The following article reveals the devastating and unprecedented impact that Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide is having on the health of our soil, plants, animals, and human population. On top of this perfect storm, the USDA now wants to approve Roundup Ready alfalfa, which will exacerbate this calamity. Please tell USDA Secretary Vilsack not to approve Monsanto’s alfalfa today. [Note: typos corrected from Jan 16th, see details]
While visiting a seed corn dealer’s demonstration plots in Iowa last fall, Dr. Don Huber walked passed a soybean field and noticed a distinct line separating severely diseased yellowing soybeans on the right from healthy green plants on the left (see photo). The yellow section was suffering from Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS), a serious plant disease that ravaged the Midwest in 2009 and ’10, driving down yields and profits. Something had caused that area of soybeans to be highly susceptible and Don had a good idea what it was.

The diseased field on the right had glyphosate applied the previous season. Photo by Don Huber

Don Huber spent 35 years as a plant pathologist at Purdue University and knows a lot about what causes green plants to turn yellow and die prematurely. He asked the seed dealer why the SDS was so severe in the one area of the field and not the other. “Did you plant something there last year that wasn’t planted in the rest of the field?” he asked. Sure enough, precisely where the severe SDS was, the dealer had grown alfalfa, which he later killed off at the end of the season by spraying a glyphosate-based herbicide (such as Roundup). The healthy part of the field, on the other hand, had been planted to sweet corn and hadn’t received glyphosate.
This was yet another confirmation that Roundup was triggering SDS. In many fields, the evidence is even more obvious. The disease was most severe at the ends of rows where the herbicide applicator looped back to make another pass (see photo). That’s where extra Roundup was applied.
Don’s a scientist; it takes more than a few photos for him to draw conclusions. But Don’s got more—lots more. For over 20 years, Don studied Roundup’s active ingredient glyphosate. He’s one of the world’s experts. And he can rattle off study after study that eliminate any doubt that glyphosate is contributing not only to the huge increase in SDS, but to the outbreak of numerous other diseases. (See selected reading list.)

Sudden Death Syndrome is more severe at the ends of rows, where Roundup dose is strongest. Photo by Amy Bandy.

Roundup: The perfect storm for plant disease
More than 30% of all herbicides sprayed anywhere contain glyphosate—the world’s bestselling weed killer. It was patented by Monsanto for use in their Roundup brand, which became more popular when they introduced “Roundup Ready” crops starting in 1996. These genetically modified (GM) plants, which now include soy, corn, cotton, canola, and sugar beets, have inserted genetic material from viruses and bacteria that allows the crops to withstand applications of normally deadly Roundup.
(Monsanto requires farmers who buy Roundup Ready seeds to only use the company’s Roundup brand of glyphosate. This has extended the company’s grip on the glyphosate market, even after its patent expired in 2000.)
The herbicide doesn’t destroy plants directly. It rather cooks up a unique perfect storm of conditions that revs up disease-causing organisms in the soil, and at the same time wipes out plant defenses against those diseases. The mechanisms are well-documented but rarely cited.

1. The glyphosate molecule grabs vital nutrients and doesn’t let them go. This process is called chelation and was actually the original property for which glyphosate was patented in 1964. It was only 10 years later that it was patented as an herbicide. When applied to crops, it deprives them of vital minerals necessary for healthy plant function—especially for resisting serious soilborne diseases. The importance of minerals for protecting against disease is well established. In fact, mineral availability was the single most important measurement used by several famous plant breeders to identify disease-resistant varieties.

1. Glyphosate annihilates beneficial soil organisms, such as Pseudomonas and Bacillus bacteria that live around the roots. Since they facilitate the uptake of plant nutrients and suppress disease-causing organisms, their untimely deaths means the plant gets even weaker and the pathogens even stronger.

1. The herbicide can interfere with photosynthesis, reduce water use efficiency, lower lignin , damage and shorten root systems, cause plants to release important sugars, and change soil pH—all of which can negatively affect crop health.

1. Glyphosate itself is slightly toxic to plants. It also breaks down slowly in soil to form another chemical called AMPA (aminomethylphosphonic acid) which is also toxic. But even the combined toxic effects of glyphosate and AMPA are not sufficient on their own to kill plants. It has been demonstrated numerous times since 1984
   

   Glyphosate with sterile soil (A) only stunts plant growth. In normal soil (B), pathogens kill the plant. Control (C) shows normal growth.

   that when glyphosate is applied in sterile soil, the plant may be slightly stunted, but it isn’t killed (see photo).

1. The actual plant assassins, according to Purdue weed scientists and others, are severe disease-causing organisms present in almost all soils. Glyphosate dramatically promotes these, which in turn overrun the weakened crops with deadly infections.

