Labeling GMO's - futures io
futures io



Labeling GMO's


Discussion in Off-Topic

Updated
      Top Posters
    1. looks_one Rachel with 156 posts (140 thanks)
    2. looks_two Victory Trader with 18 posts (25 thanks)
    3. looks_3 Zondor with 18 posts (31 thanks)
    4. looks_4 aquarian1 with 13 posts (12 thanks)
      Best Posters
    1. looks_one JohnS with 1.9 thanks per post
    2. looks_two Zondor with 1.7 thanks per post
    3. looks_3 Victory Trader with 1.4 thanks per post
    4. looks_4 Rachel with 0.9 thanks per post
    1. trending_up 34,605 views
    2. thumb_up 262 thanks given
    3. group 16 followers
    1. forum 242 posts
    2. attach_file 21 attachments




Welcome to futures io: the largest futures trading community on the planet, with well over 125,000 members
  • Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
  • Quality education from leading professional traders
  • We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
  • We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
  • We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community.  It's free and simple.

-- Big Mike, Site Administrator

(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)

 
Search this Thread
 

Labeling GMO's

(login for full post details)
  #201 (permalink)
 Zondor 
Portland Oregon, United States
 
Experience: Beginner
Platform: Ninjatrader®
Broker: CQG, Kinetick
Trading: Gameplay Klownbine® Trading of Globex
 
Zondor's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,347 since Jul 2009
Thanks: 1,245 given, 2,721 received

The notorious Seralini rat feeding experiments:

GMO Seralini





https://www.independentsciencenews.org/news/ge-soybeans-give-altered-milk-and-stunted-offspring-researchers-find/

Independent scientists warn over Monsanto herbicide | Environment | DW.COM | 01.12.2015

Massive influence of biotech industry on EU research projects on risks of genetically engineered plants | testbiotech

"If we don't loosen up some money, this sucker is going down." -GW Bush, 2008
“Lack of proof that something is true does not prove that it is not true - when you want to believe.” -Humpty Dumpty, 2014
“The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.”
Prof. Albert Bartlett
Follow me on Twitter Visit my futures io Trade Journal Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Zondor for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #202 (permalink)
 Zondor 
Portland Oregon, United States
 
Experience: Beginner
Platform: Ninjatrader®
Broker: CQG, Kinetick
Trading: Gameplay Klownbine® Trading of Globex
 
Zondor's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,347 since Jul 2009
Thanks: 1,245 given, 2,721 received

https://www.ecowatch.com/2015/12/04/mark-ruffalo-monsanto/

He came through the Green Room door ready to do high fives with his press agent and I simply told him this:

“You are wrong. You are engaged in monopolizing food. You are poisoning people. You are killing small farms. You are killing bees. What you are doing is dead wrong.”

A bead of sweat broke out on his head. “Well, what I think we are doing is good,” Grant replied.

“I am sure you do,” I told him.


Bonus:
https://sustainablepulse.com/2015/12/03/monsanto-put-on-trial-for-crimes-against-humanity-in-the-hague/

"If we don't loosen up some money, this sucker is going down." -GW Bush, 2008
“Lack of proof that something is true does not prove that it is not true - when you want to believe.” -Humpty Dumpty, 2014
“The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.”
Prof. Albert Bartlett
Follow me on Twitter Visit my futures io Trade Journal Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #203 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Jeffrey Smith interviews two scientists (who are very highly regarded) on how Roundup affects the body's biochemistry and the diseases that then manifest.
The beginning is a little dull but just stay with it and they will start to get into it and we learn something new: Roundup is now being sprayed on wheat etc 3 days before harvest.
Towards the end they touch on what you can do, to limit your exposure to Roundup and other chemicals, our environment is exposing us too.

A must watch video for anyone, who wants to stay health.


Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #204 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Public Pressure and Allies in Congress Keep “Rider” Blocking State Labeling of GMOs Out of Spending Bill

Center for Food Safety | News Room | Public Pressure and Allies in Congress Keep ?Rider? Blocking State Labeling of GMOs Out of Spending Bill

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #205 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

If you live in California, you may want to watch this video because of the up coming ballot.

Monsanto Charged with Crimes Against Humanity

We won the battle about individual state's labeling GMO's so when it is on the ballot in your state, please vote.

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #206 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Video from Dr. Mercola: Growing Doubt: A Scientist's Experience With GMOs

(Not sure if you can access this video from Dr. Mercola's newsletter.
If you have a problem, you can go to his website and sign up for the newsletter and then access his video archive.)

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/01/17/growing-doubt-gmo-issues.aspx?e_cid=20160117Z1_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20160117Z1&et_cid=DM95437&et_rid=1315829979

Posting text about this video:

By Dr. Mercola


Scientific misconduct and fraud: most of us have no concept of how they influence our food. Jonathan Latham, a scientist with a master's degree in crop and a Ph.D. in plant virology, sheds much-needed light on this issue.

Together with his wife, Allison Wilson, who is also a scientist, he founded the Bioscience Resource Project, an organization with a mission "to provide the highest quality scientific information and analysis to enable a healthy food system and a healthy world."

He's also the editor of Independent Science News.

Part of his career was spent doing medical research in the genetics department at the University of Wisconsin. He also worked in the U.K., where many of his coworkers were proposing ambitious research projects designed to alter soil microbiology and cure plant viruses using novel transgenic techniques.

As explained by Latham in the video, when you make a transgene, you take different parts of genes from different organisms, and you put them together to (hopefully) get them to do what you want them to do.

Once a transgene performs according to expectation, it is used to develop commercial transgenic plants carrying that particular feature. However, Latham noticed that the end results were frequently potentially very dangerous, both to plants and people, which made him question the purpose of it all.

"There were people proposing ideas in molecular genetics and genetic engineering that were incredibly ambitious and interesting to think about from an intellectual perspective, but really quite scary if you thought about what would happen in the real world," he says.

U.S. Regulatory System Allows Unsafe Products to Be Brought to Market

Eventually he became quite concerned about the potential implications the commercialization of genetically engineered plants might engender.

"I saw these ideas people were having, which had potentially major implications for human health or for the soil, and were risky in my opinion.

I didn't worry about them too much because I imagined no serious person would take up these ideas, and the regulatory system would work as advertised ...

But when I moved to the genetics department, I started looking at the regulatory system in the United States.

I came to realize that the regulatory system was intellectually bankrupt and also corrupt. It wasn't asking questions that it should've been asking. And they were perfectly happy with answers they shouldn't have been happy with ...

Between people making products that I was really unhappy with, and the risk assessment process that wasn't functioning intellectually ... it didn't take me long to realize that you can put 2 and 2 together here and see that bad products are going to come on the market.

Scientific Profession Is Ruled by Secret Culture of Fear

It's not uncommon for people to be fired from their academic positions or blackballed in the scientific community when disagreeing with the status quo, but fortunately that did not happen in Dr. Latham's case.

He decided to resign instead, in the late 1990s, after becoming dispirited with the scientific profession. He did see it happen to another virologist however.

"He published a couple of papers, skeptical of the idea that you can put virus genes into transgenic plants and expect nothing to go wrong. He was hounded out of his position and had to take a position in a completely different branch of science to still get grants.

This is a real thing that scientists are facing: professional intimidation, harassment, and personal effects.

Sometimes they lose their jobs over these issues. So there's a culture of fear in the scientific community. Scientists don't like to discuss it because it implies all sorts of things about academic freedom and so on. But it's a real thing."

After quitting his job with the Genetics department at the University of Wisconsin, he and his wife worked on an organic farm in England and raised a child. Still people would ask him to get involved in GMO issues, asking him to give talks and explain various issues to laypeople.

He eventually got drawn back in when the British government was setting up field trials under false pretenses.

"They were trying to bamboozle people with scientific information that, in my opinion, was incorrect," he says.

"They were trying to convince the legal system, the media, and the rest of the public that these projects were perfectly well-understood scientific experiments, and that there was nothing to worry about — most of which I disagreed with, so I ended up getting drawn back into all these issues."

Genetic Engineering Is an Imprecise Science


Latham and Wilson,ended up writing a scientific paper,1 published in 2006, which reviews what happens when you put a transgenic DNA into the genome of a plant.

