I also included some material on things we had discussed, I think you’d find them interesting. I read much of your research on science direct, pubmed and nih.gov concerning the biology of progesterone receptors, molecular and celullar endocrinology, and I found them quite intriguing. That’s why I believe you might like what I’ve included here. I also sent a bunch more pictures.

Anyway tonight I had a series of lucid dreams-within-dreams that reminded me of this thread.
At the start of my dream, I was sitting in a room, about to start a project of putting a computer together. The motherboard, cpu, case, cords, hard drives, etc- lay all across the room (some in closets) and I was getting ready to start when my phone rang and woke me up from my dream. I was so annoyed (I hate leaving anything undone- even in my dreams!) so I didn’t answer the phone and made myself fall back asleep and re-enter the dream. But more than that, I consciously searched throughout the room to find the various scattered computer parts to put together. It felt more than a dream- it felt like a computer simulation (or hologram), and it was so detailed- I could “see” every capacitor on the motherboard, read every label, and even weirder- I wasn’t even fully asleep, I consciously felt an itch on my cheek (dry skin) and I was scratching it will still immersed in my dream, still hearing sounds outside while I was moving around in my dream, putting everything together. I physically felt my eyes darting rapidly back and forth during my intense dreaming (REM?) and when I finally woke up (for the last time), I had a headache and my eyes were hurting- as if I had been concentrating really hard on something.
A few months ago, I had a similar extremely intense dream where I was in the library researching something (it had to do with companies covering up dumping toxins in the environment), and in my dream I ran across a large book with 20 chapters, each chapter written by a different author, detailing chemical masking agents used to cover up the detection of toxins. Every piece of information was extremely specific- right down to the names of the authors! The book was handed to me by my Dad, who passed away 7 months ago. I sat down and read it all and when I woke up from the dream I had a big headache, as if I had just sat down and actually read that book. The reason I say this is after I consume a large volume of information, I have this feeling that my brain is teeming with activity, as if it had just been loaded with a lot of information. And that’s exactly how I felt when I woke up.
As far as precognition is concerned, just before my Dad got sick I had a dream that he was sleeping in a hospital room and the room number was 232. Well, a few days later, my dad suddenly came down with pneumonia and he was admitted to the hospital and after he had stabilized, he was put in a hospital room and it was, you guessed it- Room 232.
Some of my other precognitive dreams involve being in a dream and the dream being interrupted by a family member coming home, only for me to realize that too, was a dream, so I basically had a dream inside a dream. And then a little later, that family member actually shows up. It could be this kind of dreaming is genetic, as my sister has had dreams warning her not to go to a certain restaurant, and then a few days later we read that they had an e. coli infestation there.
After my Dad passed away I’ve been having some really interesting dreams-within-dreams, where I black out in the middle of a conventional dream and he comes in to give me a message and then leaves and then I come out of the black out and back into my regular dream and those around me in my dream ask me what my Dad’s message was. They were members of my Mom’s side of the family and my Dad had some issues with them so I dont tell them, even though they are really persistent. And a few hours later, I will get a phone call (after I wake up) and it’s them calling, asking all sorts of weird questions about him.

I’ve started keeping a dream journal, as my dreams have gotten more and more intense over the last few months to the point where- I feel like I am dreaming without even being fully asleep! I’ve been able to lucid dream as far back as I can remember but what’s going on is even more “prolific” than what I am used to. I love writing and being extremely creative, but what I am experiencing in my dreams goes far beyond what I can consciously do, so I’m hoping keeping this journal will give me some answers.

A pattern I have noticed is that my nights of prolific dreaming (3-5 or more dreams a night) usually happens either on a Friday or Saturday night after a long week of work, and usually very late at night, towards morning. They will usually happen one right after the other with brief moments of waking in between. The other nights during the week are fairly bland and normal. Some of the dreams will leave me even more tired than before I fell asleep, with my eyes hurting and headaches, as if I had dome something that required a lot of concentration, but sometimes I’ll have more relaxing dreams that I wake up refreshed from. I do know that I really dislike waking up in the middle of a dream, so I always consciously try to fall back asleep and re-enter the dream, and usually succeed. A recent example was getting a group of friends together to go to a “haunted house” and as soon as we were all together and reached the door to the house and were about to open it- I woke up! Waking up annoyed me to no end and even though it was now morning, I made myself fall asleep and re-enter the dream, although it still remained unresolved.

I was particularly intrigued by the “black out” dream as it really did feel like I completely lost consciousness during my dream and saw my father and then was revived back into my original dream- almost like a computer subprogram nested inside a larger computer program. It also seemed like (in a way), he temporarily “jammed” the dreaming frequency in my brain (much like a hacker can hack into a TV station and use their signal.)

Basically, in my book I conjecture on a new theory of everything; in my theory each dimension can be analoged to a primary color….. in our universe each spatial dimension would be equivalent to an additive primary color (RGB) with time as the background (Black) with a complementary spacetime which consisted of dimensions that analoged to the subtractive primary colors (CMY) with complementary time as the background (White) as one space expanded the other contracts and vice versa (because the arrow of time flows opposite to each other but forward within each), It’s been peer reviewed and it seems there’s some excitement over this as this would solve the dark matter / dark energy problem by unifying the strong nuclear force and gravity (the strong nuclear force is carried by gluons and color charge and analoging dimensions to primary colors is gravity’s version of color charge) so now we have a strong force-gravity unification and an electroweak unification and we just need to combine those dualities. There are four layers to the omniverse, with universes of different dimensions in each layer (the number of dimensions in each layer bear a pythagorean relationship to the other layers and each universe has a parent superverse from whose parent black hole it was created. If you loop through the entire hierarchy of universes you end up back where you started, so the omniverse is not only cyclical time, but also in space. I guess I’ll leave that for a sequel lol.

BTW if there are multiple timelines they would be created right after the big bang, by the force of inflation and be emergent diverging timelines along two dimensions of time (think cartesian coordinates) and if the cyclic model is correct and dark flow does reverse the expansion of space, the time lines would converge once again with a Big Bounce as the universe deflated (rinse and repeat.) The antiverse would have opposing cycles (because the arrow of time was opposite compared to ours) and if there was someway to construct some sort of device (a la star gate) to tap into the barrier which separates the two (consisting of light, which does not experience the passage of time) than both time and long distance space travel would become possible through the second temporal dimension (which keeps each timeline intact)…… according to Einstein the past, present and future all coexist and it is we who move through them, so theoretically this should be possible. He also stated that the universe (or omniverse on a larger scale) created us in order to understand itself better, forming the framework for a cosmic collective mind which encompasses not only humans, but animals, plants, alien life, even whole planets (Gaia Theory, which has been proven multiple times) and even stars and galaxies, the only difference is the density of the level of consciousness, although planets (for example) are much larger than any single life form, their density of consciousness is much less, with their “memories” (fossil record) spread out over a much larger area, so any one spot (on our scale) is seemingly lifeless. But it’s not. The planet consists of a complicated series of checks and balances and delicate interplay between different parts that can and should be considered alive.

https://supermanbatmanalexthegreatest.shutterfly.com

more pictures (scroll down)

https://www.scribd.com/collections/2680326/The-Omniverse

each mirror could be the border of a new universe or timeline, but the nesting would be circular in that it would always lead back to the original eventually. This would solve the problem of “infinity”- which is an undefined quantity. In this way, on some superscale, both time and space would be cyclical- but since they might not repeat in exactly the same way each time or lead one back to the same exact starting point, instead of circular, it might be spiral (this would require additional dimensions of space and time for the spiral to curve into and separate levels or planes of existence that exist in each universe that the spiral can reach, almost like a “backbone” of the omniverse or a dna strand that genetically defines the entire structure and upon which new additions or universes are built- like when two black holes merge and combine their information- similar to dna replication, but also subject to random mutations, so the result is different each time, with each new universe with its own properties and laws.)

It reminds me of a quantum mirror, in my writing about what different kinds of universes might be like, I wrote about a two way mirror acting as a “wall” to separate two universes that were “equal but opposite” (including the way time flowed in each, forward with respect to itself but opposite with respect to the other.)

I was particularly intrigued by the “black out” dream as it really did feel like I completely lost consciousness during my dream and saw my father and then was revived back into my original dream- almost like a computer subprogram nested inside a larger computer program. It also seemed like (in a way), he temporarily “jammed” the dreaming frequency in my brain (much like a hacker can hack into a TV station and use their signal.)

I’ve started keeping a dream journal, as my dreams have gotten more and more intense over the last few months to the point where- I feel like I am dreaming without even being fully asleep! I’ve been able to lucid dream as far back as I can remember but what’s going on is even more “prolific” than what I am used to. I love writing and being extremely creative, but what I am experiencing in my dreams goes far beyond what I can consciously do, so I’m hoping keeping this journal will give me some answers.

A pattern I have noticed is that my nights of prolific dreaming (3-5 or more dreams a night) usually happens either on a Friday or Saturday night after a long week of work, and usually very late at night, towards morning. They will usually happen one right after the other with brief moments of waking in between. The other nights during the week are fairly bland and normal. Some of the dreams will leave me even more tired than before I fell asleep, with my eyes hurting and headaches, as if I had dome something that required a lot of concentration, but sometimes I’ll have more relaxing dreams that I wake up refreshed from. I do know that I really dislike waking up in the middle of a dream, so I always consciously try to fall back asleep and re-enter the dream, and usually succeed. A recent example was getting a group of friends together to go to a “haunted house” and as soon as we were all together and reached the door to the house and were about to open it- I woke up! Waking up annoyed me to no end and even though it was now morning, I made myself fall asleep and re-enter the dream, although it still remained unresolved.

