Impresionante comparación de maíz: transgénicos y no transgénicos

Impresionante comparación de maíz: transgénicos y no transgénicos

Las afirmaciones de que "no hay diferencia entre el maíz transgénico y el maíz no transgénico" son falsas. Ayer, mientras estaba en una cita para jugar en el lago, Vince de De Dell Seed Company, la única compañía de semillas de maíz NO OGM de Canadá, me llamó para apoyar la marcha y los estadounidenses que se enteran de los OGM. Me envió por correo electrónico este impresionante informe, que muestra claramente la diferencia de valor nutricional entre el maíz OGM y el maíz NO OGM. Estaba anonadado. Y al mismo tiempo, no me sorprende del todo porque el glifosato extrae los nutrientes vitales de los seres vivos y el maíz transgénico está cubierto de él. Dedell_logo_jpg.jpg

Lo importante a tener en cuenta en estas deficiencias es que estas son exactamente las deficiencias en un ser humano que conducen a la susceptibilidad a la enfermedad, los trastornos y el cáncer. Las personas que tienen osteoporosis tienen bajos niveles de calcio y magnesio, las personas que tienen cáncer tienen bajos niveles de manganeso. La lista sigue y sigue.

El maíz transgénico tiene 14 ppm de calcio y el maíz NO transgénico tiene 6130 ppm. 437 X más.

El maíz transgénico tiene 2 ppm de magnesio y el maíz NO transgénico tiene 113 ppm. 56 X más.

El maíz transgénico tiene 2 ppm de manganeso y el maíz NO transgénico tiene 14 ppm. 7X más.

Look at the levels of Formaldehyde and Glyphosate IN the corn! The EPA standard for Glyphosate in water in America is .7ppm. European Tests showed organ damage to animals at .1ppb (.0001ppm) of Glyphosate in water. Our water levels allow glyphosate 7,000X higher than what has been shown to be toxic in animals. This corn has 13 ppm! 130,000 times higher than what is toxic in the water!*

En un estudio que informó el Dr. Huber, en Talk Radio de Elizabeth Dougherty, se demostró que .97 ppm de formaldehído es tóxico si se ingiere en animales. ¡Este maíz tiene 200X eso! Es por eso que los animales, si se les da a elegir, no lo comerán en absoluto, ¡pueden oler el formaldehído!

Comparta este informe con su legislatura, agricultores, editores de noticias, servicios de alimentos del distrito escolar y mamás.

Ya no alimentaremos a nuestros hijos con deficiencias nutricionales, proteínas extrañas, toxinas, rociados con glifosato o inyectados con pesticidas. ¡Tampoco seremos alimentados con sus mentiras de seguridad!



¡GRACIAS De Dell por compartir este informe y apoyar a las Américas en el etiquetado de OGM y en volverse libre de OGM!


* Este blog se ha corregido desde su publicación original para corregir .1ppm a .1ppb, lo que en realidad refleja un hecho mucho más alarmante. Pedimos disculpas por este importante error tipográfico y prometemos una edición más completa en el futuro.