Prior to that, no one had ever collected the data to show whether or not the biotech industry was correct in saying that the process of genetic engineering was precise.

"They wanted to argue that this is much more precise than conventional plant breeding, in which you don't know what's going on because you're just crossing plants together. They wanted to argue that their methodology was very precise. We wanted to test that thesis," he says.

Together with Wilson, he collected a vast amount of data showing the process of plant transformation through genetic engineering was making a mess of plant genomes.2 The process caused:

Unexpected gene mutations
Movement and activation of transposons
DNA damage
Moreover, most genetically engineered (GE) plants contain more than one transgene: some of the plants they evaluated had as many as 40 different transgenes in them.


They even discovered that some of the now commercially available GE plants had transgene insertions that were so complicated the companies themselves had actually given up trying to get to the bottom of how much damage had been done to the plant's DNA. It was simply too difficult to do so

"The more complex and damaging the DNA effects are, the more difficult it is to do the research. We published this in the peer-reviewed literature. It was very important in our view because the whole risk assessment process, and the whole of the reassurance process for the public, depends on the idea that we know what we're doing, and that what we're doing is precise. None of those things were true," he says.


Viral Transgenes

Latham and Wilson have also published a paper3 on viral transgenes. A viral transgene is when you take a piece of a virus and put it into a transgenic plant, and for reasons that are still unclear, that plant becomes resistant to the virus from which the transgene came.

Essentially, there's an entire process of making plants resistant to viruses, but no one has any real grasp of how it works, and this lack of understanding is a serious concern according to Latham.

"To me, this was a total no-no from the perspective of risk assessment. The whole point of risk assessment is that you have to understand what it is that you're doing in order to do experiments and to answer the questions that appear to be pertinent ... So we wrote an article about all the different ways in which viral transgenes can cause ecological hazards and various other problems."

Important Science Remains Hidden Behind Expensive Paywalls

Another problem with science is that so much of the research remains hidden behind very expensive paywalls. Scientists are legally restricted from sharing their research with the public. To address this, Dr. Latham and his wife created a non-profit to publicize their and other scientists' papers, and allow the public access to this crucial information.

"I went to a scientific panel, for example, in which all of the scientists were explaining the wonders of GMOs. I wanted the public to understand that there are lots of contradictory information out there that could've discredited what these people were saying, but no one's allowed to share it because it's behind the paywall. If they do, it'll cost them a lot of money and they may have to face legal consequences. So there's a very one-sided discussion going on."

Viral Promoter Used in GE Plants Produces Potentially Hazardous Protein

Independent Science News has also published documentation that the global regulators were unaware of, such as that the viral promoter used in most transgenic plants (cauliflower mosaic virus promoter) actually contains a viral gene (called gene VI), which may be producing proteins that have never undergone risk assessment.

This despite the fact that this protein is something you would expect to cause harm to human health.

It’s known to disrupt or inhibit RNA interference (RNAi), a process by which both people and plants resist viruses. According to Latham, it appears that the protein produced can stop that process, thereby rendering plants (and possibly humans as well) susceptible to viruses.

The gene VI protein also causes other protein production in the plant to become scrambled, which will likely have additional negative effects.

"It's a multifunctional protein that has all these interesting biological consequences, so that things will happen in plants. But also, if you ingest that protein, because it's being produced in the plant you're eating, then it can go into your stomach, your gut lining, or your bloodstream, and potentially cause problems there. What happened is the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) discovered what they'd done.

They panicked and produced an article. But they tried to bury the article. They wanted on the one hand to say that they knew what was happening and they published about it, and on the other hand to make sure that nobody read it. Because I'm a virologist, I was aware of this gene. I actually had wondered about this problem before.

As soon as I saw the paper, I knew what it was they were talking about. So, we were able to show that the European Union didn't know what it was talking about and that all these other regulators around the world had been ignoring this problem for 20 years. They failed to notice that there was a gene being produced in the transgenic plants that they had not risk assessed and not told anyone about."

Worst Case Scenario

According to Latham, the worst case scenario is that this protein is directly harmful to human health. And in his opinion, some of the proteins produced by GE plants are indeed harmful, and therefore you certainly would not want your gut microbes or your cells to take up transgene DNA and therefore produce them.

In his estimation, the most likely of those scenarios is that your gut microbiome would take up those genes, some of which can have "potentially interesting" consequences.

For example, the Roundup Ready resistance gene—which is incorporated into every cell of Roundup Ready plants—could potentially be taken up and become integrated into your gut microbiome. This gene confers resistance to Roundup. Bugs that acquire this gene can become resistant to Roundup. Indeed, Monsanto originally isolated their gene from such a bug, which was isolated from a chemical plant that made the Roundup herbicide.

Were harmful bacteria to take up this gene in your gut, they may become more successful in your gut than they might have been otherwise. And we've now come to realize that gut bacteria have very complex roles in human health. So the possibilities of how Roundup Ready resistant gut bacteria might interact with your health are really difficult to foretell.

Countering GMO Propaganda

As noted by Latham, multinational corporations spin every single piece of information that might possibly benefit them, and what many are taught in school and read in the news is quite simply not true. Oftentimes the truth is the complete converse of what's being taught or presented, but these untruths are repeated so often and so consistently that people assume they must be correct.

"If you want to make change in the world; if you don't think the world is fair and if you don't think that people should have to eat food with pesticides on it, then you have to understand the politics of what is going on," Dr. Latham says. "Our project is to help people with the politics, but also with the science. The two kind of go together ...

For example, we wrote about how people are promoting GMOs online and on social media. There is always that question: Are they just irate people upset about people who are offering false solutions like organic farming, or are these people mostly working for agribusiness? Now we know pretty much that they're working for agribusiness ...

You see this whole network of people working in one way or another for Monsanto, for Bayer, the trade associations, and the biotech industry. We can see that these people are all connected together. A month ago, I would've said, 'I suspect they are but I can't prove it.' Now we know."

GMO Risk Assessments Are Severely Flawed

According to Latham, there are many shortcomings when it comes to GMO risk assessments, and companies have developed ways of fudging their risk assessments. This applies not only to GMOs but chemicals as well. Say you have a product you want the public to eat. You know that once this product comes to market, it will end up in numerous places: the water supply, the food supply, and in people's bodies, for example.

You’ve likely heard that the risk assessment can account for all these issues and will accurately demonstrate whether a product is safe or not. The million dollar question is whether this really is true. Can a risk assessment actually provide these answers?

Our industrial technological system depends on the answer to that question being, "Yes, we can find out. We can answer that question." Sadly, the true answer is "No, we cannot." So, as Latham says, "the system is intellectually bankrupt."

"The way it works is, somebody comes to the regulator and says, 'I want to test this product.' The standard method is you feed it to rats for 15 days or 30 days, and that experiment becomes the basis of your risk assessment. That is supposed to demonstrate that even though this chemical is going to get into the bodies of different organisms, and it's going to be in all these different places, in rivers, streams, and lakes, it didn't harm the rat.

Therefore, it's going to be fine for other animals, or for humans [eating it] or drinking the [contaminated] water. But that experiment violates the fundamental principle of science. The fundamental principle it violates is that inferences can only be drawn from an identical situation.

For example, if you do your experiment on rats, fed on a particular diet, at the particular stage of their life, you can't infer information about another stage of its life or about another species, or about rats fed under different circumstances, say with different diets or with different combinations of chemicals in their diets and so on. You can't do that in science.

The inference of doing that experiment is that you can extrapolate to all these different circumstances ... The whole principle of risk assessment is based on the idea that you can do a very simple experiment and extrapolate basically to the whole world ... So it's a scientifically bankrupt process ... But the risk assessment process depends on people accepting that these experiments can do exactly what science says they cannot do."

Investigators like Gilles-Eric Séralini, who has conducted lifelong feeding studies, have revealed tremendous differences in outcomes compared to feeding studies lasting for mere weeks or a few months, and his adverse findings on GMOs include tumors, increased mortality, decreased fertility, and sterility.