Happy Independence Day, Dad
July 4, 2014
Now you’re free from all your pain and finally at peace with Mom right by your side. As it was always meant to be. I just wish I had gotten to spend more time with you. What a heavy regret moments we can never get back are. A few months ago you were strong and carrying heavy furniture up and down the stairs, now it’s us who carry your memory heavy in our hearts.

We’d gotten much closer over the years since Mom passed on and I tried to take care of you as much as I could, kept track of all the pills you needed to take and your doctors’ appointments you needed to go to, did your shopping for you after you retired and was so worried how I would handle it if something ever happened to you. Well, now it has 😦 and I still worry……

My dad passed away on May 14th at 6:52 am, we buried his physical self near my mom and I have been seeing him and my mom in my dreams a lot and they are always together. It was the hardest thing I’ve ever had to do I have never seen or touched a dead person before (I was too young they wouldn’t let me see my mom) and I kept kissing his forehead and holding his hands and feet and bathed him before the burial. He looked so at peace and his forehead was glittering. I’ll never forget one of the last things he said before he passed on- we were telling him how sad we were that he was in so much pain and he said he felt so lucky because he was with the two people in the world that mattered to him the most (my sister and I). And then he said “Thank You”- that was on the last day that he felt like himself, we had brought him home hoping he’d get better, but after that day he got worse again and he went back to the hospital, where he passed on a few days later. Thirteen days, to be exact. Hm. It’s weird because sometimes I feel like he is watching me and then I smell the aroma of lilac flowers (his favorite) but we dont have any of them in bloom right now. In my dreams when I am upset or angry he comes and comforts me and he is always happy in them with a shine on his face (not just a smile, his face is literally glowing), just like my mom was. Another interesting thing is that there appears to be a recurring wet spot where my dad fell a few weeks before he passed away. We keep cleaning it up and it keeps coming back and we checked the ceiling everywhere there isn’t a leak. In another dream he came to me and told me to keep fighting the good fight (the causes I mentioned) and he gave me a book with a lot of data in it about companies dumping bad chemicals in the environment but having developed a process to hide the chemicals so they dont get caught, it was a large book with lots of chemical formulas and when I woke up I actually felt like I had just read a book. And now my sister tried to get a safety deposite box at her bank and the only one available was number 514. Again, weird. Yet, comforting. She got it, and I think I do, too.

Maybe he’s trying to send me a message or maybe multiple messages (and my mom too)…….. It’s just so hard to take whenever I see my dad’s clothes anywhere I break down in tears, when he was sick I used to wash them for him by hand and he would always wonder where they were. His alarm clock still goes off at the time he used to wake up (it sounds like a rooster crowing lol) I haven’t had the heart to change anything, I’m going to preserve his memories and everything he used to do as much as possible. I go to his house to get the mail at 1 PM just like he always used to, right when the mailman comes. I hear noises in his house sometimes or his voice and walk by his room on the offchance he’s there and sometimes I can almost feel him sitting at his desk reading something, and then looking up at me and smiling. All of the neighbors have been asking about him because they hadn’t seen him gardening and it’s amazing all of his flowers are blooming this year much more than they ever have before- as if in celebration of him and his life. We have sunflowers, roses, tiger lilies, water lilies, peonies, rhododendrons and gardenias. Even his favorite birds (cardinals, yellow finches, starlings, and doves) seem to be coming much more frequently now and when they chirp it’s as if they are asking “Where are you? Where are you?” The lilacs are long gone but I can still smell them when I feel like my dad is nearby. And the night blooming jasmine body lotion my Dad used to wear because it was my Mom’s favorite and it’s how he kept her memory alive. He never even dated again after she passed away, his whole life was about us kids and keeping her memory alive. Just like how we keep his alive now. Whenever I walk by all the pictures I used to take of Dad gardening I grab one and kiss it and hold it close to my heart (I do this before I go to sleep too, it makes me feel like he’ll come in my dreams if I do it, and he usually does.) In my dreams I always beg him not to go, and that’s when he gets really quiet and just holds my hand and then I wake up.

I dont want to wake up anymore. I cant wait to be with them again one day. Tears again, I need to go…….

Enlightenment
January 3, 2013
Anyway okay here for my story, my mom was an oncologist (cancer doctor) who had been through a number of ailments in her life, all connected to Lupus which she may have gotten when she was pregnant with me (hence my dad blaming me for everything.) The prednisone she was on for Lupus destroyed her immune system and made her prone to infections, she had had open heart surgery too, and had her gall bladder taken out, her kidneys were a mess and she even got diabetes. Although she was a doctor, having the enlightenment of being both a patient and doctor, she hated the corruption rampant in the pharmaceutical industry and how she was becoming dependent on so many drugs. I remember Id rush home from school to make sure she was okay, and she would be in so much pain just from all the internal heat buildup from the meds she was on. My dad worked a lot so I was taking care of my mom and took a lot of days off to make sure she got her meds. We even got a hospital bed set up at home and a stairlift installed so she could go up and down the stairs. My favorite Christmas memory is of walking barefoot in the snow with her, her feet were always burning up, when I was giving her foot massages I could feel the steam rising up from them and I felt so bad, especially when she was crying out in pain in the middle of the night. I wanted to do whatever I could for her. Eventually she went into remission and gradually started getting better and I started helping her study to help maintain her accreditation. I spent all summer after 7th grade helping her study learning all sorts of medical terminology myself. This helped me too because science always fascinated me, and when I read ginormous books out loud to her I learned how to pronounce and spell complex medical words, which enabled me to be a finalist in the National Spelling Bee the following year. I was so proud of my mom, she was doing her hardest to get better and wanted to make a difference and help people, Not just at her specialty, which was treating kids with cancer but she also started volunteering at an inner city clinic for people who did not have health care. She got paid only 20 dollars per patient, but she didnt care, she just wanted to help. All of this basically happened over 3 years, so this period covers the summer after 7th grade to fateful 10th grade for me. I say fateful because one day my mom came to me and showed me a boil on her leg and asked me if I thought she should get checked out. It looked like a mosquito bite so I just told her I thought it was okay. Worst mistake of my entire life! She trusted me I think because I had caught onto her angina pains the summer after 8th grade and got her an ambulance to go to the hospital and she had a heart attack on the way. She ended up getting a double bypass operation and was in the hospital most of that summer. But this time we just didnt think it was anything serious I was so stupid! Well a few days later when I came home from school my mom wasnt there and I saw there was a voice message, it was her crying and in a bunch of pain telling me that she didnt know what was wrong but my sis came and got her (my sis is 13 yrs older than me and was out of the house by then.) That was the last time I ever heard her voice 😦 She went into a coma and my dad and sister wouldnt even let me see her, they thought it would be too traumatic. They only let me see her feet, because I used to give her massages and even talk to her feet (lol I know weird, but I was lonely as a child and pretended they were elves.) The doctor was so mean he told us Mom had no chance and the equipment they had her hooked up to was better used for someone else and when I asked if there was any hope at all he told me to stop being naive! 😦 But from my Mom’s personal experiences I already knew that male doctors have a huge double standard when it comes to women. Another tragic part about all this was that she was literally weeks away from landing her dream job at a major hospital in NYC (we traveled a lot, she even worked in London for awhile.) And she was only going to be at the clinic for one more week before she caught that infection. That dream job was the culmination of all that she had worked for, even when she had to be in a wheelchair and was so sick, and to see it robbed from her at the last moment was a tragedy of Shakespearian proportions. Anyway after she passed away I was a total wreck and my family decided to send me off to Italy to visit some of our family and to tell them what happened. This was my first ever plane trip alone and while I was there I ended up getting into a series of strange mishaps, I dont know how this is connected to my mom’s passing, but it might be. Like, I stepped on a rusty nail, somehow it hit the exact weak spot in my shoe, another time I slipped on a wet floor and slid into the refrigerator and my big toe got caught under the door, ugh, another time one of my cousins left their razor laying around and I tripped on something and fell into it…..yeah all weird! The worst by far though was some weird kind of flu I caught when I was there and I was laid up in bed for over a month and missed the start of school. My fever was extremely high, 106 or 107 and I couldnt eat or get out of bed and the only positive that came out of that was spending my birthday (Sept 15) in Italy, with everyone planning a big party for me (I was better by then and ate a huge half gallon of neapolitan ice cream as soon as I could get out of bed haha.) Anyway I came back home 2 weeks after that and got back into school. Everything was okay until the following March when my dad, sis and I were having breakfast together on a cold and windy overcast March morning. It was so surreal. While we were having breakfast, this huge flock of blackbirds that numbered in the hundreds landed in the back yard and at that very moment the wind went dead calm. The birds just sat there, not moving, and we felt like we were in the middle of a movie. It was as if they were in mourning or remembrance of something and my sister even said something was about to happen. Everything was so quiet, it felt like the world was asleep, and then out of nowhere the phone started to ring. We all looked at each other, with a deep sense of foreboding written in each of our eyes, knowing what it was, but not wanting to have our fears confirmed by answering the phone. But it kept ringing, like a knife cutting through the hot butter of silence and my sister got up to answer it and instantly we knew we were correct, grandma had just passed away. Out of the corner of my eyes I saw movement, and as I looked out into the yard, the blackbirds suddenly took flight all together. The wind started blowing again and the skies cleared too, as if the world was awakening from a deep slumber. At that very moment I realized that the birds were there to tell us grandma would be okay, and so would mom, and they were waiting for us to join them one day. For my grandma had been wonderful with animals, especially birds, even wild ones would alight near her and she would feed them by hand. From her I learned to love animals more than I love most people. Animals and children both show unconditional love. What made it even more miraculous was who made the call, it was one of my uncles, who had run away from home when he was 17 and we all thought he was dead since no one had heard from him in years. My mom and grandma would always talk about him, and yet he returned a few months before my mom passed away so at least she got to see him alive. And he took care of grandma until she passed away. Im glad they are together, my grandma was never the same after mom passed away, a mom should never have to live to see one of her kids die 😦 Anyway, thats my long and sordid tale…… it got me to appreciate life much more but to also wonder what happens after death. I have seen and experienced other things that made me wonder too. It also made me want to follow in my mom’s footsteps and help other people. I just want to make her proud. And I cant feel sorry for myself, because despite not having her anymore, I am thankful for what time I did get to spend with her, she had a huge impact on my life, she was my best friend and an amazing role model, caring more for her patients than her own health, even on death’s door. I also know others have it far worse, as I have 4 little cousins I am really close to, always babysitting them and telling them stories I make up before bedtime (like the one about Cinderella turning into a pumpkin at midnight, a SLIGHT editing of the original, to get them to fall asleep early) and I always cry when I have to leave them for the summer. They pretend to not care when I return but as soon as I do something goofy, like falling flat on my face after tripping on one of their toys (intentionally?) they laugh so hard their faces turn red and they rush to my side to hug me and pick me up. And I love tickling them on their feet to watch their adorable little toes curl up haha. Anyway the reason I told you about them is that their dad, my youngest uncle, had an aneurysm and died completely unexpectedly (he was healthy otherwise) and they were as close to their dad as they are to me and he even named his store after them and they would always rush to his side as soon as he came home from work. Their dad has the same smart ass goofy personality (with a temper too) that I do and we were really good friends too and I cannot imagine losing a parent at that age. They were still in elementary school! I try to be there for them as much as I can because they need a male role model in their lives. I just wish the world was a better place, the kind of world I write about, where innocent people never got hurt. One thing about kids, they are much wiser than we give them credit for, and they inspire me to be creative, because they help me access my inner child and see the world with brand new eyes every single day. They are the reason why I never drank or did any drugs because with such silliness and goofiness all around us, who needs an artificial high? They gave back to me far more than I could ever give and I will always be thankful for that and indebted to them. Just as a postscript about my mom and grandmom I still vividly dream about them, as if time traveled to when I was little and they were still alive and I can see all the colors and smell all the aromas of their wonderful italian cooking (which I cook now) and I never want to wake up from these dreams, and when I do my pillow is drowning in tears. Sometimes I can make myself fall back asleep and get back into the dreams, for I wish more than anything else, to be a little kid again, when the world seemed so new and wonderful and everyone I cared about was still around. But I know the dream will end and the nightmare of reality will always come back. Now I just want to help people deal with their pain, as I could not with mine, those panic attacks I used to have where I couldnt even leave my house to go to school because my dad went there one day and in front of the whole class blamed me for not knowing she was sick in time, it sent my life into a tailspin and started me writing. I used to throw away everything I wrote though because I hated myself and blamed myself for her death, for having panic attacks, for not being able to leave my own house. It took me 6 months to get over that. But I dont blame my dad at all, he was grieving in his own way and he would sit in the basement all alone, crying for hours, and I had never ever heard him cry before. He deserved so much better than that and if I could erase my own life from existence so my mom could be alive and with him again, I know I would. I want that kind of love, that kind of devotion, its what I live for and its the promise I made to my mother to never settle for less. And I will keep my word. I dont know if there is a god, but I think the whole universe is alive (as are others) and created us (among other beings) to understand itself better and because the universe’s inherent quality is being creative, when we are creative we fulfill it’s original purpose and feel connected and closer to it and to each other. This is the quest of my book, a lifetime quest of journey and discovery to learn the reasons of why things happen and why we are here. I know I may never find all the answers, but the journey will be rewarding enough and hopefully I will meet my loved ones at the end of it. I believe both science and spirituality seek the same answers, they just have different paths to the same goal and one day they will meet and we will know the answers that we seek (they are converging even now.) I hope I can add to that knowledge and help others along the way. I believe both science and spirituality seek the same answers, they just have different paths to the same goal and one day they will meet and we will know the answers that we seek (they are converging even now.) I hope I can add to that knowledge and help others along the way.

