As ME/CFS is a neuro-immune disorder with altered gene expression, it's important to learn that these foods need to be avoided to avoid exacerbation of symptoms.


Story at-a-glance

• A recent science-based investigation into the claims of genetically engineered foods concludes that the scientific evidence does not support the safety and efficacy claims made
• There are three potential sources of adverse health effects from genetically engineered foods: the genetically modified (GM) gene product (for example, the Bt toxin in crops that generate its own internal insecticide); the genetic transformation process; and changes in farming practices
• Results of genetically engineering crops include toxicity, increased allergenic potential, mutagenic effects, alterations in biological structure and function, reduced nutritional value, increased toxic residues
• Russian scientists recently announced evidence of “very serious health risks for animals given genetically modified feed.” A number of pathological changes were discovered, including a delay in development and growth; a distortion of the sex ratio in the offspring; and a progressive reduction in the number of offspring up to complete infertility by the third generation of offspring fed genetically engineered feed

The Lies You’re Told about Genetically Engineered Foods
July 03 2012

By Dr. Mercola

The Atlantic recently reported on the findings of new research into the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically engineered foods.

The authors of the report GMO Myths and Truths took a science-based approach to evaluating the available research, and came to the conclusion that most of the scientific evidence regarding safety and increase yield potential do not support the claims made at all. In fact, the evidence demonstrates that the claims for genetically engineered foods are not just wildly overblown; they simply aren't true...

The featured article summarizes the evidence presented, which shows that genetically engineered (GE) crops:

• Are laboratory-made, using technology that is totally different from natural breeding methods, and pose different risks from non-GE crops
• Can be toxic, allergenic or less nutritious than their natural counterparts
• Are not adequately regulated to ensure safety
• Do not increase yield potential
• Do not reduce pesticide use but increase it
• Create serious problems for farmers, including herbicide-tolerant "superweeds", compromised soil quality, and increased disease susceptibility in crops
• Have mixed economic effects
• Harm soil quality, disrupt ecosystems, and reduce biodiversity
• Do not offer effective solutions to climate change
• Are as energy-hungry as any other chemically-farmed crops
• Cannot solve the problem of world hunger but distract from its real causes - poverty, lack of access to food and, increasingly, lack of access to land to grow it on

The authors of this critical report include Michael Antoniou, PhD, who heads the Gene Expression and Therapy Group at King's College at London School of Medicine in the UK. He's a 28-year veteran of genetic engineering technology who has himself invented a number of gene expression biotechnologies; as well as John Fagan, PhD, a leading authority on food sustainability, biosafety, and GMO testing.

If you want to get an in-depth understanding of genetically engineered foods, I highly recommend reading their report, which covers the ins-and-outs of genetic engineering and the disturbing findings of a large number of scientific studies.

Three Sources of Adverse Health Effects from Genetically Engineered Foods

According to their reportiv, there are three potential sources of adverse health effects from genetically engineered foods:

1. The genetically modified (GM) gene product – for example, the Bt toxin in GM insecticidal crops – may be toxic or allergenic
2. The GM transformation process may produce mutagenic effects, gene regulatory effects, or effects at other levels of biological structure and function that result in new toxins or allergens and/or disturbed nutritional value
3. Changes in farming practices linked to the use of a genetically modified organism (GMO) may result in toxic residues – for example, higher levels of crop contamination with the herbicide Roundup are an inevitable result of using GM Roundup Ready® crops

I've already written quite extensively on all three of these. You can locate all previous articles written on genetically engineered foods on my dedicated GMO page. To give you an example of these adverse health effects, when Monsanto's genetically engineered Bt corn was approved, Monsanto and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assured everyone that only insects would be hurt by the Bt toxin produced by these plants. The Bt-toxin, they claimed, would be completely destroyed in the human digestive system and would not have any impact at all.

They were proven wrong when doctors at Sherbrooke University Hospital in Quebec found the toxin circulating in the blood stream of pregnant women and their babies, as well as in non-pregnant womenv. Shockingly, the toxin was identified in 93 percent of pregnant women, 80 percent of umbilical blood in their babies, and 67 percent of non-pregnant women tested.

The Bt crop varieties were first introduced to the market in 1996, and since then, many of the disorders that have subsequently been linked to Bt crops have risen exponentially. The fact that the toxin is flowing through our blood supply and passes through the placenta is a potent indicator that the Bt crop varieties cannot be considered harmless at all. For example, government-sponsored research in Italyvi showed a wide range of immune responses in mice fed Monsanto's Bt corn. The specific cytokines (interleukins) that were elevated are also found to be higher in humans who suffer from a wide range of disorders as indicated in the following chart.

Elevated interleukins

Associations

IL-6 - Rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, osteoporosis, multiple sclerosis, various types of cancer (multiple myeloma and prostate cancer)

IL-13 - Allergy, allergic rhinitis, ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease)

MIP-1b - Autoimmune disease and colitis.

