GMO Facts and Arguments

There has been a debate raging about GMOs for a long time now. On one side of the debate is the idea that genetic engineering is progress for humanity, a natural extension of more traditional breeding techniques. The other side believes genetically modified foods are unsafe for human consumption and harmful to the environment.

Biotech companies claim that genetic modification yields more precise control over artificial selection. Studies funded by the industry consistently demonstrate safety, but only over the short term. For years, Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta, and other biotech based agricultural companies have told the public that there is nothing to worry about. Genetic modification will be the technology that will improve food in every conceivable way. Food will be more nutritious. Crops will be more vigorous, more disease resistant, etc. There are literally thousands of studies demonstrating GMO safety. Scrutiny reveals these short-term studies are funded by or performed by the industry itself.

As more independent scientists complete long-term studies, a very different picture has emerged about the safety of GMOs and their many other drawbacks. When these studies are not funded by industry, the results show us an uncontrollable, uncontainable, and dangerous technology with serious health hazards.

Seralini’s Research Broke New Ground

One of the first studies to ring the alarm was a 2-year, long-term chronic toxicity study. Don’t believe the hype churned out by biotech that criticizes the Seralini study until you take the time to look into the defense of their methods. The Seralini study was actually a well-designed and well-conducted study. If we are to accept the argument that Séralini’s study does not provide substantial evidence that genetically modified food is dangerous, then we must also conclude that the short-term toxicity studies funded by the agriculture industry (primarily Monsanto) on GM foods cannot prove that they are safe. They are in fact the same type of study, conducted the same way,  even using the same type of rats. The only significant difference was the duration of the study. Seralini’s study showed how the previous 90-day studies are misleading as 90 days is not long enough to test for long-term effects like organ damage, cancer, and premature death. The first tumors appeared in the rats after four months. This study was able to distinguish the effects of GM food from GM food grown with allotted pesticides. The results provide strong evidence supporting the claim that genetically modified food, especially genetically modified food grown with Roundup, is highly toxic and unfit for animal or human consumption.

New Studies on GMOs

There are other studies showing that GMOs are even worse than what was originally feared. Dr. Kruger’s research shows how chronically ill people have higher glyphosate levels than healthy people. Dr. Swanson has linked glyphosate use with America’s deteriorating health. Dr. Young’s work showed how Roundup, at surprisingly low amounts, is an endocrine disruptor in human cells. It doesn’t take much Roundup to disrupt hormones; the levels of Roundup allowed in municipal drinking water is enough to cause harm. There are many other studies that are showing other problems with GMOs. Independent science is coming to a different conclusion than industry-funded science. That doesn’t seem all that surprising though, does it?

Even Short-Term Studies (When Independently Done) are Demonstrating Real Safety Issues with GMOs

Dr. Oraby fed rats a diet of GM soy and GM corn for 1-3 months. Despite the short duration of the study, the study ended with a surprising number of dead and unhealthy rats, except of course the control group of rats who weren’t fed GMO food. The damage done to these rats from short-term GMO consumption was staggering. This study showed a wide range of toxic effects, including DNA damage, abnormal sperm, blood changes, and damage to the liver, the kidneys and testes – irrefutable evidence that GM foods are hazardous to health.

Most Americans have been eating GMOs for a lot longer than three months. The only reason we’re not all dead is because GM foods are not the only food  we eat. If 100% of all of our foods were genetically modified, our overall health as a nation would be even worse. As a nation, the U.S. is in very poor health, and we have every reason to believe that genetically modified foods are a big part of the problem.

A Controlled Dialog

For years, biotech has tried to frame the argument for genetic modification as one between the knowledgeable and the unknowledgeable. In their efforts to change their image, they have even managed to recruit to aid of Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson to advocate for the science of genetic engineering. Bill and Neil portray the critics of GMO technology as superstitious and ignorant. They respond to the criticisms of GMO technology as if they were addressing irrational fears. When Bill Nye or Neil deGrasse Tyson talk GMOs, they make all manner of bold pronouncements declaring GMOs safe and wonderful.

It would be nice to believe that Bill Nye The Science Guy and Neil deGrasse Tyson would never accept money from biotech to promote GM technology, but Monsanto is a master of lobbying and payoffs. It would have been good for business to buy off Bill and Neil. Thankfully, not every scientist is for sale.

By never addressing the evidence provided by long-term studies, independent studies, or the concerns of numerous prominent scientists, biotech furthers the misconception that they are those in the know and everyone else is misinformed. In truth, the science isn’t all that complicated. Anyone can come to understand GMOs well enough to become informed.

The public sees both Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson as spokesmen for science. Unfortunately, neither of them are as broadly trained in science as most people think. They speak on a wide variety of scientific topics, so they give the impression that they just about know it all. In truth, there has not been anyone knowledgeable enough to fill Carl Sagan’s shoes since his death, though Bill and Neil have certainly tried. They give the impression of being knowledgeable in all fields of science, as their mentor Carl Sagan actually was. (Carl Sagan was adamantly opposed to genetic engineering and he had advanced training in biology). Science needs a spokesperson who’s not for sale.

95% of the American Public and Many Scientists Want GMO Foods Labeled

This is not a debate of irrational fears versus a pragmatic technology. This is an argument among scientists and governments. There are those scientists who are employed by the U.S. government and biotech, and then there’s just about everyone else. On the issue of GMO labeling, most of us are in agreement. Many countries all over the world ban the cultivation of GMOs, and many countries mandate that GMOs be labeled. The debate went global a long time ago. While the rest of the world bans GMOs, Americans have been unsuccessful in just getting GM foods labeled.

Scientists have been speaking out against GMOs for some time now. For years they have been pointing out GMO failures in yield, toxicity, safety, and containment. Recently the World Health Organization named Roundup a carcinogen. One of the most common genetic modifications is the modification making crops Roundup ready and immune to the Roundup herbicide. In light of the health concerns raised by skeptical scientists, you would think that the U.S. would be scaling back on its use of Roundup and other suspected or known toxic chemicals in agriculture. Instead of scaling back on the use of pesticides, these kinds of chemicals are being used more widely.

Before the harvest of conventional oats, wheat, and other crops, Roundup is often applied in large amounts, dramatically increasing the American consumers’ exposure to this  carcinogen. The U.S. government has now approved the use of Agent Orange ready (24-D) soy and corn. No one should consume these chemicals in their food, yet the government says it’s okay. Common sense says otherwise. If common sense fails some of us, there is plenty of evidence and hundreds of experts to fall back on.

