ISIS Press Release 28/04/08 Agrobacterium & Morgellons Disease, A GM Connection?

Finally someone is taking the connection between GMO and Morgellons disease seriously. Here is a report released today:

Preliminary findings suggest a link between Morgellons Disease and Agrobacterium, a soil bacterium extensively manipulated and used in making GM crops; has genetic engineering created a new epidemic? 

Dr. Mae-Wan Ho and Prof. Joe Cummins

Excerpt:

Extensive genetic manipulation of Agrobacterium does have the potential to transform it into an aggressive human pathogen. Genetic engineering is nothing if not enhanced and facilitated horizontal gene transfer and recombination, which is widely acknowledged to be the main route for creating new pathogens. Mae-Wan Ho was among an international panel of scientists have raised this very issue in 1998, calling for a public enquiry into the possible contributions of genetic engineering biotechnology to the aetiology of infectious diseases which has greatly increased since genetic engineering began in the 1970s [16]. 

The epidemiological data of Morgellons Disease are very incomplete, and the Morgellons Research Foundation’s registry of more than 12 000 families afflicted worldwide is almost certainly only a fraction of the emerging epidemic. Still, it is significant that the majority of the cases are in the United States, the first country to release GM crops and remaining the top producer ever since.

Read the entire article HERE.

The World According to Monsanto Expose’ Disappears from the Internet!

The excellent French documentary titled “The World According to Monsanto – A documentary that Americans won’t ever see,” is evidently living up to its name. When I first became aware of this movie, I immediately watched it, then placed it on my websites. Today I checked the link, and found that the video is gone. In fact, when I typed the title “The World According to Monsanto” into the Google search engine, I couldn’t find the full video anywhere.

 

This is a call for action. If you find this video anywhere on the Internet, please let me know. If you haven’t seen it, you need to. If you have seen it, you know what a powerful video it is for exposing the corruption of Monsanto and the U.S. government. If Google Video has removed this documentary in acquiescence to the U.S. government or Monsanto, then that is testimony to the power and corruption behind the massive corporate movement to wage war on the environment and all living things in the pursuit of profit and power, the people be damned.

 

Siv O’Neall states:

 

The gospel according to Monsanto is that their patented GM seeds and their bovine growth hormone (BGH) will increase worldwide production of agricultural, dairy and meat products and Bt cotton to the extent that worldwide hunger and poverty will be eradicated.

 

The actual truth is rather the opposite. GMOs are creating serious damage all over the world and artificial BGH injection in cows cause numerous health problems, and even death.

 

Monsanto is not held back by any considerations of ethics and it hides the reality of its sordid machinations behind a wall of secrecy. Everything Monsanto does is exclusively with the intent of increasing its own profit – everything else be damned. [2008]

 

This is an information war, and it is highly possible that either Google Video is doing its part to help the corporate giant pull the wool over the public’s eyes so it can poison the planet with impunity, or has been threatened. Fight back! Spread the word and try to find a source for this extremely important expose’ about collusion between the U.S. government and Monsanto. It is too important to put off. Our planet is in imminent peril because of the machinations of this evil corporation.

 

If left to its own devices it (Monsanto) will most certainly destroy the livelihood of millions of farmers – a process begun a decade ago in India and certainly in many other countries as well. The planet’s ecosystems will be seriously threatened by unnatural ways of changing agricultural patterns. The dangers of GMO cultivation to the environment come in many forms:

 

·         Switching from age-old biodiverse crops that can tolerate low-level amounts of water to industrial monocultures of crops such as GM soya, cotton, sugarcane, etc. that require large amounts of irrigation.

·         Inundating cultivated lands with toxic herbicides, in particular the dangerous Monsanto product Roundup, to which the GMO seeds have been made biotechnically resistant. Any other growth should succumb to Roundup, were it not for the fact that weeds to a very large extent become Roundup resistant.

·         Putting an end to biological farming and poisoning non GM cultures through pollenization from GM crops and accidental exposure to Roundup herbicide.

·         Deforestation to make more land available for the culture of the GM seeds Monsanto sells at high prices to poor farmers. [O’Neall, 2008]

 

This issue is too important to put off. Please, try to find the video. People need to have this information. “The World According to Monsanto” is one of the most important videos I have ever seen. Help expose Monsanto!

