Four years ago I watched The World According to Monsanto, and was horrified to learn that I had been feeding my children poison. We had switched Chandler to a SCD diet the year before, and saw dramatic improvement in his behavior, language, happiness, relationships, and his puffy belly went flat. Check out my posts on his gains from the spring of 2007:
I wondered if his healing was not just because I had been giving him only simple sugars, but also because this diet was now organic, and he was not getting GMOs any more.
I wrote about it in post entitled, Monsanto GMOs: My Questions about Monsanto's GMOs and Autism. I got a response from Árpád Pusztai, one of the worlds experts on Lectins who got Wakefielded when he discovered that gm foods caused autoimmunity, GI problems and acted as an adjuvant in lab rats. He said, yes, it was plausiblethat GMOs could be facilitating some of the damage we see in our kids with an "autism" diagnosis.
Now THE master of the GMO fight, Jeffrey Smith is confirming that it is likely part of the assault on our kids is by Monsanto and her sister witches. He gave an amazing presentation at Autism One, and if there is only one speech you watch from that conference, it should be this one. This is the speech he gave there. And this is not just for those with autism. Everyone with a mouth should watch this.
Our children have been eating poisoned foods. Keep in mind, this substance is one of the "inert" ingredients in Roundup, that actually turned out to be more deadly than the actual herbicide itself.
Weed-Whacking Herbicide Proves Deadly to Human Cells
Used in gardens, farms, and parks around the world, the weed killer Roundup contains an ingredient that can suffocate human cells in a laboratory, researchers say
By Crystal Gammon and Environmental Health News
WEED KILLER: New research has found that an 'inert' ingredient in the herbicide Roundup can kill human embryonic, placental, and umbilical cord cells
Used in yards, farms and parks throughout the world, Roundup has long been a top-selling weed killer. But now researchers have found that one of Roundup’s inert ingredients can kill human cells, particularly embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells.
The new findings intensify a debate about so-called “inerts” — the solvents, preservatives, surfactants and other substances that manufacturers add to pesticides. Nearly 4,000 inert ingredients are approved for use by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Glyphosate, Roundup’s active ingredient, is the most widely used herbicide in the United States. About 100 million pounds are applied to U.S. farms and lawns every year, according to the EPA.
Until now, most health studies have focused on the safety of glyphosate, rather than the mixture of ingredients found in Roundup. But in the new study, scientists found that Roundup’s inert ingredients amplified the toxic effect on human cells—even at concentrations much more diluted than those used on farms and lawns.
One specific inert ingredient, polyethoxylated tallowamine, or POEA, was more deadly to human embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells than the herbicide itself – a finding the researchers call “astonishing.”
“This clearly confirms that the [inert ingredients] in Roundup formulations are not inert,” wrote the study authors from France’s University of Caen. “Moreover, the proprietary mixtures available on the market could cause cell damage and even death [at the] residual levels” found on Roundup-treated crops, such as soybeans, alfalfa and corn, or lawns and gardens.
The research team suspects that Roundup might cause pregnancy problems by interfering with hormone production, possibly leading to abnormal fetal development, low birth weights or miscarriages.
Monsanto, Roundup’s manufacturer, contends that the methods used in the study don’t reflect realistic conditions and that their product, which has been sold since the 1970s, is safe when used as directed. Hundreds of studies over the past 35 years have addressed the safety of glyphosate.
“Roundup has one of the most extensive human health safety and environmental data packages of any pesticide that's out there,” said Monsanto spokesman John Combest. “It's used in public parks, it's used to protect schools. There's been a great deal of study on Roundup, and we're very proud of its performance.”
Just to break in here for a second... Round up is protecting schools? From what, giant killer weeds that attack school children?
Apparently this guy has studied "Thank You For Smoking" in depth.
The EPA considers glyphosate to have low toxicity when used at the recommended doses.
“Risk estimates for glyphosate were well below the level of concern,” said EPA spokesman Dale Kemery. The EPA classifies glyphosate as a Group E chemical, which means there is strong evidence that it does not cause cancer in humans.
In addition, the EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture both recognize POEA as an inert ingredient. Derived from animal fat, POEA is allowed in products certified organic by the USDA. The EPA has concluded that it is not dangerous to public health or the environment.
Pardon me again... but does any one believe anything the EPA says anymore?
The French team, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini, a University of Caen molecular biologist, said its results highlight the need for health agencies to reconsider the safety of Roundup.
“The authorizations for using these Roundup herbicides must now clearly be revised since their toxic effects depend on, and are multiplied by, other compounds used in the mixtures,” Seralini’s team wrote.