Scientists All Over the World Have Called For a Moratorium on All Genetic Engineering

Scientists such as Prof. Ruth Hubbard, Geneticist, Harvard University, USA and 814 other scientists have written an open letter to governments and international forums. These prominent scientists are extremely concerned about the hazards that GMOs pose to biodiversity and food safety. They are “extremely concerned” about the risks GMOs pose to human health and animal health. Experts all over the world are saying it’s time to change our agricultural practices.

Patents are meant to protect property rights, but the patents on genetically modified foods have been used to take farmers’ lands away from their rightful owners. Instead of protecting the freedom to own property, these patents are eroding the rights of property owners.

GM pollen from GM crops can travel miles. It is commonplace for birds, insects, and weather to carry GM pollen and seeds. Animals and natural processes can spread patented genes onto other farms. When this happens, hapless farmers are sued, and contrary to all common sense, they are the ones who usually lose in court.

GM crops cross-pollinate with other crops so voraciously that we can’t seem to get rid of some unapproved GM varieties. Genetically modified wheat keeps popping up in farmers’ fields across the country though it was ordered to be completely destroyed 14 years ago, way back in 2001.

The current techniques used to genetically modify foods are unreliable, uncontrollable, and unpredictable. Hundreds, sometimes thousands, of unwanted mutations result from genetic engineering. These can result in new allergens or toxins, and even new viruses. This makes sense when you consider that GMO foods are made to either be immune to poison or to create their own poisons or both. Traditional breeding techniques are simply more controllable and predictable.

This is an argument made by thousands of farmers and scientists.

These Are Just Some of the Reasons GM Foods Should Not Qualify as Inventions

GM crops are neither necessary nor beneficial to agriculture. There have been many failures of genetically modified crops. Now that independent research is being done on GM crops, the picture of a failed technology emerges from the research.

  • Genetically modified crops have produced inferior yields when compared to their unmodified counterparts.
  • GM crops have been shown to have poor disease resistance.
  • GM crops engineered to contain BT toxins kill beneficial insects such as bees, lacewings, swallowtails, and monarch butterflies. (Monsanto claims they are concerned about this, but so far greenwashing has been their only response).
  • Glufosinate causes birth defects in mammals.
  • Fruit abortion (a failure of fruit production) is a problem.
  • Glyphosate has been linked to cancer.
  • Farmers are experiencing poor financial returns.
  • GMOs violate farmers rights.
  • GMOs violate human rights and basic human dignity. (The right to know and control what we put into our bodies is a basic and fundamental human right).

The 815 scientists who wrote their open letter to the world are calling for support for research and development of non-corporate sustainable agriculture. Much of this invaluable research has already been done. Bill Mollison and David Holmgren have developed sustainable, non-corporate organic agriculture. They can farm anywhere and their yields are amazing. Their techniques are called permaculture, which means permanent culture. If agriculture does not become sustainable, it will not last, and we will not survive.

Profitable and Sustainable Are Not Always the Same Thing

The biotech industry would have the public believe that they are improving upon life through genetic modification and doing it sustainably. We are told that the benefits outweigh any risks, or even less believable, that genetic engineering is a risk-free technology.

When put into practice, the benefits accrue to Big Agriculture while the costs are paid for by the consumer and society in the form of higher prices, toxic food, and environmental degradation.

The costs of genetically modifying food is also paid by farmers. They face the threat of GMO contamination, pesticide runoff, soil degradation, and higher seed prices. In a successful attempt to manipulate the market, biotech corporations have been buying seed companies for some time. This enables biotech companies to make non-genetically modified seeds more expensive, and harder to obtain after they genetically modify a particular crop such as corn. Non GMO corn seed became much more expensive in North America after Monsanto produced GM corn seed. Even though this is a violation of our antitrust laws, biotech companies are still getting away with it. The same thing is happening in Spain. After allowing GMO cultivation, the variety of maize available to Spanish farmers has declined dramatically. Rising corn prices are sure to follow.

In a successful attempt to manipulate the market, biotech corporations have been buying up seed companies for some time, as the government looks the other way, ignoring anti-trust concerns. As these giant companies monopolize the marketplace, they are able to raise seed prices for both GM and non-GM seeds. When they produce a new GM crop, the seeds for the same non-GM crop become more expensive and harder to obtain. For example,  non-GM corn seed became much more expensive in North America after Monsanto produced GM corn seed. The same thing is happening in Spain. After allowing GMO cultivation, the variety of maize available to Spanish farmers declined dramatically. Rising corn prices are sure to follow.

Genetic engineering is not what Big Agriculture claims it is, and it will never do what they claim it will.

What are Believable Coincidences and What are Unbelievable Coincidences?

Health problems are rising along with with increased GMO consumption. Many will argue that is a coincidence, but a firm belief in coincidence is what biotech has been counting on since the technology was released to the public.

There are no labels, which mean no liability and no traceability. That’s only a part of their protection. You can’t sue Monsanto for harm caused from their products. They enjoy special legal protection that they lobbied and paid big money for. (That’s right American politicians are for sale, or didn’t you know?) These legal protections could be taken away from them if more of us would question these coincidences and investigate these correlations.

It will take an overwhelming majority of us demanding change in order for change to happen. The Vietnam War ended under the intense sustained pressure of the American people. That wasn’t what the military industrial complex wanted – so it was an uphill battle. This will be an uphill battle as well.

Further Reading:
Sources:


France Bans Private Sale of Glyphosate

France is the latest country to ban the private sale of Monsanto’s favorite carcinogen – glyphosate. France has been in the alternative news quite a bit lately, asking the makers of Nutella to stop using palm oil, insisting all new rooftops be covered in solar panels or plants, and mandating the donation of all supermarket food waste. This new move by their Ecology Minister is the latest result of their forward thinking.

The French aren’t the only people around the world waking up to the effects of Roundup. Governments are now more likely to look for independent research to explain the uptick in the rates of diseases like cancer. Monsanto continues to bleat about the safety of glyphosates and their inability to harm humans, claiming that “the dose makes the poison.” With the levels of glyphosates on the rise in our food, our soil, our air, and water, at what magic point does the saturation of our environment turn from harmful to poison? Are we willing to wait until that switch has been flipped with no hope of going back?

