Regulators Discover an OCCULT & harmful Viral Gene In Commercial GMO Crops

[Berlum]

This is deeply distressing...

Published (January 21st) in Independent Science News:

Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene In Commercial GMO Crops
by Jonathan Latham and Allison Wilson

Synopsis: A scientific paper published in late 2012 shows that US and EU GMO regulators have for many years been inadvertently approving transgenic events containing an unsuspected viral gene...

...The authors of the paper, working for the European Food Safety Authority, concluded that functions of Gene VI were potential sources of harmful consequences.

They further concluded that, if expressed, the fragments of Gene VI are substantial enough for them to be functional.

This discovery has multiple ramifications for biotechnology. Foremost, there is the immediate question of GMO safety and whether the 54 events should be recalled, but secondly, the failure implicates regulators and the industry in a circle of mutual incompetence and complacency.

The discovery also strengthens the argument for GMO labeling: if regulators and industry cannnot protect the public then why should they not be allowed to protect themselves?

URL: http://independentsciencenews.org/commentaries/regulators-discover-a-hidden-viral-gene-in-commercial-gmo-crops/

[dipsydoodle]

1. "inadvertently" ?

[Berlum]

2. Ummm hmmmmm

[HiPointDem]

3. occult? i don't see that word in the original article.

[Berlum]

4. It's hidden

You can't see it. It's occulted. But trust me, it's there and not there. It's occulted.

[Berlum]

7. .

[Recursion]

48. Has a specific meaning in biology. Non-phenotypic.

A gene with no obvious expression in the organism's form or behavior.

[HiPointDem]

49. i know. i didn't ask what the word meant, i said it wasn't in the article. nor is the concept

discussed.

[nc4bo]

5. The phrase, "We are what we eat" immediately comes to mind....

I wonder what a human being infected with cauliflower mosaic virus would look like or how would it affect our bodies?

Or how about verticillium wilt or any number of blights?

I'm not going to pretend I understand every single word, sentence or paragraph in that article but I definitely think I've got the gist of where its going and I don't like it one bit and neither should any one else.

Just one more thought; we/our government allowed these jackasses to experimentally muck with our food supply, for pure profit. What could possibly go wrong?!

[Berlum]

6. "You rang?" - Cauliflower Mosaic Virus Dude

[csziggy]

9. No idea but here is what happens when cactus mixes with Time Lord

[AdHocSolver]

8. GMO crops: Playing Russian roulette with life on planet Earth for profit for a few.

K and R.

[randome]

10. "...concluded that functions of Gene VI were potential sources of harmful consequences."

Congratulations to the author for the most non-specific fire drill of the day!

Just about everything in the Universe is a 'potential source of harmful consequences'.

[Berlum]

11. But not everything in universe is occult crapola viral foodlike substance

as everyone must attest.

[randome]

12. Everything we eat is modified by human beings.

Calling something 'occult' and 'crapola' only carries weight if you can point to something specific. Saying that it's artificial and therefore axiomatically 'evil' will not gain much traction.

[Berlum]

13. You want specifics of OCCULT CRAPOLA FOODLIKE SUBSTANCE? OK

Read closely:

When a scientific study was published in September last year showing that a genetically modified maize and tiny amounts of the Roundup herbicide it is designed to be grown with damaged the health of rats, Corinne Lepage MEP called it "a bomb".

The study, by Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini's team at the University of Caen, France, was the first to test the effects of eating a GM food and its associated pesticide over the animals' lifetime of two years.

The study found that GM maize and Roundup caused severe organ damage and increased tumour rates, as well as earlier death....

HUGE STINKING TANTRUM BY "Scientists" immediately thereafter gets MASSIVE corporate media play.

"...But all was not as it seemed. Many of the critics were subsequently exposed as having commercial or career interests in GM technology – interests that went undisclosed in media articles that quoted them.

The Science Media Centre itself has taken funding from GM and agrochemical companies.

Government agencies that condemned the study, such as the EFSA, had been involved in GM crop approvals and so were simply defending their own decisions.


Read more: http://www.publicserviceeurope.com/article/2937/citizens-were-lied-to-over-gm-study#ixzz2IjCiUj00

[Berlum]

14. Michael Pollan on Crappy Mutant Foodlike Substances

[farminator3000]

42. see #41

documented source?

[cthulu2016]

15. If you have to rely on tricking people who don't know what "OCCULT" means...

then you don't have much of a message.

And the all caps is, indeed, proof of intention to highlight an alarming sounding word. (Most would find the word "harmful" in the headline of more interest than hidden or obscured)

[Berlum]

16. You don't know what occult means?

Last edited Tue Jan 22, 2013, 04:23 PM - Edit history (1)

Let me help you out. It means hidden.

The TRICK is "hidden" genetically mutant crapola in the food. You know, occulted.

[DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav]

17. A lot of people have been trying to warn US consumers about this for many years but

they were blown off as conspiracy theorists. Good to see main stream media's finally been taking an interest in it the last couple of years. GMO foods are banned many other places around the world and with good reason. If corporations want to sell poison garbage to the American people, I could care less, it's the "American way" but I do feel they shouldn't be allowed to market their trash as organic. It should be labeled GMO.

[Berlum]

18. The Daily Mail just picked up the story. New doubts on GMO Safety. "Fatal Flaws" in regulation

USA Corporate Media, Inc. (R): "z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z"

Uncovered, the 'toxic' gene hiding in GM crops:
Revelation throws new doubt over safety of foods

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266143/Uncovered-toxic-gene-hiding-GM-crops-Revelation-throws-new-doubt-safety-foods.html#ixzz2IjpH6qmo

[Berlum]

19. European Union puts Freeze on GM crops

What do the Europeans know that US Corporate Media, Inc. isn't telling Americans?

"The European Commission has decided to freeze the approval process for genetically modified food crops through the end of its mandate next year..."

http://www.seeddaily.com/reports/EU_freezes_approval_of_GM_crops_to_2014_999.html

[blazeKing]

20. I've heard of no issues with chickens or cows fed GM corn

If there were problems it would likely show up in them first. I know there are studies on rats that show liver and reproductive damage. Personally, I am against GMO until long term independent studies show they are safe.

[Berlum]

22. No problems with livestock fed GM grains?

Just because you have not heard of it, does not mean it's not happening. Check out the work of Don Huber.

[flobee1]

57. the problem is cows eat grass

not corn-they cannot digest it properly

[farminator3000]

41. the cattle network dot com are notorious radicals, but...

Rosman said he used hybrids in the past and started to use GMO corn in feed in 1997 without any trouble, but things changed in 2000 when he switched to a different company’s genetics with a new genetically modified trait.

Starting in 2000, most of Rosman’s animal were unable to reproduce with a low sperm count in males and females showing false pregnancies. The pigs that were reproducing had smaller litters. By adjusting the type of corn used, Rosman concluded the corn with the genetically modified trait he started using in 2000 was causing the problem. Continued losses and his shrinking herd forced him to close his farm two years later.
http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-news/181872191.html

[Fight2Win]

21. kick

nt

[Motown_Johnny]

23. Pitchforks and Torches.. we need Pitchforks and Torches!!!

Pitchforks to uproot the plants and torches to burn them.






^snip from link in OP^



Is There a Direct Human Toxicity Issue?

When Gene VI is intentionally expressed in transgenic plants, it causes them to become chlorotic (yellow), to have growth deformities, and to have reduced fertility in a dose-dependent manner (Ziljstra et al 1996). Plants expressing Gene VI also show gene expression abnormalities. These results indicate that, not unexpectedly given its known functions, the protein produced by Gene VI is functioning as a toxin and is harmful to plants (Takahashi et al 1989). Since the known targets of Gene VI activity (ribosomes and gene silencing) are also found in human cells, a reasonable concern is that the protein produced by Gene VI might be a human toxin. This is a question that can only be answered by future experiments.



So, at this point we have nothing but unfounded speculation.


If you google the authors and check out their Bioscience resource project it would appear that these people are profiting from scaring people.

Hey, maybe they are right (although I am very sceptically) but right now it looks like profiteering by means of fear.

[Berlum]

24. No. We need more people who have respect for land and life.

And a more careful & deliberate science that is not frantically driven by narrow-minded profit-seeking corporations.

[Motown_Johnny]

25. GMOs tend to use less land and water

and feed people who otherwise would not be fed.

[marions ghost]

27. let's find a better way

There really isn't a GOOD argument for these GMO foods. The American public are the primary guinea pigs. It would be wise to avoid them as much as possible.

[Motown_Johnny]

29. Tell that to starving people. They are dying NOW!

There is no good argument against GMO foods. There is no proof of any of these fantastic charges.

Starvation is real and is going on now.


Also, it is not just Americans who eat this. The whole world uses GMO crops now. Open your eyes just a little, will you please.

[marions ghost]

32. Uh...the whole world does not eat them by choice

Those who are eating them have NO idea of the dangers.

Open your eyes to the dangers and risks.

GMO foods are NOT the answer to starvation in the world.

[farminator3000]

40. get a new script please, that BS is 15 years old

Moral Blackmail
Many opponents argue that biotech companies are using world hunger as a form of "moral blackmail" to sell GMOs. Consumers feel they have to accept biotechnology or else they feel guilty about standing in the way of progress to help stop world hunger (Knee, 2000). The companies make themselves out to be the saviors of hungry people throughout the world, but do not actually use their expertise to help developing nations because they have no profit incentive.
http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/spring01/denlinger/problems.html

[Berlum]

43. +1

+1

[Motown_Johnny]

46. then present some evidence that GMOs are harmful

If you are incapable of doing so then I suggest you accept that GMOs do more good than harm.


I agree that the companies are out to make profits. I would never suggest otherwise. That does not change the fact that more food can be produced on the same land with the same resources using GMO crops than non altered crops.