Zen honeycutt


Mostrando 52 reacciones

  • Jessica denning
    comentado 2013-04-10 11:30:43 -0400
    As a science teacher, I expect anyone purporting to be a scientist, to support labeling of foods, so that we can track the inevitable epidemiological effects of these mutated foods being introduced to our diet on such a wide scale. It is just common sense.
    It is critical in these times of obvious escalating health problems to know exactly what is being changed in these massive experiments on our children [autism], adults [obesity, diabetes, cancer] and the resulting health epidemics that we are observing.
    Are you not concerned about the children?
    We have a right to know what we are eating.
  • Zen honeycutt
    comentado 2013-04-10 09:55:00 -0400
    To everyone who reads this blog. It is shocking. I know. What can we do about it? Let everyone know. If we won’t buy it, they can’t sell it. How do we let everyone know? Besides sharing this, please sign up to march in July. I know it seems a long way off, but if you do sign up now, you can organize in your area to expand awareness NOW. Connecting with your neighbors that you never knew, that care about this too, is what will strengthen America. Sign up now and you take one more step in making this country be a place we are proud of, where our freedoms are respected and our kids are healthy. Thank you.
  • Zen honeycutt
    comentado 2013-04-10 09:49:46 -0400
    Thank you Gemma. Kevin your comments, and anyone elses’ comments that insinuate that anything posted on this site is negative or inauthentic will be deleted if you don’t come with proof of your own. What I have seen is you name calling. Now that’s just not nice and Momma always says, if you don’t have anything nice to say don’t say anything at all.
    In the mean time, Moms don’t care if anyone has 1000 years of being a scientist….we have our kids right in front of us, kids with life threatening allergies, autism, tics, stammering, rashes and digestive problems, all get better when they get off GMOs. Please, do take a screen shot and tell your class that! That will really help the skyrocketing numbers of kids and young adults who suffer needlessly from the toxins on our food. Thanks for your passion. Please share it.
  • Gemma starr
    comentado 2013-04-10 09:27:44 -0400
    Kevin I do like your stamina! But you have done it again! You have just put all of the people who are against GMOs into the ‘anti-intellectual, anti-science’ etc.etc. categories. And you say make these angry, negative remarks just after you have just told us again that you are a truly independent, public scientist! And you are not PRO GMO all the way???

    If you truly believe that GMOs are safe and necessary in our world, that is your perrogative -ACCEPT that at this point in time WE DON’T! Give us some truly independent research on the subject INSTEAD of focusing on all of the anti-gmo movement’s apparent flaws. Picking apart a small piece of data shared on an ANTI GMO site is probably NOT going to be evidence enough for us! Where is this NON INDUSTRY FUNDED long term research that proves to a large extent that GMOs are SAFE??? So far, we haven’t seen it! INSTEAD, last year, we see the FIRST long term study on rats from Professor Seralini which clearly shows that rats eating the GMO maize DID get massive tumours and die prematurely!!!

    Furthermore, as a truly independent scientist you sign the petition against the labeling of GMOs. Why would you bother to even sign this if you were not heavily LINKED to BIOTECH companies themselves??? HOW would getting GMOs labelled actually impact on your lecture duties at Universities and beyond? Obviously, it IS in your BEST interests to PROMOTE BIOTECH and REALLY HARD!…SO that’s what you DO on other blogs and that’s what you attempted to DO here…

    You have certainly NOT given us the PROS and CONS of GMOs.

    We DON’T trust scientists with a clear industry connections and AGENDA cos they are NEVER genuinely interested in the SCIENCE.
  • Gemma starr
    comentado 2013-04-09 17:59:08 -0400
    Mr Lee thank you for all of your detailed information which clearly discredits the idea of ‘substantial equivalence,’ ie. GMO crops are ever the same as NON GMO crops! Even without extensive scientific background, this idea that they would EVER be the same, has NEVER sat with me. Slice a gene from a different species of plant/animal and crudely reinsert it into another plant/animal using a gene gun to FORCE it through the cell walls? The SAME as related species plants/animals crossbred WITHOUT a GENE GUN? Nope, I don’t think so!!!

    Further information on the scientist on this post who started raving on about HOW unscientific/ misleaded etc. we all are thinking GMOs are different and dangerous, REVEALS that Kevin Folta was one of the signatures on the ‘PETITION in SUPPORT of BIOTECHNOLOGY and OPPOSED to MANDATORY LABELLING of GE FOODS!!’ This petition is mostly sponsored by the Council for Biotechnology and Information and Grocery Manufacturers Association. (See –

    A neutral academic scientist ONLY trying to educate US on the boons of GMOs??? AS we say in Australia, " I don’t bloody well think so!" LOL!
  • SR. Lee
    comentado 2013-04-09 16:05:33 -0400
    GM food good or bad? GMO giants said: just ban it!

    It could be extremely difficult to know that nearly all GMO giants eat or ban GM foods but the leakage of just below 3 giants that have banned GM foods is more than shocking and moral! So it is obvious for whom the toxic/poisonous GM food is prepared.