Controversy about the safety of the weed killer recently erupted in Argentina, one of the world’s largest exporters of soy.
And why were they not buying it? Because dairys who didn't use it started labeling their product as Non BGH milk, educating the consumer that it was out there.
And who was the first dairy to do this and to have to face down Monsanto's lawyers for it? OAKHURST DAIRY OF PORTLAND, MAINE!
Our little Maine milk makers started labeling their milk, "Our Farmers' Pledge: No Artificial Growth Hormones Used." Monsanto did not like that because it implied that there was something bad about BGH milk. Oakhurst decided that they had a duty to consumers and kept the labeling, and because they stared down the Mean Monsanto, other Maine dairies followed, and dairies followed nationally.
So thanks to Oakhurst for looking out for the consumer, and let's hope that no one is interested in buying the looser product, Posilac, and it goes the way of the dinosaur.
Now can you see why Monsanto is fighting labeling their genetically modified foods as such? Once people find out what they are eating, they give a damn and won't buy this stuff.
After writing my last piece on the questions on the link between GMO's and Autism based on the comments of Dr. Arpad Pusztai in "The World According to Monsanto", I wrote to Dr. Pusztai and asked if he thought the ideas may be plausible ones.
He has not read the post yet, as he is traveling, but after reading the summary of the ideas in my email to him, he thought that the idea that the adjuvant properties of GMO's are setting our kids up for vaccine injury was a plausible one.
Here is his response:
Unfortunately, I have not had the time to read your second bit but I shall do so soon. However, I have found your ideas on the possible adjuvant role of GMOs very convincing.
You know there is quite a bit of evidence that the Cry toxins from Bacillus thuringiensis are strong immune stimulants and also immune adjuvants. Moreover, in GM-peas (not commercially available) even the transgenically expressed bean alpha-amylase inhibitor (not allergenic in beans) becomes an allergen and and immune adjuvant when its gene is transferred to peas.
There is now ample evidence to reinforce our original observation... that one of the unintended and unpredicted consequences of genetic engineering is the inducement of immune changes in the recipients, particularly in their mucosal (gut) immune system.
I shall attach our 2006 scientific review in which you will find more material on this.
So, your idea that in addition to the adjuvants (thiomersal, aluminium, etc) used in vaccines, if the diets contain immune adjuvants originating from GMOs and in receptive individuals, one may reinforce the possibly unwanted immune consequences of vaccination. This may be one too many of the immune changes that contribute to the development of autism in a genetic subset of individuals.
I am sorry that your child may be one these unfortunate individuals. It is possible that you may shut the doors after the horses bolted but I very strongly advise you to keep an eye on your child's diet and avoid GM corn, GM rice, etc at all cost. Although the Americans have difficulties to maintain the GM free status of even organic foodstuffs, please, do your best to cut out all GM from the diet. Write to Ronnie Cummins at OCA (ronnie@organicconsumers.org) for advice if you have not done so already.
Watching The World According to Monsanto, I was struck by the section of the film about Árpád Pusztai’s research that showed that rats fed GMO potatoes developed gut problems and an immune response. The section is as follows:
Árpád Pusztai, world renowned scientist lost his job when he warned about GE (genetically engineered or genetically modified) foods.
1998 Aberdeen, Scotland
Árpád Pusztai worked for the Rowett Institute in Scotland. At the Ministry of Agriculture’s request, he lead a study on genetically modified potatoes with a budget of over two million Euros and a staff of 30 researchers, to prepare the arrival of GMOs in Great Britain.
"We were all enthusiastic about it… I was enthusiastic about it… The ministry thought that if we did this study, looking at all aspects, then it would be an endorsement of GM and when they introduce it, they will say that the foremost laboratory in Europe… nutritional laboratory… had looked at them and found them all right."
Árpád Pusztai specializes in lectins, these proteins function as an insecticide protecting plants against aphids. Rowett scientists had created potatoes that were resistant to aphids, and into which they introduced a snowdrop gene which produces the lectin in question. Beforehand they verified that in their naturally occurring state, lectins themselves do not pose a health risk.
The genetically modified potatoes were tested on rats.
"It had a twofold effect. First it started to increase a proliferative response in the gut… and that you don’t like… because this is possibly… I am not saying it is cancerous… but what it does… it can have an adjuvant effect on any chemical… any chemically induced tumor.
The other thing is that the immune system was certainly… got into high gear. And that was… we don’t know whether that is good or bad. But it certainly did recognize the GM potatoes as alien. And we were convinced that this insertion is causing the problem and not the trans gene. As I said, the trans gene when we did it in isolation, even at 800 fold concentration, didn’t do any harm.