The List of Governments Waking Up Keeps Growing

The fight against GMOs and Monsanto has made waves the world over, and as the United States deals with a food system where 80 percent of products now likely contain GMOs, Europe continues their crackdown against the damage caused by Monsanto and all of their products. While most of the focus has been on Monsanto crops, the tremendously influential study from the International Agency for Research on Cancer has caused many to consider banning all of their products. The Netherlands, Bermuda, and Sri Lanka preceded France in banning over the counter sales of Roundup. It is worth noting that Bermuda and Sri Lanka have prohibited the use of glyphosates in all applications, including commercial ones, unlike the Dutch and the French.

Monsanto Maintains the Same Response as Always

It’s business as usual for the PR department of Monsanto, as they continue to refine their denial skills. Glyphosate was introduced as Roundup in the 1970s, and in that time it has expanded to become the most produced weed killer is the world. As Monsanto is a company willing to throw their financial weight around, it’s been easy for government institutions to look the other way, and it was easy to keep the public in the dark before the Internet. In 1985, the Environmental Protection Agency listed glyphosate as a possible carcinogen. Six years later the memo had been changed, despite several scientists supporting the original classification. With it officially listed as a 2A carcinogen, it’s become more difficult to accept Monsanto’s manipulation in the face of growing public outrage.

Monsanto’s variations on the theme that “glyphosate is non-toxic” are endless. They frequently argue that studies that find any fault with their products ignore important information. Some statements have referred to Roundup as low risk to human health, but that has been the extent of any admission of guilt.

It’s time to acknowledge that Monsanto is an irresponsible corporation with enough money, power, and manipulation to sway government agencies. Nothing will change until the public steps up and says, “Enough!” The tipping point is near – that point at which our planet is too saturated with environmental disruptors. Groups like Occupy Monsanto and March Against Monsanto are great place to start if we are ready to step up and heal our environment.

Further Reading:
Sources:


We Like Seeing More Non-GMO and Gluten-Free Labeling – Extra Labels Are a Good Thing!

In the last few days I have read two articles with snide comments about labeling. One was an article slamming a popcorn company for their non-GMO label, the other criticized companies for putting gluten-free labels on foods that never had gluten in them.

The assumption from both of these writers is that the companies are doing something wrong, that by labeling their products with these “trendy” labels, they are somehow duping their customers.

Let’s look at this from the consumer’s perspective.

GMO-Free Label

Consumer A has learned enough about GMOs to know she doesn’t want to eat them or feed them to her family. While the battle rages on in the media with biotech claiming their genetically modified foods are safe, she has learned that study after study has indicated the long-term, third generational effects of genetically modified foods raise serious concerns – among them, disruption of reproduction.

Biotech firms are so powerful they have blocked every attempt to label GM foods. The only way to avoid GMOs in processed foods is to know that every single ingredient in a food is not GMO. Any non-organic food is likely to have GM ingredients, especially if it contains corn syrup. Since an organic or certified organic label means that 95%-99% of the ingredients are organic, there is still a risk of GM ingredients though admittedly small. Only a 100% organic label protects you from GMOs. So, with no mandatory labels stating that GMOs are included, what is wrong with stating a product is GMO-free?

In the case of popcorn, we are told that 90% of the corn grown in the United States is GMO. This is common knowledge. At this time, popcorn is not a genetically modified food, but this fact is not common knowledge. And with the way things are going, popcorn could easily become genetically modified in the future. So let’s applaud a popcorn company that tells its consumers that its products are not genetically modified, even if all popcorn is still non-GMO.

Gluten Free Label

Consumer B cannot eat foods with gluten. Every time he does, he experiences joint pain, muscle pain, painful weeping rashes, and gastrointestinal problems. He has learned through experience that gluten is hidden in many processed foods. He would have to memorize a long list of ingredients to always avoid it. He truly appreciates finding foods with a gluten-free label and the stores that post a gluten free sign on the shelf. Whether a food has ever been gluten free or not does not concern him. He does not feel it is a manipulation to have a gluten free label on a food, he feels it is a welcome consideration.

Are these companies jumping on the bandwagon with these labels? Yes, of course, they are. But what’s wrong with that?

If every non-GMO food producer put a non-GMO label on their packages, we would quickly defeat the biotech industry’s attempt to keep us in the dark about what we are eating.

Other Labels

A few products found in the health food aisles or health food stores use every label that applies to their product and it makes shopping so much easier for those with food restrictions. What about the person who has a life-threatening reaction to nuts? Or the child who gets a nosebleed whenever a trace of a dairy product is eaten? Wouldn’t it be nice to see all of these labels used whenever they apply?

  • 100% organic
  • Gluten free
  • Dairy free
  • Nut-free
  • Vegan

And for meat and dairy:

  • Organic
  • Grass-fed
  • Antibiotic-free
  • Free-range

Conclusion

In the meantime, it is good to remember that processed foods should be limited if not excluded from a healthy diet. A truly healthy diet consists of 80% or more fresh, raw, organic produce – more vegetables than fruits. Check out the 80% Raw Food Diet for more information.

If you suffer from any chronic illness, learn more about gluten and why it may be in your best interest to exclude it from your diet. Gluten, Candida, Leaky Gut Syndrome, and Autoimmune Diseases will address the basic issues and how to heal your gut.

We should commend any food company that provides additional labels to make our purchasing choices easier. And we should encourage all companies who sell GMO-free foods to advertise that choice with a GMO-free label.

Further Reading:


Chipotle goes 100% non-GMO; flatly rejecting the biotech industry and its toxic food ingredients

(NaturalNews) The free market victories against the sleazy biotech industry are coming at a rapid pace now, and the latest announcement is a real game changer: Chipotle Mexican Grill has outright rejected all GMOs and, as of today, is now serving all non-GMO ingredients in its foods.

“When it comes to our food, genetically modified ingredients don’t make the cut,” says an official announcement on the Chipotle website. “…[T]he food we serve should be made with ingredients raised with care for animals, farmers, and the environment. We’re doubtful that the GMO ingredients that used to be in our food meet these criteria.”

The fighting words from Steve Ells very closely mirror the clean food mantra that Natural News has been advocating for years. He says, quoted in the New York Times:

This is another step toward the visions we have of changing the way people think about and eat fast food… Just because food is served fast doesn’t mean it has to be made with cheap raw ingredients, highly processed with preservatives and fillers and stabilizers and artificial colors and flavors.

Well said, Steve. You get it. Your customers get it. Your shareholders might even get it, too: people want clean food, transparent supply lines, ethical treatment of animals and no GMOs!