https://supermanbatmanalexthegreatest.shutterfly.com/

Scroll down on the above link and you can see a lot more of my pictures

More of my book(s)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39466110/Origin-3-Philosophy-of-Love

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39589854/Origin-4-Consciousness

You can read them all from the beginning:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39589856/Origin-1-The-Omniverse

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39589880/Origin-2-Beyond-the-Planck-Scale

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39589852/Origin-5-The-Cosmic-Casimir-Effect

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39589869/Origin-6-Unification

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39589870/Origin-7-The-Shape-of-Things-to-Come

http://www.scribd.com/doc/42053712/Origin-8-It-s-Only-A-Matter-Of-Time

http://www.scribd.com/doc/48419984/Origin-9-The-Omniverse-Reloaded

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49476053/Origin-10-The-Backbone-of-the-Omniverse

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49648920/Origin-11-The-Lifeline-of-the-Omniverse

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49868380/Origin12-The-Universe-On-a-String

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52079144/Origin-13-So-Many-Dimensions-So-Little-Time
http://www.scribd.com/doc/52189765/Origin-14-So-Much-Time-So-Little-Space

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52815998/Origin-15-A-Kaleidoscope-of-Color

http://www.scribd.com/doc/53056403/Origin-16-Out-with-the-Old-and-in-with-the-New

http://www.scribd.com/doc/55417308/Origin-17

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39466110/Origin-3-Philosophy-of-Love

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39589854/Origin-4-Consciousness

Some of my other writing (not for anyone in particular, just my fantasies):

Angel Hero Forever

As I was lying half awake, half asleep, in a bed of soft and fragrant grass, gazing up at the stars, my hands softly lit by the light of the moon, my mind began to drift away. I gazed at the stars and imagined the eyes of my Angel, sparkling down upon me. I, the hero, had been through many battles, had been hurt in so many places, so many times before. But that which had been hurt the most, was my heart. It lay in pieces… But the hero’s Angel had been sleeping outside on the very same night, and in the light of the moon, had noticed something sparkling. It was a piece of her Hero’s heart. She picked it up, and a little further away, she found another piece, and as she kept walking she kept finding more and more pieces.
Meanwhile, the hero noticed the grass was wet; it was wet with the tears of his Angel. He carefully brushed the grass with his hands, collecting every single teardrop, and he crawled on his hands and knees, as far as the trail of tears would lead him. Thus the two of them traveled, day and night, never straying from the trail of tears or the road of hearts.
The Angel had picked up every single piece and carefully pieced them all together, and added many parts of her own heart, the most beautiful parts that were not even there before his heart broke..and thus their hearts were joined before they even met. And the Hero cried because his Angel had been crying, her pain is his pain, and he wept his tears upon her tears, and because tears come from parts of the soul melting away, the Angel’s soul and the Hero’s soul were joined thus before they ever met.
Then on the dawn of one beautiful summer day, the trail of tears and the road of hearts ended… The Hero looked up from his crouched pose, and the Angel looked down….The Hero saw the blush on the cheeks of his Angel, more beautiful than any dawn ever could be…Their gaze met, eyes locked, hearts joined, two souls as one….The Hero held out his hands, full of the tears he had collected from his Angel, plus his own tears which had been shed, two souls joined as one.
The Angel held out her hands, full of the pieces of his broken heart which she had collected, plus the parts of her heart, which she had added to his, two hearts joined as one. Their hands reached out for each other, their rings sparkled brightly against each other…and thus the hearts and souls of the Hero and Angel were joined, never to be separated again.

Sunrise Smile

Watching the moon rising from beyond the bubbling stream, which is steaming in the cool night air is like looking into your eyes through the mists of distance… and you are so beautiful to me… and, just like the moon, the distance can not alter or diminish you in any way.
I sit lurking under the darkness of murky shadows, waiting for the clear vision of your warm smile to bring light into the darkness of my soul, in nervous anticipation…like waiting for a beautiful sunrise over a darkened landscape…knowing in my mind’s eye how beautiful it will be, the first blush of dawn reminding me of your tender rosy cheeks, yet the real wonder of your smile not fully revealed til it is before me, for not even the greatest mind can fully comprehend the joy of your *sunrise smile* until it is is upon thee.
Wonders when I reach out my hands to you, if you can feel it; and when I hold my hands in each other….wrapping four fingers of my right hand under the four fingers of my left and the thumb over them… if you can feel me holding your hands in mine. Wonders when I press my hands to my chest, if you can feel me touching your heart. Wonders when I shed my tears if you can feel the rain falling down…although there are no clouds… Wonders if when I call out your name and say “Sweet honey, I know it sounds so crazy to have these feelings so early, but I feel this from deep within my soul… I think I’m falling in love you”…if you can hear me.
A deep heartfelt sigh, as the cold west wind blows and dries my tears before they can touch your tender cheeks, taking my hand away from my chest, to reveal a snow encrusted long-stemmed rose, sparkling like countless stars in the first light of dawn. Placing it gently upon your pillow, and then slowly backing away, not wanting to disturb your sleep. Gazing at you from afar, in appreciation and admlration for who you are, awaiting your smile like the first light of the Sun after a long cold and lonely night and the sparkle of your eyes like the twinkle of the Morning Star.
Slowly departing, across the endless emerald fields of grass, teary eyed and overcome with the beauty and joy of what I just saw, my tear drops intermingling with the morning dew that you see when you venture outside, glittering with the brilliance of your *Sunrise Smile* bringing light to all the shadows upon the landscape and guiding me and keeping me warm upon my long journey home… the memory of you bringing me hope and comfort and something to look forward to til the next time we meet…

My One and Only

Let me tell you this right before I start :
At first sight you part the door to my heart .