It was a very important point because the American FDA is going on by mutual Technology. And what we did say and what we did publish actually corroborated and confirmed that it was not the trans gene that was the problem, but it was the technology."
When Pusztai was interviewed by the BBC, with permission from his bosses, he stated:
"As a scientist actively working on the field, I find that it is very, very unfair to use our fellow citizens as guinea pigs."
The day after the statement was broadcast, Pusztai was fired and the team was dismantled.
While watching this, I put together a few things:
1. Dr. Pusztai’s finding, that GM potatoes triggered gut problems and an immune response.
2. The additional section of the documentary which discussed the migration of trans genes (genes that have been genetically modified and inserted into cells that then become a part of the DNA) from GM corn sold in the US to native corn grown in rural southern Mexico.
3. A comment that David Kirby made in his column that reported on the March 11th CDC conference call that discussed the Hanna Poling mitochondrial disorder and its link to autism.
Kirby wrote:
"Some researchers believe that the modern American diet is largely to blame for an increase in the number of children whose underlying mitochondrial dysfunction is "triggered" into autism by febrile infections.
The answer, they hypothesize, is corn.
The American diet has become extraordinarily dependent on corn oil and corn syrup used in processing, these experts contend. They say that corn oil and syrup are inflammatory, whereas fish oil is anti-inflammatory. Could our diet be a factor in making this mutated gene become more pathogenic?"
In an email conversation with Mr. Kirby while he was researching that conference call, he wrote to me that:
"One of the top scientists I spoke with today said the increase in autism in America was due to consumption of corn"
His comments in the article about the theoretical corn/inflammation link to autism were straight from a high level scientist involved with the CDC and on that conference call.
Putting all these together, my questions are these:
||Could not just over exposure to corn be the problem, but exposure to genetically modified corn, presumably that used the same problematic technology as Dr. Pusztai’s believed was to blame for the gut inflammation and immune response in his rats that were eating genetically modified potatoes?||
||And what exactly does the CDC believe to be the relationship between the American diet, overconsumption of corn products, inflammation and autism?||
||And if they believe, or even suspect, that inflammation is at play in the bodies of children with autism, why have they not stated this publicly and encouraged research and treatment along these lines?||
||And if they believe there might be a link, then why are they not investigating and promoting the Specific Carbohydrate Diet that removes corn products?||
Most vaccine induced regressions happen after a child's first birthday, around 18 months to age two, after they have begun eating processed foods; and we have no way of knowing if those were GMO foods unless we only bought foods that were labeled organic.
||Was there an inflammatory/autoimmune response already going on in our children, due to the gm foods they were consuming, that set them up for vaccine injuries because they had taken in one adjuvant too many?||
Remember Dr. Pusztai's words, "it can have an adjuvant effect on any chemical"
The standard contraindication for vaccination is the illness of the child because their immune system is not properly regulated to safely accept the vaccine. Parents are taught not to vaccinate when their child has a cold or the flu or any other viral illness. But if our kids had dis regulated immune systems at the time of vaccination due to GM food derived immune system over stimulation, we would have no way of knowing, and would be presumably be putting our kids at risk for further immune system damage by vaccinating at a time of immune activation.
Corn is a problem for many of our kids. Because genetically modified food products are not labeled, we have no way of figuring out if our kids are having problems with corn, or GM corn. Or if one causes a bigger problem than the other. In fact we have no way of knowing at all what GM foods might be doing to our children.
Chandler drank milk by the truck load before he regressed, it was probably Bovine Growth Hormone milk, which is found to have inflammatory effects on the cows and because of the illness of the cows puss is in the milk, as well as the antibiotics that were given to the cows to counter the infections. To say nothing of the hormone itself which also may be in the milk.
||So is the very good response that my own son had to the GFCF/SCD Diet, which removes grains, dairy and processed foods, and encourages eating only organic foods, due in part to the fact that he is no longer eating pro-inflammatory genetically modified foods?||
The way most of the interventions that help our kids are discovered are by happy accidents, we find something that helps them, then spend 5 years trying to figure out exactly why it works for them.
||What if the SCD diet worked not just because it was removing complex carbohydrates that feed yeast, but also because it was removing foods that were having an adjuvant effect on him?||
His belly went from puffy (suggesting gut inflammation) to flat in about three weeks.