“While some studies have shown GMOs to be safe, most of this research was funded by companies that sell GMO seeds and did not evaluate long-term effects,” says the Chipotle website. “Evidence suggests that GMOs engineered to produce pesticides or withstand powerful chemical herbicides damage beneficial insect populations and create herbicide resistant super-weeds.”

For the first time, Natural News publicly endorses the leadership of a fast food restaurant chain

With this announcement, Chipotle makes history. It is the first fast food chain in the world to outright reject GMOs in a very public manner, making its stance a feature of its food offerings.

For this reason, Natural News is now publicly endorsing the leadership and clean food vision of the Chipotle restaurant chain, honoring the courage and pioneering spirit of this chain in staking out new territory in the clean food movement.

I don’t normally eat at fast food chains, but I’m now going to make it a point to visit a Chipotle soon and check out what they have to offer. If you happen to see me chowing down at a Chipotle restaurant in Austin, Texas, don’t be surprised… (and yeah, it’s totally cool to say hi!)

Why switching to 100% non-GMO is a remarkable achievement

In order to help you appreciate the difficulty of going 100% non-GMO, allow me to share some of what’s involved in this. I’m qualified to share this because I’m intimately involved in the product sourcing, certification and laboratory testing of raw materials for products sold via the Natural News Store. We are certified organic and GMP-compliant (FDA rules). I’m also the lab science director of the Natural News Forensic Food Lab, which is in the process of achieving ISO 17025 accreditation.

Sourcing non-GMO ingredients requires a tremendous supply line effort involving non-GMO certification and documentation, complex raw materials acquisition logistics, and laboratory testing of raw materials to ensure they are indeed free of genetically engineered ingredients. None of this is easy to accomplish, and it all requires a concerted effort (and additional cost).

“Ridding the supply chain of genetically altered components is difficult,” reports the New York Times. “They lurk in baking powder, cornstarch and a variety of ingredients used as preservatives, coloring agents and added vitamins, as well as in commodities like canola and soy oils, corn meal and sugar.”

It’s surprising to even see this printed in the New York Times, but it’s also very welcomed. Indeed, the NYT is correct on this point: GMOs are “lurking” even in many popular vitamins, protein powders and some superfoods! Almost anything made from corn — maltodextrin, corn starch, corn syrup and even ascorbic acid — is largely derived from genetically engineered corn.

That’s why sourcing foods made without GMOs is no walk in the park. It adds complexity and cost to the sourcing of those foods, and at times it can cause supply line shortages. On the flip side, however, it also creates enormous profit opportunities for farmers who wish to grow non-GMO foods. The demand for non-GMO crops is now at an all-time high in America, and more and more farmers and learning that they can earn far more revenue by ditching biotech seeds and growing organic or non-GMO crops instead.

As Chipotle rises, McDonald’s falls

The timing of this announcement by Chipotle is notable, as it coincides with McDonald’s declaring another miserable quarter of falling revenues and plummeting market share. McDonald’s is in desperation mode, scrambling to try to figure out why fewer and fewer people want to eat its factory-processed, genetically modified, artificially-flavored “fake foods.” (Is that a Chicken McNugget, or a tiny scrubbing sponge for my toilet?)

The idea that consumers might be informed enough to make holistic choices about food ingredients, food supply lines, the ethical treatment of animals and even the ecological costs of certain ingredients (such as palm oil) seems to absolutely baffle McDonald’s executives. They appear to be stuck in the 1950’s, believing that food marketing is all about social engineering — children’s playgrounds and emotional marketing slogans — rather than the food itself.

What McDonald’s has yet to realize is that food awareness is skyrocketing everywhere, in large thanks to the very same independent media outlets that McDonald’s can’t control (like Natural News). With independent organizations like Natural News now owning and operating its own high-level food forensics laboratories, the scrutiny of food can no longer be controlled by corporations doing things like pressuring universities or the FDA to remain silent about food toxins and contaminants.

In other words, the age of independent laboratory scrutiny of foods is now upon us… and food transparency will be forced into the open, even as fast food corporations like McDonald’s would likely prefer to keep their food composition a secret. Imagine what will happen when independent labs across the alternative media universe upgrade their laboratories to test for pesticides, hormones or even glyphosate contamination! At that point, factory food companies like McDonald’s will have their full chemical composition publicly revealed for the entire world to see. And it won’t take long for consumers to see why restaurants like Chipotle are a far healthier choice.

Watch the sleazebags of biotech now attack Chipotle

Now that Chipotle has taken a courageous and game-changing stance against GMOs, we’re all going to get to enjoy the entertainment of watching the “biotech sleazebag brigade” roll out its contrived attacks on Chipotle and anyone who endorses them.

These attacks will of course be staged by the so-called “Monsanto Discredit Bureau” which has now been utterly exposed and revealed to be a group of quackpot criminals and fraudsters, such as the felony criminal doctor running the American Council on Science and Health, an astroturfing corporate front group that was behind the recent attempt to smear Doctor Oz.

Biotech smear operatives work for publications like Vox.com, Slate and the Washington Post, where defamation and character assassination attacks are routinely waged against humanity and all those who defend humanity against the mass poisoning by pesticide corporations (and GMO companies). Increasingly, no one believes the biotech smear campaigns anymore. That’s why the science editors of the Washington Post and other mainstream media outlets are increasingly seen as being propaganda mouthpieces for Monsanto and Big Pharma rather than real journalists. “Journalism,” as they say, is printing what the corporations and governments don’t want printed. Everything else is just public relations.

What almost everyone is coming to realize is that nearly every single person defending the biotech industry is a paid corporate shill. Take a look at former Forbes.com writer Jon Entine, for example, who Natural News exhaustively exposed as being a violent wife abuser, according to these court documents. He was a key author for the ACSH, writing a booklet that ridiculously tried to claim atrazine was environmentally safe.

People who try to defend glyphosate, GMOs, atrazine, pesticides and mercury in vaccines only discredit themselves. The public is waking up, and they aren’t stupid. They know that GMOs are toxic, glyphosate is destructive to the environment, mercury in vaccines causes harm to children and, above all, corporations and the mainstream media are lying to them.

ACTION ITEM: Visit Chipotle this week and tell them why!

To celebrate this mass awakening, I’m now suggesting that everybody rush out to Chipotle this week and enjoy a non-GMO meal there. While you’re there, ask to speak to the manager of the restaurant and tell them you are a customer because of their rejection of GMOs.