Seralini became a massive target of discrediting; so much so, that industry supporters retracted his paper even though it was done using the identical methods Monsanto used. He merely extended the length of the experiment, and was discredited for finding adverse health outcomes. As lifelong consumers of food, this is indeed important information, and you ignore it at your own risk.

Err on the Side of Caution in Your Own Decision-Making

Faking data that doesn't "fit" the outcome you want to see is also all too common a phenomena. In the '50s, '60s, and '70s, chemical companies were sending their products to independent testing companies. One of them, Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories (IBT), was eventually caught faking data; moving animals from the control groups to the test groups, and so on.

Some of the employees went to prison, and after an investigation, the US Food and Drug Administration concluded that only 1 percent of IBT's animal experiments were scientifically valid.

Yet, chemicals that are still on the market today were approved based on these faked experiments! Both Roundup and Atrazine were approved based on IBT experiments. There are also far more subtle ways of fudging data, and Latham saw such tactics employed in GMO testing.

"So you have a fraudulent and intellectually bankrupt risk assessment process, which means that ultimately you can assume that none of the industrial chemicals that enter your body have been adequately tested, and you have no idea whether they're safe or not. You should act in accordance with that conclusion," Latham warns.

What You Need to Know About GMOs

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are live organisms whose genetic components have been artificially manipulated in a laboratory setting through creating unstable combinations of plant, animal, bacteria, and even viral genes that do not occur in nature or through traditional crossbreeding methods.

GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is “safe and beneficial,” and that it advances the agricultural industry. They also say that GMOs help ensure the global food supply and sustainability. But is there any truth to these claims? I believe not. For years, I've stated the belief that GMOs pose one of the greatest threats to life on the planet. Genetic engineering is NOT the safe and beneficial technology that it is touted to be.

The FDA cleared the way for GE (Genetically Engineered) Atlantic salmon to be farmed for human consumption. Thanks to added language in the federal spending bill, the product will require special labelling so at least consumers will have the ability to identify the GE salmon in stores. However, it’s imperative ALL GE foods be labeled, which is currently still being denied

The FDA is threatening the existence of our food supply. We have to start taking action now. I urge you to share this article with friends and family. If we act together, we can make a difference and put an end to the absurdity.

QR Codes Are NOT an Adequate Substitute for Package Labels

The biotech industry is trying to push the QR code as an answer for consumer concerns about GE foods. QR stands for Quick Response, and the code can be scanned and read by smart phones and other QR readers.

The code brings you to a product website that provides further details about the product. The video below shows you why this is not an ideal solution. There’s nothing forcing companies to declare GMOs on their website. On the contrary, GE foods are allowed to be promoted as “natural,” which further adds to the confusion.

These so-called "Smart Labels" hardly improve access to information. Instead, by making finding the truth time consuming and cumbersome, food makers can be assured that most Americans will remain ignorant about the presence of GMOs in their products. Besides, everyone has a right to know what's in the food. You shouldn't have to own a smartphone to obtain this information.

Non-GMO Food Resources by Country

If you are searching for non-GMO foods here is a list of trusted sites you can visit.

Organic Food Directory Australia, Buy Organic Food, Where to Buy Organic Products, Find Organic Shops, Online Organic Fruit and Vegetables, Order Organic Food Delivery

Eat Wild - Canada

Directory of NZ Organic Retailers with Fresh Produce, Groceries, Health

Eat Well Guide | Eat Well Guide

https://www.farmmatch.com/

Local Harvest / Farmers Markets / Family Farms / CSA / Organic Food / Pick your Own

Dr. Mercola's Video Library:
https://articles.mercola.com/videos.aspx

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #207 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Last week U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack met in secret with five undisclosed representatives from Monsanto and the Grocery Manufacturers Association and five individuals industry claims represent the GE food labeling movement, to broker a deal on the labeling of genetically engineered foods that would allow industry to avoid Vermont’s GE labeling law.

Tell Secretary Vilsack: No Backroom Deals on GE Labeling

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #208 (permalink)
Rory
 
 
Posts: 2,743 since May 2014
Thanks: 5,444 given, 8,140 received

Colombia suspends spraying illegal coca fields with herbicide over cancer link | World news | The Guardian

I spoke to some older Colombian military friends here and they say Roundup is a killer.

Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #209 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/why-cornell-university-hosting-gmo-propaganda-campaign

and

Label GMOs with QR Codes? Not So Fast, Senators Say


https://www.organicconsumers.org/blog/label-gmos-qr-codes-not-so-fast-senators-say

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #210 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Tell USDA officials: don't silence science

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #211 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Read and share this post.
Monsanto is having a share holder meeting tonight.

In honor of the annual Monsanto shareholder meeting taking place today I have a special request to ask of you that can be done in less than 10 seconds.


Please share my letter to Monsanto shareholders and companies considering merger with Monsanto entitled “8 Reasons To Avoid Doing Business With Monsanto” that is currently trending on the Huffington Post. Let’s get the message to Monsanto shareholders that GMOs are not a sound investment!

8 Reasons To Avoid Doing Business With Monsanto

https://www.responsibletechnology.org/irtnew/docs/damaging-effects-of-roundup.pdf

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #212 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/trouble-iowa

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #213 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

The Senate is voting on the DARK Act tomorrow, March 16

Share this Capital Hill Ad on the Truth about GMOs with your Senators

The Great GMO Cover-up (referenced) - Institute for Responsible Technology

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #214 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

https://www.salsalabs.com/no-longer-salsa-client?email_blast_KEY=1344944

From the above URL, you can check your state, to see how your Senators voted.

Also:
Victory! Latest Industry Effort to Block GMO Food Labeling Defeated in Senate

https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/press-releases/4301/victory-latest-industry-effort-to-block-gmo-food-labeling-defeated-in-senate

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #215 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Wednesday we defeated the DARK Act. And guess what? Today, General Mills has announced that it will begin labeling genetically engineered ingredients in all its products nationwide. This is a major victory for your right to know.

Oddly enough, General Mills has been one of the companies most vehemently opposed to GE labeling, spending millions of dollars to oppose state labeling initiatives around the country. Why would a company that has fought so hard to stop your right to know finally come around? Well, with the overwhelming defeat of the DARK Act this week they read the writing on the wall. As their public announcement made clear, General Mills’ decision to label was made because with our victory in the Senate they realized they had to begin labeling to obey the Vermont law which comes into effect in July.

This announcement follows Campbell’s decision in January to start labeling its own genetically engineered products. The move to national labeling by two of the largest food companies in the country also shows that labeling for GE ingredients will not increase costs to consumers as industry and some in Congress have claimed – both Campbell’s and General Mills have stated that prices will not increase due to the change in labels. These changes also show that, despite what they have been saying in Congress, and in the media, food companies can and will label their GE ingredients with simple words on the package, not hidden behind some QR code.

This shift could not have happened without YOU! CFS members like you joined together to send over half a million emails and phone calls to Congress demanding our right to know what it’s in our food. You beat back the DARK Act and now Congress and food companies are paying attention.

Thank you for all that you do – every action you take with us brings us one step closer to GE food labeling in the U.S. These victories truly belong to you!
From "Center for Food Safety"

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #216 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

By Dr. Mercola

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, recently earned the ominous title of the most heavily-used agricultural chemical of all time.1

In fact, an analysis showed that farmers sprayed enough glyphosate in 2014 to apply 0.8 pounds of the chemical to every acre of cultivated cropland in the U.S., and nearly 0.5 a pound of glyphosate to all cropland worldwide.

As you might suspect, when you use this much of a chemical, it doesn't simply stay on the fields. Laboratory testing commissioned by the organizations Moms Across America and Sustainable Pulse revealed that glyphosate is now showing up virtually everywhere.

Monsanto's 'Gift' to Newborns

The analysis revealed glyphosate in levels of 76 μg/L to 166 μg/L in women's breast milk. As reported by The Detox Project, this is 760 to 1,600 times higher than the EU-permitted level in drinking water (although it's lower than the U.S. maximum contaminant level for glyphosate, which is 700 μg/L.)2

This dose of glyphosate in breastfed babies' every meal is only the beginning. An in vitro study designed to simulate human exposures also found that glyphosate crosses the placental barrier. In the study, 15 percent of the administered glyphosate reached the fetal compartment.