There has not been any discussion that I know of surrounding the potential role of GM foods and autism in our community. I am assuming because, like me, none of us knew our kids were eating them. It is certainly an important discussion to be had as many of our kids on GFCF diets will continue to eat processed foods with genetically modified ingredients. The most immediate treatment question that jumps to mind is:
||Are poor responders to the GFCF diet still getting so many processed GM foods that gut inflammation and autoimmune responses remains high and negates much of the good the diet may do them?||
But bottom line for me, the biggest question I have is:
||WHAT THE HELL HAVE I BEEN FEEDING MY CHILDREN FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS???||
UPDATE:
I TOTALLY FORGOT ABOUT PESTICIDES AND HERBICIDES!
These plants are being engineered so that they can be doused in Roundup herbicide and so that they produce their own pesticides, and we already have evidence that bug and weed killers are implicated in autism and mitochondrial disorders, which HHS and Julie Gerberding herself say are at play in vaccine injuries that produce autism 'symptoms'.
“Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe for the safety of biotech food, our interest is in selling as much as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”
Phil Angell
Director of Corporate Communication – Monsanto
New York Times, Oct. 25, 1998
"Monsanto came to Arthur Anderson to look at how they wanted to position themselves, and they asked them, 'where do you want to be with Monsanto in 20 or 30 years?' And the answer was, 'We want to control the global food supply".
- Kirk Azevedo, former Monsanto employee
If you eat food, you need to watch this documentary:
The World According to Monsanto (updated: found a working source for the film)
I have never understood what the big complaints about genetically modified foods were all about. If you can breed a plant to be resistant to bugs or more fruitful, if you can get a cow to give more milk, why would that be a bad thing? People have been cross breeding plans for thousands of years. I assumed that bioengineered foods would be tested like crazy by the FDA, not allowed into the food supply if they were problematic and would be labeled as GMOs (genetically modified organisms) in the grocery store, because in this country we have to have full disclosure in the packaging of our food.
I figured that when they did come on the market, I would just avoid them for a few years to make sure that there were not problems en mass. You don’t buy a new model car the first year on the market, you don’t take a new vaccine (Gardasil) or medication as soon as it is introduced, and you don’t eat stuff that has ingredients that have not had a safety history of at least a few years, right?
On March 11th this documentary on Monsanto’s business practices and their introduction of GMOs into the food supply aired on French television. Apparently we have all been eating genetically modified foods for a decade or so. 70% of the items at the grocery store contain GM foods. They are not labeled as such, and, as I was with vaccines, apparently I was very naive about the FDA’s regulatory process.
Instead of testing GMO foods for safety, the FDA decided that they were similar enough to the original food product to just be considered equivalent to the original food product, and GMOs do not even have to go through as stringent a regulatory process as a new food dye or preservative.
As with vaccines, the FDA does not do any testing of their own, but just reviews the company’s safety studies; but just taking the word of a company that already has a history of very serious abuses of the public, like the PCB poisoning in Anniston, Alabama that Monsanto was responsible for, is monumentally foolish. Internal Monsanto documents showed that the contamination in Anniston was so serious that fish put in the local waters died in THREE AND A HALF MINUTES, but Monsanto decided to continue what they were doing because, "…we can’t afford to loose one dollar".
Watch the documentary to see what happened to the poor, black population of Anniston. (If this was done in a town full of white people with money, you probably would have heard about it long before now. We tend to draw more attention when we complain that our kids are being poisoned).
As with vaccines, the Monsanto GMO safety studies turn out to be junk, that actually claim the opposite of what a well designed study might find. (If you don’t want to find a problem, only look where you know you won’t find it!) The parallels to Verstraeten, Denmark and Fombonne and the like are obvious to anyone in our community.
This is a two hour documentary, so pick a night this week, grab your spouse and watch it. This is really important.
I lost track of how many whistle blowers, previously highly respected scientists, were fired and had their reputations trashed for reporting that their findings showed that Monsanto’s GMO products were not safe or reported the million dollar bribes that Monsanto was offering to regulators. Researchers found they caused problems in cell division, which is step one in the development of cancer, and that the bodies of animals reacted to the GMO food as a foreign substance to be attacked, stimulating the immune system. (Does this set off any alarms for anyone? More on this in my follow up post.)
I also lost track of how many cotton farmers in India had committed suicide because of Monsanto’s take over of the industry. Was it 600 last year and then another 600 so far this year? Monsanto sells the seed, which are marketed as growing plants that are resistant to a certain problematic bug, at very high prices, but it apparently doesn’t even protect against the bug, and often take on a blight and dies. Farmers, rather than being faced with the shame of loosing everything, are killing themselves by the hundreds.
And because Monsanto has flooded the market with their seeds, it is apparently next to impossible for the farmers to get a hold of regular seeds any more.
