0
POPSGMO foods Like it or not, GMO foods have made there way into our food supply. We have no way of knowing how they will affect us and no way to identify these foods at our local supermarket. Frankenfood!
1
POPSAsylum for those who push GM food and us from them GM food sounds so attractive until you think about this: Is Monsanto, Bayer, or whomever big corp thinking first about 1. their profit; 2. people's health; 3. dangers to the environment; 4. making crops and farmers more susceptible to crop collapse due to unforeseen or unintended consequences. Who did not vote for #1 as their first priority? What works best for profit is to plant all the same crop - right. What works best for a new insect, fungus, or bacteria - humans plant all the same crop.
12
POPSChickens Not Fooled by GM Crops When an animal refuses to eat its regular feed it is oftentimes a clear sign that something is wrong with the food. Animals, as opposed to humans, tend to have a “sixth sense” about what’s safe to eat, and what’s not.
11
POPSChickens Not Fooled by GM Crops GM corn found itself in the hot seat late last year, after a highly reputable study commissioned by the Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety discovered that mice fed GM corn had significantly smaller and fewer offspring compared to the control group. The lead author of the study stated there was a direct link between the GM diet and reduced fertility. Likewise, Jeffrey Smith, author of Seeds of Deception and Genetic Roulette, has documented 65 serious health risks from GM products of all kinds. Among them: * Offspring of rats fed GM soy showed a five-fold increase in mortality, lower birth weights, and the inability to reproduce * Male mice fed GM soy had damaged sperm * The embryo offspring of GM soy-fed mice had altered DNA functioning * Several US farmers reported sterility or fertility problems among pigs and cows fed on GM corn varieties So the question is, what
8
POPSPepsiCo Chooses to Continue Using GE Ingredients Despite Evidence of Harm
The list of evil corporations grows longer. What else would you label a corporation that continues to use ingredients proven to cause toxicity in the kidney and liver? They sure as hell cannot be considered beneficial or benevolent. US law does not require GE foods be tested for toxicity so PepsiCo will continue to use the material without conscience. To quote Pepsi's response to the proposal: "We believe that genetically-modified products can play a role in generating positive economic, social and environmental contributions to societies around the world; particularly in times of food shortages." PepsiCo’s belief system (making money no matter what) doesn’t fit in with lab test results therefore disregard the tests. Incredibly, Monsanto had this to say: "Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA's job." That’s my definition of an evil corporation.
2
POPSScientific American editors decry research restrictions on GMOs Something as basic as seed to grow food, the very substance of life, necessary for the survival of every person, should not in any way be controlled by any corporation or individual. Patents for the control of plant seed is a crime against humanity designed to gain ownership of life itself.
0
POPSAgribusiness and British Government Pull GM Food Trick They will always have a good reason for trying to fool the public and nature with profit of their bosses, not the public or farmers at the root of their experiments. They may be able to fool the public but not nature - and therein lays the problem. When the incentive is profit, rather than safety, sustainability and system impact, then the risk of unexpected and perhaps crop killing consequences goes up!
16
POPSGenetically Modified Humans Not likely, you say. Really. Just a few years ago, we didn’t think that genetically modified animals would be an issue. Now it is. When the genetically modified baby boom starts coming into play, don’t you think the designers will want a patent on the genes? And do you think they will be any less willing to enforce their patent on those genes than Monsanto is on farmers who use the company’s patented technology for crops? Let’s face it. We could be looking at a future of patented designer humans. If a person is found to have the patented gene, that person could be indebted for life to the patent holder – born to pay from the moment of conception. This is a multinational corporate wet dream. And last but certainly not least, we have to ask ourselves – do we really want genetically modified humans in our midst?
1
POPSThe Risks of Genetically Modified Foods WHEN will people start reacting to Monsanto and pals before it is too late and they hold the keys to our food supplies? I have a horrible fear of not being able to find an organic vegetable anywhere and having to buy all our seeds and vegetables, etc from these people with absolutely no scruples!!!
0
POPSFood, Inc.: How factory farming affects you (movie trailer on site)
But despite the factory-farm scenes, some of the most thought-provoking moments were these statements that were spoken or flashed on the screen. According to the filmmakers: In 1972, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration conducted 50,000 food safety inspections. In 2006, the FDA conducted only 9,164. In 1996 when it introduced Round-Up Ready soybeans, Monsanto controlled only 2 percent of the U.S. soybean market. Now, over 90 percent of soybeans in the U.S. contain Monsanto's patented gene. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was an attorney at Monsanto from 1976 to 1979. After his appointment to the Supreme Court, Justice Thomas wrote the majority opinion in a case that helped Monsanto enforce its seed patents. 70 percent of processed foods have some genetically modified ingredient. (Genetically modified crops are not labeled in the U.S. even though 90 percent of consumers have said they want labeling.) 1 in 3 Americans born after 2000 will contract early onset diabe
0
POPSThe Salba-nator An interesting health product to say the least. I have been trying this for about 8 months.
1
POPSMahesh Bhatt presents: Poison on the Platter “Poison on the Platter”, is an eye-opening film, made by Mahesh Bhatt and Ajay Kanchan, illustrating how all of our lives are gonna be (adversely) affected by genetically modified foods. It is no more a farmer’s issue alone, it’s a matter of the consumers’ right to food safety. You and I wouldn’t even be able to separate/choose a normal Brinjal from/over a GM one, if Bt Brinjal - a GM crop produced by the mighty agri-MNC Monsanto - is let through by our corrupt regulatory body. Let’s put up strong resistance, demanding a ban on GM food/crops for 5 years, until they are proven safe for human consumption by independent, long-term studies.
3
POPSIslands at Risk: Genetic Engineering in Hawaii Produced for Earthjustice, a non-profit public interest law firm, this half-hour program focuses on experiments with genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) in Hawai’i, a place that has been named the GMO testing capitol of the world because of the more than 2,000 secret experimental field tests carried out over the past decade. Farmers, legal and medical experts and community activists share their perspective on the genetic engineering of crops and the patenting of life forms. In addition, they warn against the possible health impacts of GMOs, including allergic and immune system responses from exposure to biopharmaceutical crops —both in humans and in Hawai’i’s endangered species — and contamination of regular food crops such as papaya, taro, coffee and corn with genetically modified versions of those crops.
1
POPS GENETICALLY MODIFIED SUGAR BEETS: A BAD BET (AT THE WORST TIME)
BIOTECH PROMISES COME UP SHORT For more than a decade, biotech advocates spread promises of an unprecedented economic boom, but according to the San Francisco Chronicle, most of their hoopla remains “in the ‘promise’ category - and has been each year.” Their “smorgasbord of marketing claims,” writes the Asia Times, just adds to “the credibility problems that are piling up against genetic engineering.” The Wall Street Journal reported, “Not only has the biotech industry yielded negative financial returns for decades, it generally digs its hole deeper every year.” The Associated Press says it “remains a money-losing, niche industry.” In spite of their poor track record, advocates continue to convince politicians and others to invest in their infant technology. “This notion that you lure biotech to your community to save its economy is laughable,” said Joseph Cortright, an Oregon economist who co-wrote a report on the subject. “This is a bad-idea virus that has swept t
5
Pops
Newest Clips
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Print
Save
Turn on live update