Argentinean woman and man are highly infertile, but without scientific studies this would be impossible to determine.  Except maybe to look at birth rates which would have a delay effect of many years to show up.

Maybe there should be a study performed on the fertility rates of these 'petite' women versus regular-size Argentinean women to confirm that eating GMO foods causes in humans what this animal study confirms for mice.

Take care,

David 

by David C (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 19, 2008 at 5:31:46 PM

  (1+)

I was not familiar with GMO foods until I happened to hear GMO expert Jeff Smith interviewed on the Alex Jones show.  I subsequently purchased his books, videos and audio.  GMO foods are an unimaginable horror.  In Europe they are rightly called Frankenfoods.  GMO is NOT your grandfather breeding two types of soybeans to produce a better variety.  It is taking DNA from say a pig, and injecting it into a watermelon in order to produce porkmelon.  It is totally unnatural and the idiots doing it are like children playing with loaded guns.  I've posted free MP3 downloads about GMO at http://drop.io/Summerbird  One is titled jeffreysmith and is the aforementioned interview with Alex Jones.  The other is titled You're Eating What? and is Jeff Smith in front of an audience.   They are way at the bottom of the page as I uploaded them first.   Also the interview with F. William Engdahl briefly touches on GMO  Please download and listen and learn.

by Edward Safranski (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments [4 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 19, 2008 at 6:09:01 PM

  (1+)

I hope we ban them like the Europeans have.

by Linda Gonzales (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 18 comments) on Monday, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:32:57 PM

  (0+)