Which leads us to the craziest thing about this whole story. That Monsanto had patented seeds (how did the supreme court decide that was legal?), and by flooding the market, gotten rid of other seeds (if they are not being grown and re harvested every year, plant lines die out, and in about a decade, Monsanto has come to own like 90% of the world's seeds. Farmers using these seeds cannot save the Monsanto owned seeds from a previous crop and replant. They have to re buy them every year from Monsanto, and the corporation is suing local farmers suspected of resowing seed. Even when they haven't and can prove they bought the seed. Apparently Monsanto is now the Stalin of the Farm Belt infiltrating local farming communities, showing up incognito at local meetings and encouraging farmers to report on each other.
If a truck driving by your land accidentally drops a seed and it grows on your property, Monsanto can sue you. And apparently is suing people for seeds that have blown on to their land and taken root. Farmers are giving up fighting these law suits, that drag on for years, because they can't afford protracted legal battles, and just paying Monsanto a settlement.
Additionally, Monsanto is patenting regular seeds, seeds that have been around forever, so that they can just put them in a vault and not let anyone use them.
So Monsanto is basically poised to own food. All food. It is like something out of a movie, but apparently Monsanto is more clever than Hollywood, because not even the X-Files came up with a conspiracy plot to own all the food in the world.
Oh and by the way their food may cause cancer and autoimmune disorders.
I can’t even explain all the problems that this documentary brings to light in the US, the UK, Canada, Mexico, Argentina and India. Monsanto declined to be interviewed for the documentary and has not commented on it, but their web site assures us that they are working ethically.
For anyone who criticizes the autism community for their mistrust of the federal regulators, big pharma and the revolving door between the two where one day someone is working for the government on vaccine safety, the next they are a high paid pharma employee and next year they are back in government regulation (or even doing both at the same time), this documentary shows in living color that our mistrust is not only founded, but probably not distrustful enough.
This story is our story. Replace Merck for Monsanto, replace FDA/CDC for the FDA and replace vaccine for food, and this is what parents like me have been bitching about.
Our kids are getting sick, and when we look into how the sausage that is being injected into our kids is made, this is the junk we are finding.
Our sick babies are the canaries in the coal mine of this toxic world. It is long past time for us all to wake up and realize that we might have been wise to listen to those crazy, drama club drop out hippies screaming about FrankenFoods in the 1990’s. They might have been crazy and dramatic, but they might not have been wrong.
UPDATE: In the mean time... if you want more information, check out Mercola's post on the subject.
ANOTHER UPDATE: If you have Netfix, go watch the 2004 documentary "The Future of Food". It serves as a prequel to this documentary.
Interestingly, one man is featured in both films. He is one of the fired researchers in The World According to Monsanto, but was still employed during The Future of Food. He was a professor at Berkley. Berkley for petes sake! When Berkley starts firing professors for standing up to corrupt multinationals for the sake of indigenous foods and rural farmers who grow them, that is pretty much a sign of the end times.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Here is a 2007 Documentary called Genetically Modified Organisms - Unnatural Selection:
It's a Monsanto UPDATE weekend:
Monsanto is currently applying to patent pigs.
You heard me right, they want to own all pigs.
Last year they applied for a patent on a gene that is found in pigs. A pre-existing gene that has always been in pigs and that Monsanto had absolutely nothing to do with, and if it is granted, they will own almost all pigs everywhere. If this is legal, then anyone with enough money and hubris can walk into the patent office and claim the rights to a gene sequence in any living thing, whether they created it or not, and they could become the legal property of said entity and anyone using them must pay a licensing fee to the patent holder.
Further, if two pigs get the natural urge to get funky and do what pigs do and they make a little piglet, the pigs will have violated Monsanto's patent because only Monsanto would be allowed to say who can make little piglets and how. Said owner of the two pigs could then be sued by Monsanto. And we know that Monsanto LOVES to sue farmers. They have threatened thousands of farmers with lawsuits, sued hundreds and reaped millions in settlements. They have a $10 million budget and a staff of 75 devoted solely to prosecuting farmers.
They have already done it with seeds, now they have moved on to livestock. Where exactly does that end? If they patent a gene that is in my kidney, do I have to pay them every time I go pee pee?
Watch this 2007 German documentary.
I wish there were not so much info out there to UPDATE with:
Monsanto bullies Fox News into pulling a Bovine Growth Hormone story and Fox fires the journalists because they would not change the story to conform to Monsanto's demands:
More UPDATEed milk information:
UPDATE:
Monsanto GMO's and food allergies, toxic foods (new toxins never seen before) and inadequate and missing testing.