A written rhyme that forever preserves
Is the least your breathtaking shape deserves .

Before we met, I planned to run lonely ;
Now, you’re my true pet, MY ONE AND ONLY .

For you, in my heart, there is no rival .
Your true, unequaled love’s my survival .

When we meet, the sun glows into my soul .
Then I greet the ONE who knows my heart whole .

Every glorious day I glimpse your face ,
I see flawless beauty and swan-like grace .

Your hair is a halo of flaming fire .
Having your care is my deepest desire .

My heart can soar when I hear your laughter .
I know, then, you’re my humors’ clear master .

When you’re laughing, light glitters in your eyes ;
Then, each dazzling bright diamond drops disguise !

The sad twinkling tears streaming while you cry ,
Are like shooting stars streaking through the sky !

Your soft, rapturous, ruby red lips screen
Twin strings of precious pearls fit for a queen .

A kiss from your lips, my sweet darling love ,
Is an angel’s touch from Heaven above .

Your voice is sultry as a summer’s night .
To my soul’s darkest depth, your smile brings light .

An unsurpassed face the texture of cream ;
Beauty from some place past my wildest dream !

Each hand as smooth as a butterfly wing ;
Tanned arms that soothe my demand by warming .

Your legs look like golden oars at first glance ;
Or eagles that soar when immersed in dance .

Though seeing your splendid shape may entice ,
Only your love can bring me paradise .

Why I Love You So Much

Living life is like walking through a fog, except that you don’t know that you are in the fog, until a bright light cuts through it, and shows you the way out of the darkness. And all of a sudden that light not only illuminates the paths you had previously taken, and all the wrong turns, pitfalls and mistakes you made along the way…but it also shows you the right road ahead, the road to happiness, the path to the future you had always dreamed of, but never dared hope could exist.
A future with true love. One special day this light dawns in your eyes……..it is the light of the smile of the one you love, your one and only….it is the light in her sparkling eyes, shining down upon you with love, making you feel so special, so happy, so protected, so loved. Your heart opens up to her, full of love, blossoms like a rose, her sweetness overwhelming you like the sweet aroma of jasmine in the air, making your cheeks glow like the morning’s dew drops make rose petals sparkle.
True Love is like sight to the blind man: unless you have it, you don’t know what you’re missing. I was that blind man until I met you. Every time you tell me “I love you,” it feels like the first time. It’s because not only have you healed my heart, and picked up pieces broken along the way, but your love has added new parts that were never there before. You have made my heart, and my soul, so much stronger and happier than it ever was, stronger and happier more than even before the first time it was hurt.
This is so wonderful and rare, not only have you given me back what I thought I had lost forever, you gave me something better and more special than I have ever had before, or even believed could be possible to have…Your Love. And every time you tell me “I love you,” you touch one of those new parts of my heart which you have created, a new and different one each and every time, that’s why every “I love you” feels like the first “I love you.”
You are like the blind man’s first sunrise, the first light dawning on a new day, a day of Hope, a day of Love. You are like the first time a deaf man hears his own heart beating… he feels life within him that he never knew existed. I used to settle for less, but being loved by you now, I know that True Happiness only lies along the road which leads me to you. I’ve told you before, sweetheart, a million years of pain and a million miles of unhappiness are all worth it, as long as you’re waiting for me at the end of that road.
I would climb the highest mountain barefoot, as long as I knew you waited for me on the peak; you, my Love, being my warmth and my shelter, as the rest of the world falls beneath us. I would dive into the deepest ocean without scuba gear, as long as I knew you waited for me at the sea bottom, your sweet soft breath being the only air I would ever need to breathe.
Like the morning sun rises over my garden, revealing more and more beauty with each passing moment, my love for you grows day by day, getting stronger and stronger in every way. Even though at any one particular moment it doesn’t seem it could grow any greater, just like the beauty of my roses, the very next moment exceeds all expectations and every new moment I discover a new reason of why…………………………………. I LOVE YOU SO MUCH !

And remember we discussed this

Barbara Natterson-Horowitz: What veterinarians know that physicians don’t

image

Barbara Natterson-Horowitz: What veterinarians know th…
View on http://www.ted.com
Preview by Yahoo

Now most of the time, I was working at UCLA Medical Center with physicians, discussing symptoms and diagnoses and treatments for my human patients, but some of the time, I was working at the Los Angeles Zoo with veterinarians, discussing symptoms and diagnoses and treatments for their animal patients. And occasionally, on the very same day, I went on rounds at UCLA Medical Center and at the Los Angeles Zoo. And here’s what started coming into very clear focus for me. Physicians and veterinarians were essentially taking care of the same disorders in their animal and human patients:congestive heart failure, brain tumors, leukemia, diabetes, arthritis, ALS, breast cancer, even psychiatric syndromes like depression, anxiety, compulsions, eating disorders and self-injury.
3:31
Now, I’ve got a confession to make. Even though I studied comparative physiology and evolutionary biology as an undergrad — I had even written my senior thesis on Darwinian theory — learning about the significant overlap between the disorders of animals and humans, it came as a much needed wake-up call for me. So I started wondering, with all of these overlaps, how was it that I had never thought to ask a veterinarian, or consult the veterinary literature, for insights into one of my human patients? Why had I never, nor had any of my physician friends and colleagues whom I asked, ever attended a veterinary conference? For that matter, why was any of this a surprise? I mean, look, every single physician accepts some biological connection between animals and humans. Every medication that we prescribe or that we’ve taken ourselves or we’ve given to our families has first been tested on an animal.
4:55
But there’s something very different about giving an animal a medication or a human disease and the animal developing congestive heart failure or diabetes or breast cancer on their own. Now, maybe some of the surprise comes from the increasing separation in our world between the urban and the nonurban. You know, we hear about these city kids who think that wool grows on trees or that cheese comes from a plant. Well, today’s human hospitals, increasingly, are turning into these gleaming cathedrals of technology. And this creates a psychological distance between the human patients who are being treated there and animal patients who are living in oceans and farms and jungles.
6:00
But I think there’s an even deeper reason. Physicians and scientists, we accept intellectually that our species, Homo sapiens, is merely one species, no more unique or special than any other. But in our hearts, we don’t completely believe that. I feel it myself when I’m listening to Mozart or looking at pictures of the Mars Rover on my MacBook. I feel that tug of human exceptionalism, even as I recognize the scientifically isolating cost of seeing ourselves as a superior species, apart. Well, I’m trying these days. When I see a human patient now, I always ask, what do the animal doctors know about this problem that I don’t know? And, might I be taking better care of my human patient if I saw them as a human animal patient?
7:18
Here are a few examples of the kind of exciting connections that this kind of thinking has led me to.Fear-induced heart failure. Around the year 2000, human cardiologists “discovered” emotionally induced heart failure. It was described in a gambling father who had lost his life’s savings with a roll of the dice, in a bride who’d been left at the alter. But it turns out, this “new” human diagnosis was neither new, nor was it uniquely human. Veterinarians had been diagnosing, treating and even preventing emotionally induced symptoms in animals ranging from monkeys to flamingos, from to deer to rabbits, since the 1970s. How many human lives might have been saved if this veterinary knowledge had been put into the hands of E.R. docs and cardiologists?
8:34
Self-injury. Some human patients harm themselves. Some pluck out patches of hair, others actually cut themselves. Some animal patients also harm themselves. There are birds that pluck out feathers.There are stallions that repetitively bite their flanks until they bleed. But veterinarians have very specific and very effective ways of treating and even preventing self-injury in their self-injuring animals.Shouldn’t this veterinary knowledge be put into the hands of psychotherapists and parents and patients struggling with self-injury?
9:28
Postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis. Sometimes, soon after giving birth, some women become depressed, and sometimes they become seriously depressed and even psychotic. They may neglect their newborn, and in some extreme cases, even harm the child. Equine veterinarians also know that occasionally, a mare, soon after giving birth, will neglect the foal, refusing to nurse, and in some instances, kick the foal, even to death. But veterinarians have devised an intervention to deal with this foal rejection syndrome that involves increasing oxytocin in the mare. Oxytocin is the bonding hormone, and this leads to renewed interest, on the part of the mare, in her foal. Shouldn’t this information be put into the hands of ob/gyn’s and family doctors and patients who are struggling with postpartum depression and psychosis?
10:46
Well, despite all of this promise, unfortunately the gulf between our fields remains large. To explain it, I’m afraid I’m going to have to air some dirty laundry. Some physicians can be real snobs about doctors who are not M.D.’s. I’m talking about dentists and optometrists and psychologists, but maybe especially animal doctors. Of course, most physicians don’t realize that it is harder to get into vet school these days than medical school, and that when we go to medical school, we learn everything there is to know about one species, Homo sapiens, but veterinarians need to learn about health and disease in mammals, amphibians, reptiles, fish and birds. So I don’t blame the vets for feeling annoyedby my profession’s condescension and ignorance. But here’s one from the vets: What do you call a veterinarian who can only take care of one species? A physician. (Laughter)
12:10
Closing the gap has become a passion for me, and I’m doing this through programs like Darwin on Rounds at UCLA, where we’re bringing animal experts and evolutionary biologists and embedding them on our medical teams with our interns and our residents. And through Zoobiquity conferences,where we bring medical schools together with veterinary schools for collabortive discussions of the shared diseases and disorders of animal and human patients. At Zoobiquity conferences, participants learn how treating breast cancer in a tiger can help us better treat breast cancer in a kindergarten teacher; how understanding polycystic overies in a Holstein cow can help us better take care of a dance instructor with painful periods; and how better understanding the treatment of separation anxiety in a high-strung Sheltie can help an anxious young child struggling with his first days of school.
13:33
In the United States and now internationally, at Zoobiquity conferences physicians and veterinarians check their attitudes and their preconceptions at the door and come together as colleagues, as peers, as doctors. After all, we humans are animals, too, and it’s time for us physicians to embrace our patients’ and our own animal natures and join veterinarians in a species-spanning approach to health.