“This is the herbicidal mode of action of glyphosate,” says Don. “It increases susceptibility to disease, suppresses natural disease controls such as beneficial organisms, and promotes virulence of soilborne pathogens at the same time.” In fact, he points out that “If you apply certain fungicides to weeds, it destroys the herbicidal activity of glyphosate!”
By weakening plants and promoting disease, glyphosate opens the door for lots of problems in the field. According to Don, “There are more than 40 diseases of crop plants that are reported to increase with the use of glyphosate, and that number keeps growing as people recognize the association between glyphosate and disease.”
Roundup promotes human and animal toxins

Photo by Robert Kremer

Some of the fungi promoted by glyphosate produce dangerous toxins that can end up in food and feed. Sudden Death Syndrome, for example, is caused by the Fusarium fungus. USDA scientist Robert Kremer found a 500% increase in Fusarium root infection of Roundup Ready soybeans when glyphosate is applied (see photos and chart). Corn, wheat, and many other plants can also suffer from serious Fusarium-based diseases.
But Fusarium’s wrath is not limited to plants. According to a report by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, toxins from Fusarium on various types of food crops have been associated with disease outbreaks throughout history. They’ve “been linked to the plague epidemics” of medieval Europe, “large-scale human toxicosis in Eastern Europe,” oesophageal cancer in southern Africa and parts of China, joint diseases in Asia and southern Africa, and a blood disorder in Russia. Fusarium toxins have also been shown to cause animal diseases and induce infertility.
As Roundup use rises, plant disease skyrockets
When Roundup Ready crops were introduced in 1996, Monsanto boldly claimed that herbicide use would drop as a result. It did—slightly—for three years. But over the next 10 years, it grew considerably. Total herbicide use in the US jumped by a whopping 383 million pounds in the 13 years after GMOs came on the scene. The greatest contributor is Roundup.
Over time, many types of weeds that would once keel over with just a tiny dose of Roundup now require heavier and heavier applications. Some are nearly invincible. In reality, these super-weeds are resistant not to the glyphosate itself, but to the soilborne pathogens that normally do the killing in Roundup sprayed fields.
Having hundreds of thousands of acres infested with weeds that resist plant disease and weed killer has been devastating to many US farmers, whose first response is to pour on more and more Roundup. Its use is now accelerating. Nearly half of the huge 13-year increase in herbicide use took place in just the last 2 years. This has serious implications.
As US farmers drench more than 135 million acres of Roundup Ready crops with Roundup, plant diseases are enjoying an unprecedented explosion across America’s most productive crop lands. Don rattles off a lengthy list of diseases that were once under effective management and control, but are now creating severe hardship. (The list includes SDS and Corynespora root rot of soybeans, citrus variegated chlorosis (CVC), Fusarium wilt of cotton, Verticillium wilt of potato, take-all root, crown, and stem blight of cereals, Fusarium root and crown rot, Fusarium head blight, Pythium root rot and damping off, Goss’ wilt of corn, and many more.)
In Brazil, the new “Mad Soy Disease” is ravaging huge tracts of soybean acreage. Although scientists have not yet determined its cause, Don points out that various symptoms resemble a rice disease (bakanae) which is caused by Fusarium.
Corn dies young
In recent years, corn plants and entire fields in the Midwest have been dying earlier and earlier due to various diseases. Seasoned and observant farmers say they’re never seen anything like it.
“A decade ago, corn plants remained green and healthy well into September,” says Bob Streit, an agronomist in Iowa. “But over the last three years, diseases have turned the plants yellow, then brown, about 8 to 10 days earlier each season. In 2010, yellowing started around July 7th and yield losses were devastating for many growers.”
Bob and other crop experts believe that the increased use of glyphosate is the primary contributor to this disease trend. It has already reduced corn yields significantly. “If the corn dies much earlier,” says Bob, “it might collapse the corn harvest in the US, and threaten the food chain that it supports.”
A question of bugs
In addition to promoting plant diseases, which is well-established, spraying Roundup might also promote insects. That’s because many bugs seek sick plants. Scientists point out that healthy plants produce nutrients in a form that many insects cannot assimilate. Thus, farmers around the world report less insect problems among high quality, nutrient-dense crops. Weaker plants, on the other hand, create insect smorgasbords. This suggests that plants ravaged with diseases promoted by glyphosate may also attract more insects, which in turn will increase the use of toxic pesticides. More study is needed to confirm this.
Roundup persists in the environment
Monsanto used to boast that Roundup is biodegradable, claiming that it breaks down quickly in the soil. But courts in the US and Europe disagreed and found them guilty of false advertising. In fact, Monsanto’s own test data revealed that only 2% of the product broke down after 28 days.
Whether glyphosate degrades in weeks, months, or years varies widely due to factors in the soil, including pH, clay , types of minerals, residues from Roundup Ready crops, and the presence of the specialized enzymes needed to break down the herbicide molecule. In some conditions, glyphosate can grab hold of soil nutrients and remain stable for long periods. One study showed that it took up to 22 years for glyphosate to degrade only half its volume! So much for trusting Monsanto’s product claims.

Glyphosate can attack from above and below. It can drift over from a neighbors farm and wreak havoc. And it can even be released from dying weeds, travel through the soil, and then be taken up by healthy crops.
The amount of glyphosate that can cause damage is tiny. European scientists demonstrated that less than half an ounce per acre inhibits the ability of plants to take up and transport essential micronutrients (see chart).
As a result, more and more farmers are finding that crops planted in years after Roundup is applied suffer from weakened defenses and increased soilborne diseases. The situation is getting worse for many reasons.

1. The glyphosate concentration in the soil builds up season after season with each subsequent application.
2. Glyphosate can also accumulate for 6-8 years inside perennial plants like alfalfa, which get sprayed over and over.

3. Wheat affected after 10 years of glyphosate field applications.

   Glyphosate residues in the soil that become bound and immobilized can be reactivated by the application of phosphate fertilizers or through other methods. Potato growers in the West and Midwest, for example, have experienced severe losses from glyphosate that has been reactivated.
4. Glyphosate can find its way onto farmland accidentally, through drifting spray, in contaminated water, and even through chicken manure!