IL-12p70 - Inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis

Syngenta Charged for Covering up Livestock Deaths from GE Corn

Over the years, genetically engineered crops have proven disastrous for animals, although the conventional media has done a remarkable job of keeping such details from the public. Most recently, the Swiss biotech company Syngenta had criminal charges filed against it by a German farmer. Sixty-five of his cows died after he fed them Syngenta's genetically modified Bt corn. He alleges the company not only knew the corn could be lethal to livestock, but was also covering up deaths that occurred during clinical trials.

According to a recent press release by GM Watchvii, the lawsuit asserts that Syngenta committed a grave criminal offense by deliberately withholding the results of a feeding trial in which four cows died in two days. The deaths prompted the company to halt the test. No health problems or deaths were reported in the control group, which was not fed the genetically engineered Bt 176 corn.

Other health ramifications from the Bt 176 corn have also been found. In April 2004, Spain banned Syngenta's Bt 176 corn on the grounds that it may confer resistance to the antibiotic ampicillinviii. As of December that same year, the EU decided to prohibit genetically engineered crops with antibiotic resistance genes, and cultivation of Bt 176 crops were subsequently discontinued in the EU in 2007. However, similar varieties, such as Bt 11 sweet cornix are still cultivated for both animal and human consumption...

The Health Effects of GE Feed on Livestock

As reported by Institute of Science in Societyx, mysterious animal deaths are not limited to Syngenta's Bt 176 corn. Thousands of livestock deaths have been reported across India as a result of grazing on genetically engineered Bt cotton, for example.

"Shepherds' own observations and post-mortem analysis carried out in the laboratory revealed abnormal liver, enlarged bile ducts and black patches in the intestine. The shepherds said that the sheep became "dull/depressed" after 2-3 days of grazing, started coughing with nasal discharge and developed red lesions in the mouth, became bloated and suffered blackish diarrhea, and sometimes passed red urine.

Death occurred within 5-7 days of grazing. Sheep from young lambs to adults of 1.5-2 years were affected.

One shepherd reported getting diarrhea from eating the meat of an affected sheep. The vets declared that the toxicity could be due to the Bt toxin but this could not be proven as results were confounded by additional pesticides used on the fields. The shepherds were however, advised against letting the sheep graze on any more Bt cotton plants," Institute of Science in Society writesxi.

The Philippines have also reported cases of villagers suffering health effects from surrounding Bt crop fields. In 2006, the blood of 38 individuals was analyzed and all tested positive for antibodies specific to Cry1Ab, suggesting an immune reaction to the Bt toxinxii.

GE Crops Seriously Threatens Reproductive Health

According to Dr. Don Huber, an expert on the toxicity of genetically engineered plants, a new organism linked to GE crops appears to be the cause of high reproductive failure in livestock. The organism was initially identified by veterinarians around 1998—about two years after the introduction of Roundup Ready soybeans, which is one of the staple feeds. The vets were puzzled by sudden rates of miscarriages. While sporadic at first, the phenomenon has continued to increase in severity.

In an interview last year, Dr. Huber stated:

"We [recently] received a call from a county extension educator, indicating that he has a dairy that has a 70 percent [spontaneous] abortion rate. You put that on top of 10 to 15 percent of infertility to start with, and you're not going to have a dairy very long. In fact, a lot of our veterinarians are now becoming very concerned about the prospects for being able to have replacement animals."

According to a recent report by the European GM Watchxiii, Russian scientists have also jumped into the fray, proving the existence of "very serious health risks for animals given genetically modified (GM) feed." This announcement was reportedly made during a press conference of the National Association for Genetic Security (NAGS). As a result of the findings, the Russian Parliament is considering a new veterinary law, which could potentially include a ban on genetically engineered animal feed.

"According to the authors; a number of pathological changes were discovered in the experimental animals that consumed the GM feed," GM Watch reports. "A delay in development and growth was detected, plus a distortion of the sex ratio in breeds with an increase in the proportion of females, reducing the number of pups per litter, up to their complete lack in the second and third generation...

According to the President of NAGS Alexander Baranov, the main negative impact of GM feed, which was discovered during the investigation, is a "ban on reproduction," making it almost impossible to obtain third-generation animals."The results of our study confirmed the findings of European scientists who pointed out the negative impact on the health of animals from the GM ingredients in feed of animals," Baranov, said. "We used soybean meal, which is widely used in Russia for fattening livestock. Soya of the line 40-3-2, contained in extracted meal, which is allowed in Russia. It is also for use in human food." he added."

Engineering Washington Politics

Why do American politicians and government health, environmental, and agricultural officials seem to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to all these concerns? In short, they've sold their souls and the future of this planet. They're paid to not give a damn...