 

 

© 2008 Barbara H. Peterson

 

References:

 

O’Neall, S. (2008). The World According to Monsanto – A documentary that Americans won’t ever see. The Intelligence Daily. 

GMO – A Dangerous Experiment

The problems with Genetically Modified (GM) foods are as many as they are varied. Respected scientists have risked everything to step forward and warn consumers that this new fast-track “solution to world hunger” is bad for their health and the environment, but to little avail. Giant agri-business companies such as Monsanto forge ahead to flood the world’s food chain with experimental technologies that are proving to be harmful to life. The worst part is, the longer this reckless experiment is allowed to go on, the closer we get to a complete planetary takeover by Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). 

The GMO Cover-up

Dr. Arpad Pusztai, PhD, FRSE, “one of the few genuinely independent scientists specializing in plant genetics and animal feeding studies” (OCA, 2005), worked for the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland in 1998. During his employment, he was commissioned to study potatoes “fitted” or genetically modified (GM) with a lectin gene from Galanthus Nivalis, a European plant. He inserted the gene into the potatoes himself, then fed the GM potatoes to lab rats in order to document the effects. What he found was that these potatoes had damaged the organs of the rats and depressed their immune systems. On August 10, 1998, Dr. Pusztai appeared on a British documentary and issued a warning to the public about the inadequate testing of GM foods, and revealed his test results. For his candor, Dr. Pusztai was accused of incompetence, and forced to retire.

A scandal ensued after Dr. Pusztai raised questions about the safety of GM potatoes. Accusations that Monsanto used its influence to ram the technology through with bribery and coercion were made, as chronicled by the Doric Column (1999):

12 February 1999: Twenty scientists from 14 countries who have examined Pusztai’s report accuse Rowett of bowing to political pressure. The group calls for a moratorium on GM crops.  

13 February 1999: The British government “rejects calls for a moratorium amid allegations that it is in the pocket of the biotech industry.”  

14 February 1999: Rowett is reported to have received £140,000 from Monsanto before the blow-up.  

Dr Pusztai was later “asked by the German authorities in the autumn of 2004 to examine Monsanto’s own 1,139-page report on the feeding of MON863 to laboratory rats over a 90-day period” (OCA, 2005). He was forced to sign a “declaration of secrecy,” or gag order before Monsanto would allow him to see the report. 

This would not be so bad if it were not for the fact that Dr Pusztai’s evaluation was highly critical of both the methods and the findings of the study, indicating that MON863 maize by no means has a “clean bill of health.” Subsequent leaks from France, Germany and Belgium suggest that the maize variety may indeed be unsafe for animal or human consumption, and that a major cover-up is under way, designed to protect the corporate giant Monsanto and the regulatory authorities that have prematurely advised that MON863 is perfectly safe. (GM-Free Ireland, 2005).

His concerns regarding the dangers of MON863 maize after seeing the report were the same as several German and other European scientists, “but the German Government refused to publish their findings, and insisted that Dr Pusztai should respect his “gagging order”” (OCA, 2005).

Not to be held back in its rush to give the okay to GMO foods and the questionable technology behind them, The European Safety Authority commissioned its own set of experts to conclude that,

MON863 was perfectly safe and wholesome. More seriously, in the EFSA Statement, and in subsequent Monsanto press releases, Dr Pusztai was named and criticized in spite of the fact that it was known by all concerned that he was effectively “gagged” and could not defend himself. (OCA, 2005)

Independent Research Confirms – GMO Food is Dangerous 

On October 10[2005], during the symposium over genetic modification, which was organized by the National Association for Genetic Security (NAGS), Doctor of Biology Irina Ermakova made public the results of the research led by her at the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS). This is the first research that determined clear dependence between eating genetically modified soy and the posterity of living creatures (Regnum, 2005). 

Over half of the rats born to mothers who ate GM-soy (55-56%) were dead in three weeks, as opposed to a 9% mortality rate in rats whose mothers ate normal soy. “The morphology and biochemical structures of rats are very similar to those of humans, and this makes the results we obtained very disturbing,” said Irina Ermakova to NAGS press office. (Regnum, 2005) 

Another glaring example of the dangers of GMO food is that of Syngenta and the German farmer, Gottfried Glockner of North Hessen. As William Engdahl explains in Seeds of Destruction, 

This farmer found evidence that planting Syngenta Bt-176 genetically engineered corn to feed his cattle in 1997 had been responsible for killing off his cattle, destroying his milk production, and poisoning his farmland. Syngenta’s Bt-176 corn had been engineered to produce a toxin of Bacillus thuringiensis, which they claimed was deadly to a damaging insect, the European Corn Borer (pg. 230). 