Imagine the shock of farmers who spread chicken manure in their fields to add nutrients, but instead found that the glyphosate in the manure tied up nutrients in the soil, promoted plant disease, and killed off weeds or crops. Test results of the manure showed glyphosate/AMPA concentrations at a whopping 0.36-0.75 parts per million (ppm). The normal herbicidal rate of glyphosate is about 0.5 ppm/acre.
Manure from other animals may also be spreading the herbicide, since US livestock consume copious amounts of glyphosate—which accumulates in corn kernels and soybeans. If it isn’t found in livestock manure (or urine), that may be even worse. If glyphosate is not exiting the animal, it must be accumulating with every meal, ending up in our meat and possibly milk.
Add this threat to the already high glyphosate residues inside our own diets due to corn and soybeans, and we have yet another serious problem threatening our health. Glyphosate has been linked to sterility, hormone disruption, abnormal and lower sperm counts, miscarriages, placental cell death, birth defects, and cancer, to name a few. (See resource list on glyphosate health effects.)
Nutrient loss in humans and animals
The same nutrients that glyphosate chelates and deprives plants are also vital for human and animal health. These include iron, zinc, copper, manganese, magnesium, calcium, boron, and others. Deficiencies of these elements in our diets, alone or in combination, are known to interfere with vital enzyme systems and cause a long list of disorders and diseases.
Alzheimer’s, for example, is linked with reduced copper and magnesium. Don Huber points out that this disease has jumped 9000% since 1990.
Manganese, zinc, and copper are also vital for proper functioning of the SOD (superoxide dismustase) cycle. This is key for stemming inflammation and is an important component in detoxifying unwanted chemical compounds in humans and animals.
Glyphosate-induced mineral deficiencies can easily go unidentified and untreated. Even when laboratory tests are done, they can sometimes detect adequate mineral levels, but miss the fact that glyphosate has already rendered them unusable.
Glyphosate can tie up minerals for years and years, essentially removing them from the pool of nutrients available for plants, animals, and humans. If we combine the more than 135 million pounds of glyphosate-based herbicides applied in the US in 2010 with total applications over the past 30 years, we may have already eliminated millions of pounds of nutrients from our food supply.
This loss is something we simply can’t afford. We’re already suffering from progressive nutrient deprivation even without Roundup. In a UK study, for example, they found between 16-76% less nutrients in 1991, compared to levels in the same foods in 1940.
Livestock disease and mineral deficiency

Roundup Ready crops dominate US livestock feed. Soy and corn are most prevalent—93% of US soy and nearly 70% of corn are Roundup Ready. Animals are also fed derivatives of the other three Roundup Ready crops: canola, sugar beets, and cottonseed. Nutrient loss from glyphosate can therefore be severe.
This is especially true for manganese (Mn), which is not only chelated by glyphosate, but also reduced in Roundup Ready plants (see photo). One veterinarian finds low manganese in every livestock liver he measures. Another vet sent the liver of a stillborn calf out for testing. The lab report stated: No Detectible Levels of Manganese—in spite of the fact that the mineral was in adequate concentrations in his region. When that vet started adding manganese to the feed of a herd, disease rates dropped from a staggering 20% to less than ½%.
Veterinarians who started their practice after GMOs were introduced in 1996 might assume that many chronic or acute animal disorders are common and to be expected. But several older vets have stated flat out that animals have gotten much sicker since GMOs came on the scene. And when they switch livestock from GMO to non-GMO feed, the improvement in health is dramatic. Unfortunately, no one is tracking this, nor is anyone looking at the impacts of consuming milk and meat from GM-fed animals.
Alfalfa madness, brought to you by Monsanto and the USDA
As we continue to drench our fields with Roundup, the perfect storm gets bigger and bigger. Don asks the sobering question: “How much of the hundreds of millions of pounds of glyphosate that have been applied to our most productive farm soils over the past 30 years is still available to damage subsequent crops through its effects on nutrient availability, increased disease, or reduced nutrient of our food and feed?”
Instead of taking urgent steps to protect our land and food, the USDA just made plans to make things worse. In December they released their Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Roundup Ready alfalfa, which Monsanto hopes to reintroduce to the market.
Alfalfa is the fourth largest crop in the US, grown on 22 million acres. It is used primarily as a high protein source to feed dairy cattle and other ruminant animals. At present, weeds are not a big deal for alfalfa. Only 7% of alfalfa acreage is ever sprayed with an herbicide of any kind. If Roundup Ready alfalfa is approved, however, herbicide use would jump to unprecedented levels, and the weed killer of choice would of course be Roundup.
Even without the application of glyphosate, the nutritional quality of Roundup Ready alfalfa will be less, since Roundup Ready crops, by their nature, have reduced mineral . When glyphosate is applied, nutrient quality suffers even more (see chart).
The chance that Roundup would increase soilborne diseases in alfalfa fields is a near certainty. In fact, Alfalfa may suffer more than other Roundup Ready crops. As a perennial, it can accumulate Roundup year after year. It is a deep-rooted plant, and glyphosate leaches into sub soils. And “Fusarium is a very serious pathogen of alfalfa,” says Don. “So too are Phytophthora and Pythium,” both of which are promoted by glyphosate. “Why would you even consider jeopardizing the productivity and nutrient quality of the third most valuable crop in the US?” he asks in frustration, “especially since we have no way of removing the gene once it is spread throughout the alfalfa gene pool.”
It’s already spreading. Monsanto had marketed Roundup Ready alfalfa for a year, until a federal court declared its approval to be illegal in 2007. They demanded that the USDA produce an EIS in order to account for possible environmental damage. But even with the seeds taken off the market, the RR alfalfa that had already been planted has been contaminating non-GMO varieties. Cal/West Seeds, for example, discovered that more than 12% of their seed lots tested positive for contamination in 2009, up from 3% in 2008.
In their EIS, the USDA does acknowledge that genetically modified alfalfa can contaminate organic and non-GMO alfalfa, and that this could create economic hardship. They are even considering the unprecedented step of placing restrictions on RR alfalfa seed fields, requiring isolation distances. Experience suggests that this will slow down, but not eliminate GMO contamination. Furthermore, studies confirm that genes do transfer from GM crops into soil and soil organisms, and can jump into fungus through cuts on the surface of GM plants. But the EIS does not adequately address these threats and their implications.
Instead, the USDA largely marches lock-step with the biotech industry and turns a blind eye to the widespread harm that Roundup is already inflicting. If they decide to approve Monsanto’s alfalfa, the USDA may ultimately be blamed for a catastrophe of epic proportions.
Please send a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, urging him not to approve Roundup Ready alfalfa, and to fully investigate the damage that Roundup and GMOs are already inflicting.