Angelika Hilbeck, Ph.D., senior scientist at the Institute of Integrative Biology in Zurich, told The Detox Project:3

"If confirmed in a full investigation, it seems that glyphosate has become a ubiquitous chemical in terms of presence and persistence.

This data also offers a first indication of potential accumulation in the human body, giving newborns a substantial dose of synthetic chemicals as a 'gift' for their start into life, with unknown consequences.

This is reckless and irresponsible conduct in a democratic society, which still has a living memory of previous reckless chemical contaminations, such as DDT."


Glyphosate Found in Blood and Urine Samples

The analysis revealed glyphosate in additional samples as well, including the blood of non-pregnant Canadian women. Their average level was 73.6 μg/L, which is similar to the concentration found to have endocrine-disrupting effects in vitro.

Further, glyphosate was also detected in urine samples, and U.S. women had maximum glyphosate levels that were more than eight times higher than levels found in urine of Europeans.

Where is the glyphosate exposure coming from? It's likely coming from food (although it could be in water as well). We don't know exactly how much glyphosate may be in your food because the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) does not test for it.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) just announced in February 2016 that it would begin testing foods for glyphosate, however, which will help to quantify just how much glyphosate Americans are consuming.

For now, the analysis suggests that eating non-organic, genetically engineered (GE) foods (the prime candidates for Roundup spraying) is associated with higher glyphosate levels in your body. The Detox Project explained:4

"Glyphosate levels have been found to be significantly higher in urine of humans who ate non-organic food, compared with those who ate mostly organic food. Chronically ill people showed significantly higher glyphosate residues in their urine than healthy people.

In a separate detailed analysis, glyphosate was found in the urine of cows, humans, and rabbits. Cows kept in a GM-free area had significantly lower glyphosate concentrations in urine than cows in conventional livestock systems."

Glyphosate Is Contaminating Air and Water


Glyphosate and its degradation product, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), were detected in more than 75 percent of air and rain samples collected during the 2007 growing season in the Mississippi Delta agricultural region.5

This could be even higher now, as since 1996 the use of glyphosate has risen nearly 15-fold.6 The testing commissioned by Moms Across America also found glyphosate in 13 of 21 U.S. drinking water samples tested.7

They contained glyphosate levels between 0.085 ug/l and 0.33 ug/l, which is only slightly below the EU maximum allowed level for glyphosate in drinking water of 0.1 ug/l. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standard for glyphosate in U.S. water supplies is 0.7 ppm.

Further, a 2012 analysis used a magnetic particle immunoassay to test for the presence of glyphosate in roughly 140 samples of groundwater from Catalonia, Spain. The analysis found that glyphosate was present above the limit of quantification in 41 percent of the samples.

This suggests the chemical does not break down rapidly in the environment, as its manufacturer claims, and instead it might be accumulating (both in the environment and in people).

Groundwater, which is water from rain, lakes, streams or other bodies of water that soaks into soil and bedrock, can easily become contaminated when chemicals in the soil with low biodegradability and high mobility empty into it.

When groundwater is used as a drinking water source, this contamination poses a risk to animals, plants and humans alike.

Glyphosate Is Sprayed on Some Crops Right Before Harvest


In northern, colder regions, farmers of wheat and barley must wait for their crops to dry out prior to harvest.

Rather than wait an additional two weeks or so for this to happen naturally, farmers realized they could spray the plants with glyphosate, killing the crop and accelerating their drying (a process known as desiccating).

Desiccating wheat with glyphosate is particularly common in years with wet weather and has been increasing in North Dakota and Upper Midwestern states in the U.S., as well as in areas of Canada and Scotland (where the process first began). One Canadian farmer told EcoWatch:8

"I think every non-organic farmer in Saskatchewan uses glyphosate on most of their wheat acres every year … I think farmers need to realize that all of the chemicals we use are 'bad' to some extent …

Monsanto has done such an effective job marketing glyphosate as 'safe' and 'biodegradable' that farmers here still believe this even though such claims are false."

What this means is that even non-GE foods are likely to be contaminated with glyphosate, and possibly even more so because they're being sprayed just weeks prior to being made into your cereal, bread, cookies and the like.

Many Crops Are Desiccated With Glyphosate, a 'Barbaric' Process Along with wheat and oats, other crops that are commonly desiccated with glyphosate include:

Lentils
Peas
Non-GMO soybeans
Corn
Flax
Rye and buckwheat
Triticale
Canola
Millet
Sugar beets
Potatoes
Sunflowers
No one is keeping track of how many crops are being desiccated with glyphosate; those in the industry have described it as a "don't ask, don't tell policy."


Others have described spraying crops with glyphosate just days before harvest "barbaric." Charles Benbrook, Ph.D., a researcher involved in the recent study showing glyphosate use is increasing,9 told EcoWatch:10

"It may be two percent of agriculture use, but well over 50 percent of dietary exposure … I don't understand why Monsanto and the food industry don't voluntarily end this practice. They know it contributes to high dietary exposure (of glyphosate)."


European Union Puts Off Decision to Renew Use of Glyphosate

European Commission leaders met in early March 2016 to vote on whether to renew a 15-year license for glyphosate, which is set to expire in June. The decision has been tabled for now amid mounting opposition. More than 180,000 Europeans signed a petition calling for glyphosate to be banned. They cited the International Agency for Research on Cancer's (IARC) determination that glyphosate is a "probable carcinogen" (Class 2A).

This determination was based on evidence showing the popular weed killer can cause non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and lung cancer in humans, along with "convincing evidence" it can also cause cancer in animals. The opposition comes amidst another new report that found 75 percent of the German population has glyphosate residue in their urine.

The majority of those tested had levels that were five times higher than the legal limit of drinking water, while one-third had levels that were between 10 and 42 times higher than the legal limit.11 A study of glyphosate residues by the Munich Environmental Institute also found glyphosate in 14 best-selling German beers.12

Monsanto CEO Caught Lying

In a Twitter conversation with Monsanto, TriplePundit said they hoped to gain a "constructive conversation" and "build some bridges with an organization that has a lot of power and opportunity to do good."13 In the conversation, Monsanto's CEO Hugh Grant claimed the company's position on GMO labeling may be shifting, stating:

"The myth is that we're against labeling. The reality is we would support some kind of federal standard. We would support something that covers the country, that helps consumers. Our concern has been the danger of a state-by-state labeling approach that resulted in confusion and expense."

As TriplePundit reported, however, it's no "myth" that Monsanto is against such labeling:14

"This statement is somewhat at odds with Monsanto's website, last updated in 2013: 'We oppose mandatory labeling of food and ingredients developed from GM seeds in the absence of any demonstrated risks, as it could be interpreted as a warning or imply that food products containing these ingredients are somehow inferior to their conventional or organic counterparts.'"

Monsanto Spends Millions to Prevent GMO Labeling Initiatives

Monsanto has spent millions to defeat GMO labeling initiatives, so you won't know which foods contain their genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In 2013, the company donated nearly $5 million to the anti-labeling campaign in Washington State, and in 2012 they donated more than $7 million to help defeat California's Proposition 37. In total, Monsanto has spent at least $22 million in lobbying against state-level GMO labeling initiatives.15

Together with the food and industrial agriculture industries, biotechnology companies like Monsanto spent more than $101 million on lobbying to avert GMO labeling and preempt state rights, and that was in 2015 alone.16

They may feel defeat is near, as such lobbying efforts have risen sharply. For instance, these industries spent $66 million on such lobbying efforts in 2014 and just over $25 million in 2013.17 They are trying to HIDE the presence of genetically engineered ingredients and are pulling out ALL the stops to do so.