Let ’em know as long as they take a leadership position in clean food, you will continue to reward them with your business. Vote with your dollars. Punish the poison-pushing corporations like McDonald’s, Kellogg’s and General Mills by simply denying them your business. Reward honorable, ethical companies like Chipotle, Nature’s Path and One Degree Organic Foods by purchasing their products.

You hold the power in your hands to change the food industry one purchase at a time. In fact, your power is enormous and lasting. Exercise it NOW… and you WIN!

Editor’s note:

If you’re going to eat at Chipotle, pop a few anti-Candida supplements like SF722 or a good probiotic (see Kill Candida). With almost every single restaurant, even their healthiest choices still feed Candida even in a healthy person. Also check out Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods.

Further Reading: 



Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods

GMO foods are very common in American and Canadian diets. Not because people choose to eat GMOs, but because they are unaware of how pervasive GMO ingredients have become in processed foods. Biotech companies have been very successful in lobbying to prevent labeling. There are no requirements to label GMO foods, despite concerted efforts by consumer groups.

Unnatural Isn’t Always Bad

As a general rule, the more natural and unadulterated a food, the better it is for you. Selective breeding is an exception to this rule. Selective breeding, or artificial selection, is the process of interbreeding plants to enhance positive qualities and eliminate or diminish negative qualities. Some cultivars are much better for our health than the original. For example, wild almonds contain amygdalin, a substance that is converted to cyanide in the body. Sweet almonds are the domesticated cultivar. Though they are less “natural,” they are better for you than their wild counterparts. Selective breeding is the good kind of unnatural.

But It Usually Is

The bad kind of unnatural is almost everything else that is being done to our food, including the majority of practices adopted by modern agriculture. Chemical fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, concentrated animal feed operations, grain fed meats (vs grass fed), pasteurized foods, irradiated foods…the list goes on and on. Genetically modifying our foods is the latest insult to our food supply, and it is as unnatural as it gets.

One of the most common types of genetic modifications is to modify a crop so that it can withstand unlimited Roundup applications. This enables farmers to spray their whole fields with Roundup, killing the weeds while sparing their crops. Of course by this process, we end up with foods that have been soaked in herbicide. But this is not the only way that your food could be doused with Roundup.

Round Up Sprayed Just Prior to Harvest

Wheat, sugar cane, and other crops are often routinely treated with Roundup just prior to harvest. Of course some of this pesticide is making its way into our food. The Non-GMO project allows this practice. Non-GMO only means a food is not genetically modified. It could still be treated with all kinds of pesticides.

Recently, the World Health Organization released a report stating that the world’s most widely used herbicide, Monsanto’s Roundup, probably causes cancer.

What is a Genetically Engineered Food?

GMOs are made from combing genes from two or more unrelated species into one organism. The two most common types of genetic modifications are modifying crops to produce pesticides or modifying them to be immune to herbicides (making them Roundup ready). Sugar beets have been modified to be Roundup ready. Both kinds of genetic modifications have been done to corn and soy in the same seed.

What’s so bad about them?

GMOs have not undergone long-term studies. When biotech claims GMOs have been tested thousands of times, they’re referring to 90-day studies or studies done for less than two years that have been funded by the industry.

There have been several studies linking GMOs to numerous health problems. The most common problems associated with long-term GMO consumption are kidney and liver damage, faulty insulin regulation, accelerated aging, cancer, and infertility. To look at the results of these studies, please see the link below.

How to avoid GM Food

When asked, more than half of all consumers say they avoid eating GMOs. Sadly this isn’t the case at all. Consumers probably would if they were labeled. Over 90% of Americans and Canadians eat GMOs on a regular basis. If more of us knew what was genetically modified, we wouldn’t eat these foods, and Monsanto and other businesses would be forced to find another way to make money.

Buying organic is the easiest way to avoid GMOs, and when you buy organic you also avoid pesticides and other chemical additives. Non-GMO project verified is a safe bet that the food is free of GMOs, but other toxins from conventional methods of agriculture are a given if the food is not organic.

The eight most common GMO crops are corn, soybeans, canola, cottonseed, sugar beets, papaya, zucchini, and squash. Unfortunately, hundreds of other genetically modified foods are in development. It is only a matter of time before GMOs become much harder to avoid.

GMOs are almost always in processed foods. Soy, high fructose corn syrup (now also called fructose) or sugar from sugar beets are found in almost every processed food. Over 90% of soy, corn and sugar beets grown in the U.S. have been genetically modified. If you see these ingredients in your food, you can bet it has been genetically modified.

You have to Avoid GMOs to Detox from GMOs

Of course you can’t keep eating GMOs if you wish to fully detox from them. This means no restaurants (unless you eat at organic restaurants, which are very hard to find), and no processed foods, unless they are organic, or Non-GMO project verified.

Why Detox Genetically Modified Organisms?

Detoxification is defined as the removal of toxic substances from the body. This is often an emphasis of alternative medicine. The benefits of removing toxins from the body are numerous, too many to list in their entirety. Some of the better-known benefits are increased energy, improved sleep, weight loss, and lowered risk of diseases, such as colds, flu, and cancer.

How to Detoxify GMOs

In order to detox from GMOs, you’ll need to eat a diet rich in produce with lots of raw foods and sulfuric vegetables. A high fiber diet is essential. Drinking lots of clean water, and getting lots of exercise aids our bodies in detoxification. Salads and smoothies are staples of a detox diet. Detoxifying genetically modified organisms takes time, a clean diet, lots of clean water, and a healthy digestive tract with a strong and healthy ecosystem of beneficial flora. Speed up the process by eating large salads (recipe), killing candida and healing the gut, drinking lots of cranberry lemonade (recipe), and using a clean and pure nutrition formula with spirulina and chlorella (recipe).

Recommended Supplements:
Further Reading:
Sources:


GMO Science – Understanding How GMOs Are Created, and What Prominent Scientists Are Saying

According to the World Health Organization, GMOs are “Organisms in which the genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally.”

Genetically modified organisms are organisms built with genes from more than one species. The process involves laboratories and scientists followed by regulators, lawyers and lobbyists. There is nothing natural about it. So when biotech argues that the techniques for creating GMO crops are just like traditional crop breeding techniques, those statements are blatantly false.

The First Frankenfoods

One of the first GMO crops to be put on the market was Bt-corn. Bt-corn was made a few decades ago by combining the genes of a bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis, with the DNA of corn. This genetic modification was engineered to create corn that produces pesticide. Every cell now produces a new protein never before seen in corn, the Bt endotoxin or Bt protein. The toxin is produced in sufficient quantities to kill insects.