Monsanto’s Roundup Triggers Over 40 Plant Diseases and Endangers Human and Animal Health

by Ethan Huff, citizen journalist
See all articles by this author
Email this author
Original article here

(NaturalNews) On September 21, a California federal district court found that the USDA's 2004 approval of Monsanto's genetically engineered "Roundup Ready" sugar beets was unlawful. The USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) deregulated GMO sugar beets without preparing an Environmental Impact Statement. Plaintiffs in the case, filed in January 2008, include the Center for Food Safety, the Organic Seed Alliance, the Sierra Club, and High Mowing Seeds.

Failing to account for cross-pollination of the GMO seeds with nearby fields of conventional and organic varieties was one of many unreasonable deficiencies cited by the court in the original USDA approval of the crop. Plaintiffs in the case are also emphasizing in no uncertain terms that they will not tolerate the continued pandering to the likes of Monsanto by the USDA. The USDA's job is to protect America's growers, farmers, and consumers, not multinational corporations who patent genetically-altered seeds.

When Monsanto originally began marketing its "Roundup Ready" GMO sugar beet seeds, it enticed farmers with promises that the crops could be doused with herbicide up to five times a year without killing the crop. What it failed to disclose was the potential for entire crop fields to be cross-contaminated with genetically modified seeds, devastating the availability of untainted conventional and organic crops. The environmental impact of using GMO seeds is tremendous and could wipe out the non-GMO crops entirely.

Another issue not addressed by APHIS is the fact that continual applications of glyphosate, the herbicide marketed by Monsanto as Roundup, has led to the growth of Roundup-resistant weeds commonly referred to as "superweeds". Similar to antibiotic "superbugs" that become resistant to antibiotics, these superweeds require ever-increasing amounts of not only Roundup but other more potent, toxic herbicides just to keep them under control. There are currently millions of U.S. land acres that are infested with superweeds.

An independent analysis of USDA data by the former Executive Director of the National Academy of Sciences' Board on Agriculture, Dr. Charles Benbrook, has revealed some startling information. Between 1996, when "Roundup Ready" genetically engineered crops were first introduced, and 2004, herbicide use in the U.S. has increased by 138 million pounds.

A 2008 study conducted at the University of Caen in France found that Monsanto's Roundup concoctions triggered the death of human embryonic, placental, and umbilical cells in vitro. The dilution levels used in the study were far below the recommendation levels used in agriculture and were meant to replicate the amount ingested due to residue left on food.

Despite the tremendous victory this case represents, there is still the unfortunate reality that the lead defendant in the case was USDA head Thomas Vilsack, an Obama hand pick who heavily supports genetic engineering. Other appointments to top USDA positions under the Obama administration include many former Monsanto executives, perpetuating the Bush-era legacy of revolving-door politics that favors corporate agribusiness and GMOs at the expense of food freedom and consumer protection.

In his ruling, Judge Jeffrey S. White has scheduled a meeting on October 30 to deliberate the remediation phase of the case that may include injunctive relief against the use of GE sugar beets.

Sources:

Victory! Court Finds USDA Violated Federal Law by Allowing Genetically Engineered Sugar Beets on the Market - The Center for Food Safety

Genetically Engineered Sugar Beet Approval Illegal, Judge Rules - Environment News Service

Glyphosate Formulations Induce Apoptosis and Necrosis in Human Umbilical, Embryonic, and Placental Cells - American Chemical Society

Genetically Engineered Crops, Obama Administration, USDA: Food Politics - gourmet.com

USDA Approval of Genetically Engineered Sugar Beets Ruled Unlawful by Federal Court