GMO Technology Threatens the World’s Food Supply 

Not only is GMO food harmful to the animals that eat it, but it also has the potential to overcome the crops around it. Insects, birds, and wind carry seeds into neighboring fields and beyond. This is cross-pollination, and cannot be controlled in an outdoor environment. Genetically engineered plants are no exception to this. The pollen from GM plants can cross-pollinate with normal plants and contaminate entire fields. With the proliferation of GM crops, this is a real danger. 

In 1996, there were approximately 6,563 square miles of farmland in the world devoted to GMO crops. In 2006, there were 393,828 square miles devoted to GMO crops (GMO Compass, 2007). This is a 5900% increase in land devoted to GMO crops in a 10-year period! At this rate, the amount of GM crops will double in the next ten years, not including cross-pollination factors. 

Is “Organic” Really Organic? 

Even foods labeled “organic” are allowed a percentage of GMO contamination. 

“EU Agricultural Ministers have decided to allow organic food accidentally contaminated with genetically modified organisms to be classified as organic as long as the GMO presence is less than 0.9%” (Shield, 2007). 

In the United States, “the US National Organic Program (NOP) rules prohibit GMOs in organics but don’t require methods to prohibit GMO contamination or establish thresholds for adventitious GM presence” (Roseboro, 2007). 

Many organic companies simply do not want to undergo the expense and effort necessary to test their fields for GMO contamination, but some say that it is essential in order to maintain integrity. 

Jack Olson is an organic farmer in Litchville, North Dakota, who grows organic soybeans, wheat, and other crops. “It’s hard for one organic farmer to fight Monsanto,” he says. Still, Olson puts up with the inconveniences because he is committed to organic agriculture. “At least we’re clean, that’s why we grow organic. It’s God’s way,” he says. (Roseboro, 2007) 

Fighting the Giant 

It is difficult to fight the giant like Jack Olson is doing, but essential for health and the survival of our food supply. Scientists that are not afraid to speak out, and organic farmers that are not afraid to compete with companies such as Monsanto and offer customers GMO-free organic foods, stand between the agri-business giants intent on profiting from an improperly tested technology and the people who need the information and resources to make sure that what they are eating is healthy and nutritious. Without these people, the Monsanto’s of the world will soon have us eating nothing but their genetically engineered foods, with no thought for the consequences of their actions. 

 

© 2008, Barbara H. Peterson

 

References: 

Doric Column. (1999). Transgenic Potatoes Á La Carte

Engdahl, F.W. (2007). Seeds of Destruction. Global Research. 

GM Free Ireland. (2005). Monsanto GM Maize Conspiracy Revealed

GMO Compass. (2007). Transgenic Crops by Trait. GM Trait Statistics.  

Organic Consumers Association (OCA). (2005). Monsanto’s GE Corn Experiments on Rats Continue to Generate Global Controversy  

Regnum. (2005). Genetically modified soy affects posterity: Results of Russian scientists’ studies.  

Roseboro, K. (2007). How Organic is Organic? New Calls for Testing Organic Foods for GMOs. Environmental News Network. 

Shield, P. (2007). GMOs Threaten Organic Standards. Organic Consumers Association (OCA). 

Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear

Monsanto already dominates America’s food chain with its genetically modified seeds. Now it has targeted milk production. Just as frightening as the corporation’s tactics–ruthless legal battles against small farmers–is its decades-long history of toxic contamination.

by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele May 2008

Gary Rinehart clearly remembers the summer day in 2002 when the stranger walked in and issued his threat. Rinehart was behind the counter of the Square Deal, his “old-time country store,” as he calls it, on the fading town square of Eagleville, Missouri, a tiny farm community 100 miles north of Kansas City. READ MORE…

 

The World According to Monsanto

The World According to Monsanto video is a documentary that exposes Monsanto’s GMO agenda. It is powerful, thorough, and chilling. A must-see video: 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-842180934463681887&hl=en 

I will be distributing this as far as I can, and I recommend you do too. 