A recent article in the GMO Journal addresses the profound influence of biotech lobbying on our political processxiv. The article lists a number of facts showing how companies like Monsanto manipulates Washington to pass laws and regulations wholly in their favor. This includes preventing much-needed legislation to label genetically engineered foods. Thousands of ingredients must be listed on food labels, and yet genetically engineered ingredients, which have never been proven safe, do not need to be specified. Certainly, it is NOT because they are proud of their product and convinced it is superior to conventional or organic products. And it's not because it would be cost-prohibitive.

Again, countless other ingredients and health claims have been added to labels through the years, without sending prices soaring. I'm not sure what it'll take to make them grow a conscience and realize the dangers they've unleashed, and continue to support. As suggested in the GMO Journalxv, it's time to realize that this industry is based on profit alone, at the expense of everything and everyone else.

"To borrow a phrase from Bill Maher, here's a New Rule: anytime a GMO advocate gushes about the benefits and safety of genetically engineered products, someone must recite the following statistics from Food & Water Watchxvi:

1. Since 1999, the 50 largest agricultural and food patent-holding companies and two of the largest biotechnology and agrochemical trade associations have spent more than $572 million in campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures.
2. Lobbying expenditures for food and agricultural biotechnology more than doubled between 1999 and 2009, rising 102.8 percent from $35 million in 1999 to $71 million in 2009.
3. Food and agricultural biotechnology PACs made more than $22 million in campaign contributions since 1999.
4. Food and agriculture biotechnology firms employ more than 300 former congressional and White House staff members as lobbyists.
5. In addition to in-house lobbyists, the food and agricultural biotechnology firms employed more than 100 lobbying firms in 2010."

How to Protect Your Health

Until genetically engineered foods are labeled, your BEST strategy is to buy USDA 100% Organic products whenever possible, as these do not permit genetically engineered ingredients, or buy whole fresh produce and meat from local farmers.

The majority of the genetically engineered ingredients you're exposed to are via processed foods, so by cooking from scratch with whole foods, you can be sure you're not inadvertently consuming something laced with altered ingredients. When you do purchase processed food, avoid products containing anything related to corn or soy that are not 100 percent organic, as any foods containing these two non-organic ingredients are virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, as well as toxic herbicide residues.

Please Continue Supporting California's Ballot Initiative to Label GMO's!

Due to lack of labeling, many Americans are still unfamiliar with what genetically engineered foods are. We now have a great opportunity to change that, and I urge you to participate and to continue supporting the California ballot initiative—which will require labeling of genetically engineered foods and food ingredients, and ban the routine industry practice of labeling and marketing such foods as "natural"—in any way you can. The voting takes place in November, so we still have a few more months to go, and we need "all hands on deck," so to speak, until then.

Since California is the 8th largest economy in the world, a win for the California Initiative would be a huge step forward, and would likely affect ingredients and labeling nationwide, as large companies are not likely going to label their products as genetically engineered when sold in California, but not when sold in other states. Doing so would be a PR disaster.

But it's an enormous ongoing battle, as the biotech industry will outspend us by 100 to 1, if not more, for their propaganda.

Needless to say, the campaign needs funds. So if you have the ability, I strongly encourage you to make a donation.

They also need more volunteers, because that's how we're going to win this battle. The biotech industry may outdo us in funding ability, but we as consumers still outnumber them. Pamm Larry, the California grandmother who created the initiative, is correct when she says we need to reach every single California community—large and small. I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can. Be assured that what happens in California will affect the remainder of the U.S. states, so please support this important state initiative, even if you do not live there!

• If you live in California and want to get involved, please contact LabelGMOs.org. They will go through all volunteer requests to put you into a position that is suitable for you, based on your stated interests and location.
• No matter where you live, please help spread the word in your personal networks, on Facebook, and Twitter. For help with the messaging, please see LabelGMOs.org's "Spread the Word!" page.
• Whether you live in California or not, please donate money to this historic effort, either through the Organic Consumers Fund.
• Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the California Ballot. It may be the only chance we have to label genetically engineered foods.
• For timely updates, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.

By Ronnie Cummins

It has been a year since the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) joined with Mercola.com, National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), Fluoride Action Network (FAN), Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), and Consumers for Dental Choice to form a new non-profit coalition, Health Liberty.

Over the past 12 months this alliance has proven to be a brilliant merging of talent, networks, resources and passion around consumer rights and protection.

Each of us in this coalition brings the knowledge gleaned from years of research on health and environmental issues, combined with strong track records of activism and successful campaigning for consumers' right to know what the potential risks are – to their health and to their communities – of food and other products they buy. 