Doctors Warn Avoid
Genetically Modified Food
By Jeffrey M. Smith
7-22-9

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine states,"Genetically Modified foods have not been properly tested and pose a serious health risk. There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation." Last May the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) called on "Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community, and the public to avoid GM (genetically modified) foods when possible and provide educational materials concerning GM foods and health risks." They called for a moratorium on GM foods, long-term independent studies, and labeling. AAEM's position paper stated, "Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food," including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. They conclude, "There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation," as defined by recognized scientific criteria. "The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies." More and more doctors are already prescribing GM-free diets. Dr. Amy Dean, a Michigan internal medicine specialist, and board member of AAEM says, "I strongly recommend patients eat strictly non-genetically modified foods." Ohio allergist Dr. John Boyles says "I used to test for soy allergies all the time, but now that soy is genetically engineered, it is so dangerous that I tell people never to eat it." Dr. Jennifer Armstrong, President of AAEM, says, "Physicians are probably seeing the effects in their patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions." World renowned biologist Pushpa M. Bhargava goes one step further. After reviewing more than 600 scientific journals, he concludes that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are a major contributor to the sharply deteriorating health of Americans. Among the population, biologist David Schubert of the Salk Institute warns that "children are the most likely to be adversely effected by toxins and other dietary problems" related to GM foods. He says without adequate studies, the children become "the experimental animals." The experience of actual GM-fed experimental animals is scary. When GM soy was fed to female rats, most of their babies died within three weeks-compared to a 10% death rate among the control group fed natural soy. The GM-fed babies were also smaller, and later had problems getting pregnant. When male rats were fed GM soy, their testicles actually changed color-from the normal pink to dark blue. Mice fed GM soy had altered young sperm. Even the embryos of GM fed parent mice had significant changes in their DNA. Mice fed GM corn in an Austrian government study had fewer babies, which were also smaller than normal. Reproductive problems also plague livestock. Investi-gations in the state of Haryana, India revealed that most buffalo that ate GM cottonseed had complications such as premature deliveries, abortions, infertility, and prolapsed uteruses. Many calves died. In the US, about two dozen farmers reported thousands of pigs became sterile after consuming certain GM corn varieties. Some had false pregnancies; others gave birth to bags of water. Cows and bulls also became infertile when fed the same corn. Food Designed to Produce Toxins GM corn and cotton are engineered to produce their own built-in pesticide in every cell. When bugs bite the plant, the poison splits open their stomach and kills them. Biotech companies claim that the pesticide, called Bt (produced from soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis) has a history of safe use, since organic farmers and others use Bt bacteria spray for natural insect control. The Bt-toxin produced in GM plants, however, is thousands of times more concentrated than natural Bt spray, is designed to be more toxic, has properties of an allergen, and unlike the spray, cannot be washed off the plant. Moreover, studies confirm that even the less toxic natural bacterial spray is harmful. When dispersed by plane to kill gypsy moths in the Pacific Northwest, about 500 people reported allergy or flu-like symptoms. Some had to go to the emergency room. The exact same symptoms are now being reported by farm workers throughout India who have handled Bt cotton. In 2008, based on medical records, the Sunday India reported, "Victims of itching have increased massively this year related to BT cotton farming." American Academy of Environmental Medicine states, "Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation," in-cluding increase in cytokines, which are "associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation"-all on the rise in the US. According to GM food safety expert Dr. Arpad Pusztai, changes in the immune status of GM animals are "a consistent feature of all the studies." Even Monsanto's own research showed significant immune system changes in rats fed Bt corn. A November 2008 study by the Italian government also found that mice have an immune reaction to Bt corn. GM soy and corn each contain two new proteins with allergenic properties, GM soy has up to seven times more trypsin inhibitor-a known soy allergen-and skin prick tests show some people react to GM, but not to non-GM soy. Soon after GM soy was introduced to the UK, soy allergies skyrocketed by 50%. Perhaps the US epidemic of food allergies and asthma is a casualty of genetic manipulation. In India, animals graze on cotton plants after harvest. But when shepherds let sheep graze on Bt cotton plants, thousands died. Post mortems showed severe irritation and black patches in both intestines and liver (as well as enlarged bile ducts). Investigators said preliminary evidence "strongly suggests that the sheep mortality was due to a toxin most probably Bt-toxin." In a small follow-up feeding study by the Deccan Development Society, all sheep fed Bt cotton plants died within 30 days; those that grazed on natural cotton plants remained healthy. In a small village in Andhra Pradesh, buffalo grazed on cotton plants for eight years without incident. On January 3rd, 2008, the buffalo grazed on Bt cotton plants for the first time. All 13 were sick the next day; all died within 3 days. Bt corn was also implicated in the deaths of cows in Germany, and horses, water buffaloes, and chickens in the Philippines. In lab studies, twice the number of chickens fed Liberty Link corn died; 7 of 20 rats fed a GM tomato developed bleeding stomachs; another 7 of 40 died within two weeks. Monsanto's own study showed evidence of poisoning in major organs of rats fed Bt corn, according to top French toxicologist G. E. Seralini. Worst Finding of All-GMOs Remain Inside Us The only published human feeding study revealed what may be the most dangerous problem from GM foods. The gene inserted into GM soy transfers into the DNA of bacteria living inside our intestines and continues to function. This means that long after we stop eating GMOs, we may still have potentially harmful GM proteins produced continuously inside of us. Put more plainly, eating a corn chip produced from Bt corn might transform our intestinal bacteria into living pesticide factories, possibly for the rest of our lives. When evidence of gene transfer is reported at medical conferences around the US, doctors often respond by citing the huge increase of gastrointestinal problems among their patients over the last decade. GM foods might be colonizing the gut flora of North Americans. Scientists at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had warned about all these problems even in the early 1990s. According to documents released from a lawsuit, the scientific consensus at the agency was that GM foods were inherently dangerous, and might create hard-to-detect allergies, poisons, gene transfer to gut bacteria, new diseases, and nutritional problems. They urged their superiors to require rigorous long-term tests. But the White House had ordered the agency to promote biotechnology and the FDA responded by recruiting Michael Taylor, Monsanto's former attorney, to head up the formation of GMO policy. That policy, which is in effect today, denies knowledge of scientists' concerns and declares that no safety studies on GMOs are required. It is up to Monsanto and the other biotech companies to determine if their foods are safe. Mr. Taylor later became Monsanto's vice president. American Academy of Environmental Medicine states, "GM foods have not been properly tested" and "pose a serious health risk." Not a single human clinical trial on GMOs has been published. A 2007 review of published scientific literature on the "potential toxic effects/health risks of GM plants" revealed "that experimental data are very scarce." The author concludes his review by asking, "Where is the scientific evidence showing that GM plants/food are toxicologically safe, as assumed by the biotechnology companies?" Famed Canadian geneticist David Suzuki answers, "The experiments simply haven't been done and we now have become the guinea pigs." He adds, "Anyone that says, 'Oh, we know that this is perfectly safe,' I say is either unbelievably stupid or deliberately lying." Dr. Schubert points out, "If there are problems, we will probably never know because the cause will not be traceable and many diseases take a very long time to develop." If GMOs happen to cause immediate and acute symptoms with a unique signature, perhaps then we might have a chance to trace the cause. This is precisely what happened during a US epidemic in the late 1980s. The disease was fast acting, deadly, and caused a unique measurable change in the blood-but it still took more than four years to identify that an epidemic was even occurring. By then it had killed about 100 Americans and caused 5,000-10,000 people to fall sick or become permanently disabled. It was caused by a genetically engineered brand of a food supplement called L-tryptophan. If other GM foods are contributing to the rise of autism, obesity, diabetes, asthma, cancer, heart disease, allergies, reproductive problems, or any other common health problem now plaguing Americans, we may never know. In fact, since animals fed GMOs had such a wide variety of problems, susceptible people may react to GM food with multiple symptoms. It is therefore telling that in the first nine years after the large scale introduction of GM crops in 1996, the incidence of people with three or more chronic diseases nearly doubled, from 7% to 13%. To help identify if GMOs are causing harm, the AAEM asks their "members, the medical community, and the independent scientific community to gather case studies potentially related to GM food consumption and health effects, begin epidemiological research to investigate the role of GM foods on human health, and conduct safe methods of determining the effect of GM foods on human health." Citizens need not wait for the results before taking the doctors advice to avoid GM foods. People can stay away from anything with soy or corn derivatives, cottonseed and canola oil, and sugar from GM sugar beets-unless it says organic or "non-GMO." If even a small percentage of people choose non-GMO brands, the food industry will likely respond as they did in Europe-by removing all GM ingredients. Thus, American Academy of Environmental Medicine's non-GMO prescription may be a watershed for the US food supply. Jeffrey M. Smith, Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology, is the leading spokesperson on the health dangers of GMOs. His first book, Seeds of Deception is the world's bestselling book on the subject. His second, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, identifies 65 risks of GMOs and demonstrates how superficial government approvals are not competent to find most of them. He invited the biotech industry to respond in writing with evidence to counter each risk, but correctly predicted that they would refuse, since they don't have the data to show that their products are safe. Spilling the Beans, the institute's monthly column, is available at www.reliabletechnology.org. The website also offers eater-friendly tips for avoiding GMOs at home and in restaurants. Contact American Academy of Environmental Medicine at (734) 213-4901; environmentalmed@yahoo.com; www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html. http://www.sentienttimes.com/09/June_July_09/doctors.html