http://www.nature.com/news/case-studies-a-hard-look-at-gm-crops-1.12907

he question is how much longer those benefits will last. So far, farmers have dealt with the proliferation of resistant weeds by using more glyphosate, supplementing it with other herbicides and ploughing. A study by David Mortensen, a plant ecologist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park, predicts that total herbicide use in the United States will rise from around 1.5 kilograms per hectare in 2013 to more than 3.5 kilograms per hectare in 2025 as a direct result of GM crop use3.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.02.079
Get rights and content
Highlights

The cytogenetic effects of pesticide mixtures were evaluated on CHO cells.

A 20-fold enhanced activity was observed in mixture with the four pesticides.

It was 100-fold increased after light-irradiation, through oxidative stress.

It highlighted the importance of cocktail effects in environmental matrices.

It showed the limits of usual strategies to estimate environmental risks.
Abstract
The photo-inducible cytogenetic toxicity of glyphosate, atrazine, aminomethyl phosphoric acid (AMPA), desethyl-atrazine (DEA), and their various mixtures was assessed by the in vitro micronucleus assay on CHO-K1 cells.

Results demonstrated that the cytogenetic potentials of pesticides greatly depended on their physico-chemical environment. The mixture made with the four pesticides exhibited the most potent cytogenetic toxicity, which was 20-fold higher than those of the most active compound AMPA, and 100-fold increased after light-irradiation. Intracellular ROS assessment suggested the involvement of oxidative stress in the genotoxic impact of pesticides and pesticide mixtures.

This study established that enhanced cytogenetic activities could be observed in pesticide mixtures containing glyphosate, atrazine, and their degradation products AMPA and DEA. It highlighted the importance of cocktail effects in environmental matrices, and pointed out the limits of usual testing strategies based on individual molecules, to efficiently estimate environmental risks.

Keywords
Glyphosate; Atrazine; Pesticide mixture; Pesticide metabolites; Genotoxicity; Photoactivation

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2013.05.057
Get rights and content
Highlights

Glyphosate at 10−12 to 10−6 M promoted growth of T47D cells via estrogen receptors.

Glyphosate produced the activation of ERE which can be blocked by ICI 182780.

Glyphosate altered estrogen receptors by increasing expression ratio of ERα and ERβ.

Glyphosate had an additive effect with genistein on ERE activation and cell growth.
Abstract
Glyphosate is an active ingredient of the most widely used herbicide and it is believed to be less toxic than other pesticides. However, several recent studies showed its potential adverse health effects to humans as it may be an endocrine disruptor. This study focuses on the effects of pure glyphosate on estrogen receptors (ERs) mediated transcriptional activity and their expressions. Glyphosate exerted proliferative effects only in human hormone-dependent breast cancer, T47D cells, but not in hormone-independent breast cancer, MDA-MB231 cells, at 10−12 to 10−6 M in estrogen withdrawal condition. The proliferative concentrations of glyphosate that induced the activation of estrogen response element (ERE) transcription activity were 5-13 fold of control in T47D-KBluc cells and this activation was inhibited by an estrogen antagonist, ICI 182780, indicating that the estrogenic activity of glyphosate was mediated via ERs. Furthermore, glyphosate also altered both ERα and β expression. These results indicated that low and environmentally relevant concentrations of glyphosate possessed estrogenic activity. Glyphosate-based herbicides are widely used for soybean cultivation, and our results also found that there was an additive estrogenic effect between glyphosate and genistein, a phytoestrogen in soybeans. However, these additive effects of glyphosate contamination in soybeans need further animal study.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.09.095
Get rights and content
Highlights

Addresses gap in information about glyphosate and AMPA in urban riparian groundwater.

Glyphosate and AMPA detected at most sites, 1 in 10 samples overall.

Detection frequency varied between sites – from none to found in most samples.

AMPA was correlated with glyphosate, not acesulfame, suggesting a glyphosate source.
Abstract
The herbicide glyphosate and its putative metabolite aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) have been found in urban streams, but limited information is available on their presence in urban riparian groundwater. Information is also lacking regarding the source of AMPA in these urban settings (glyphosate metabolite or wastewater), and whether, if present, glyphosate residues in urban riparian groundwater contribute significantly to urban streams. Glyphosate and AMPA were detected in shallow riparian groundwater at 4 of 5 stream sites in urban catchments in Canada and each were found in approximately 1 in 10 of the samples overall. Frequency of observations of glyphosate and AMPA varied substantially between sites, from no observations in a National Park near the Town of Jasper Alberta, to observations of both glyphosate and AMPA in more than half of the samples along two short reaches of streams in Burlington, Ontario. In these two catchments, AMPA was correlated with glyphosate, rather than the artificial sweetener acesulfame, suggesting that the AMPA is derived mainly from glyphosate degradation rather than from wastewater sources. Land use, localized dosage history, depth below ground and other factors likely control the occurrence of detectable glyphosate residues in groundwater.

Keywords
Glyphosate; AMPA; Urban groundwater; Riparian; Metabolite

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2014.03.001
Get rights and content
Highlights

Roundup® induces Ca2+ influx through L-VDCC and NMDA receptor activation.

The mechanisms underlying Roundup® neurotoxicity involve glutamatergic excitotoxicity.

Kinase pathways participate in Roundup®-induced neural toxicity.

Roundup® alters glutamate uptake, release and metabolism in hippocampal cells.
Abstract
Previous studies demonstrate that glyphosate exposure is associated with oxidative damage and neurotoxicity. Therefore, the mechanism of glyphosate-induced neurotoxic effects needs to be determined. The aim of this study was to investigate whether Roundup® (a glyphosate-based herbicide) leads to neurotoxicity in hippocampus of immature rats following acute (30 min) and chronic (pregnancy and lactation) pesticide exposure. Maternal exposure to pesticide was undertaken by treating dams orally with 1% Roundup® (0.38% glyphosate) during pregnancy and lactation (till 15-day-old). Hippocampal slices from 15 day old rats were acutely exposed to Roundup® (0.00005–0.1%) during 30 min and experiments were carried out to determine whether glyphosate affects 45Ca2+ influx and cell viability. Moreover, we investigated the pesticide effects on oxidative stress parameters, 14C-α-methyl-amino-isobutyric acid (14C-MeAIB) accumulation, as well as glutamate uptake, release and metabolism. Results showed that acute exposure to Roundup® (30 min) increases 45Ca2+ influx by activating NMDA receptors and voltage-dependent Ca2+ channels, leading to oxidative stress and neural cell death. The mechanisms underlying Roundup®-induced neurotoxicity also involve the activation of CaMKII and ERK. Moreover, acute exposure to Roundup® increased 3H-glutamate released into the synaptic cleft, decreased GSH content and increased the lipoperoxidation, characterizing excitotoxicity and oxidative damage. We also observed that both acute and chronic exposure to Roundup® decreased 3H-glutamate uptake and metabolism, while induced 45Ca2+ uptake and 14C-MeAIB accumulation in immature rat hippocampus. Taken together, these results demonstrated that Roundup® might lead to excessive extracellular glutamate levels and consequently to glutamate excitotoxicity and oxidative stress in rat hippocampus.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2013.06.043
Get rights and content
Abstract
Glyphosate is the primary active constituent of the commercial pesticide Roundup. The present results show that acute Roundup exposure at low doses (36 ppm, 0.036 g/L) for 30 min induces oxidative stress and activates multiple stress-response pathways leading to Sertoli cell death in prepubertal rat testis. The pesticide increased intracellular Ca2+ concentration by opening L-type voltage-dependent Ca2+ channels as well as endoplasmic reticulum IP3 and ryanodine receptors, leading to Ca2+ overload within the cells, which set off oxidative stress and necrotic cell death. Similarly, 30 min incubation of testis with glyphosate alone (36 ppm) also increased 45Ca2+ uptake. These events were prevented by the antioxidants Trolox and ascorbic acid. Activated protein kinase C, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, and the mitogen-activated protein kinases such as ERK1/2 and p38MAPK play a role in eliciting Ca2+ influx and cell death. Roundup decreased the levels of reduced glutathione (GSH) and increased the amounts of thiobarbituric acid-reactive species (TBARS) and protein carbonyls. Also, exposure to glyphosate–Roundup stimulated the activity of glutathione peroxidase, glutathione reductase, glutathione S-transferase, γ-glutamyltransferase, catalase, superoxide dismutase, and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase, supporting downregulated GSH levels. Glyphosate has been described as an endocrine disruptor affecting the male reproductive system; however, the molecular basis of its toxicity remains to be clarified. We propose that Roundup toxicity, implicated in Ca2+ overload, cell signaling misregulation, stress response of the endoplasmic reticulum, and/or depleted antioxidant defenses, could contribute to Sertoli cell disruption in spermatogenesis that could have an impact on male fertility