And each of us is committed to fighting on behalf of consumers everywhere for the right to make an informed choice about whether or not to avoid those risks. When it comes to genetically engineered foods, the risks to your health come from multiple angles. The genetic alteration itself can cause significant problems in animals and humans consuming the food, but the potential hazards of the chemicals sprayed in large quantities on such crops are just as great...

Genetically Engineered Foods: The Right to Know

With the help of our new coalition partners, and many other concerned organizations and individuals, the OCA has focused this past year on what we believe is the most critical threat to the health of consumers and our planet: genetically modified organisms (GMOs), also referred to as genetically engineered (GE) seeds and food.

With little or no regulatory restraints, labeling requirements, or scientific protocol, bio-engineers since the 1990s have been creating hundreds of new genetically engineered "Frankenfoods" and crops. The research is done with little concern for the human and environmental hazards and the negative socioeconomic impacts on the world's several billion farmers and rural villagers.

Since the advent of GMO testing, the OCA has relentlessly gone to bat against the biotech and agribusiness industries, Food Inc., and the FDA and the USDA, in an effort to protect human health and the environment from the potential hazards of these genetically modified organisms.

Over the years, we have fought the battle on numerous fronts, using every tactic in the book. Our latest and potentially most successful strategy has been to fight for consumers' basic right to know what is in their food – and to take that battle directly to voters, through citizens' initiatives.

This two-pronged strategy – demanding the basic right to know through the use of direct democracy tools - is our best chance at winning the fight against genetically engineered foods.

We believe that once food manufacturers are required to label any and all genetically modified ingredients in their food products – which will finally give consumers the ability to choose whether or not to buy those products – consumers will stop buying them, and manufacturers will stop making them.

That strategy has been successful in Europe and more than 20 other countries that require labeling of genetically engineered foods. Consumers in those countries have spoken clearly: We don't want those products. And manufacturers have responded by reformulating their products to be GMO-free.

Using Direct Democracy to Force GMO Labeling

The notion that consumers have the right to know about genetically engineered foods has gathered steam, culminating this year in an unprecedented number of state – and one federal – campaigns to require GMO labeling.  The OCA has supported individual legislative efforts this past year in Washington State, Vermont, Hawaii, and Connecticut.

In all, 18 states tried and failed to pass popular GMO labeling legislation this year, watching cowardly Governors and state legislatures back down under the weight of massive lobbying efforts on the part of Big Biotech and in some states, threats of lawsuits from Monsanto.

But now we are on the verge of what we believe will be our first major victory – a citizens' ballot initiative in California that, if passed, will mark the single biggest victory in the GMO right to know battle, and will finally change the direction of food and farming in our country. Forever.

On May 2, campaign volunteers representing a broad and unprecedented health, environmental, and consumer coalition, spearheaded by the Organic Consumers Association, Mercola.com, Food Democracy Now LabelGMOs, Natural News, and scores of other groups, filed ballot petition papers signed by almost a million California registered voters to place a Citizens Initiative on the Ballot in November 2012 that will require labeling of genetically engineered foods and food ingredients, and ban the routine industry practice of labeling and marketing such foods as "natural."

This battle has not yet been won – we are stepping up efforts to educate California's voters on the dangers of genetically engineered foods, mobilize them to spread the word, and get out the vote.

To fund the campaign OCA, the Organic Consumers Fund (our grassroots lobbying ally), Mercola.com, and our allies have been forced to raise over $4 million dollars thus far, with another $4-6 million needed before November, to counter the anticipated $50 million dollar war chest of Monsanto, the biotech industry, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association. The good news is that although we may be outspent 10 to one, polls show that 80-90 percent of California voters support labeling of genetically engineered foods. In other words we are confident that we can win.

Scientists Warn about the Potential Health Hazards of Genetically Engineered Foods

An increasing number of scientists are warning that current gene-splicing techniques are crude, inexact, and unpredictable—and therefore inherently dangerous. Yet, pro-biotech governments and regulatory agencies maintain that genetically engineered foods and crops are "substantially equivalent" to conventional foods, and therefore require neither labeling nor pre–market safety-testing.

This Brave New World of Frankenfoods is frightening. Today, nearly 80 percent of all processed foods containing corn, soy, or canola oil contain unlabeled genetically altered ingredients. This, despite a long list of potential health hazards, including:

• Toxins  and poisons: GE products clearly have the potential to be toxic and a threat to human health. In 1989, a GE brand of  L-tryptophan, a common dietary supplement, killed 37 Americans. More than 5,000 others were permanently disabled or afflicted with a potentially fatal and painful blood disorder, eosinophilia myalgia syndrome (EMS), before it was recalled by the FDA.
• Increased cancer risks: In 1994, the FDA approved the sale of Monsanto's controversial recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH). This genetically engineered hormone is injected into dairy cows to force them to produce more milk. Scientists have warned that significantly higher levels (400-500 percent or more) of a potent chemical hormone, Insulin-Like Growth Factor (igf-1), in the milk and dairy products of rBGH injected cows, could pose serious hazards such as human breast, prostate, and colon cancer. A number of studies have shown that humans with elevated levels of igf-1 in their bodies are much more likely to get cancer. 
• Food allergies: The alarming rise in childhood allergies in the past two decades has been linked by scientists to the arrival of genetically engineered foods in the 1990s. In 1996, a major GE food disaster was narrowly averted when Nebraska researchers learned that a Brazil nut gene spliced into soybeans could induce potentially fatal allergies in people sensitive to Brazil nuts. Animal tests of these Brazil nut-spliced soybeans had turned up negative. People with food allergies whose symptoms can range from mild unpleasantness to sudden death, may likely be harmed by exposure to foreign proteins spliced into common food products. Since humans have never before eaten most of the foreign proteins now being gene-spliced into foods, stringent pre-market safety-testing (including long-term animal feeding and volunteer human feeding studies) is necessary in order to prevent a future public health disaster.
• Antibiotic resistance: When gene engineers splice a foreign gene into a plant or microbe, they often link it to another gene, called an antibiotic resistance marker gene (arm), that helps determine if the first gene was successfully spliced into the host organism. Some researchers warn that these arm genes might unexpectedly recombine with disease-causing bacteria or microbes in the environment or in the guts of animals or people who eat genetically engineered food. These new combinations may be contributing to the growing public health danger of antibiotic resistance—of infections that cannot be cured with traditional antibiotics, for example new strains of salmonella, e-coli, campylobacter, and enterococci
• Damage to food quality and nutrition: A 1999 study by Dr. Marc Lappe published in the Journal of Medicinal Food found that concentrations of the beneficial  phytoestrogen compounds thought to protect against heart disease and cancer were lower in GE soybeans than in traditional strains. These and other studies, including Dr. Pusztai's, indicate that GE food will likely result in foods lower in quality and nutrition. For example, the milk from cows injected with rBGH contains higher levels of pus, bacteria, and fat.

GE Crops and Farming Techniques Threaten the Planet

From the decimation of the planet's critical honeybee and monarch butterfly populations, to the creation of superweeds and superinsects, to the depletion of valuable nutrient-rich farming soil, genetic engineering poses a dangerous, and potentially irreversible threat, to planet Earth.

Among the dangers of GE crops, are:

• Increased Pesticide Residues: Contrary to biotech industry propaganda, recent studies have found that US farmers growing GE crops are using just as many toxic pesticides and herbicides as conventional farmers and in some cases more. The "benefits" of these herbicide-resistant crops are that farmers can spray as much of a particular herbicide on their crops as they want-killing the weeds without damaging their crop. Scientists estimate that herbicide-resistant crops planted around the globe will triple the amount of toxic broad-spectrum herbicides used in agriculture. These broad-spectrum herbicides are designed to literally kill everything green. 
• Damage to Beneficial Insects and Soil Fertility: In 1999, Cornell University researchers made a startling discovery. They found that pollen from genetically engineered bt corn was poisonous to Monarch butterflies. The study adds to a growing body of evidence that GE crops are adversely affecting a number of beneficial insects, including ladybugs and lacewings, as well as beneficial soil microorganisms, bees, and possibly birds.
• Creation of GE "Superweeds" and "Superpests": Genetically engineering crops to be herbicide-resistant or to produce their own pesticide presents dangerous problems. Pests and weeds will inevitably emerge that are pesticide or herbicide-resistant, which means that stronger, more toxic chemicals will be needed to get rid of the pests. Herbicide resistant "superweeds" are already emerging. GE crops such as rapeseed (canola) have spread their herbicide-resistance traits to related weeds such as wild mustard plants. Lab and field tests also indicate that common plant pests such as cotton bollworms, living under constant pressure from GE crops, are evolving into "superpests" completely immune to bt sprays and other environmentally sustainable bio-pesticides.
  This will present a serious danger for organic and sustainable farmers whose biological pest management practices will be unable to cope with increasing numbers of superpests and superweeds. 
• Genetic Pollution:  "Genetic pollution" and collateral damage from GE field crops already have begun to wreak environmental havoc. Wind, rain, birds, bees, and insect pollinators have begun carrying genetically-altered pollen into adjoining fields, polluting the DNA of crops of organic and non-GE farmers. An organic farm in Texas has been contaminated with genetic drift from GE crops grown on a nearby farm.  Because they are alive, gene-altered crops are inherently more unpredictable than chemical pollutants-they can reproduce, migrate, and mutate. Once released, it is virtually impossible to recall GE organisms back to the laboratory or the field. 
• Genetic "Bio-Invasion": By virtue of their "superior" genes, some GE plants and animals will inevitably run amok, overpowering wild species in the same way that exotic species, such as kudzu vine and Dutch elm disease have created problems when introduced in North America. What will happen to wild fish and marine species, for example, when scientists release into the environment carp, salmon, and trout that are twice as large, and eat twice as much food, as their wild counterparts?

Most Commonly Used Herbicide Found to be Carcinogenic

As if the health hazards of genetically altered food crops weren't bad enough, glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, has also been deemed a major health hazard both to the environment, and to animal and human health. It is toxic to human cells, and according to a French research team, it is also carcinogenic. The team has studied the herbicide extensively, and published at least five articles on glysphosate's potential for wide-ranging environmental and human harm. Their research shows that glyphosate:

Causes cell cycle dysregulation, which is a hallmark of tumor cells and human cancers

• Inhibits DNA synthesis in certain parts of the cell cycle—the process by which cells reproduce that underlies the growth and development of all living organisms
• Impedes the hatchings of sea urchins. (Sea urchins were used because they constitute an appropriate model for the identification of undesirable cellular and molecular targets of pollutants.) The delay was found to be dose dependent on the concentration of Roundup. The surfactant polyoxyethylene amine (POEA), another major component of Roundup, was also found to be highly toxic to the embryos when tested alone, and could therefore be a contributing factor

It doesn't matter that the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health recently published "research" to the contraryii, the French team says―the world needs to know the truth about who did that "safety-finding" research. It was funded by none other than Monsanto itself! Is it any wonder they came to the conclusion that:

"[T]he available literature shows no solid evidence linking glyphosate exposure to adverse developmental or reproductive effects at environmentally realistic exposure concentrations."

The new Monsanto-funded safety research actually used the French team's original research to debunk the evidence that Roundup could have human or environmental safety issues. And that didn't sit well with the French team, which was so angered they wrote a detailed response to Monsanto's article, accusing the researchers of minimalizing the French group's work and publishing misleading information.  

What Lies Ahead: The Food Fight of Our Lives

Monsanto and Food Inc.'s stranglehold over the nation's food and farming system is being challenged in a food fight that will largely determine the future of American agriculture. Genetically engineered foods have absolutely no benefits for consumers or the environment, only hazards.

After 20 years of biotech bullying and force-feeding unlabeled and hazardous genetically engineered (GE) foods to animals and humans, a critical mass of food and health activists have decided it's time to move beyond small skirmishes and losing battles and go on the offensive.

It's time to move the food fight over labeling GE food from the unfavorable terrain of Washington DC and Capital Hill, where Monsanto and Food Inc. exercise near-dictatorial control, to California, the heartland of organic food and farming and anti-GMO sentiment, where 90 percent of the body politic, according to recent polls, support GMO labeling.

Monsanto and their allies understand the threat that truth-in-labeling poses for the future of genetically engineered foods. As soon as genetically engineered foods start to be labeled in the US. millions of consumers will start to read these labels and react. They'll complain to grocery store managers and companies, they'll talk to their family and friends. They'll start switching to foods that are organic or at least GMO-free. Once enough consumers start complaining about GE foods and food ingredients; stores will eventually stop selling them; and farmers will stop planting them.

If you are willing to volunteer or donate money to this campaign visit the Organic Consumers Fund website or call the OCA office at 218-226-4164. It's time to stand up to Monsanto and win the Food Fight of our lives. Please join us!

About the Author

Ronnie Cummins is the founder and Director of the Organic Consumers Association. He has been a writer and activist since the 1960s, with massive expertise in human rights, anti-war, anti-nuclear, consumer, labor, environmental, and sustainable agricultural areas.  He is the author of several published articles, a children's book series called Children of the World, and Genetically Engineered Food: A Self-Defense Guide for Consumers.

About the Organic Consumers Association

The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots 501(c)3 public interest organization promoting health, justice, and sustainability. It prides itself as the only organization in the United States focused on promoting the views and interests of the country's estimated 76 million organic and socially responsible consumers.

The OCA participates in the important issues of food safety, industrial agriculture, genetic engineering, children's health, corporate accountability, Fair Trade, environmental sustainability, and other key topics. The Organic Consumers Fund, a 501(c)4, is the OCA's grassroots action and lobbying arm.

References:

• i [1] Marc, J., Mulner-Lorillon, O., Boulben, S., Hureau, D., Durand, G., and Belle, R. 2002. Pesticide Roundup provokes cell division dysfunction at the level of CDK1/cyclin B activation. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 15: 326–31
  
  [2] Marc, J., Mulner-Lorillon, O., Durand, G., and Belle, R. 2003. Embryonic cell cycle for risk assessment of pesticides at the molecular level. Environnemental. Chemistry. letters. 1: 8–12
  
  [3] Marc, J., Belle, R., Morales, J., Cormier, P., and Mulner-Lorillon, O. 2004a. Formulated glyphosate activates the DNA-response checkpoint of the cell cycle leading to the prevention of G2/M transition. Toxicol. Sci. 82: 436–42
  
  [4] Marc, J., Mulner-Lorillon, O., and Belle, R. 2004b. Glyphosate-based pesticides affect cell cycle regulation. Biol. Cell. 96: 245–49
  
  [5] Marc, J., Le Breton, M., Cormier, P., Morales, J., Belle, R., and Mulner-Lorillon, O. 2005. A glyphosate-based pesticide impinges on transcription. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 203:1–8
• ii Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health 2012: 15(1)

Six Types of Tissue That Can Be Regenerated Through Nutrition

via ProHealth.com
by Sayer Ji*
May 30, 2012

Nutrition research writer Sayer Ji is founder and chair of GreenMedInfo.com – a not-for-profit consumer advocacy site offering 'the world’s largest natural medicine database,’ with a searchable index linking to more than 18,000 biomedical study abstracts. This article, first published May 23, 2012, is reproduced with kind permission from Sayer Ji’s blog. ©2012 GreenMedInfo.com all rights reserved.

The tissues discussed are nerves, liver, beta cells (pancreas), hormones, heart, and cartilage/joint/spine.

____________

6 Bodily Tissues That Can Be Regenerated Through Nutrition

It may come as a surprise to some, especially those with conventional medical training, but the default state of the body is one of ceaseless regeneration. Without the flame-like process of continual cell turnover within the body - life and death ceaselessly intertwined - the miracle of the human body would not exist.

Consider the fact that every two days the enterocytes lining your intestines are completely replaced, and that within 100 days almost every atom and molecule within your body has been excreted, breathed out, or sloughed off, only to be replaced by new ones from the food you ate, the water you drank or the air you breathed in, in the interim.

In times of illness, however, regenerative processes are overcome by degenerative ones.

This is where [wholistic] medicine may perform its most noble feat, nudging the body back into balance with foods, herbs, nutrients, healing energies; i.e., healing intention.

Today, however, drug-based medicine invariably uses chemicals that have not one iota of regenerative potential; to the contrary, they almost always interfere with bodily self-renewal in order to suppress the symptoms against which they are applied.

Despite the outright heretical nature of things which stimulate healing and regeneration vis-à-vis the conventional medical system which frowns upon, or is incredulous towards, spontaneous remission in favor of symptom suppression and disease management - over the course of the past few years of trolling MEDLINE we have collected a series of remarkable studies on the topic.

Nerve Regeneration

There are actually a broad range of natural compounds with proven nerve-regenerative effects. A 2010 study published in the journal Rejuvenation Research, for instance, found a combination of blueberry, green tea and carnosine have neuritogenic (i.e., promoting neuronal regeneration) and stem-cell regenerative effects in an animal model of neurodegenerative disease.(1)

Other researched neuritogenic substances include:

1.  Curcumin (compound in turmeric)   
2.  Lion’s Mane Mushroom 
3.  Apigenin (compound in vegetables like celery) 
4.  Blueberry 
5.  Ginseng 
6.  Huperzine (from ‘fir moss’)
7.  Natto (from fermented soybeans) 
8.  Red Sage (compound in root of a type of salvia native to China and Japan).
9.  Resveratrol (compound in grapes, red wine, purple grape juice, peanuts, some berries)
10. Royal Jelly 
11. Theanine (amino acid derived most commonly in Camellia sinensis teas, esp green tea)
12. Ashwaganda (‘Indian ginseng’)
13. Coffee (trigonelline)

There is another class of nerve-healing substances, known as remyelinating compounds, which stimulate the repair of the protective sheath around the axon of the neurons known as myelin, and which is often damaged in neurological injury and/or dysfunction, especially autoimmune and vaccine-induced demyelination disorders.

It should also be noted that even music and falling in love have been studied for possibly stimulating neurogenesis, regeneration and/or repair of neurons, indicating that regenerative medicine does not necessary require the ingestion of anything.

Rather, a wide range of therapeutic actions may be employed to improve health and well-being, as well.

(To view the first-hand biomedical citations on these neuritogenic substances, visit the GreenMedInfo Neuritogenic Research page on the topic.)

Liver Regeneration

Glycyrrhizin, a compound found within licorice, and which we recently featured as a powerful anti-SARS virus agent, has also been found to stimulate the regeneration of liver mass and function in the animal model of hepatectomy. Other liver regenerative substances include:

1. Carvacrol (a volatile compound in oregano) 
2. Curcumin 
3. Korean Ginseng 
4. Rooibos (aka  ‘bush tea’)
5. Vitamin E 

[Note: another substance in this category that Sayer Ji may discuss in future is Milk Thistle.]

(View the first-hand biomedical citations on the GreenMedInfo Liver Regeneration research page.)

Beta-Cell Regeneration

Unfortunately, the medical community has yet to harness the diabetes-reversing potential of natural compounds.

Whereas expensive stem cell therapies, islet cell transplants, and an array of synthetic drugs in the developmental pipeline are the focus of billions of dollars of research annually, our kitchen cupboards and backyards may already contain the long sought-after cure for type 1 diabetes.

The following compounds have been demonstrated experimentally to support regeneration of the insulin-producing beta cells, which are destroyed in insulin dependent diabetes, and which once restored, may (at least in theory) help restore the health of the patient to the point where they no longer require insulin replacement.

1. Gymenna Sylvestre ("the sugar destroyer") 
2. Nigella Sativa ("black cumin") 
3. Vitamin D 
4. Curcumin (from the spice turmeric) 
5. Arginine (amino acid) 
6. Avocado 
7. Berberine (found in bitter herbs such as Goldenseal and Barberry) 
8. Bitter Melon 
9. Chard (yes, the green leafy vegetables) 
10. Corn Silk 
11. Stevia  
12. Sulforaphane (especially concentrated in broccoli sprouts).

(View the first-hand biomedical citations on the Beta Cell Regeneration research page.)

Hormone Regeneration

There are secretagogues, which increase the endocrine glands' ability to secrete more hormone.

And there are substances that truly support regeneration of hormones which have degraded (by emitting electrons) into potentially carcinogenic "transient hormone" metabolites.

One of these substances is vitamin C. A powerful electron donor, this vitamin has the ability to contribute electrons to help resurrect the form and function of estradiol (estrogen; E2), progesterone, testosterone, for instance.(2)

In tandem with foods that are able to support the function of glands, such as the ovaries, vitamin C may represent an excellent complement or alternative to hormone replacement therapy.

Cardiac Cell Regeneration

Not too long ago, it was believed that cardiac tissue was uniquely incapable of being regenerated.

A new, but rapidly growing body of experimental research now indicates that this is simply not true, and there is a class of heart-tissue regenerating compounds known as neocardiogenic substances.

Neocardiogenic substances are able to stimulate the formation of cardiac progenitor cells which can differentiate into healthy heart tissue, and they include the following:

1. Resveratrol 
2. Siberian Ginseng (Eleuthero) 
3. Red Wine Extract 
4. Geum Japonicum 
5. N-acetyl-cysteine 

Another remarkable example of cardiac cell regeneration is through what is known as fetomaternal trafficking of stem cells through the placenta.

In a recent article we discussed the amazing process known as "fetal microchimerism" by which the fetus contributes stem cells to the mother which are capable of regenerating her damaged heart cells, and possibly a wide range of other cell types.

Cartilage / Joint / Spine Regeneration

As for the spinal cord, curcumin and resveratrol have been shown to support improved recovery from spinal cord injury.

(Over a dozen other natural compounds hold promise in this area, which can be viewed on our Spinal Cord Injury research page.)

As for degenerative joint disease, i.e., osteoarthritis, there is a broad range of potentially regenerative substances.

(With 50 listed on our osteoarthritis research page.)

* * * *

Ultimately, regenerative medicine threatens to undermine the very economic infrastructure that props up the modern, drug-based and quite candidly degenerative medical system.

Symptom suppression is profitable because it guarantees both the perpetuation of the original underlying disease, and the generation of an ever-expanding array of additional, treatment-induced symptoms.

This is the non-sustainable, infinite growth model which shares features characteristic of the process of cancer itself - a model, which by its very nature, is doomed to fail and eventually collapse.

Cultivating diets, lifestyles and attitudes conducive to bodily regeneration can interrupt this pathological circuit, and help us to attain the bodily freedom that is a precondition for the liberation of the human soul and spirit, as well.

- Sayer Ji
____

1. “NT-020, a natural therapeutic approach to optimize spatial memory performance and increase neural progenitor cell proliferation and decrease inflammation in the aged rat,” Rejuvenation Res. 2010 Jun 29. Epub 2010 Jun 29. PMID: 20586644

2. “Photo-induced regeneration of hormones by electron transfer processes: Potential biological and medical consequences.” Radiat Phys Chem Oxf Engl 1993. Updated 2011 Aug ;80(8):890-894. PMID: 21814301

Disclaimer: This information (©2012 GreenMedInfo.com. All Rights Reserved) has not been reviewed by the FDA. It is general information, based on the research of Sayer Ji unless otherwise noted; and does not necessarily reflect the views of GreenMedInfo or its staff, or that of ProHealth, Inc. It is not intended as medical advice, or for prevention, diagnosis or treatment for any condition, illness or disease; and is not meant to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified healthcare professional. It is always very important that you make no change in your healthcare plan or health support regimen without researching and discussing it in collaboration with your professional healthcare team.