Doctors Warn Avoid Genetically Modified Food

Codex Alimentarius is a system of rules and regulation governing food and medicine to be HARMonized worldwide. This system is not your friend. Watch this video to understand what this will mean for the health of humanity.

Codex Alimentarius - The Sinister Truth Behind Operation Cure-All
(From an original article by Ruth James)

What's really behind Operation Cure-All? Is it just the FDA and FTC taking their power too far? Or is there a deeper, more sinister purpose to this campaign? Who are Codex Alimentarius?

How could a country that prides itself in its freedom of speech, freedom of choice, and freedom of information be facing such severe restrictions in health freedom and dietary supplements? Haven't the people made their will known? Didn't our government pass the Dietary Supplement Health & Education Act of 1994 to insure our right to health supplements?

Indeed, our government did. But the FDA and FTC have found ways to get around that. The laws put in place to protect us are being ignored. And what's worse is that those laws are about to be superseded, if the powers that be have their way.

OPERATION CURE ALL IS JUST ONE MEANS TO AN END
You see, Operation Cure-All is just a tactic, a vehicle, in a much bigger overall plan. It is a result of "Codex Alimentarius" (meaning food code) -- a set of regulations that aim to outlaw any health information in connection with vitamins and limit free access to natural therapies on a worldwide scale.

WHAT'S BEHIND CODEX ALMENTARIUS?
Behind the Codex Alimentarius Commission is the United Nations and the World Health Organization working in conjunction with the multinational pharmaceutical cartel and international banks. Its initial efforts in the US with the FDA were defeated, so it found another ally in the FTC. Now Codex, with the FTC and the pharmaceutical cartel behind it, it threatens to become a trade issue, using the campaign of Operation Cure-All to advance its goals.