[farminator3000]

51. try posts #48, #76, #69, #91, #99, #43...

and if you want to get into this new 'golden rice' gmo crap that you have to eat 2.2 pounds of to get the same vitamin A as 1 mango, but it is also supposed to 'save the world', i have some thoughts on that, also.

sorry, got the threads mixed up there, those posts, from this one:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022243841

[farminator3000]

56. also a bunch of links here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2248150

or you could do your own checking. try googling 'gmo yield improvement'

A study from the Union of Concerned Scientists shows that genetically engineered crops do not produce larger harvests. Crop yield increases in recent years have almost entirely been due to improved farming or traditional plant breeding, despite more than 3,000 field trials of GM crops.

from SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, those legendary commies!

[wisechoice]

34. Tell that to suicide belt in India

VANDANA SHIVA: (interviewed in 2006) Indian farmers have never committed suicide on a large scale. It’s something totally new. It’s linked to the last decade of globalization, trade liberalization under a corporate-driven economy. The seed sector was liberalized to allow corporations like Cargill and Monsanto to sell unregulated, untested seed. They began with hybrids, which can’t be saved, and moved on to genetically engineered Bt cotton.
The cotton belt is where the suicides are taking place on a very, very large scale. It is the suicide belt of India. And the high cost of seed is linked to high cost of chemicals, because these seeds need chemicals. In addition, these costly seeds need to be bought every year, because their very design is to make seeds nonrenewable, seed that isn’t renewable by its very nature, but whether it’s through patenting systems, intellectual property rights or technologically through hybridization, nonrenewable seed is being sold to farmers so they must buy every year.



Continue reading at NowPublic.com: The Farmer Suicide Belt of India | NowPublic News Coverage http://www.nowpublic.com/environment/farmer-suicide-belt-india#ixzz2Ip6epVXO

[farminator3000]

39. really? you just know that off the top of your head?

try posting a link or fact, perhaps.

[randome]

28. We passed that point a LONG time ago.

Once we entered the industrial revolution. But I agree, we need less destructive ways to manage our insatiable appetite for change.

[farminator3000]

38. you seem to have missed the dot org part completely

which means non profit.

they guy that wrote the article has a master's in genetics AND virology. and gets his MONEY by presenting at scientific conferences.

what do you 'know', precisely?

[Motown_Johnny]

47. the people who run non profits pay themselves a salary

to assume that they are not making any money is foolish


What I know is that there is no hard evidence for any of these accusations. Once there is some then I will change my opinion. Until there is some my opinion stands. GMOs are doing more good than harm.

[wisechoice]

50. And that is a opinion and not a fact

There is neither hard evidence that GMOs are good. This is real massive live experiment going on and people refuse to label GMOs because we can then document the result of this experiment. Even wonder why they refuse to label GMOs?

[patrice]

26. we are lab rats.

[Duer 157099]

30. Here's what I don't understand

There are millions of laboratory rodents that are being fed daily with... what? Non-GMO rodent chow? Does such a thing even exist? If virtually all the corn produced today is GMO, then wouldn't their regular chow be derived from GMO corn?

[patrice]

31. What does "occult" mean in this context, please?

[Speck Tater]

33. "occult" simply means "hidden" in every technical context.

To the common person it means hidden, also, but with supernatural overtones not present in technical and scientific contexts.

[patrice]

36. I wasn't thinking supernatural. So, they infer that something's there, but none of their technical

processes and procedures can address it? They have no way of "seeing" it deductively?

[Speck Tater]

35. Read "Oryx and Crake" by Margaret Atwood.

For a grim (fictional) picture of our genetically altered, globally warming future.

[patrice]

37. Does the article suggest hypothetical effects upon our immune systems? nt

[Berlum]

44. It suggests that GMOs may be doing all kinds of damage

...but since almost all the 'science' that has been done has been skewed by corporate funding or other dubious means, we have missed some huge issues and we need real, impartial science to know the truth about GMOs.

Despite this, corporations continue to spew out massive quantities of GMO SEEDS and foods in an occult (unlabeled) manner, thereby violating the rights of every human being to know what they are eating.

[patrice]

45. One of THE worst things going down right now. :-(((((((((((((

[mike_c]

52. oh for pete's sake....

This is embarrassing.

[Kalidurga]

53. I don't know how a person can trust a company that sues farmers over cross pollination.

Or the same company fighting putting GMO labels on their food stuff products. If these foods are just as good and there are no problems they should be happy to label them GMO.

[quote]

[/quote]

[wisechoice]

54. I never got a answer why they refuse to label GMOs.

[Kalidurga]

55. Well I think we both know the answer to that.

But, Monsanto et al aren't going to give that reason. Many people won't knowingly put food in their bodies that could cause cancer cells to grow faster or cause abnormalities in their cell linings.

[wisechoice]

58. defenders of Monsonto disappear

whenever I ask this question. THey know the answer too