Health Risks of Glyphosate

Glyphosate has a number of devastating biological effects beyond being a probable carcinogen, including the following:


Nutritional deficiencies, as glyphosate immobilizes certain nutrients and alters the nutritional composition of the treated crop Disruption of the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids (these are essential amino acids not produced in your body that must be supplied via your diet)
Increased toxin exposure (this includes high levels of glyphosate and formaldehyde in the food itself) Impairment of sulfate transport and sulfur metabolism; sulfate deficiency
Systemic toxicity — a side effect of extreme disruption of microbial function throughout your body; beneficial microbes in particular, allowing for overgrowth of pathogens Gut dysbiosis (imbalances in gut bacteria, inflammation, leaky gut, and food allergies such as gluten intolerance)
Enhancement of damaging effects of other food-borne chemical residues and environmental toxins as a result of glyphosate shutting down the function of detoxifying enzymes Creation of ammonia (a byproduct created when certain microbes break down glyphosate), which can lead to brain inflammation associated with autism and Alzheimer's disease
How to Avoid Pesticides in Your Food


Your best bet for minimizing health risks from pesticide exposure is to avoid them in the first place, by eating organic as much as possible and investing in a good water filtration system for your home or apartment. If you know you have been exposed to pesticides, the lactic acid bacteria formed during the fermentation of kimchi may also help your body break down pesticides.

So including fermented foods like kimchi in your diet may also be a wise strategy to help detox the pesticides that do enter your body. One of the benefits of eating organic is that the foods will be free of GE ingredients — and this is key to avoiding exposure to toxic glyphosate. Following are some great resources to obtain wholesome organic food.


Eating locally-produced organic food will not only support your family's health, it will also protect the environment from harmful chemical pollutants and the inadvertent spread of genetically engineered seeds and chemical-resistant weeds and pests.

What You Need to Know About GMOs

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or genetically “engineered” (GE) foods, are live organisms whose genetic components have been artificially manipulated in a laboratory setting through creating unstable combinations of plant, animal, bacteria, and even viral genes that do not occur in nature or through traditional crossbreeding methods.

GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is “safe and beneficial,” and that it advances the agricultural industry. They also say that GMOs help ensure the global food supply and sustainability. But is there any truth to these claims? I believe not. For years, I've stated the belief that GMOs pose one of the greatest threats to life on the planet. Genetic engineering is NOT the safe and beneficial technology that it is touted to be.

The FDA cleared the way for GE (Genetically Engineered) Atlantic salmon to be farmed for human consumption. Thanks to added language in the federal spending bill, the product will require special labeling so at least consumers will have the ability to identify the GE salmon in stores. However, it's imperative ALL GE foods be labeled, which is currently still being denied.

The FDA is threatening the existence of our food supply. We have to start taking action now. I urge you to share this article with friends and family. If we act together, we can make a difference and put an end to the absurdity.

QR Codes Are NOT an Adequate Substitute for Package Labels

The biotech industry is trying to push the QR code as an answer for consumer concerns about GE foods. QR stands for Quick Response, and the code can be scanned and read by smart phones and other QR readers.

The code brings you to a product website that provides further details about the product. The video below shows you why this is not an ideal solution. There’s nothing forcing companies to declare GMOs on their website. On the contrary, GE foods are allowed to be promoted as “natural,” which further adds to the confusion.


These so-called "Smart Labels" hardly improve access to information. Instead, by making finding the truth time-consuming and cumbersome, food makers can be assured that most Americans will remain ignorant about the presence of GMOs in their products. Besides, everyone has a right to know what's in the food. You shouldn't have to own a smartphone to obtain this information.

Vermont's mandatory labeling law is scheduled to go into effect July 1. Now, Monsanto is going with the only strategy it has left to block it — a Senate version of H.R.1599, also referred to as the DARK (Denying Americans the Right to Know) Act. Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan) introduced the bill, which would preempt Vermont's GMO labeling law, and replace state mandatory labeling laws with a federal voluntary labeling plan.

Fortunately, on March 16, the Senate rejected the bill, falling far short of the 60 votes it needed in its favor to pass. This is great news, but though the DARK Act was defeated, it's not over yet.

Roberts said he would still work to find another way to preempt the law, and majority leader Mitch McConnell changed his vote from YES to NO for procedural reasons. This allows him to bring up the bill again later if a compromise is created, and the creation of such a compromise is certainly already underway.

Vermont's law is set to take effect on July 1. It's imperative you take action now by contacting your senators. Ask them to oppose any compromise that would block or delay Vermont's labeling law. It's critical that we flood Senators' phone lines — it's now or never for GMO labeling.

OCA: Call Your Senators Today! Tell Them No Compromise on GMO Labeling!

Non-GMO Food Resources by Country

If you are searching for non-GMO foods, here is a list of trusted sites you can visit.

Organic Food Directory (Australia)
Eat Wild (Canada)
Organic Explorer (New Zealand)
Eat Well Guide (United States & Canada)
Farm Match (United States)
Local Harvest (United States)
Weston A. Price Foundation (United States)

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 3 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #217 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

After years of relentless campaigning to protect our right to know what is in the food we eat, this week we’ve achieved 4 HUGE victories!

1st — The Dark Act was voted down in Congress. If passed, this legislation would have stopped states from labeling GMOs — FOREVER. Thank you for taking action with us; sounds like Congress got the memo!

2nd — General Mills agreed to voluntarily label their foods that contain GMOs! Thanks to our pressure, they removed GMOs from original Cheerios in 2014. Now they will disclose the presence of GMOs in hundreds of products.

3rd — Mars agreed to voluntarily label GMOs. Thank you for signing the Mars petition over Valentine’s Day asking them to take this step!

4th — Kellogg’s agreed to voluntarily label GMOs! And we’re going to see a lot more companies following suit.
And just two months ago, Campbell’s took the lead by first revealing their GMO ingredients, and also calling for mandatory federal labeling of GMOs.

That is 5 VICTORIES for safe food in 2016… and it is only March!
From Green America

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	GMO_Dominoes_are_Falling!_2016-03-23_2203.png
Views:	72
Size:	171.2 KB
ID:	204685  
Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 3 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #218 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

"It’s also worth noting that all of the companies that have revealed plans to label adamantly defend the “safety” of GMOs—without once mentioning the fact that the vast majority of GMO crops, from which GMO food ingredients are derived, are sprayed with glyphosate, classified last year by the World Health Organization as “a probable human carcinogen.” Clearly, we have a long way to go before food corporations acknowledge the devastating consequences of the GMO monoculture model on the environment, human health and global warming."

Who’s labeling, and why?

https://www.organicconsumers.org/essays/food-companies-plan-label-gmos%e2%80%94-there-more-story

"A Campbell’s spokesperson responded by saying that regardless of what happens in Congress, Campbell’s products will be labeled, with the words “partially produced with genetic engineering,” in all 50 states. On the surface, that's good news. But let's not forget that a federal labeling bill could forbid companies from printing those, or similar words on a label, to prevent food producers from "stigmatizing" biotechnology."......

Timing is everything

General Mills, Mars and Kellogg’s all revealed their labeling plans after the Senate failed to pass S. 2609, a bill intended to preempt Vermont. It’s possible that their announcements signal that these food giants have conceded defeat, especially as they all noted the need to comply with the Vermont July 1 deadline.

That’s the optimistic view. But the timing of these announcements, made before the Senate returns to try again to try to pass a preemption bill, could also be part of a calculated strategy to win over more Senators to a compromise bill, one that will delay or outright preempt enactment of Vermont’s Act 120........

Whatever the new-and-improved version of the Senate bill morphs into, assuming the Senate passes a bill, it will have to go back to the U.S. House. There, members of a Republican-controlled Joint Standing Conference Committee will try to “reconcile” the Senate bill with the House version, H.R. 1599, which passed the House in July by a vote of 275 – 150. Guaranteed, the House won’t sign off on anything with the words “mandatory” or “on-package.” In fact, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway (R-Texas), according to Politico, “declared just this week that he won't support on-package labeling, which he has said stigmatizes the technology.” Whatever ends up coming out of the committee will have to go back to the House and Senate for a full vote.

That leaves consumers no choice but to continue to hammer our Senators with this message: No compromise. Let Vermont’s law take effect. And if you really can’t tolerate supporting states’ rights to pass labeling laws, then pass a federal labeling law that meets, or preferably exceeds, the standards set by Vermont’s law.