Codex began simply enough when the U.N. authorized the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization to develop a universal food code. Their purpose was to 'harmonize' regulations for dietary supplements worldwide and set international safety standards for the purposes of increased trade. Pharmaceutical interests stepped in and began exerting their influence. Instead of focusing on food safety, Codex is using its power to promote worldwide restrictions on vitamins and food supplements, severely limiting their availability and dosages.

REAL GOALS OF CODEX
This is to bring about international 'harmonization.' While global harmony sounds benign, is that the real purpose of this plan? While the stated goal of Codex is to establish unilateral regulations for dietary supplements in every country, the actual goal is to outlaw health products and information on vitamins and dietary supplements, except those under their direct control. These regulations would supersede United States domestic laws without the American people's voice or vote in the matter.

HOW CAN IT BE POSSIBLE?
Americans gasp at the thought. It goes against everything America stands for. Many believe this can't be possible. The truth is, it's not only possible, it's required by the Codex Alimentarius agreement.

In fact, under the terms of the Uruguay Round of GATT, which created the World Trade Organization, the United States agreed to harmonize its domestic laws to the international standards. This includes standards for dietary supplements being developed by the United Nation's Codex Alimentarius Commission's Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Use.

The Uruguay Round Agreements carry explicit language clearly indicating that the U.S. must harmonize to international standards:

"Members are fully responsible under this Agreement for the observance of all provisions.... members shall formulate and implement positive measures and mechanisms in support of the observance of the provisions.... by other than central government bodies." [WTO TBT Agreement at Article 3.5]"

In other words, the federal government must NOT ONLY CHANGE FEDERAL LAW, but must ALSO require state and local governments to change their laws as well to be in accordance with international law.

Not only that, but Codex Alimentarius is now enforceable through the World Trade Organization (WTO). If a country disagrees with or refuses to follow Codex standards, the WTO applies pressure by withdrawing trade privileges and imposing crippling trade sanctions. Congress has already bowed to this pressure several times and so have the governments of many countries.

While the exemption clause (USC 3512(a)(1) and (a)(2) was created to supposedly protect our laws from harmonization to international standards, it has proven to be totally ineffective. The United States has already lost seven trade disputes despite the exemption clause. Due to the enormous pressures put on them by lobbyists from multinational corporations (who contribute millions to congressional campaigns), Congress bowed to pressure and changed U.S. laws.

It appears our government (as well as al others) is being manipulated one way or another to serve the goals of the UN, the World Health Organization and the World Trade Organization. Food control equals people control -- and population control. Is this beginning to sound like world government and one-world order? Could this be the real goal behind Codex Alimentarius?

The United States, Canada, the Europeans, Japan, most of Asia, and South America have already signed agreements pledging total harmonization of their laws including food and drug laws to these international standards in the future.

WHAT CODEX WILL BRING
What can we expect under Codex? To give you an idea, here are some important points:

• Dietary supplements could not be sold for preventive (prophylactic) or therapeutic use.
  
• Potencies would be limited to extremely low dosages. Only the drug companies and the big phytopharmaceutical companies would have the right to produce and sell the higher potency products (at inflated prices).
  
• Prescriptions would be required for anything above the extremely low doses allowed (such as 35 mg. on niacin).
  
• Common foods such as garlic and peppermint would be classified as drugs or a third category (neither food nor drugs) that only big pharmaceutical companies could regulate and sell. Any food with any therapeutic effect can be considered a drug, even benign everyday substances like water.
  
• Codex regulations for dietary supplements would become binding (escape clauses would be eliminated).
  
• All new dietary supplements would be banned unless they go through Codex testing and approval.
  
• Genetically altered food would be sold worldwide without labeling.

According to John Hammell, a legislative advocate and the founder of International Advocates for Health Freedom (IAHF), here is what we have to look forward to:

"If Codex Alimentarius has its way, then herbs, vitamins, minerals, homeopathic remedies, amino acids and other natural remedies you have taken for granted most of your life will be gone. The name of the game for Codex Alimentarius is to shift all remedies into the prescription category so they can be controlled exclusively by the medical monopoly and its bosses, the major pharmaceutical firms. Predictably, this scenario has been denied by both the Canadian Health Food Association and the Health Protection Branch of Canada (HPB).

The Codex Alimentarius proposals already exist as law in Norway and Germany where the entire health food industry has literally been taken over by the drug companies. In these countries, vitamin C above 200 mg is illegal as is vitamin E above 45 IU, vitamin B1 over 2.4 mg and so on. Shering-Plough, the Norway pharmaceutical giant, now controls an Echinacea tincture, which is being sold there as an over the counter drug at grossly inflated prices. The same is true of ginkgo and many other herbs, and only one government controlled pharmacy has the right to import supplements as medicines which they can sell to health food stores, convenience stores or pharmacies."

It is now a criminal offence in parts of Europe to sell herbs as foods. An agreement called EEC6565 equates selling herbs as foods to selling other illegal drugs. Action is being taken to accelerate other European countries into 'harmonization' as well.