Alex Reynolds http://​www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/​articles/PMC2952409/

Abstract

We summarize the major points of international debate on health risk studies for the main commercialized edible GMOs. These GMOs are soy, maize and oilseed rape designed to contain new pesticide residues since they have been modified to be herbicide-tolerant (mostly to Roundup) or to produce mutated Bt toxins. The debated alimentary chronic risks may come from unpredictable insertional mutagenesis effects, metabolic effects, or from the new pesticide residues. The most detailed regulatory tests on the GMOs are three-month long feeding trials of laboratory rats, which are biochemically assessed. The tests are not compulsory, and are not independently conducted. The test data and the corresponding results are kept in secret by the companies. Our previous analyses of regulatory raw data at these levels, taking the representative examples of three GM maize NK 603, MON 810, and MON 863 led us to conclude that hepatorenal toxicities were possible, and that longer testing was necessary. Our study was criticized by the company developing the GMOs in question and the regulatory bodies, mainly on the divergent biological interpretations of statistically significant biochemical and physiological effects. We present the scientific reasons for the crucially different biological interpretations and also highlight the shortcomings in the experimental protocols designed by the company. The debate implies an enormous responsibility towards public health and is essential due to nonexistent traceability or epidemiological studies in the GMO-producing countries.
Keywords: GMOs, Health risks, Pesticides, Regulatory toxicology, Animal testsDebate on GMOs Health Risks after Statistical Findings in Regulatory Tests
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
We summarize the major points of international debate on health risk studies for…See More

http://​www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/​pubmed/17356802

Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2007 May;52(4):596-602. Epub 2007 Mar 13.
New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity.
Séralini GE, Cellier D, de Vendomois JS.
Source
Committee for Independent Information and Research on Genetic Engineering CRIIGEN, Paris, France. criigen@unicaen.fr
Abstract
Health risk assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) cultivated for food or feed is under debate throughout the world, and very little data have been published on mid- or long-term toxicological studies with mammals. One of these studies performed under the responsibility of Monsanto Company with a transgenic corn MON863 has been subjected to questions from regulatory reviewers in Europe, where it was finally approved in 2005. This necessitated a new assessment of kidney pathological findings, and the results remained controversial. An Appeal Court action in Germany (Münster) allowed public access in June 2005 to all the crude data from this 90-day rat-feeding study. We independently re-analyzed these data. Appropriate statistics were added, such as a multivariate analysis of the growth curves, and for biochemical parameters comparisons between GMO-treated rats and the controls fed with an equivalent normal diet, and separately with six reference diets with different compositions. We observed that after the consumption of MON863, rats showed slight but dose-related significant variations in growth for both sexes, resulting in 3.3% decrease in weight for males and 3.7% increase for females. Chemistry measurements reveal signs of hepatorenal toxicity, marked also by differential sensitivities in males and females. Triglycerides increased by 24-40% in females (either at week 14, dose 11% or at week 5, dose 33%, respectively); urine phosphorus and sodium excretions diminished in males by 31-35% (week 14, dose 33%) for the most important results significantly linked to the treatment in comparison to seven diets tested. Longer experiments are essential in order to indicate the real nature and extent of the possible pathology; with the present data it cannot be concluded that GM corn MON863 is a safe product.

PMID:

17356802

PLOS ONE: an inclusive, peer-reviewed, open-access resource from the PUBLIC LIBRARY OF SCIENCE. Reports of well-performed scientific studies from all disciplines freely available to the whole world.
Like · · Promote · Share
Alex Reynolds shared a link.
April 20
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/17/is-organic-better-ask-a-fruit-fly/
Is Organic Better? Ask a Fruit Fly
well.blogs.nytimes.com
A middle-school experiment using fruit flies and organic foods has won publication in a national scientific journal and spurred a debate about the relative benefits of organic eating.

Groundbreaking Study Links Monsanto’s Glyphosate To Cancer | Collective-Evolution http://t.co/HQa8vL1fxZ Groundbreaking Study Links Monsanto’s Glyphosate To Cancer collective-evolution.com Glyphosate is a major component of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. It was created and manufactured on a mass scale by Monsanto and is one of the most widely used herbicides in the world. A number of scientific studies Groundbreaking Study Links Monsanto’s Glyphosate To Cancer http://www.collective-evolution.com Glyphosate is a major component of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. It was created and manufactured on a mass scale by Monsanto and is one of the most widely used herbicides in the world. A number of scientific studies surrounding glyphosate have shed light on the danger it posses to the human body. A… 3:42pm Alex Henry Monsanto GM maize may face Europe ban after French study links to cancer : http://t.co/3Dt1IirMJJ Monsanto GM maize may face Europe ban after French study links to cancer rfi.my FRANCE – France will ask for a Europe-wide ban on a genetically modified maize developed by US agribusiness Monsanto if the findings of tests made public Wednesday prove to be true. The study found… Monsanto GM maize may face Europe ban after French study links to cancer http://www.english.rfi.fr FRANCE – France will ask for a Europe-wide ban on a genetically modified maize developed by US agribusiness Monsanto if the findings of tests made public Wednesday prove to be true. The study found… 3:42pm Alex Henry Corn Flakes With a Side of Cancer:http://t.co/bjHcMX3PQ3 via @PolicyMic Corn Flakes With a Side of Cancer: Why America Should Pay Attention to France’s GMO Research policymic.com Research in France reveals that GMOs have devastating health effects and can lead to cancer. Prop. 37, California’s GMO labeling bill, is an opportunity Corn Flakes With a Side of Cancer: Why America Should Pay Attention to France’s GMO Research http://www.policymic.com Research in France reveals that GMOs have devastating health effects and can lead to cancer. Prop. 37, California’s GMO labeling bill, is an opportunity that should not be wasted. 3:42pm Alex Henry Peru Passes Monumental Ten-Year Ban on Genetically Modified Foods http://t.co/THMJOg41Rk via @naturalsociety Peru Passes Ten-Year Ban on Genetically Modified Foods naturalsociety.com In an act of defiance against biotech companies like Monsanto, Peru has officially passed a law banning genetically modified ingredients. Peru Passes Ten-Year Ban on Genetically Modified Foods naturalsociety.com In an act of defiance against biotech companies like Monsanto, Peru has officially passed a law banning genetically modified ingredients. 3:43pm Alex Henry GMO Crops Require More Pesticides, Create Resistant Insects http://t.co/dgWT6KOXtA via @naturalsociety GMO Crops Require More Pesticides, Create Resistant Insects naturalsociety.com Genetically modified crops are not only devastating to your health, but they are also wreaking havoc on the environment. GMO Crops Require More Pesticides, Create Resistant Insects naturalsociety.com Genetically modified crops are not only devastating to your health, but they are also wreaking havoc on the environment. 3:43pm Alex Henry France Maintains Key Ban on Monsanto’s GMO Maize Crops http://t.co/i9LknUk4fh via @naturalsociety France Maintains Key Ban on Monsanto’s GMO Maize Crops naturalsociety.com France has upheld a decision to ban Monsanto’s GMO maize crops, the last remaining GMO allowed within Europe. France Maintains Key Ban on Monsanto’s GMO Maize Crops naturalsociety.com France has upheld a decision to ban Monsanto’s GMO maize crops, the last remaining GMO allowed within Europe. 3:43pm Alex Henry Italy to Ban Monsanto GMO Corn with 80% Public Support http://t.co/bgzBNK8QMZ via @naturalsociety Italy to Ban Monsanto GMO Corn with 80% Public Support naturalsociety.com Italy is moving to ban one of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn maize crops, and 80 percent of the public is supporting the ban on GMOs. Italy to Ban Monsanto GMO Corn with 80% Public Support naturalsociety.com Italy is moving to ban one of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn maize crops, and 80 percent of the public is supporting the ban on GMOs. 3:44pm Alex Henry Greenpeace Tells the FDA: Stop Misleading the Public About GMOs http://t.co/gCToLKWuFh via @naturalsociety Greenpeace Tells the FDA: Stop Misleading the Public About GMOs naturalsociety.com Greenpeace is speaking up for the general public, by telling the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that they have no right to claim that GMOs are safe. 3:44pm Alex Henry Groundbreaking New Study Links GMO to Leukemia: When Will Monsanto Stop Lying to Us? http://t.co/SzI94pYFQc via @naturalsociety Groundbreaking New Study Links GMO to Leukemia naturalsociety.com A recent and concerning study shows the potential ‘leukemogenic’ properties of the Bt toxin biopesticides used in almost all GMO foods. GMOs are dangerous. Unlike your article that you posted which was published in a magazine which owns major stocks in Monsanto and by a writer who has always been biased, all of these are scientific studies and it’s why GMOs are now banned throughout Europe and starting to become labeled even here- Connecticut just passed a labelling law and New York is next! Monsanto doesn’t want labeling because they dont want people to know what’s in their food just like they didn’t want anyone to know about the PCBs and Mercury they were putting in the ground water of Anniston, Alabama for over 40 years! And this guy Henry Miller works for the FDA? Please. Both the FDA and USDA have been exposed countless times for letting companies like Monsanto go unregulated because the people who work for them (cough Michael Taylor cough) also work for that company- or used to. How stupid does this man think we are that he thinks he can hoodwink us? There’s a reason these so-called “conventional” GMO products are being outlawed throughout Europe, Asia and South America and we’re finally starting to label them here. Because the company behind them hides its research (and for good reason) and whenever unbiased scientific research is done, it shows exactly how the chemicals GMOs are treated with increase the likelihood of everything from leukemia to autism to birth defects. There is plenty of research even on the government’s own NIH website showing this, the above is just a small inkling of what I was able to find in a few minutes. So when you talk to a real scientist, that isn’t in the pay of the big corporations, a Monsanto lackey, you’ll hear the truth.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/15889/french-gmo-research-finds-monsanto-corn-causes-cancer-america-should-pay-attention_