The Bt protein or Bt endotoxin must be ingested in order for it to kill. After ingestion, the Bt protein binds to the insect’s digestive tract. It can no longer feed, and in a matter of hours its gut breaks down, and bacteria from its digestive tract flood the insect’s body. It dies of septicemia, eaten from within.

The Bt toxin has been found in human blood and in pregnant women and their fetuses. This means that these toxins are not only making their way into our bodies, our bodies are not fully eliminating them.

Other examples of GMOs include adding a gene from a fish into tomatoes and strawberries to protect them from freezing. Goats have been injected with spider genes in order to produce milk that contains proteins more durable than Kevlar. Also rice has been injected with human genes to manufacture pharmaceuticals.

Methods to Create GMOs

Genetically modifying plants and animals are typically created using one of three methods: the gene gun, the plasmid method, and the vector method.

Gene Gun

The gene gun literally shoots genetic material into the targeted cells. Genetic modification using the gene gun begins with either a young plant, or with cells grown in a culture. The gene gun, using specially prepared bullets, bombards the cultured cells or the young plant. The bullets are coated with microscopic gold or tungsten particles that contain segments of DNA. Once the microscopic particles are inside the nucleus of cells, the DNA can merge into the genes of the young plant or the genes of the cells in a tissue culture.

It is interesting to note that the young plant (now called a chimera) will retain most of its physical characteristics, but the plant grown from a cell culture may grow to look very different from the original plant.

The Plasmid Method

The plasmid method, the most common method, uses bacteria to modify an organism. Plasmids are a type of DNA found in bacteria. The process involves bathing the plasmids in enzymes, encoding the bacteria for antibiotic resistance, and then fusing the plasmids into target bacteria. The culture is then treated with antibiotics that kill all of the unmodified bacteria.

The Vector Method

The vector method uses a modified virus to alter the genes of the target cells. The genes to be modified or removed are isolated. The virus is altered to be less destructive and to carry the genetic payload. The virus then infects the target cells with altered genes. The infection modifies the cells’ genetic structure. As the cells multiply, all copies of the cells will express the modified genes.

Artificial Selection Vs. GMOs

Biotech argues that genetically modifying food is no different than artificial selection. Irrefutably, both processes change the genes of plants and animals.

But artificial selection and natural selection carry genes within populations that are constrained by species. Genetically modified foods have no such constraints. Genes from different species are put together to make new organisms. Let’s take a closer look at artificial selection.

What is Artificial Selection

Artificial selection is a process by which natural evolutionary processes are altered by human intervention. Current estimates place the beginning of life at 3 ½ to 4 billion years ago. This long time span is what accounts for the rich diversity of life on Earth. More than 99.9% of all species that have existed on this planet are now extinct. Of those that remain, the plants and animals most useful to us have been domesticated. Instead of survival of the fittest, think survival of the friendliest and survival of the most nutritious and delicious. With our help, the evolution of these plants and animals was put on fast forward.

Through artificial selection (also called artificial breeding) we have bred plants and animals that are in almost all cases so different from their wild counterparts as to be unrecognizable.

Wild carrots, and wild lettuce are, by today’s standards, inedible. Wild carrots produce natural pesticides, which are good for carrots and bad for us, so we bred that trait out of carrots. Wild carrots also provide fewer calories, and less nutrition than their domesticated counterparts. Wild lettuce contains latex. As you might have guessed, latex tastes horrible, and it irritates our digestive tract.

The main limitation of selective breeding is that the organisms to be bred must be closely related, usually of the same species. If not of the same species, they must be very closely related and share a recent common ancestor, such as dogs and wolves, or wild boars and pigs. Attempts to breed more distant relations such as horses and donkeys or lions and tigers usually produce sterile offspring, or no offspring at all. (A mule is bred from a male donkey and a female horse. A hinny is bred from a female donkey and a male horse. Less commonly known, a liger is an animal bred from a male lion and a female tiger. The progeny of a female lion and a male tiger is called a tigon.)

This radical alteration of plants and animals has been going on for a long time. Selective breeding has a proven track record. It isn’t perfect, and agronomists still have a lot to learn to learn in order to improve upon it, but we have been doing it for thousands of years. Without the domestication of plants and animals we could not support our population, not nationally and definitely not globally.

The changes made to domesticated plants and animals over time do alter genes. Desired traits are selected and undesirable traits are selected against. To say this modifies genes is semantically correct, but so does natural selection, but it is not the same thing as genetic modification.

Despite this limitation, it is incredible what can be achieved via artificial selection. We can produce purple potatoes, black tomatoes, yellow watermelon, over 300 breeds of dogs, and more than 800 breeds of cows. Heirloom fruits and vegetables, commercial cultivars, and hybrids have all been realized through artificial selection.

The GMO Debate and Prominent Scientists

Neil Degrasse Tyson argues that all foods are genetically modified, and that people have an irrational fear of these new foods. Bill Nye echoes the same sentiments. Both have begun publicly supporting GMOs. Neither individuals are experts on genetics, nutrition, health, or biology. Dr. Tyson is an accomplished astrophysicist. Bill Nye earned a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering. Both individuals studied under Carl Sagan, and the late Carl Sagan had something very different to say about genetic engineering.

“Fortunately, we do not know, or at least do not yet know…how to assemble alternative sequences of nucleotides…to make alternative kinds of human beings. In the future, we might well be able to put nucleotides together…in any desired sequence…to produce human characteristics we think desirable. A disquieting and awesome prospect.” – Carl Sagan

“Biology is more like history than it is like physics. You have to know the past to understand the present. There is no predictive theory of biology just as there is no predictive theory of history. The reason is the same both subjects are still too complicated for us.” – Carl Sagan

A Geneticist Weighs In – David Suzuki

David Suzuki agrees that biology and genetics (a subfield of biology), are unpredictable. He doesn’t think that GMOs have been adequately tested, and he says that biotech has put us all in great experiment by prematurely introducing GMOs to the food supply.

“The problem is this: geneticists follow the inheritance of genes in what we call a vertical fashion. You breed a male and a female. You follow their offspring. You breed them. You follow it on down, within a species. What biotechnology allows us to do is to take genes from this organism and move it, what we call horizontally, into a totally unrelated species. …What biotechnology allows us to do is to switch genes from one to the other without the biological constraints.” -David Suzuki

“The problem is this you see, it’s very, very bad science. We assume that the principles governing the inheritance of genes vertically applies when you move genes laterally or horizontally. There is absolutely no reason to make that conclusion. We have to do more experimentation.” – David Suzuki

Biotech claims that they are thousands of studies proving the safety of GMOs. Many short-term studies, up to 90 days, do show their products are safe. Many long-term studies, show a very different outcome.