Paul Hellyer in his book, "The Evil Empire," states: "Codex Alimentarius is supported by international banks and multinational corporations including some in Canada, and is in reality a bill of rights for these banks and the corporations they control. It will hand over our sovereign rights concerning who may or may not invest in our countries to an unelected world organization run by big business. The treaty would make it impossible for Canadian legislators either federal or provincial to alter or improve environmental standards for fear of being sued by multinational corporations whether operating in Canada or not.

This will create a world without borders ruled by a virtual dictatorship of the world's most powerful central banks and multinational companies. This world is an absolute certainty if we all sit on our hands and do nothing."

This is the future the FDA and FTC are striving to bring us via Codex harmonization. Is this a future we are going to willingly accept or prevent?

WHY TARGET THE INTERNET?
It is no accident that the FDA and FTC are targeting Internet health sites through Operation Cure-All. We are standing in the doorway of an unprecedented revolution -- the information revolution brought about by the Internet.

Now all people everywhere have the ability to learn about anything that interests them with just a few clicks. History has shown that informed, educated people change civilizations -- they change the flow of thought and they change the flow of money. They can even change the direction of a country. When similar transitions have happened in the past, the powers that existed did not give up willingly. The Catholic Church fiercely protected its practice of selling 'indulgences' as a forgiveness of sin. When the practice was abolished, the Catholic Church lost a great deal of power and money.

When the printing press was invented, books were banned and printers were imprisoned by the authorities, who feared an educated public could not be governed. In the same way, the medical monopoly (and the UN) now fears that a public educated in health and privy to the shortcomings of modern medicine could not be controlled. Loss of control means loss of revenue and loss of power. And they are doing everything they can to stop progress so they can contain their losses and strengthen their power.

The printing press changed the world. Can you imagine what life would be like today if the book banners had their way? But because the printing press won out, society progressed and freedom was embraced. The Internet is changing the world in an equally significant way. While the entire Internet can hardly be suppressed, the pharma-cartels and their backers are looking to protect their interests by restricting as much information as they can on the Internet.

Will we, the people, win out again -- or will the UN and the World Health Organization agenda and the pharmaceutical cartel change the course of history and take us back to the "dark ages" of medicine?

WHAT CAN WE DO?
Step number one is learn as much as possible about this issue. Here are some websites where you will find a great deal of information:

John Hammell's International Advocates for Health Freedom
website: http://www.iahf.com

"The Health Movement Against Codex Alimentarius" - article from Dr. Rath's website: http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/PHARMACEUTICAL_BUSINESS/health_movement_against_codex/index.htm#top

'U.S. and European Leaders Agree on Principles to Harmonize Dietary Supplement Regulations: 'http://www.crnusa.org/shellnr112000.html

Federal Register where the FDA states its intention to harmonize with Codex standards: http://iahf.com/codx-fda.txt

Read, "WHOSE TRADE ORGANIZATION? Corporate Globalization and the Erosion of Democracy" by By Lori Wallach and Michelle Sforza,

Public Citizens Global Trade Watch:
http://www.tradewatch.org/publications/wtobook.htm

Sign the petition - Click on 'Sign Health Freedom Petition:'
http://www.iahf.com/index2.html

Also sign the European Anti-Codex petition at: www.laleva.cc

Signing petitions is fine, but not nearly as effective as writing to your congressmen and congresswomen. Write to them insisting we hold a PROPER Oversight Hearing on Codex. An oversight hearing was held in March, but the truth was not allowed to come out. Witness who could have exposed what was going on, and who wanted to testify, were denied the opportunity to testify. Congress is strongly resisting another Codex hearing, telling their constituents it is not necessary. This could not be further from the truth.

Contact information for representatives: http://www.house.gov
Contact information for senators: http://www.senate.gov

Codex Alimentarius 101

On June 30th, 2009, The European Union food agency showed the world once again where their allegiance lies, and I'll give you one guess where that is. If you said with the people you are dead wrong. They have sided with the bio-tech and big agriculture to conclude that GMO corn is "safe". This directly flies in the face of consumers in Europe, who have rejected GMO products and forced companies food companies to take GMO ingredients out of their products. The same products which in the US have GMO ingredients.

Bio-Tech industries, including Monsanto, have claimed that their goal is to have all food to be genetically engineered. There are three reasons why this may be their goal.

1. Blind ignorance to the documented dangers of genetic engineering in most of the scientific experiments, due to the belief that their products will save world hunger.
2. Greed: Control all the food and you make all the profit.
3. The depopulation agenda: Poison the world and you will get rid of the biggest problem: too many people.

Unfortunately for you and me, answer number 3 is likely the real reason. Again and again, the power elite eugenicists have proclaimed there are too many people, and they are actively trying reduce the population.

Search engine: eugenics, depopulation and watch this movie to understand what I mean:


Here are some links to articles about this blasphemous decision by the EU food agency:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hQS0TB-JFJzvzAO6bX8VXT__XnGw


http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/8584465

GMO corn is safe according to the EU food agency

Monolithic agribusiness & biotech corporations like Monsanto are gaining more and more power over our food supply, thanks in part to Congress creating policies that give them competitive advantage while harming small farmers & competitors, but also because we consume their products every day, without knowing it.

Want to do something about it? For starters, watch this video:

Now go to the institute for responsible technology and learn what GMO's are and how to avoid eating them.

You can also go to my post:

NON-GMO shopping guide

cheers!

2 ways you may be helping Monsanto everyday

NON-GMO Shopping Guide

NON-GMO shopping guide

Who will pay for health care?

Get GMO's out of my food supply