Barb

Klamath Basin Water Theft

Klamath Basin water is still in hot dispute. In April of 2001, the greatest water theft in history took place in the Klamath Falls Basin. This theft was conducted by the Federal government on the pretense of saving the “endangered” sucker fish for the Klamath Tribes. After speaking to a member of a tribe who was not in agreement with this theft, I found that the sucker fish is not one that the tribe normally eats, but instead, is used as bait because it is unpalatable. The sucker fish also requires low water levels, not more water as the Federal government states. This “endangered” sucker fish was also considered a pest in the 1960s:

In the case of the sucker, the government itself holds the smoking gun. After a poisoning campaign in the 1960s, it’s a wonder there are any suckers left. At that time, the state of Oregon embarked on an eradication campaign to poison several lakes to rid them of the sucker, then considered a pest. Even poisoning could not eliminate the sucker, yet the government now claims the difference of a few feet in lake elevation could spell doom for the sucker. (LINK)

What happened in 2001 resulted in family farms going dry, and people going bankrupt and losing their homes. Dry fields could be seen for miles while driving down the road. The farmers that survived the crisis got water, but the dispute is still going on. It is not over by a long shot. The Klamath Tribes council is calling for almost all of the Klamath Basin water to be under their direction even though there is no tribal reservation, and the Federal government is backing the plan. 

Save the Family Farm

Maxine Kizer and her neighbors have been minding their own business tending their farms and ranches for generations. Now the Federal government and the local Indian Tribes have decided they need all the water because they intend to “reserve” the water for hunting and fishing rights for the now non existent Indian reservation, which was created 140 years ago. Never mind the fact that both the Indian Tribe and the Federal government actually aggressively promoted the development of irrigated agriculture in this 140 year interim. Armed with millions of our tax dollars they have now set out to destroy Maxine and her neighbor’s life. But it is not just Maxine’s American dream at stake, if they are successful here, Indian Tribes across the country will be able to demand all the water, even threatening municipal supplies for our cities.

The success of this plan spells disaster for not only the Klamath Basin family farmers, but for all family farmers, as it will be a precedent. Without locally grown produce and animal feed, we will be even more dependent on imported food at a much higher price. This will also open the door for multinational corporations to infiltrate our agricultural community with more GMO products. To read more about this crisis and what you can do about it, go here: (LINK

© 2008, Barbara H. Peterson

Bay Area Population to be Sprayed with Unregistered Pesticide

The people who live in the Bay area of California are about to be sprayed with a new pesticide not registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in a pre-emptive strive against a non-existent threat.

 “In August, the California Department of Food and Agriculture plans to spray pesticides in five Bay Area counties” (CBS 5, 2008) in response to a perceived threat from the Light Brown Apple Moth. One of the chemicals being used is Checkmate, manufactured by Suterra, LLC, which is owned by Stewart Resnick, one of the richest men in California, and owner of the largest farming operation of tree crops in the world. Mr. Resnick is also included in California Governor Schwarzenegger’s top 100 donors. (Arnold Watch, 2008) 

Mr. Resnick has developed and owns a number of successful companies including Paramount Agribusiness, the largest farming operation of tree crops in the world, which includes Paramount Citrus, Paramount Farming and Paramount Farms, growers, processors and marketers of citrus, almonds and pistachios; POM Wonderful, grower of pomegranates and maker of the all-natural POM Wonderful pomegranate juice; Teleflora, the largest floral wire service in the world; FIJI Water, the second largest imported bottled water in the United States and the newest member of the Roll family of companies; The Franklin Mint, a leader in high-quality collectibles; and Suterra, the largest biorational pest control company in the United States. (Political Friendster, 2006) 

The pesticide used to spray Santa Cruz last year was the same product, but without a new active ingredient. The new and improved Checkmate contains two active ingredients. It is this version that will be used on Bay Area residents. The new version of the pesticide contains an active ingredient that has not been approved by the EPA. The picture below shows the original ingredient, (E)-11-tetradecen-1-yl acetate, which was in the original product, and the second ingredient, (E,E)-9,11-tetradecadien-1-yl acetate, which was not, and is the ingredient currently under exemption from EPA registration. 

 active-ingredients-in-checkmate.jpg

(C&EN, 2007) 

Tests have been conducted with the original version of Checkmate, but not on such a large scale. 