    1. Monsanto’s caterers ban GM foods

    2. Cargill (USA), Monsanto’s big partner, have been buying non-GM soybeans from China under strict supervision

    This is from China’s government source in 2011. The article says:

    Even Cargill USA, the world giant in trading and processing of soybeans, also import non-GM soybeans from China.

    Almost all foreign buyers require that the raw material of protein powder for food be non-GM soybeans. Importers from Japan and USA not only stipulate strict requirements in contracts but also dispatch personnel to inspect the growing environment of the raw materials and the growing technologies, and also conduct testing by themselves on the soybean raw materials. Some of them even station reps in processing workshops for supervision to prevent raw materials from being mixed with GM soybeans.

    Five years ago, just more than 10 countries imported soybean protein powder from China, but that number has increased to more than 50 now.

    3. Monsanto’s close friend in China, Ministry of Agriculture, bans GM foods themselves and in their kindergartens as well.

    [They carried banners accusing the ministry of being traitors who approve of the industrialization of GM staple foods in China, and of caring little about residents’ health.

    According to protesters, the officials avoided important questions in the subsequent discussion, which were directly related to their own interests.
    “Do you eat GM food? I asked, and they said, ‘yes.’ But when we requested that we send inspectors to their cafeteria, they refused,” said one of the protesters, who insisted on anonymity.

    “The ministry is advocating the commercialization of GM food in China, while banning it from their tables at the same time,” he told the Global Times. GM food can affect human fertility and the functions of internal organs, he said.

    According to protesters, the kindergarten of the Ministry of Agriculture had at one time published a notice on their website for newly recruited children, to guarantee the cooking oil they used was not genetically modified.
    “Why would they popularize it while keeping themselves and their children from it?” said the anonymous protester.]

    My remarks: My over-3-year study shows that, in order to make the whole China genetically modified, China’s Ministry of Agriculture and its affiliated GMO promoters or so-called scientists have invented about 25 big lies to cheat all the governments and all the people in China. Ironically, what kind of science has to survive purely on big lies? The funniest big lie is that when farmers in USA have been fighting a hard-to-win battle against superweeds for about 5 years which have been in existence for more than 10 years, the Ministry declared on its official website “Till now there is no evidence showing the existence of such a thing as superweeds.”!

    The above are just a few reps of worldwide GMO promoters and developers that ban GM foods themselves. Anyone with the right head can see why thye ban GM foods.

    What about the new GMO giant Bill Gates? Who can find out if he and his family eat GM food or not?
  • SR. Lee
    comentado 2013-04-09 14:54:00 -0400
    4. Field released transgenic papaya effect on soil microbial communities and enzyme activities
    J Environ Sci (China). 2006;18(4):734-40.

    Soil properties, microbial communities and enzyme activities were studied in soil amended with replicase (RP)-transgenic or non-transgenic papaya under field conditions. Compared with non-transgenic papaya, significant differences (P
  • SR. Lee
    comentado 2013-04-09 14:41:45 -0400
    I was not surprised to see a self-called scientist (25 years in academic institutions, working with students and farmers) called people with a different idea “fools”, “scientific dorks” and concluded that "the anti-GMO folks hating scientists ". It seems that is the worldwide biotech style in argument as his GMO counterparts in China use the same rough words and more often the dirtiest words on earth to attack people who say GMOs are harmful. It is also their cunning and deceptive tactics to refer to a tree as a forest. I do not know what other scientists the anti-GMO people hate except the biotechnologists who have brought toxic or poisonous GMO food to the world, and also those who bring technical harm to the world. Who except bad people will hate a good scientist? If there is a mistake, a good scientist will ask himself: why do people hate me? while a bad scientist will insist on a mistake and tell the people: you should not hate scientists.

    In China we often say “One says what he thinks. One does what he says.” Or simply, if someone says something bad to good people, will he do good things to good people? Just the contrary. Obviously, pro-GMO folks often use rough or bad words to attack opponents. So are the GMOs they have been pushing onto our table good or bad? Who says what does what.