Dr. Goodall’s Informed Opinion

Before Jane Goodall’s work our definition of mankind was “man the toolmaker.” Dr. Goodall has made many important scientific discoveries. She proved that chimpanzees use tools, that they eat meat, and that they have a complex social system. She is a highly respected scientist.

She is well informed on GMOs, so her opinion of them is not borne of ignorance. Dr. Goodall has publically accused GMO supporters of fraud, and says that they are the ones who are “anti science”. She has warned Britain and Europe not to lower GM safeguards, and she has condemned politicians for endorsing “Frankenstein food.”

“I pursued nature to her hiding-places. Who shall conceive the horrors of my secret toil, as I dabbled among the unhallowed damps of the grave, or tortured the living animal to animate the lifeless clay?” Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

When the GMO Studies Are Not Funded By Industry…

A two-year study in France has shown that rats didn’t get cancer in the first 90 days of being fed GMO corn, they began to get cancer after four months. The journal, which published the study, retracted it.

The scientists stand by their results, and they believe that the editorial appointment of Richard Goodman, a former Monsanto employee, is the reason behind the retraction. The study has been criticized for what kind of rats was used, but these are the same kind of rats used in many Monsanto studies.

There have also been long-term studies that show disruption of reproduction due to GMOs with low fertility and high infant death rates in rats and mice.

And while articles will state that there is no evidence, even anecdotal evidence of disease or problems due to GMO livestock feed, this is another lie. Farmers have complained about their animals’ poor health and sterility due to GMO feed.

GMO Contamination

Biotech said they could contain GMOs, but this was another lie. GMOs contaminate other varieties by cross-pollination. This contamination typically comes from natural sources. Birds, insects, wind, and weather can carry pollen or seeds from GMO crops many miles to other farmer’s fields. When this happens, if the farmer isn’t growing the same GMO crop, he isn’t considered the victim, he is often sued for patent violation. The usual procedure is a settlement agreement that forces the farmer into silence.

GMO wheat was not approved by the FDA, but a field of GMO wheat was found in Montana, well after the GMO crop was ordered to be destroyed.

The South Korean government bans the cultivation of GMO crops, but GMOs have been found growing in their country; especially along shipping routes. South Korea imports animal feed, and they import GMO crops, but they do prohibit growing GMOs. Now they have no choice; GMOs are growing themselves.

Many countries have banned the cultivation of GMOs, and most countries require GMOs to be clearly labeled. Canada and the U.S. do not currently require GMO labeling, except in a few states. There is currently a bill called the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act, which would eliminate state’s rights to label GMOs.

The Labeling Double-Standard

Biotech has opposed GMO labeling for consumers, but they are certainly pro-labeling when it comes to their seeds. When farmers buy their seed, they extensively label it, and they explain the many restrictions placed on their seeds. One of the restrictions is that farmers are prohibited from growing non-GMO crops alongside GMO crops, making it impossible to compare yields. Biotech claims GMOs increase yield, but this is another lie as proven by crop yields across the world.

One of the more common genetic modifications renders a plant immune to Round Up. This allows the farmer to spray Round Up in large amounts all over his or her field to kill weeds. Unfortunately, this process has resulted in Round Up resistant weeds, and it increases herbicide residues in the crops. Recently, the World Health Organization said the widespread use of Round Up is a main cause of the rising cancer rates worldwide.

How To Avoid GMOs

Avoiding GMOs won’t be easy for most people who eat prepackaged, processed foods. The NON-GMO project verified label is helpful. It means the ingredients are 99% GMO free. Organic also means 99% GMO free. More than 80% of processed foods contain GMO ingredients. If you buy processed foods, buy organic.

Trader Joe’s sells GMO foods, though their name brand items do not contain them.

Whole Foods talks a good game, but so far they have done nothing except provide some organic options. Exclusively organic restaurants are few and far between, and unfortunately, almost any other restaurant will be serving GMO food. The most common GMOs are canola oil, soy (including milk and oil), corn (including high fructose corn syrup), cottonseed oil, zucchini, yellow squash, papaya, aspartame (which is produced from genetically modified bacteria) and sugar (from sugar beets).

Conclusion

Despite what biotech would have you believe, it is not unscientific to reject GMOs. The rest of the world is not too keen on genetically modified foods, and the scientific community is divided on the issue. The majority of scientists appear to support GMO technology, but there is a lot of money involved in supporting it and nothing but hardship for those who dare oppose it. Many scientists are harshly criticized, censored, and have their funding disappear if they are critical of biotechnology.

Censorship has no place in science, and in order for science to thrive, scientific inquiry must be given free reign. If allowed, science is ultimately self-correcting, but not when scientists are coerced into supporting commercial interests before science. This is exactly what is happening.

The belief that GMOs are harmful to human health certainly has scientific validity. Despite what biotech companies would have us believe, we evolved to eat food, not chemicals. We evolved to eat organisms that came from the earth, not organisms that came from a laboratory.

What We Can Do About It

In a free society, it should be easier to opt out of this GMO experiment. We should have the right to choose what we put into our bodies and not have it chosen for us.

We can vote with our dollars, but not when we are kept in the dark.

Please contact your representative and senators (also check out How To Contact Congress) now and let them know you want to see all GMO foods labeled. Ask them to vote against the Food Safety and Labeling Act, which would deny states the right to require GMO labeling.

 

Further Reading:
Sources:

 



Why Conventional Agriculture Has To Stop

When chemicals were first introduced in farming, everyone marveled at what they could do. Yields were dramatically increased. In the beginning, the soil was so healthy, any damage done by chemical fertilizers was imperceptible, and pests had yet to evolve resistance to the insecticides. Our technologies were exported around the world as a revolution in agriculture – the green revolution.

Chemical fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, antibiotics, hormones, factory farms, and genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. It just keeps coming. Almost no one calls it the green revolution anymore because there is nothing green about it, at least not in the modern ecologically friendly meaning of the word green.

Downsides to the Green Revolution

There are a number of problems brought on by conventional agriculture’s techniques. Conventional methods are inhumane to animals; they spread disease and pollution and degrade our nation’s soil and water. In the interests of sustainability, protecting our nation’s resources and improving our health, conventional agriculture needs to be banned, both in the U.S. and abroad.