It is the second active ingredient, (E,E)-9,11-tetradecadien-1-yl acetate, that is the wild card. The EPA has not approved this new ingredient! In fact, the EPA has granted an exemption just for the Bay Area spraying and waived the public comment period due to the “emergency situation.” The following is taken from the EPA site: 

SUMMARY: EPA has received a quarantine exemption request from the United States Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant HealthInspection Service (USDA/APHIS) to use the pesticide (E,E)-9,11-tetradecadien-1-yl acetate (CAS No. 30562-09-5) to treat host plants tocontrol the Light Brown Apple Moth (LBAM). The Applicant proposes theuse of a new chemical which has not been registered by EPA. Due to the unique nature of this emergency situation, in which the time to reviewthe conditions of this situation was short, it was not possible toissue a solicitation for public comment, in accordance with 40 CFR166.24, prior to the Agency’s decision to grant these exemptions. 

DATES: EPA is waiving the public comment period, as allowed in 40 CFR166.24, due to the short period of time available with which to reviewthis situation and render a timely decision. However, comments maystill be submitted and will be evaluated. (EPA, 2007) 

This exemption is dated July 2007. The spraying is to begin in August 2008, over a year after the exemption was granted. “Because of that exemption, the spraying program isn’t subject to state approval, according to representatives of the state Department of Pesticide Regulation” (Kay, 2008). 

Just what is this emergency situation? Some say that it is no emergency at all. According to botanist Daniel Harder, Executive Director of the Arboretum at UC Santa Cruz, “It’s not such a nasty pest. You’re not going to see a plant succumbing to the Light Brown Apple Moth.” The bug is considered a minor pest in New Zealand, where it arrived from Australia, they say. (Kay, 2008) 

No eradication measures have been taken against the moth in New Zealand, and none are planned. The moth is a minor pest whose larvae are eaten by earwigs, birds, and spiders. Furthermore, “there is no widespread infestation of the light brown apple moth [in the U.S.], but U.S. Department of Agriculture officials say they are trying to head off a potential disaster” (Kay, 2008). Therefore, Bay Area residents will be sprayed with an untested unregulated pesticide on the pretense of this non-existent emergency by Stewart Resnick, owner of the largest farming operation of tree crops in the world, and one of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s top 100 contributors, and are basically told to just shut up and take it. Cities to be sprayed are as follows:

Alameda County:
Albany
Alameda
Piedmont
Emeryville
Oakland

Contra Costa County:
El Cerrito
El Sobrante
Hercules
Kensington
Pinole-N. Richmond
San Pablo

San Francisco County:
San Francisco

San Mateo County:
Daly City
Colma
Pacifica
San Bruno
South San Francisco

Marin County:
Tiburon
Belvedere
San Pablo
Corte Madera
Larkspur
Sausalito 

Copyright 2008, Barbara H. Peterson    References: Arnold Watch. (2008). Arnold’s Top 100 Donors. Retrieved from: http://www.arnoldwatch.org/special_interests/index.html C&EN. (2007). Rancor over Pesticide Spraying in California. Retrieved from: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/85/i46/8546news3.html 

CBS 5. (2008). Outrage over Planned Bay Area Apple Moth Spraying. Retrieved from: http://cbs5.com/local/apple.moth.spraying.2.662703.html 

EPA. (2007). Federal Register Environmental Documents. Retrieved from: http://www.epa.gov/EPA-PEST/2007/July/Day-06/p12872.htm 

Free Patents Online. (2008). Communication Disturbing Agents and Method for Disturbing Communication. Retrieved from: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP0962137.html 

Kay, J. (2008). Experts Question Plan to Spray to Fight Moths. San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved from: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/06/MN69VD309.DTL 

Kay, J. (2008). State Plans Bay Area Pesticide Spraying. San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved from:  http://www.sfgate.com:80/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/15/MN99V2PMN.DTL 

Political Friendster. (2006). Rate the Roll International Corporation – Stewart Resnick Connection. Retrieved from: http://www.politicalfriendster.com/rateConnection.php?id1=5223&id2=5220

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started