    A key deception is that GMO technists always try to put themselves in the sky and all others on the ground by saying “you have not learned modern molecular biology and you have no right to comment on or critisize or refuse GMOs” or “GMO is science. If you object to GMOs, you are against science.”, etc. My thinking is that people all over the world are not eating molecular biology or science, they are eating simple food. Safety or non-toxicity is the basic standard or requirement for any food. Concern for food safety is a basic human right. Unfortunately all independent studies, researches done by scientists and worldwide facts have proven that GMOs are harmful to environment, animals and humans. So why cannot people follow the good independent scientists and facts and question the safety of GMOs? Will a good scientist who does good things to people and the world think the opposite? Definitely NO.

    As the above-mentioned GMO advocate has said the data in the chart might not be based on corn, and solid source is not available yet, I will not recommend it to others. However, as all GMOs based on resistance have many properties in common, I can safely say that GM corn and non-GM corn will definitely have shocking differences and are not substantially equivalent even if this chart were misused. Their impact on environment, such as soil, also vary significantly. These are speculations based on facts and reasonable analogy. Science allows this kind of speculation, doesn’t it? Will biotech science allow this too? If they do not allow, the only way out is to publicize the testing results from an independent lab. Let’s keep our fingers crossed for this?

    Below are 5 authoritative examples of substantial/significant differences instead of substantial equivalence between GMOs and non-GMOs by independent sources mostly in different countries.

    1. GM rice vs. non-GM rice

    Unintended Compositional Changes in Transgenic Rice Seeds (Oryza sativa L.) Studied by Spectral and Chromatographic Analysis Coupled with Chemometrics Methods
    J. Agric. Food Chem., 2010, 58 (3), pp 1746–1754 DOI: 10.1021/jf902676y

    Unintended compositional changes in transgenic rice seeds were studied by near-infrared reflectance, GC-MS, HPLC, and ICP-AES coupled with chemometrics strategies. Three kinds of transgenic rice with resistance to fungal diseases or insect pests were comparatively studied with the nontransgenic counterparts in terms of key nutrients such as protein, amino acids, fatty acids, vitamins, elements, and antinutrient phytic acid recommended by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The compositional profiles were discriminated by chemometrics methods, and the discriminatory compounds were protein, three amino acids, two fatty acids, two vitamins, and several elements. Significance of differences for these compounds was proved by analysis of variance, and the variation extent ranged from 20 to 74% for amino acids, from 19 to 38% for fatty acids, from 25 to 57% for vitamins, from 20 to 50% for elements, and 25% for protein, whereas phytic acid content did not change significantly. The unintended compositional alterations as well as unintended change of physical characteristic in transgenic rice compared with nontransgenic rice might be related to the genetic transformation, the effect of which needs to be elucidated by additional studies.

    2. Proteomics as a Complementary Tool for Identifying Unintended Side Effects Occurring in Transgenic Maize Seeds As a Result of Genetic Modifications
    Journal of Proteome Research 2008, 7, 1850–1861 Received agosto 6, 2007


    To improve the probability of detecting unintended side effects during maize gene manipulations by bombardment, proteomics was used as an analytical tool complementary to the existing safety assessment techniques. Since seed proteome is highly dynamic, depending on the species variability and environmental influence, we analyzed the proteomic profiles of one transgenic maize variety (event MON 810) in two subsequent generations (T05 and T06) with their respective isogenic controls (WT05 and WT06). Thus, by comparing the proteomic profiles of WT05 with WT06 we could determine the environmental effects, while the comparison between WT06 and T06 seeds from plants grown under controlled conditions enabled us to investigate the effects of DNA manipulation. Finally, by comparison of T05 with T06 seed proteomes, it was possible to get some indications about similarities and differences between the adaptations of transgenic and isogenic plants to the same strictly controlled growth environment. Approximately 100 total proteins resulted differentially modulated in the expression level as a consequence of the environmental influence (WT06 vs WT05), whereas 43 proteins resulted up- or down-regulated in transgenic seeds with respect to their controls (T06 vs WT06), which could be specifically related to the insertion of a single gene into a maize genome by particle bombardment. Transgenic seeds responded differentially to the same environment as compared to their respective isogenic controls, as a result of the genome rearrangement derived from gene insertion. To conclude, an exhaustive differential proteomic analysis allows to determine similarities and differences between traditional food and new products (substantial equivalence), and a case-by-case assessment of the new food should be carried out in order to have a wide knowledge of its features.
    (My remarks: This study was obviously done against the non-GM corn which has been in existence for tens of year as hybrids or thousand of years as natural species.)