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #219 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/come-april-fools-day-will-joke-be-us

"So what’s next? When Congress returns on April 4, after a two-week recess, we expect the pro-GMO, Monsanto-funded Democrats in the Senate, led by Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), to keep working on a compromise bill. Stabenow has said all along that she wants a federal labeling bill that preempts Vermont. Can she come up with a compromise bill that accomplishes preemption, but is acceptable enough to win over a few more Senators? Enough to get the bill passed in the Senate? And turn consumers into April Fools?

TAKE ACTION: Call Sen. Debbie Stabenow and ask her to protect Vermont’s GMO Labeling Law

Dial 888-897-0174 to tell your Senators to vote against any compromise that would block or delay Vermont's bill from taking effect.

Help or organize an April Fool’s Day action at the home office of your Senator. Email campaigns (at) organicconsumers.org if you can help!"

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #220 (permalink)
 JohnS 
Bamberg, Germany
 
Experience: Beginner
Platform: Sierra Chart
Broker: IB, SierraCharts data
Trading: MES, FDXM
 
Posts: 1,091 since Oct 2014
Thanks: 15,031 given, 2,591 received


Rachel View Post
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/come-april-fools-day-will-joke-be-us

"So what’s next? When Congress returns on April 4, after a two-week recess, we expect the pro-GMO, Monsanto-funded Democrats in the Senate, led by Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), to keep working on a compromise bill. Stabenow has said all along that she wants a federal labeling bill that preempts Vermont. Can she come up with a compromise bill that accomplishes preemption, but is acceptable enough to win over a few more Senators? Enough to get the bill passed in the Senate? And turn consumers into April Fools?

TAKE ACTION: Call Sen. Debbie Stabenow and ask her to protect Vermont’s GMO Labeling Law

Dial 888-897-0174 to tell your Senators to vote against any compromise that would block or delay Vermont's bill from taking effect.

Help or organize an April Fool’s Day action at the home office of your Senator. Email campaigns (at) organicconsumers.org if you can help!"

Thanks @Rachel for keeping us informed. I just left a message with Senator Stabenow to voice my displeasure over a compromise bill. I also wrote my Senator (Kaine, D, Va) and Representative (Griffith, R, Va), who had voted "yes" on the original House bill, but I felt he needed a reminder of my displeasure.

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to JohnS for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #221 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received


JohnS View Post
Thanks @Rachel for keeping us informed. I just left a message with Senator Stabenow to voice my displeasure over a compromise bill. I also wrote my Senator (Kaine, D, Va) and Representative (Griffith, R, Va), who had voted "yes" on the original House bill, but I felt he needed a reminder of my displeasure.

Thank you so much, for doing that. We have to stand up for our rights, otherwise they will take them away. Right on and sincerely Thank you. Rachel

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #222 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

From Dr. Mercola's newsletter:

Accept No Compromise


We can expect the issue to resurface sometime after Easter, and this gives the agrichemical businesses and junk food manufacturers time to buy off more Senators for some sort of compromise, such as the use of QR codes, which completely fail to provide people with clear and mandatory transparency.

As noted by American Soybean Association President Richard Wilkins, this vote was only "a temporary detour in a larger effort," adding:

"We think that we're close to a solution that helps the industry stay innovative while providing consumers the information they're looking for. Once Congress returns from the Easter break, we'll get back to work with leaders in the Senate and continue on the path to a compromise."

It's become quite clear that any compromise they come up with is likely to be deeply flawed, and will go against the clear majority of Americans who want clear labeling on packages that contain genetically engineered (GE) ingredients.

So please, keep the pressure on your Senators, and urge them not to accept any compromise that would jeopardize state and individual rights.

the article goes on to cover many aspects along with Monsanto's new rider, to protect them from any future law suits...
along with a boycot list and a petition to sign.....

What You Need to Know About Monsanto's GMO Labeling Act

https://www.theboycottlist.org/infographic.html

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	GMA_boycot_list_2016-03-29_0845.png
Views:	92
Size:	421.5 KB
ID:	204913  
Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #223 (permalink)
 JohnS 
Bamberg, Germany
 
Experience: Beginner
Platform: Sierra Chart
Broker: IB, SierraCharts data
Trading: MES, FDXM
 
Posts: 1,091 since Oct 2014
Thanks: 15,031 given, 2,591 received


JohnS View Post
Thanks @Rachel for keeping us informed. I just left a message with Senator Stabenow to voice my displeasure over a compromise bill. I also wrote my Senator (Kaine, D, Va) and Representative (Griffith, R, Va), who had voted "yes" on the original House bill, but I felt he needed a reminder of my displeasure.

Senator Kaine's office responded to my email. Here is his response. So he voted against the bill and he seems to favor a compromise. A Business friendly compromise such as "call 1-800 blah blah to find out if this product contains GMOs" would not cut the mustard. I will let him know that.
Labeling GMO's-preview-gmail-reply-senator-kaine-copy.pdf

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to JohnS for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #224 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received


JohnS View Post
Senator Kaine's office responded to my email. Here is his response. So he voted against the bill and he seems to favor a compromise. A Business friendly compromise such as "call 1-800 blah blah to find out if this product contains GMOs" would not cut the mustard. I will let him know that.
Attachment 205162

Hi JohnS,

Regarding our governmental officials, I have two thoughts: either they are bought in some way: they have stock in a company, they are being given campaign money or they are promised a job at Monsanto when they leave office or asked to lobby for Monsanto when they leave office. The other side of the coin, they do not have enough information, so I am posting some links, you may want to share with them, so they see more than what Monsanto representatives are telling them.

World famous whistleblower, Dr. Giles-Eric Séralini, will speak March 6 in San Diego - Institute for Responsible Technology (note: Seralini is a scientist and did a 2 year study, were Monsanto's in house studies are only 3 months in duration, which is not enough time, to really see any effects of GMO's and Roundup). Note: trusting a company like Monsanto to do their own tests, is having a fox guard the hen house. Why would we trust Monsanto when their past track record is to misrepresent a product and say, it is not harmful only many years later, their product is found to cause harm. Example they brought these products to market: Saccharin, PCB pipes, DDT, Agent Orange and Bovine Growth Hormone. Monsanto has still not cleaned up the environmental mess they made with PCB or DDT yet. They get a law passed so they don't have too. Do you see a pattern forming?

Monsanto Employee Admits an Entire Department Exists to ?Discredit? Scientists | Natural Society

Widely Used Herbicide Linked to Cancer - Scientific American

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/wikileaks-reveals-monsantos-close-relationship-us-government

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/weeks-main-articles-genetically-engineered-foods-crops-july-13-2008

https://www.organicconsumers.org/old_articles/ge/Seeds021706.php

Monsanto guilty of bribery
1. https://www.organicconsumers.org/newsletter/organic-bytes-48-food-and-consumer-news-tidbits-edge/monsanto-found-guilty-international
2. https://www.organicconsumers.org/newsletter/organic-bytes-479-regeneration-revolution/what-really-scares-us
3. https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/us-politicians-bought-and-owned-big-biotech-%e2%80%93-and-maybe-media-too
4. https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/factory-farms-taxpayers-pay-politicians-take-agribusiness-profits
5. https://www.organicconsumers.org/old_articles/monsanto/bribes010705.php
This list is longer but this should be enough to get the point across.

Ask your Senator to read these links and see what his response is then, then you will know, if he was just uninformed or if he is bought. If he is bought, does he deserve to be your Senator?

PS Those new codes, they were trying to get passed have a couple of things wrong: not everyone has a smart phone and it was written that the government would do PR for GMO's etc. We will keep our ear's and eyes open, to see what if anything they try to pass into law before Vermont's law goes into effect.

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #225 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

https://www.change.org/p/say-no-to-genetically-modified-mosquitoes-release-in-the-florida-keys?recruiter=73553722&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #226 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Corporations would have us believe that there’s no harm in consuming or inhaling or absorbing small amounts of these chemicals into our bodies. But mounting evidence suggests otherwise. Here’s a scary thought: New research shows that the additives (co-formulants) used in glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, may have damaging endocrine-disrupting effects. Sobering news, given that billions of pounds of Roundup are sprayed on both GMO and non-GMO crops every year, everywhere in the world.