A return to organic agriculture, which prohibits the use of chemicals and encourages crop rotation, will protect our nation’s arable land, increase the nutritional value of our food, and dramatically reduce our food’s toxicity.

Toxic Food

Yes, our food is toxic when grown by conventional means. Ninety-three percent of Americans tested by the CDC had metabolites of chlorpyrifos, a neurotoxin in their urine. Chlorpyrifos has been banned for use in homes because it has been linked to autoimmune diseases and neurological damage, but it is still commonly used on golf courses and in bait containers, and it is sprayed all over our food.

Over 99% of Americans tested, tested positive for exposure to DDT. DDT has been banned from use in the U.S. since 1972. But it’s still perfectly legal to manufacture it in the U.S. ship it to Mexico and other countries, and then have it sprayed on food, and then sell the food to the U.S. DDT has been linked to various cancers and birth defects. It is a persistent toxin that stays in the environment for an extended period of time.

The government sets limits on how much of each pesticide can be on our food, but there is no limit to the number of different approved pesticides that can be on our food or the total amount of chemical contamination. The Pesticide Action Network tells us that Americans are exposed to an average of 10-13 pesticides every day.

As a last resort, organic farmers do use pesticides; however, organic farmers use pesticides that are plant based. These bio-chemicals naturally, quickly decompose. In contrast, conventional agriculture uses a vast array of chemicals, most of them synthetic. There are over 600 pesticides used in the United States. Many of these chemicals are known to last for hundreds or thousands of years before breaking down, and they are toxic to both humans and animals. The degree of exposure to these chemicals directly affects one’s risk of developing numerous cancers, especially cancer of the brain, prostate cancer, leukemia, and lymphoma.

If growing nutrient deficient, chemical laden food isn’t bad enough, conventional agriculture has gone even further by genetically modifying our food to make it easier to grow at an even higher cost to the consumer’s health. Many genetically modified foods are modified to produce pesticides within the plant. GMOs radically alter the microorganisms in the soil, damaging the soil’s fertility. GMOs introduce new allergens, new toxins, and unknown proteins into our bodies.

“Every day we make life or death decisions, decisions about what we eat. This may sound melodramatic, but it’s true.” Superfoods RX

Studies have repeatedly shown that the nutritional content of organic food is dramatically superior to the nutritional content of conventionally grown food. Before the advent of today’s conventional agriculture, our food contained more nutrients. Organic agriculture’s predominant strategy is to cultivate nutrient rich soil. In order to add nutrients back into the soil, organic agriculture uses crop rotation and natural fertilizers. This produces healthy plants, which makes for healthy food.

What About the Soil

We must protect our nation’s arable land in order to protect our food supply for future generations. With approximately 18% to 19% of America’s land being arable, we have the world’s most abundant farming resources. Even though agriculturally viable resources are obviously of great economic value to the entire nation, our nation’s soil is treated as though it were disposable. Pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, and petroleum-based fertilizers strip the soil of nutrients and kill beneficial organisms such as earthworms, predatory insects, and microorganisms. In order to grow anything in such chemical laden soil, more chemicals are added. This process degrades the topsoil and causes salts to build up in the land, leaving barren dirt. After this process strips the land of its agricultural viability, conventional agribusiness moves on, acquiring more farmland. Then the process is repeated, rendering more land barren. By comparison, organic farming replenishes the soil through crop rotation, natural fertilizers, and the use of time-honored, natural techniques.

Deadly Germs

A whopping 50% of antibiotic use is not for human beings but for livestock. The media is constantly warning about the dangers of overuse of antibiotics. The concern is that overuse (and abuse) of antibiotics can breed antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

It is commonplace to add antibiotics to livestock feed, even when the animals aren’t sick. This is because conventional methods typically overcrowd the animals so badly that too many of them will get sick without an on-going diet that includes antibiotics.

It is cruel and inhumane to force animals to live with their own waste and in such crowded conditions. To keep consumers in the dark about the realities of factory farming, many states are passing laws forbidding filming inside these factory farms. The stench of these crowded pens is unbearable to any but the most stalwart and habituated individuals, and the animals’ waste is so concentrated that it poses a risk to nearby natural water sources.

These are perfect conditions for pathogens to thrive. It provides bacteria with the opportunity for many different food sources, and many different animal hosts to infect. This gives bacteria an opportunity to develop resistance to our medications. These conditions are also ideal for viruses to spread from animal to animal and potentially to humans.

Dead Zones

Conventional farming utilizes phosphorous and nitrogen chemical fertilizers. When rain and runoff carry these fertilizers into the ocean, marine life is suffocated. The fertilizers trigger overgrowth of marine plankton. Once the masses of plankton die, their death feeds ocean bacteria. The bacteria consume oxygen, and with an unnatural overabundance of plankton, the bacteria consume just about all of the oxygen left in the ocean. Shrimp, fish, and all other forms of marine life either leave the area or die from lack of oxygen. The end result is hypoxia, oceanic dead zones. These areas are devoid of nearly all life other than plankton and bacteria.

Scientists have documented coastal dead zones, areas that are hypoxic in over 400 coastal areas. All over the world, these dead zones are found downstream of conventional farming from Chesapeake Bay to Oregon to Denmark, and to the Black Sea.

We have a vested interest in marine life. It is not only shameful that marine animals suffocate as a side effect of our farming pollution, it is also economically damaging. The ocean provides us with billions of dollars worth of food annually. Nothing of commercial importance survives a dead zone, fish, shellfish, and shrimp all either leave the area or suffocate in the dead waters. Many of these dead zones are thousands of square miles. The dead zone off of the Gulf of Mexico was once recorded as being an area larger than the state of New Jersey, 22,000 kilometers.

Conclusion

Pesticide residue, antibiotics, preservatives, and genetic modification directly affect the long-term sustainability of farming, fishing, the consumer’s health, and the health of those who grow and produce the food. We do not exist separately from the environment in which we live. If what we consume is polluted, our bodies become polluted. Beyond choosing what we buy in the store, we as a nation must choose, for the long term or short term, organic or conventional. This choice affects us all, even those not yet born.

If you are in a position to grow your own food, check out How To Start A Vegetable Garden and Ten Great Gardening Tips. If you’re not growing your own food in very healthy soil, it’s time to get more nutrition: Make Your Own Homemade Multivitamin and Mineral Formula.

Further Reading:
Sources: