Geneticist David Suzuki Says Humans
“Are Part Of A Massive Experiment”
Thursday, November 28, 2013
We are doing our part to try and spread the word about GMOs,
(genetically modified organisms) but we’re not the only ones. Multiple public
figures, scientists and researchers have been speaking out about GMOs for a
number of years. For example, not long ago a former Canadian Government
Scientist at Agriculture Canada,
Dr. Thierry Vrain (one of many) spoke out against GMOs. Another prominent
public figure, Geneticist David Suzuki has been a long time advocate against
GMOs, and has been speaking out about how they can be hazardous to human health
as well as the environment.
Geneticist David Suzuki Says Humans “Are Part Of A Massive
Experiment” - GMOBelow, I’ve provided a video example of Suzuki explaining why
he feels the way he does about GMOs. Public figures with a wide audience can
have a great impact on the consciousness of the masses, they are great ‘tools’
for waking more people up to the reality that GMOs can be harmful to human
health as well as the environment. It’s time to pay attention, do your own
research and to question what you’ve been told. We can no longer trust branches
of the government that deal with food and health, we must not take their word
for it, it’s better if you actually look into it yourself rather than blindly
believing what your are told. It doesn’t seem to be much of a debate anymore,
it’s clear that GMOs can indeed be harmful to human health.
There is a reason why a majority of countries around the
world have permanently banned GMOs, so what’s taking North
America so long? One reason might be the fact that biotech
corporations like Monsanto seem to be above the government and influence
policy, but thankfully these things are changing. Big Island, Hawaii
has recently banned all GMO products and bio-tech company products. Various
bills calling for moratoria on GE food include Vermont,
North Dakota, Boulder,
Colorado, San Francisco and more. This large movement
against GMOs is not based on belief, multiple researchers and scientists all
around the world have shown that GMOs can be harmful. Here is a study that
shows how Bt toxins found in Monsanto crops can be damaging to red blood cells,
and potentially cause leukemia. Here is another one that shows how GMO animal
feed caused severe stomach inflammation and enlarged uteri in pigs.
There have been
multiple studies linking GMOs to cancer, and a range of other diseases.
Scientists all over the world have come together to show their support for the
ban of GMOs. Along with GMOs come the pesticides, which have been linked to
cancer, parkinson’s, autism and alzheimer’s, to name a few. As you can see,
alternative media outlets are not the only ones doing their research. Most who
investigate this topic, and do the research for themselves will come to the
same conclusions. This is what David Suzuki and many others have done as well.
By slipping it into our food without our knowledge, without any indication that
there are genetically modified organisms in our food, we are now unwittingly
part of a massive experiment.
The FDA has said that
genetically modified organisms are not much different from regular food, so
they’ll be treated in the same way. The problem is this, geneticists follow the
inheritance of genes, what biotechnology allows us to do is to take this
organism, and move it horizontally into a totally unrelated species. Now David
Suzuki doesn’t normally mate with a carrot and exchange genes, what
biotechnology allows us to do is to switch genes from one to the other without
regard to the biological constraints. It’s very very bad science, we assume
that the principals governing the inheritance of genes vertically, applies when
you move genes laterally or horizontally. There’s absolutely no reason to make
that conclusion. Below is an article written by David Suzuki and Faisal Moola.
At the beginning concerns with the 210 release of the super-genetically
modified corn called ‘SmartStax,’ are mentioned which has now shown to be
harmful to human health and banned all over the world. This article was written
in 2009, but still has some good information. By David Suzuki with Faisal Moola
In gearing up for the 2010 release of its super-genetically modified corn
called ‘SmartStax’, agricultural-biotechnology giant Monsanto is using an
advertising slogan that asks, ‘Wouldn’t it be better?’ But can we do better
than nature, which has taken millennia to develop the plants we use for food?
We don’t really know.
And that in itself is a problem. The corn, developed by
Monsanto with Dow AgroSciences, “stacks” eight genetically engineered traits,
six that allow it to ward off insects and two to make it resistant to
weed-killing chemicals, many of which are also trademarked by Monsanto. It’s
the first time a genetically engineered (GE) product has been marketed with
more than three traits. Canada
approved the corn without assessing it for human health or environmental risk,
claiming that the eight traits have already been cleared in other crop seeds —
even though international food-safety guidelines that Canada helped develop state that
stacked traits should be subject to a full safety assessment as they can lead
to unintended consequences.
One problem is that we don’t know the unintended
consequences of genetically engineered or genetically modified (GM) foods.
Scientists may share consensus about issues like human-caused global warming,
but they don’t have the same level of certainty about the effects of
genetically modified organisms on environmental and human health! A review of
the science conducted under the International Assessment of Agricultural
Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development in 2008 concluded that “there
are a limited number of properly designed and independently peer-reviewed
studies on human health” and that this and other observations “create concern
about the adequacy of testing methodologies for commercial GM plants.” Some
have argued that we’ve been eating GM foods for years with few observable
negative consequences, but as we’ve seen with things like trans fats, if often
takes a while for us to recognize the health impacts. With GM foods, concerns
have been raised about possible effects on stomach bacteria and resistance to
antibiotics, as well as their role in allergic reactions.
We also need to understand more about their impact on other
plants and animals. Of course, these aren’t the only issues with GM crops.
Allowing agro-chemical companies to create GM seeds with few restrictions means
these companies could soon have a monopoly over agricultural production. And by
introducing SmartStax, we are giving agro-chemical companies the green light
not just to sell and expand the use of their “super crops” but also to sell and
expand the use of the pesticides these crops are designed to resist. A
continued reliance on these crops could also reduce the variety of foods
available, as well as the nutritive value of the foods themselves. There’s also
a reason nature produces a variety of any kind of plant species. It ensures
that if disease or insects attack a plant, other plant varieties will survive
and evolve in its place. This is called biodiversity. Because we aren’t certain
about the effects of GMOs, we must consider one of the guiding principles in
science, the precautionary principle. Under this principle, if a policy or
action could harm human health or the environment, we must not proceed until we
know for sure what the impact will be. And it is up to those proposing the
action or policy to prove that it is not harmful. That’s not to say that
research into altering the genes in plants that we use for food should be
banned or that GM foods might not someday be part of the solution to our food
needs.
We live in an age when our technologies allow us to “bypass”
the many steps taken by nature over millennia to create food crops to now
produce “super crops” that are meant to keep up with an ever-changing
human-centred environment. A rapidly growing human population and deteriorating
health of our planet because of climate change and a rising number of natural
catastrophes, among other threats, are driving the way we target our efforts
and funding in plant, agricultural, and food sciences, often resulting in new
GM foods. But we need more thorough scientific study on the impacts of such crops
on our environment and our health, through proper peer-reviewing and unbiased
processes. We must also demand that our governments become more transparent
when it comes to monitoring new GM crops that will eventually find their ways
in our bellies through the food chain. Sources:
http://davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2009/09/more-science-needed-on-effects-of-genetically-modifying-food-crops/
Read More: http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/11/geneticist-david-suzuki-says-humans-are-part-of-a-massive-genetic-experiment.html
We are doing our part
to try and spread the word about GMOs, (genetically modified organisms)
but we’re not the only ones. Multiple public figures, scientists and
researchers have been speaking out about GMOs for a number of years.
For example, not long ago a former Canadian Government Scientist at
Agriculture Canada, Dr. Thierry Vrain (one of many) spoke out against
GMOs.
Another prominent public figure, Geneticist David Suzuki has been a long
time advocate against GMOs, and has been speaking out about how they
can be hazardous to human health as well as the environment.
Geneticist David Suzuki Says Humans “Are Part Of A Massive Experiment” -
GMOBelow, I’ve provided a video example of Suzuki explaining why he
feels the way he does about GMOs. Public figures with a wide audience
can have a great impact on the consciousness of the masses, they are
great ‘tools’ for waking more people up to the reality that GMOs can be
harmful to human health as well as the environment.
It’s time to pay attention, do your own research and to question what
you’ve been told. We can no longer trust branches of the government that
deal with food and health, we must not take their word for it, it’s
better if you actually look into it yourself rather than blindly
believing what your are told.
It doesn’t seem to be much of a debate anymore, it’s clear that GMOs can
indeed be harmful to human health. There is a reason why a majority of
countries around the world have permanently banned GMOs, so what’s
taking North America so long?
One reason might be the fact that biotech corporations like Monsanto
seem to be above the government and influence policy, but thankfully
these things are changing. Big Island, Hawaii has recently banned all
GMO products and bio-tech company products. Various bills calling for
moratoria on GE food include Vermont, North Dakota, Boulder, Colorado,
San Francisco and more.
This large movement against GMOs is not based on belief, multiple
researchers and scientists all around the world have shown that GMOs can
be harmful. Here is a study that shows how Bt toxins found in Monsanto
crops can be damaging to red blood cells, and potentially cause
leukemia.
Here is another one that shows how GMO animal feed caused severe stomach
inflammation and enlarged uteri in pigs. There have been multiple
studies linking GMOs to cancer, and a range of other diseases.
Scientists all over the world have come together to show their support
for the ban of GMOs.
Along with GMOs come the pesticides, which have been linked to cancer,
parkinson’s, autism and alzheimer’s, to name a few.
As you can see, alternative media outlets are not the only ones doing
their research. Most who investigate this topic, and do the research for
themselves will come to the same conclusions. This is what David Suzuki
and many others have done as well.
By slipping it into our food without our knowledge, without any
indication that there are genetically modified organisms in our food, we
are now unwittingly part of a massive experiment.
The FDA has said that genetically modified organisms are not much
different from regular food, so they’ll be treated in the same way. The
problem is this, geneticists follow the inheritance of genes, what
biotechnology allows us to do is to take this organism, and move it
horizontally into a totally unrelated species.
Now David Suzuki doesn’t normally mate with a carrot and exchange
genes, what biotechnology allows us to do is to switch genes from one to
the other without regard to the biological constraints. It’s very very
bad science, we assume that the principals governing the inheritance of
genes vertically, applies when you move genes laterally or horizontally.
There’s absolutely no reason to make that conclusion.
Below is an article written by David Suzuki and Faisal Moola. At the
beginning concerns with the 210 release of the super-genetically
modified corn called ‘SmartStax,’ are mentioned which has now shown to
be harmful to human health and banned all over the world. This article
was written in 2009, but still has some good information.
By David Suzuki with Faisal Moola
In gearing up for the 2010 release of its super-genetically modified
corn called ‘SmartStax’, agricultural-biotechnology giant Monsanto is
using an advertising slogan that asks, ‘Wouldn’t it be better?’ But can
we do better than nature, which has taken millennia to develop the
plants we use for food?
We don’t really know. And that in itself is a problem. The corn,
developed by Monsanto with Dow AgroSciences, “stacks” eight genetically
engineered traits, six that allow it to ward off insects and two to make
it resistant to weed-killing chemicals, many of which are also
trademarked by Monsanto. It’s the first time a genetically engineered
(GE) product has been marketed with more than three traits.
Canada approved the corn without assessing it for human health or
environmental risk, claiming that the eight traits have already been
cleared in other crop seeds — even though international food-safety
guidelines that Canada helped develop state that stacked traits should
be subject to a full safety assessment as they can lead to unintended
consequences.
One problem is that we don’t know the unintended consequences of
genetically engineered or genetically modified (GM) foods. Scientists
may share consensus about issues like human-caused global warming, but
they don’t have the same level of certainty about the effects of
genetically modified organisms on environmental and human health!
A review of the science conducted under the International Assessment of
Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development in 2008
concluded that “there are a limited number of properly designed and
independently peer-reviewed studies on human health” and that this and
other observations “create concern about the adequacy of testing
methodologies for commercial GM plants.”
Some have argued that we’ve been eating GM foods for years with few
observable negative consequences, but as we’ve seen with things like
trans fats, if often takes a while for us to recognize the health
impacts. With GM foods, concerns have been raised about possible effects
on stomach bacteria and resistance to antibiotics, as well as their
role in allergic reactions. We also need to understand more about their
impact on other plants and animals.
Of course, these aren’t the only issues with GM crops. Allowing
agro-chemical companies to create GM seeds with few restrictions means
these companies could soon have a monopoly over agricultural production.
And by introducing SmartStax, we are giving agro-chemical companies the
green light not just to sell and expand the use of their “super crops”
but also to sell and expand the use of the pesticides these crops are
designed to resist.
A continued reliance on these crops could also reduce the variety of
foods available, as well as the nutritive value of the foods themselves.
There’s also a reason nature produces a variety of any kind of plant
species. It ensures that if disease or insects attack a plant, other
plant varieties will survive and evolve in its place. This is called
biodiversity.
Because we aren’t certain about the effects of GMOs, we must consider
one of the guiding principles in science, the precautionary principle.
Under this principle, if a policy or action could harm human health or
the environment, we must not proceed until we know for sure what the
impact will be. And it is up to those proposing the action or policy to
prove that it is not harmful.
That’s not to say that research into altering the genes in plants that
we use for food should be banned or that GM foods might not someday be
part of the solution to our food needs. We live in an age when our
technologies allow us to “bypass” the many steps taken by nature over
millennia to create food crops to now produce “super crops” that are
meant to keep up with an ever-changing human-centred environment.
A rapidly growing human population and deteriorating health of our
planet because of climate change and a rising number of natural
catastrophes, among other threats, are driving the way we target our
efforts and funding in plant, agricultural, and food sciences, often
resulting in new GM foods.
But we need more thorough scientific study on the impacts of such crops
on our environment and our health, through proper peer-reviewing and
unbiased processes. We must also demand that our governments become more
transparent when it comes to monitoring new GM crops that will
eventually find their ways in our bellies through the food chain.
Sources:
http://davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2009/09/more-science-needed-on-effects-of-genetically-modifying-food-crops/
Read More: http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/11/geneticist-david-suzuki-says-humans-are-part-of-a-massive-genetic-experiment.html | Follow us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/whydontyoutrythis
We are doing our part
to try and spread the word about GMOs, (genetically modified organisms)
but we’re not the only ones. Multiple public figures, scientists and
researchers have been speaking out about GMOs for a number of years.
For example, not long ago a former Canadian Government Scientist at
Agriculture Canada, Dr. Thierry Vrain (one of many) spoke out against
GMOs.
Another prominent public figure, Geneticist David Suzuki has been a long
time advocate against GMOs, and has been speaking out about how they
can be hazardous to human health as well as the environment.
Geneticist David Suzuki Says Humans “Are Part Of A Massive Experiment” -
GMOBelow, I’ve provided a video example of Suzuki explaining why he
feels the way he does about GMOs. Public figures with a wide audience
can have a great impact on the consciousness of the masses, they are
great ‘tools’ for waking more people up to the reality that GMOs can be
harmful to human health as well as the environment.
It’s time to pay attention, do your own research and to question what
you’ve been told. We can no longer trust branches of the government that
deal with food and health, we must not take their word for it, it’s
better if you actually look into it yourself rather than blindly
believing what your are told.
It doesn’t seem to be much of a debate anymore, it’s clear that GMOs can
indeed be harmful to human health. There is a reason why a majority of
countries around the world have permanently banned GMOs, so what’s
taking North America so long?
One reason might be the fact that biotech corporations like Monsanto
seem to be above the government and influence policy, but thankfully
these things are changing. Big Island, Hawaii has recently banned all
GMO products and bio-tech company products. Various bills calling for
moratoria on GE food include Vermont, North Dakota, Boulder, Colorado,
San Francisco and more.
This large movement against GMOs is not based on belief, multiple
researchers and scientists all around the world have shown that GMOs can
be harmful. Here is a study that shows how Bt toxins found in Monsanto
crops can be damaging to red blood cells, and potentially cause
leukemia.
Here is another one that shows how GMO animal feed caused severe stomach
inflammation and enlarged uteri in pigs. There have been multiple
studies linking GMOs to cancer, and a range of other diseases.
Scientists all over the world have come together to show their support
for the ban of GMOs.
Along with GMOs come the pesticides, which have been linked to cancer,
parkinson’s, autism and alzheimer’s, to name a few.
As you can see, alternative media outlets are not the only ones doing
their research. Most who investigate this topic, and do the research for
themselves will come to the same conclusions. This is what David Suzuki
and many others have done as well.
By slipping it into our food without our knowledge, without any
indication that there are genetically modified organisms in our food, we
are now unwittingly part of a massive experiment.
The FDA has said that genetically modified organisms are not much
different from regular food, so they’ll be treated in the same way. The
problem is this, geneticists follow the inheritance of genes, what
biotechnology allows us to do is to take this organism, and move it
horizontally into a totally unrelated species.
Now David Suzuki doesn’t normally mate with a carrot and exchange
genes, what biotechnology allows us to do is to switch genes from one to
the other without regard to the biological constraints. It’s very very
bad science, we assume that the principals governing the inheritance of
genes vertically, applies when you move genes laterally or horizontally.
There’s absolutely no reason to make that conclusion.
Below is an article written by David Suzuki and Faisal Moola. At the
beginning concerns with the 210 release of the super-genetically
modified corn called ‘SmartStax,’ are mentioned which has now shown to
be harmful to human health and banned all over the world. This article
was written in 2009, but still has some good information.
By David Suzuki with Faisal Moola
In gearing up for the 2010 release of its super-genetically modified
corn called ‘SmartStax’, agricultural-biotechnology giant Monsanto is
using an advertising slogan that asks, ‘Wouldn’t it be better?’ But can
we do better than nature, which has taken millennia to develop the
plants we use for food?
We don’t really know. And that in itself is a problem. The corn,
developed by Monsanto with Dow AgroSciences, “stacks” eight genetically
engineered traits, six that allow it to ward off insects and two to make
it resistant to weed-killing chemicals, many of which are also
trademarked by Monsanto. It’s the first time a genetically engineered
(GE) product has been marketed with more than three traits.
Canada approved the corn without assessing it for human health or
environmental risk, claiming that the eight traits have already been
cleared in other crop seeds — even though international food-safety
guidelines that Canada helped develop state that stacked traits should
be subject to a full safety assessment as they can lead to unintended
consequences.
One problem is that we don’t know the unintended consequences of
genetically engineered or genetically modified (GM) foods. Scientists
may share consensus about issues like human-caused global warming, but
they don’t have the same level of certainty about the effects of
genetically modified organisms on environmental and human health!
A review of the science conducted under the International Assessment of
Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development in 2008
concluded that “there are a limited number of properly designed and
independently peer-reviewed studies on human health” and that this and
other observations “create concern about the adequacy of testing
methodologies for commercial GM plants.”
Some have argued that we’ve been eating GM foods for years with few
observable negative consequences, but as we’ve seen with things like
trans fats, if often takes a while for us to recognize the health
impacts. With GM foods, concerns have been raised about possible effects
on stomach bacteria and resistance to antibiotics, as well as their
role in allergic reactions. We also need to understand more about their
impact on other plants and animals.
Of course, these aren’t the only issues with GM crops. Allowing
agro-chemical companies to create GM seeds with few restrictions means
these companies could soon have a monopoly over agricultural production.
And by introducing SmartStax, we are giving agro-chemical companies the
green light not just to sell and expand the use of their “super crops”
but also to sell and expand the use of the pesticides these crops are
designed to resist.
A continued reliance on these crops could also reduce the variety of
foods available, as well as the nutritive value of the foods themselves.
There’s also a reason nature produces a variety of any kind of plant
species. It ensures that if disease or insects attack a plant, other
plant varieties will survive and evolve in its place. This is called
biodiversity.
Because we aren’t certain about the effects of GMOs, we must consider
one of the guiding principles in science, the precautionary principle.
Under this principle, if a policy or action could harm human health or
the environment, we must not proceed until we know for sure what the
impact will be. And it is up to those proposing the action or policy to
prove that it is not harmful.
That’s not to say that research into altering the genes in plants that
we use for food should be banned or that GM foods might not someday be
part of the solution to our food needs. We live in an age when our
technologies allow us to “bypass” the many steps taken by nature over
millennia to create food crops to now produce “super crops” that are
meant to keep up with an ever-changing human-centred environment.
A rapidly growing human population and deteriorating health of our
planet because of climate change and a rising number of natural
catastrophes, among other threats, are driving the way we target our
efforts and funding in plant, agricultural, and food sciences, often
resulting in new GM foods.
But we need more thorough scientific study on the impacts of such crops
on our environment and our health, through proper peer-reviewing and
unbiased processes. We must also demand that our governments become more
transparent when it comes to monitoring new GM crops that will
eventually find their ways in our bellies through the food chain.
Sources:
http://davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2009/09/more-science-needed-on-effects-of-genetically-modifying-food-crops/
Read More: http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/11/geneticist-david-suzuki-says-humans-are-part-of-a-massive-genetic-experiment.html | Follow us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/whydontyoutrythis
Geneticist David Suzuki Says Humans “Are Part Of A Massive Experiment”
Thursday, November 28, 2013 Read More: http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/11/geneticist-david-suzuki-says-humans-are-part-of-a-massive-genetic-experiment.html | Follow us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/whydontyoutrythis