Read this week's essay

https://www.organicconsumers.org/essays/hormone-disruptors-everyday-poisons-non-organic-food-body-care-products-water-bottles-and

Co-formulants of glyphosate herbicides are endocrine disruptors

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #227 (permalink)
 Money1017 
Cypress/Texas
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: TradeStation
Trading: ES
 
Money1017's Avatar
 
Posts: 7 since Apr 2016
Thanks: 6 given, 3 received

Get national government out of our business. If a company gets third party testing of its products or doesn't use GMOs it will bring in more revenue if that is what the consumers want. This is only possible with free market capitalism as Ayn Rand wrote. The national government has no right to regulate to the extent it has, it needs to stop NOW!!.

Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Money1017 for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #228 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

California Widow Is Suing Monsanto for Killing Her Husband

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #229 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/17/178870_-os-rok-food-gv-two-faces-of-food-security-.html

Cut and paste part of an email from an email on Wikileaks: Two Faces of Food Security

"Syngenta's space-saving technology involves use of pesticides and GMOs.

For instance, the company's annual report says that herbicides can help
saving water by killing weeds and lower the need to till the land,
explaining that agriculture uses 70 percent of the world's all available
fresh water and 40 percent of that goes wasted. The soil of the non-tilled
land absorbs water better, and is protected against erosion, the firm
says.

The technology, however, isn't perfect. A type of a herbicide would kill
all kinds of plants with the common trait the herbicide is targeting. The
crops the farmers are actually cultivating would be no exception. As a
result, herbicide makers had to genetically engineer the seeds to have
resistance against the herbicide. Now, the herbicide and the GM seeds come
in one package.

Take the case of Roundup, a signature glyphosate-based herbicide made by
Monsanto, the world's top producer of genetically-engineered seeds and
herbicides based in the U.S. The agricultural giant is the major rival of
Syngenta with a much worse reputation.

Monsanto's Roundup accompanies seeds with "Roundup-ready" traits which the
company patented.

While some criticize such practices as vile attempts to control the
market, weed resistance to glyphosate emerged as an annoying problem.

Nine types of weeds in the U.S. and 12 worldwide including horseweed and
Johnson grass have been identified to be resistant to glyphosate
herbicides and many more, and showing more tolerance to them
, Syngenta
says in its website. The Swiss counterpart also developed its own version
of Roundup called Touchdown Total as well as the NK-Brand crops with the
"Roundup Ready" trait that has been genetically engineered under a license
from Monsanto.


Syngenta may be shifting its attention from the business that is as much
controversial as it is lucrative.


In addition to mentioning less use of pesticides in the future, Syngenta
CEO Mack said, "We are in an industry that has traditionally come up
through targeting really specific pests... A big area of science we are
now working on is how to improve the productivity in absence of pests.""

Note: we have heard that using GMO's and Roundup, weeds become resistant to them and you need to use more and more Roundup and other chemicals to kill these super weeds. For this one reason alone, we should not use Roundup or GMO's. Also, this was the first time, I heard, there were weeds that were resistant to Roundup, which brings up the question: Why are we using Roundup etc, how good of a job does it actually do?
Also, Roundup has been classified as being a carcinogen to humans.

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #230 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

It’s not enough that many of our Congress members are fighting alongside Monsanto to keep GMO labels off of food products.

Now some of our federal lawmakers want to use your tax dollars—$3 million of it—on propaganda to promote Monsanto under the guise of “educating” consumers about the “benefits” of GMOs.

Last week, as millions of tax returns traveled through the mail to the IRS, the House Appropriations Committee decided that Monsanto needs some of your hard-earned money.

The committee passed an agriculture spending bill that includes $3 million “to promote understanding and acceptance of agricultural biotechnology and biotechnology-derived food products and animal feed.”

This new “Monsanto Promotion Act” was championed by Subcommittee Chairman Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) who said, “We need to avoid consumer confusion.”

Not everyone agreed. House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) said, “The jury is still out on genetically modified organisms. Some may be safe. Some may be of concern. It’s not the responsibility of FDA to mount a government-controlled propaganda campaign, particularly when the science is far from certain.”

Unfortunately, her amendment to strike the Monsanto Promotion Act from the agriculture spending bill failed 29 to 20.

It’s not too late to stop the Monsanto Promotion Act. If we make a big enough stink about this, we could strike this provision from the spending bill before there’s a final vote.

https://action.organicconsumers.org/o/50865/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=18812

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #231 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

The EPA hid Monsanto’s secret studies on Roundup for years, until scientist Anthony Samsel, with the assistance of his US Senator, pried it out of the agency. He discovered that animals fed even small amounts of glyphosate [Roundup’s declared active ingredient] ended up with cancer and tumors in virtually every organ and gland. Did we really have to wait till last year’s declaration by the World Health Organization that glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen?

Read the full ad here: America's Favorite Poison - Institute for Responsible Technology
which includes some pretty dark details of America’s Favorite Poison - Roundup - and how the EPA has colluded with Monsanto and the other pesticide companies by supporting make-believe-science.

Action Alert: contact your senators: U.S. Senate: Contacting The Senate

Even when contacting your senators by email, you should include your postal mailing address. Let them know your concerns about the health risks of GMOs and glyphosate (Roundup). Ask them to refer to the April 25th edition of the Hill and go to ResponsibleTechnology.org/references for access to all three articles published in the Hill including "America's Favorite Poison", and both Part I and II of "The Great GMO Cover-up."

Here is the URL to "America's Favorite Poison", and both Part I and II of "The Great GMO Cover-up."
https://www.responsibletechnology.org/references-2/

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	RooundUP_2016-04-26_1859.png
Views:	67
Size:	332.5 KB
ID:	206975  
Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #232 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

This is the the 3rd Day of the Food Revolution Summit
Currently they are live interviews, then directly they will
post a link to listen to the replay for free for 24 hours



Today is about:

the truth about GMO's

Protect Your Fmaily From Toxic Food

and Food Safety: what you need to know

If you miss the live presentation, after the last interview,
for 23 hours, a replay will be available for free:

https://www.foodrevolutionsummit.org/

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Monday_May_2__2016-05-02_0958.png
Views:	84
Size:	168.2 KB
ID:	207461  
Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #233 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

https://action.organicconsumers.org/o/50865/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=16052

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #234 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Every 15 years, pesticides come up for review by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Last year, 2015, was the year the EPA was supposed to review and either renew, or reject, glyphosate.

We’re still waiting. Meanwhile, glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, was as ubiquitous in the media this week as it is in our environment—and on our food.

As OCA, Friends of the Earth, Moms Across America and other groups planned our May 4 petition delivery (over half a million signatures) to EPA officials in Washington D.C., asking the agency to reject the renewal of glyphosate, the EPA was busy posting—then un-posting—documents the agency will use to justify its final, and presumably Monsanto-friendly, decision. From Politico:

The EPA on Monday [May 2] posted online and then removed an October 2015 final report
https://src.bna.com/eAi
from its Cancer Assessment Review Committee, which is made up of staff, that concluded glyphosate is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans."

The move prompted House Committee on Science Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) to fire off a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. In the letter, according to Politico, Smith said that the decision to yank the report "raises questions about the agency's motivation in providing a fair assessment of glyphosate."

Smith wasn’t the only one with questions. The Center for Biological Diversity issued a press release
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/epa-uses-industry-funded-studies-determine-glyphosate-does-not-cause-cancer
accusing the EPA of using industry-funded studies to refute the World Health Organization’s findings that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen:

“EPA’s determination that glyphosate is non-carcinogenic is disappointing, but not terribly surprising — industry has been manipulating this process for years,” said Nathan Donley, a scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity. “The analysis done by the World Health Organization is more open and transparent and remains the gold standard.”

US Right to Know (USRTK)’s Carey Gillam outlined
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/what-going-glyphosate-epas-odd-handling-controversial-chemical
the significance of the yanked document

as it relates to protecting Monsanto from any legal liability from cancer patients:

Monsanto touted and tweeted the release of the document, which follows the release by EPA of a different memorandum
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/glyphosate-417300_2015-06-29_txr0057175.pdf
supporting the safety of glyphosate last June. The newest memo gives the company added evidence to defend itself against a mounting stack of lawsuits filed by agricultural workers and others alleging Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup herbicide gave them cancer.