    3. Comparative Studies Involving Transgenic and Non-Transgenic Soybean: What is Going On?
    Submission date: 25. junio, 2012
    DOI: 10.5772/52212

    The initial hypothesis formulated that the genetic modification itself is stressing the soybean, is apparently right, once the plant is searching a new equilibrium as living organism. The results presented in this chapter demonstrate that not only is the proteomic map changed with some proteins increasing and others decreasing, but also chromatographic separations are altered when transgenic and non-transgenic soybeans are compared. Examples are activities of some enzymes (as CAT, SOD, GPx, among others) involved in neutralization of ROS, as well as the possible capacity in taking metals from the soil (mainly for Fe and Cu). Because of these modifications that occur when both transgenic and non-transgenic organisms are compared, the theme of genetic modification could be even better explained with some alternative strategies, such as quantitative proteomics, image analysis, tracer experiments with stable isotopes, and other possibilities.
    Finally, in our point of view, one of the key points for the success of studies involving transgenic organisms is not only to involve good technology, but also a transdisciplinary view, involving different areas of expertise. With this strategy, it will be easier to understand this area of investigation, making possible the demystification of the genetic modification that have occurred, and allowing answers for some questions that still remain unknown.

    4. Field released transgenic papaya effect on soil microbial communities and enzyme activities
    J Environ Sci (China). 2006;18(4):734-40.

    Soil properties, microbial communities and enzyme activities were studied in soil amended with replicase (RP)-transgenic or non-transgenic papaya under field conditions. Compared with non-transgenic papaya, significant differences (P
  • Zen honeycutt
    comentado 2013-04-08 14:45:03 -0400
    To the people tempted to say this is a soil report and not a corn report- I have had a farmer expert ask the questions you ask and he has found the information to be results from corn, not soil. (Call Profit Pro) This kind of study is usually done on soil YES, that is why it is confusing for some, but this was done on corn to test for nutritional findings. We have never had to test and compare foods like this before, so its all new.
    Don’t you wonder why Monsanto had the EPA raise the level of acceptable glyphosate to 13ppm the year before this report came out? They knew. They also had reasons for pushing to get the Monsanto Protection Act passed so they could not be sued from harm due to GMO seeds…just when this report came out.
    To anyone else tempted to discredit this report..I am going by my Momma’s sayings, " If you can’t say anything nice don’t say anything at all" . I don’t want the negativity on my site. Take what you like and leave the rest. Your opinion about the report is not more important than Moms finding out that studies have been done and the results are not in favor of our kids health. Besides the report, many moms have told us that their kids have IMPROVED by going GMO Free. My own kids incuded. THAT is all the proof we need.
  • Zen honeycutt
    comentado 2013-04-08 13:39:18 -0400
    This report is here because it was done and shows possible harm to anything that eats it. I am well aware that the opposing side will claim it is all lies. They have alot on the line.
    As Moms, all we have on the line is our families’ health. You cannot take our jobs away from us, and you cannot stop us from sharing. If we see anything that is a red flag to our families’s health, we will let others know about it. “Better to be safe than sorry.”
  • Gemma starr
    comentado 2013-04-08 09:42:01 -0400
    Kevin it IS sad that people no longer trust scientists. On this topic, the data may be soil samples, I am not a soil scientist and neither are you for that matter . Perhaps, it simply shows then, the difference in soil quality ie. soil that is planted with GMO corn compared with soil planted with NON GMO corn. If that’s the case, the soil taken from the NON GMO crops has MORE nutrients and NO formaldehyde or glyphosate in it. But since neither of us have any more information from the source, this can’t be further investigated right now. This I admit is unfortunate.

    Furthermore, you have attempted to tell me you have taken the academic route rather than the BIG AG direction in your science career and yet you were interviewed on the blog which is run by GM PROMOTERS themselves! ‘Have a Beer with Kevin Folta,’ was one such interview I noticed. Interestingly, this biotech blog appears to be Monsanto’s websites TOP biotech Blog!! And you tell me you have no affiliations with BIG AG???? Really?

    That’s why the general public (myself included) NO LONGER respect SOME scientists and get tired of THEM discrediting information that doesn’t fit in with their ulterior motives ie. to convince people who are ANTI GMO that they are all stupid, their independent scientists are as well and that we all should happily embrace GMOs without question!

    Unfortunately, this IS NOT HAPPENING. Evidence is mounting against against OMG…Even your friends at Monsanto are a little scared, threatening to sue EFSA for publishing their GM NK603 maize study online! Obviously, not the best science happened here…They should be feeling proud of their work BUT instead they want to hide it and certainly don’t want any of the ANTI GMO crowd to review it! But I guess that’s a bit late now…
  • Gemma starr
    comentado 2013-04-06 21:54:08 -0400
    Here we go again! Kevin another PRO GMOer (Oops scientist LOL!) trying to discredit ANY information that comes to light on the deficiencies/ safety/ health effects of GMO crops! Well you must be tired fighting so hard to conceal GMOs weakness and health hazards! More and more evidence is mounting against GMOs and nobody I Know WANTS to actually eat them!
  • Zen honeycutt
    comentado 2013-04-01 20:06:59 -0400
    Nancy Feel free to call Profit Pro for more info. I got it from DeDell Seed Company in Canada. We have an inquiry into more info about the report. Keep in mind any farmer connected to the report may experience serious backlash so they may not be forthcoming, and understandably so. Monsanto has ruined many farmers. My concern is even one report shedding the slightest concern about our food should be public information immediately.
  • SR. Lee
    comentado 2013-03-29 14:33:59 -0400
    The situation in China is more serious and more terrible. GMO giants throughout the world,esp. those from USA have been flocking into China and China’s MOA warmly welcome them! Fact now is China ia actually and secretly the world’s No.1 GM crops grower and GM food consumer. GM crops here include but not limited to corn, rice, wheat, potato, millet, vegetables, cotton, papaya, apple, grape fruit, Chinese medical herbs, etc., hundreds of them. Crazy? Yes. And crazy disasters have been prevailing in China, such as mass disappearance of rats in most parts of north China due to planting of a GM corn developed by Pioneer, mass deaths of pigs due to GM feed, and even mass stillbirths and miscarriages by prgnant women, also mass infertility and mass malignant tumors, etc., all of which have been mainly caused by GMO toxins. Now we are fighting back and we need help from USA and others to finally win the big battle.

    For now I urgently need the orignal source of the 2 charts comparing the GMO corn and Non-GMO corn on this page. Can someone kindly provide this information to me if available? E-mail (please change into e-mail format when e-mailing).

    FYI, GM rice has been illegally widely grown in China the past few years. Two universities has tested samples and findings are shocking.The difference in one nutrient between natural rice and GM rice is 74% and other differences are also big. So GMO and Non-GMO are actually almost 2 different things. Instead of saying they are substantially equivalent, we can safely say they are substantially different.
  • Kory Muniz
    comentado 2013-03-28 18:09:52 -0400
    Thank you Zen. This is really important information for us all. I will be marching julio 4!
  • Gemma starr
    comentado 2013-03-27 21:13:31 -0400
    As if any GMO food could ever be as nutritious as it’s NON GMO counterpart LOL!!!
  • deb seidel
    comentado 2013-03-27 10:01:57 -0400
    Regarding India!

    The Queensland University of Technology (QUT) signed an agreement with India’s department of biotechnology to invest in a four-year project to develop the iron-rich bananas.

    Check this out:
  • Jeanne Ingress
    comentado 2013-03-26 11:14:21 -0400
    I personally think it’s a ridiculous waste of time and energy to beg the perpetrators of crimes against humanity to please tell us which poisons they’re using to kill us with today. That would be like saying to Hitler, “please sir, can you tell your gestapos to stop kicking down the door?” When mass genocide is being committed, a polite request to label the action is just another form of insanity. We should know by now that “business as usual” within the corporate model means it’s okay with them to lie, cheat, steal, maim, torture, kill and enslave as many people as possible for their personal and corporate gain at the people’s expense. Perhaps the time has finally come to say “enough is enough” and to start putting the criminals behind bars. Poisoning the food supply, the water, the air, the soil, and our minds, not to mention vaccine poisons pumped directly into our children’s blood supply, should be recognized for what it is ~ planned genocide, which includes mass enslavement as well as mass murder ~ a crime against humanity perpetrated by sociopaths with absolutely no regard for the rights of others. They’ll never tell us that the entire food supply is riddled with GMO’s. It’s up to us to figure it out. If the label doesn’t say “Non-GMO”, you can be pretty sure it is a GMO product. No guess work necessary. There are only a few companies I’ve come across so far which go to the extensive trouble of labeling their products “Non-GMO” and those are the only ones I trust to buy. Search out the companies with a higher consciousness about life sustaining foods and boycott the rest. If their goal is to poison us, our only reaction should be to boycott them and put them out of business, or take the time to go after them and put them in jail. If we buy their products, we are agreeing to let them kill us off, and whose fault is that? My motto is: I do not agree. I do not consent. I will not knowingly support programs of genocide. I found these companies that label their products “Non-GMO” – Nature’s Path Organic, Lifeway Kefir, and Go Raw – Real Life Food Organic. There must be others (?) but if not, why do we need what they offer? We don’t!
  • Tony Mitra
    comentado 2013-03-25 19:37:05 -0400
    There is in fact two important court cases in India. One of them in the supreme court between concerned scientists/experts and the Govt of India – claiming that the Govt should ban and or postpone many GMO crops from Indian Agricultural fields, for the purpose of safety and security. There is an even chance, perhaps better than an even chance, that Supreme court would agree and force the Govt’s hand.

    There is another court case proceeding at the Provincial high court, a public interest litigation between some citizens and the Govt of India – where evidence is produced at the court that Monsanto and its partners have violated the Biodiversity preservation act of 2002, by sequencing the genome of Indian Eggplant without prior permission and then tinkering with it to patent a GM plant called Bt. Brinjal. This violation amounts to Biopiracy. The court case aims to again force the Govt of India for suing Monsanto for Biopiracy, deny its licence on Bt. Egg Plant (locally called Bt.Brinjal) and perhaps revoke or restrict its future activity in India with regard to stealing India’s collective intellectual property – its biomass.
  • Chi kulig
    comentado 2013-03-16 11:02:27 -0400
    Thank you for sharing this! In seeing the nutritional comparisons I can see more and more why there is so much disease and obesity in our country. Of course eating gmo corn in many of our foods leads to health issues, right? When we eat food that isn’t good for us or lesser in quality, our bodies want to continue to eat (even though it should be satisfied with a portion of food) because it is craving the vital nutrients that we should normally get from nongmo food!!! So our people, our communities, our children, are overeating what is basically junk food, and the result is this epidemic of weight and health issues that we are now experiencing in this country.

    I hope your post helps to expand the awareness of the public and those that are so opposed to labeling gmos, and those that believe we need to continue using gmos. Seriously people, what would you rather eat? Food chock full of nutrients, or food that is basically cardboard? What do you want your kids eating every day? Lesser quality corn with formaldehyde in it?

    Check out this quote: “Currently, up to 85 percent of U.S. corn is genetically engineered as are 91 percent of soybeans and 88 percent of cotton (cottonseed oil is often used in food products). According to industry, up to 95% of sugar beets are now GE. It has been estimated that upwards of 70 percent of processed foods on supermarket shelves–from soda to soup, crackers to condiments–contain genetically engineered ingredients.”


    Thanks for that post, Moms Across America- let’s do this together. Awareness is the key. Thank you!!
  • Ellen Bridges
    comentado 2013-03-15 23:41:16 -0400
    Do you want to save money on health care??? Label GMOs!!! The good news is that when you stop eating GMOs you get healthier.

    Ellen in Eugene
  • Jessica denning
    comentado 2013-03-15 13:52:27 -0400
    Wow! No wonder the rats who ate the cold cereal died, and those who ate the box lived!!

Síguenos aquí