In other glyphosate news this week? Quaker Oats faces a class action lawsuit for being “deceptive and misleading” after glyphosate is detected in its oatmeal. Members of the European Parliament call for the European Commission to rethink plans to renew glyphosate in the EU.

And then there was this gem from Mercola.com: “Many Surprising Foods Found to Contain Monsanto's Deadly Poison.” Not to mention our Video of the Week, from ABC News, about glyphosate in your California wine.
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/many-surprising-foods-found-contain-monsantos-deadly-poison
https://www.organicconsumers.org/newsletter/organic-bytes-509/under-influence

The EPA now says it will be the end of 2016 before they issue their final ruling. That's how long we have to stop the madness.

What Is Going on with Glyphosate? EPA’s Odd Handling of Controversial Chemical
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/what-going-glyphosate-epas-odd-handling-controversial-chemical

TAKE ACTION: Tell the EPA: Don't Re-Up Roundup!
https://action.organicconsumers.org/o/50865/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=16052

-----------------------------------------
My 2 cents, just another motivation to make sure you are eating organic foods and as a citizen sign petitions.

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #235 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/gmo-mosquitoes-are-being-released-wild

Petition:
https://action.organicconsumers.org/o/50865/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=18853

Attached Images
 
Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #236 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/adm-bunge-wont-buy-monsantos-new-genetically-modified-soy

Is a crack in the armor of Monsanto starting to begin?
Are we going to see a short coming on GE soy sometime in the coming future?

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #237 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

ACTION ALERT: "NO CONSENT To Release Of Genetically Modified Mosquitoes" - Institute for Responsible Technology

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #238 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Nazi-founded Bayer chemical company wants to buy Satan-inspired Monsanto for $42 billion... it's a perfect match made in chemical Hell

Learn more: Nazi-founded Bayer chemical company wants to buy Satan-inspired Monsanto for $42 billion... it's a perfect match made in chemical Hell - NaturalNews.com

My view point, I think, Monsanto sees the writing on the wall and wants to sell. This has been their MO for the life of the company. They create a product and would exit, anyway they could prior to having to be accountable for their criminal activities: selling a product that harmed people. They went bankrupt many times example: after their PCB pipes were found to be causing skin and liver cancer etc. They also didn't have to clean up the environment, that they polluted. then Then they would resurrect themselves and bring a new harmful product to market.

Once we get labeling and the connection with Roundup and cancer can then be proved, will Bayer be holding the bag?
Is this a move to not be held accountable for Monsanto's crimes against humanity?

Ban Bayer products!

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #239 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Time to sign the petition and call your Senator's.

Center for Food Safety

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #240 (permalink)
 Rachel 
San Diego
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Private
Broker: private
Trading: CL future
 
Rachel's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,380 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 935 given, 1,955 received

Green America: Economic Action for a Just Planet

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Started this thread Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Rachel for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #241 (permalink)
 aquarian1 
Point Roberts, WA, USA
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: IB and free NT
Broker: IB
Trading: ES
 
aquarian1's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,033 since Dec 2010
Thanks: 1,507 given, 2,585 received

Most Corn Is Hiding

GMO corn is engineered to produce its own insecticide called Bt toxin. Some newer varieties are also resistant to weed killers or herbicides. Avoiding GMO corn can be challenging because so many food products are derived from it or contain it. Obvious sources are sweet corn, corn muffins, corn chips, corn flakes, tortillas and popcorn. Less apparent sources may be hidden in the ingredient list, such as high fructose corn syrup, regular corn syrup, corn oil, corn starch, corn flour, dextrose, glucose and sugar alcohols such as xylitol. Most vitamin C supplements are synthesized from GMO corn.
Soy Is Sneaky, Too

GMO soy is engineered to resist being sprayed with weed killers. Popular soy foods are soy milk, tofu, soy chips, edamame, miso, soy sauce, baby formula, protein drinks, energy bars, bread made with soy flour and meat substitutes such as soy "turkey." Soybean oil is an ingredient in mayonnaise, salad dressings, prepared foods, canned tuna and supplements such as vitamin E. Partially hydrogenated soybean oil, a major source of trans fat, is used in baked goods and fried foods. Soy can be disguised as textured vegetable protein, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, vegetable broth and natural flavoring, so reading labels is essential.

Other Sources of GMOs

Cottonseed oil, found in many processed foods and canned nuts, is mostly GMO. Canola oil, an ingredient in many so-called “healthy” foods, is also mostly GMO. Canola mayonnaise and salad dressings, therefore, are usually GMO, just like their soybean oil counterparts. Most commercial sucrose, or table sugar, is made from GMO sugar beets instead of sugar cane. Hawaiian papaya and some varieties of zucchini and yellow squash are GMO. Many dairy foods, unless specified otherwise on the label, contain traces of recombinant growth hormone (RBGH), administered to cows to increase milk production. Meat products that are not certified organic or grass-fed have been raised on GMO corn and soy.
List of Foods Containing GMOs | LIVESTRONG.COM

..........
peace, love and joy to you
.........
Visit my futures io Trade Journal Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #242 (permalink)
 aquarian1 
Point Roberts, WA, USA
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: IB and free NT
Broker: IB
Trading: ES
 
aquarian1's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,033 since Dec 2010
Thanks: 1,507 given, 2,585 received

The genetically modified FLAX seed was named "Triffid" by Dr. Alan McHughen, the scientist who developed it at the University of Saskatchewan in the 1990s.
Renegade Genetically Modified Flax Seed is Crippling Canadian Market : TreeHugger

----------------------
The GM varieties approved include Ranger Russet, Russet Burbank and Atlantic, produced by J.R. Simplot Co. The potatoes have been genetically modified to reduce black spots and bruises by lowering certain enzymes. These varieties have also been also modified to produce less acrylamide -- a potentially cancer-causing chemical that forms when starchy foods are heated at high temperatures.

The varieties use a new form of genetic engineering known as RNA interference, according to the Center for Food Safety, an industry watchdog. In a press statement released in March 2015, Andrew Kimbrell, the center's director, said the consequences of this new form of genetic engineering are not yet well understood and referred to the introduction of GM potatoes as "risky." The center favors labeling GM foods so that consumers know which foods contain GMOs.
Some Food Suppliers Say No

Research submitted to the FDA by Simplot to gain approval has not been made public.
ConAgra Foods and McCain are among the food suppliers that say they won't use GM potatoes, according to a March 2015 Chicago Tribune article. Food chain McDonald's has also rejected Simplot's GM potatoes.

What Varieties of Potatoes Are GMO? | LIVESTRONG.COM

..........
peace, love and joy to you
.........
Visit my futures io Trade Journal Reply With Quote
 
(login for full post details)
  #243 (permalink)
 Cloudy 
desert CA
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NT7, SC, ToS
Broker: AMP, DT, TDA
Trading: CL,NQ,YM
 
Posts: 2,135 since Jul 2011
Thanks: 2,388 given, 1,727 received


"Internal Documents: Monsanto Knew For Years Their Products Damaged Farms"



https://www.zerohedge.com/health/internal-documents-monsanto-knew-years-their-products-damaged-farms


"The documents (some of them date back more than a decade) have been uncovered during a recent successful $265 million lawsuit brought against both firms by a Missouri farmer. The internal documents were seen and released by the Guardian. They also revealed how Monsanto opposed some third-party product testing, in order to curtail the generation of data that might have worried regulators. In some of the internal BASF emails, employees were even joking about sharing “voodoo science“ and hoping to stay “out of jail.”"

Visit my futures io Trade Journal Reply With Quote


futures io Trading Community Off-Topic > Labeling GMO's


Last Updated on April 3, 2020


Upcoming Webinars and Events

NinjaTrader Indicator Challenge!

Ongoing

Journal Challenge w/$1,800 in prizes!

May 7

The Cold Hard Truth: Maybe I Am Not Good Enough w/Chris Gray @ Earn2Trade

Elite only
     



Copyright © 2021 by futures io, s.a., Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama, Ph: +507 833-9432 (Panama and Intl), +1 888-312-3001 (USA and Canada), info@futures.io
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
no new posts