http://www.english.rfi.fr/americas/20120920-monsanto-gm-maize-may-face-europe-ban-after-french-study-links-cancer

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/06/14/groundbreaking-study-links-monsantos-glyphosate-to-cancer/

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/06/14/groundbreaking-study-links-monsantos-glyphosate-to-cancer/

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx1001749?journalCode=crtoec

http://www.naturalnews.com/032201_pesticides_birth_defects.html

ttp://www.davidicke.com/headlines/47833-gmo-pesticides-linked-to-birth-defects-disruption-of-male-hormones-cancer-

http://www.english.rfi.fr/americas/20120920-monsanto-gm-maize-may-face-europe-ban-after-french-study-links-cancer

http://www.policymic.com/articles/15889/french-gmo-research-finds-monsanto-corn-causes-cancer-america-should-pay-attention_

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx1001749?journalCode=crtoec

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/17/is-organic-better-ask-a-fruit-fly/

lots more studies in the NIH database, wake up people, this is the same thing the tobacco industry did to us in the 60s and Merck did with Vioxx.
\
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-we-trust-monsanto-with-our-food&page=2&posted=1&posted=1&posted=1&posted=1&posted=1&posted=1&posted=1#comments

1. Elio Campitelli
11:12 AM 7/25/13
“If the popular mythology about farmer suicides, tumors and toxicity had an ounce of truth to it, these companies would long since have gone out of business.”

I don’t think this is a good argument. After doing my best at reading the literature, I agree that GMOs are generally safe and glyphosate is less toxic than other herbicides and has clear link with cancer. But I don’t buy that if that were not the case, Monsanto would go bankrupt. There are lot’s of other factors involved in a company’s success other than the quality and safety of their products.

Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
2. OgreMk5
11:37 AM 7/25/13
There’s a fundamental difference between GMOs as a process and a food and Monsanto as a business.

Why can’t people get that?

Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
3. The Ethical Skeptic
11:47 AM 7/25/13
“…scientists have amassed more than three decades of research on GM biosafety, none of which has surfaced credible evidence that modifying plants by molecular techniques is dangerous.”

1. Decades? Amassed? Strong words for little evidence. We have only recently begun to study the impact of GMO foods (GMO maize and soy in particular) on the population. The results are inconclusive at best, to a variety of very negative outcomes.

2. Food is guilty until proven innocent. Rolling the dice to see if it works, as a test inside the general population, is not credible science.

3. Gram Negative and Gram Positive GMO bacteria chemo-signatures DO have impacts on the human body. The are not benign, and the latest studies in the New England Journal of Medicine are flagging this every year.

4. Our ‘genetic modification’ (by selective breeding, being spun as ‘GMO’ here, a standard memorized line of propaganda) of wheat has rendered it as the single most allergenic contribution food on the face of the planet. The problem is not breeding, the problem is lack of understanding of the health impacts of various plant and bacterial defense strategies – on human health.

No, the standard still stands….

a. We need to see the aggregate population science. It is NOT been done.

b. We need an international agreed Open Standard of Science around GMO technology developmet. One which will foster trust and trade, and not “Trust us, we did the science.” We have been damaged by that claim myriad times in the past. The rest of the world is not a babbling gaggle of credulists – they ban our wheat and our GMO foods for specific reasons which they consider SCIENCE……..

I would give them an ear…

c. The ‘science’ done to date needs to be published to the public at large and NOT simply conclusions of ‘probably looks good’ and ‘no evidence we could find’ – this is not a set of sufficient claims for review by the peers.

d. The ‘peers’ in Food Technology ARE the general public. If they are objecting, then listen to them.

e. Script propaganda is not science.

Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
4. yippyoyippyay
12:02 PM 7/25/13
One cannot debate faith-based beliefs. Fear and misunderstanding of GMO foods don’t abate in the face of overwhelming factual evidence, because they are rooted in faith-based thinking. Like climate change and vaccinations, once you treat factual science as opinion debates, the reality-based side loses.

Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
5. davekyte
12:14 PM 7/25/13
We need to ban foods raised by people using tractors and mechanical harvesters! Thing of the poor farmer with just a horse and plow!

Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
6. elorson
12:22 PM 7/25/13
GMO’s and the GMO industry are bad for the environment, bad for the economy, and bad for human consumption. GMO’S are NOT THE SAME AS CROSSBREEDING PLANTS! Monsanto and lemmings like Federoff try and make them out to be the same thing, and they are completely different, COMPLETELY! When she says humans have been genetically modifying crops they are trying to infer that GMOs are the same as crossbreeding – look up both, and you will see what a lie it is.

These articles are marketing materials for Monsanto and the GMO industry.

Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
7. elorson
12:25 PM 7/25/13
She also ignores that these new strains they create are breeding more resistant insects and diseases – it is not a sustainable practice, and I would love to see Nina Fedoroff try and disprove that!

Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
8. rknight101
12:38 PM 7/25/13
The author either has a stunning lack of knowledge about this subject or is intentionally trying to deceive people by putting out this Big Ag propaganda.

A large and growing body of scientific and other authoritative evidence shows that GM crops:

*Are laboratory-made, using technology that is totally different from natural breeding methods, and pose different risks from non-GM crops

*Can be toxic, allergenic or less nutritious than their natural counterparts

*Are not adequately regulated to ensure safety

*Do not increase yield potential

*Do not reduce pesticide use but increase it

*Create serious problems for farmers, including herbicide- tolerant “superweeds”, compromised soil quality, and increased disease susceptibility in crops

*Have mixed economic effects

*Harm soil quality, disrupt ecosystems, and reduce biodiversity

*Do not offer effective solutions to climate change

*Are as energy-hungry as any other chemically-farmed crops

*Cannot solve the problem of world hunger but distract from its real causes – poverty, lack of access to food and, increasingly, lack of access to land to grow it on.

Also, studies have shown that glyphosate-based herbicides (Roundup) are active principles of human cell toxicity.

http://www.nongmoproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/GMO_Myths_and_Truths_1.31.pdf

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300483X12003459

Long term rat study showing liver and kidney toxicity and tumors from GM maize:

http://gmoseralini.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/GES-final-study-19.9.121.pdf

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/08/148227668/insect-experts-issue-urgent-warning-on-using-biotech-seeds

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/12/05/143141300/insects-find-crack-in-biotech-corns-armor

npr insect experts issue urgent warning on using biotech seeds

http://www.fitnessmagazine.com/recipes/healthy-eating/nutrition/gmo-facts/

But less than 20 years later, over a dozen weeds have developed resistance to glyphosate, meaning that farmers have to use more of it, as well as other more hazardous chemicals such as 2,4-D, a powerful herbicide linked to reproductive problems and birth defects, says Chuck Benbrook, PhD, a research professor at Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources. On the basis of 16 years of pesticide data, collected since GMOs were introduced, Benbrook predicts that use of 2,4-D will increase more than fourfold in the next decade, spurred by new GMO crops. “Twenty years from now we will look back and deeply regret the misuse and mismanagement of current-generation GMO technology,” he says.

This is Agent Orange, the same carcinogen that Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, et. al, poisoned Vietnam and our soldiers with. Now they are trying to patent it as their new pesticide- this is the part everyone should be paying attention to

These are also interesting reads- illustrative of what may happen in the future

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/08/148227668/insect-experts-issue-urgent-warning-on-using-biotech-seeds

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/12/05/143141300/insects-find-crack-in-biotech-corns-armor

Note how scientists differed with Monsanto’s assessments and guess who the “regulators” listened to (and you can probably guess why- conflict of interest when they are allowed to be on the regulatory agencies.)

http://fieldquestions.com/2012/02/12/bt-cotton-remarkable-success-and-four-ugly-facts/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/us-gmo-science-idUSKCN0IV24C20141111

But critics of the products say that is not the last word on the issue.

Some international scientists are challenging the assertion and say many scientific studies show concerns with crops whose DNA has been spliced in ways not seen in nature.

On Tuesday, a group with backing from institutions in Russia, the United States and Europe said it would undertake the longest, largest and most definitive study of GMOs to date to try to settle the debate once and for all.

The $25 million study of 6,000 rats to be fed a GMO corn diet is designed as an independent examination of the health impacts of GMO corn and the herbicide used on it. The research is to be done in Russia and western Europe over two to three years. (factorgmo.com/en/)

“The science on these GMOs is not settled by a long shot,” said Bruce Blumberg, an endocrinology expert at the University of California, Irvine, who sits on the study review board. “Studies that were done by the manufacturers are the main ones showing safety, and those have an inherent conflict of interest.”

he program is implemented by farmers to assess non-GMO product performance compared to the dominant GMO products on their farms. “Buying seed is an investment and we understand our seed products must offer additional returns. Last year, based on 120 replications of farmer-generated data, we found non-GMO hybrids out-yielded GMO hybrids by an average of 4.7 bushels per acre,” says Odle. And he adds, “This is why we see our PlotPak™ program as a critical component of our story. The purpose is to empower farmers and re-engage them in the decision making process.”

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/genetic-engineering-match-weed-resistance/

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110628006520/en/non-GMO-Corn-Farmers-Discover-Yield-Profits-Promote

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/why-do-g-m-o-s-need-protection/

The Mutational Consequences of Plant Transformation
Plant transformation is a genetic engineering tool for introducing transgenes into plant genomes. It is now being used for the breeding of commercial crops. A central feature of transformation is insertion of the transgene into plant chromosomal DNA. Transgene insertion is infrequently, if ever, a precise event. Mutations found at transgene insertion sites include deletions and rearrangements of host chromosomal DNA and introduction of superfluous DNA. Insertion sites introduced using Agrobacterium tumefaciens tend to have simpler structures but can be associated with extensive chromosomal rearrangements, while those of particle bombardment appear invariably to be associated with deletion and extensive scrambling of inserted and chromosomal DNA. Ancillary procedures associated with plant transformation, including tissue culture and infection with A. tumefaciens, can also introduce mutations. These genome-wide mutations can number from hundreds to many thousands per diploid genome. Despite the fact that confidence in the safety and dependability of crop species rests significantly on their genetic integrity, the frequency of transformation-induced mutations and their importance as potential biosafety hazards are poorly understood. Genetic Engineering | EcoNexus

Anyway tonight I had a series of lucid dreams-within-dreams that reminded me of this thread.
At the start of my dream, I was sitting in a room, about to start a project of putting a computer together. The motherboard, cpu, case, cords, hard drives, etc- lay all across the room (some in closets) and I was getting ready to start when my phone rang and woke me up from my dream. I was so annoyed (I hate leaving anything undone- even in my dreams!) so I didn’t answer the phone and made myself fall back asleep and re-enter the dream. But more than that, I consciously searched throughout the room to find the various scattered computer parts to put together. It felt more than a dream- it felt like a computer simulation (or hologram), and it was so detailed- I could “see” every capacitor on the motherboard, read every label, and even weirder- I wasn’t even fully asleep, I consciously felt an itch on my cheek (dry skin) and I was scratching it will still immersed in my dream, still hearing sounds outside while I was moving around in my dream, putting everything together. I physically felt my eyes darting rapidly back and forth during my intense dreaming (REM?) and when I finally woke up (for the last time), I had a headache and my eyes were hurting- as if I had been concentrating really hard on something.
A few months ago, I had a similar extremely intense dream where I was in the library researching something (it had to do with companies covering up dumping toxins in the environment), and in my dream I ran across a large book with 20 chapters, each chapter written by a different author, detailing chemical masking agents used to cover up the detection of toxins. Every piece of information was extremely specific- right down to the names of the authors! The book was handed to me by my Dad, who passed away 7 months ago. I sat down and read it all and when I woke up from the dream I had a big headache, as if I had just sat down and actually read that book. The reason I say this is after I consume a large volume of information, I have this feeling that my brain is teeming with activity, as if it had just been loaded with a lot of information. And that’s exactly how I felt when I woke up.
As far as precognition is concerned, just before my Dad got sick I had a dream that he was sleeping in a hospital room and the room number was 232. Well, a few days later, my dad suddenly came down with pneumonia and he was admitted to the hospital and after he had stabilized, he was put in a hospital room and it was, you guessed it- Room 232.
Some of my other precognitive dreams involve being in a dream and the dream being interrupted by a family member coming home, only for me to realize that too, was a dream, so I basically had a dream inside a dream. And then a little later, that family member actually shows up. It could be this kind of dreaming is genetic, as my sister has had dreams warning her not to go to a certain restaurant, and then a few days later we read that they had an e. coli infestation there.
After my Dad passed away I’ve been having some really interesting dreams-within-dreams, where I black out in the middle of a conventional dream and he comes in to give me a message and then leaves and then I come out of the black out and back into my regular dream and those around me in my dream ask me what my Dad’s message was. They were members of my Mom’s side of the family and my Dad had some issues with them so I dont tell them, even though they are really persistent. And a few hours later, I will get a phone call (after I wake up) and it’s them calling, asking all sorts of weird questions about him.

I’ve started keeping a dream journal, as my dreams have gotten more and more intense over the last few months to the point where- I feel like I am dreaming without even being fully asleep! I’ve been able to lucid dream as far back as I can remember but what’s going on is even more “prolific” than what I am used to. I love writing and being extremely creative, but what I am experiencing in my dreams goes far beyond what I can consciously do, so I’m hoping keeping this journal will give me some answers.

A pattern I have noticed is that my nights of prolific dreaming (3-5 or more dreams a night) usually happens either on a Friday or Saturday night after a long week of work, and usually very late at night, towards morning. They will usually happen one right after the other with brief moments of waking in between. The other nights during the week are fairly bland and normal. Some of the dreams will leave me even more tired than before I fell asleep, with my eyes hurting and headaches, as if I had dome something that required a lot of concentration, but sometimes I’ll have more relaxing dreams that I wake up refreshed from. I do know that I really dislike waking up in the middle of a dream, so I always consciously try to fall back asleep and re-enter the dream, and usually succeed. A recent example was getting a group of friends together to go to a “haunted house” and as soon as we were all together and reached the door to the house and were about to open it- I woke up! Waking up annoyed me to no end and even though it was now morning, I made myself fall asleep and re-enter the dream, although it still remained unresolved.

I was particularly intrigued by the “black out” dream as it really did feel like I completely lost consciousness during my dream and saw my father and then was revived back into my original dream- almost like a computer subprogram nested inside a larger computer program. It also seemed like (in a way), he temporarily “jammed” the dreaming frequency in my brain (much like a hacker can hack into a TV station and use their signal.)

A newly published study in Harvard’s The Lancet weighs in on the toxins causing autism and ADHD (attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder). Researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (ISMMS) say that along with these numerous environmental toxins, fluoridated water is adding to the higher incident of both cognitive and behavioral disorders.
Harvard had already published a study in 2006 that pointed to fluoride as a ‘developmental neurotoxicant’, and this newer study looks to over 27 additional investigations into the matter via meta nalysis. In the previous study, it was already established that fluoride consumption lowered children’s IQ scores. The left-over from industry, passed off as ‘medicine,’ obstructs brain development, and can cause a full spectrum of serious health issues – from autism to dyslexia, ADHD, ADD, and more.
The study calls the effects from this chemical a ‘silent epidemic’ that mainstream media and many scientific papers have ignored.
Two of the main researchers involved in the study, Philippe Grandjean from HSPH and Philip Landrigan from ISMMS, say that incidences of chemical-related neurodevelopmental disorders have doubled over the past seven years from six to 12.
The study admits that there are numerous chemicals to blame – many of which are untested or ceremoniously approved by the FDA, USDA, and CDC without truly knowing their long term ramifications on human health – but that fluoride is a definite culprit.
“[S]ince 2006, the number of chemicals known to damage the human brain more generally, but that are not regulated to protect children’s health, had increased from 202 to 214,” writes Julia Medew for The Sydney Morning Herald. “The pair said this could be the tip of the iceberg because the vast majority of the more than 80,000 industrial chemicals widely used in the United States have never been tested for their toxic effects on the developing fetus or child.”
The fact is that fluoride, pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, radioactive isotopes, GMO foods, and weather warfare chemicals are creating a neurological-toxic mix that is unprecedented in human history.
Fluoride, like other toxins, accumulates in the blood stream and even makes it past the blood-brain barrier. Eventually, as the body tries to protect itself from these unwanted substances, the substances make it into the bones and the organs, causing cancer, cognitive abnormalities, and even birth defects in unborn children. Fluoride is known to pass into the placenta in pregnant women, yet regulatory agencies ignore its toxic legacy.
The chemicals lurking in our food supply, water supply, and in our air and soil are causing the neurological decline of both young and old.
This article first appeared on the Natural Society website.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/130501_superbugs
Antibiotic resistant bacteria at the meat counter
May 2013
The pork chops you buy in the supermarket neatly packaged in plastic and styrofoam may look completely sterile, but are, in fact, likely to be contaminated with disease-causing bacteria — and not with just any old bugs, but with hard-to-treat, antibiotic resistant strains. In a recently published study, researchers with the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System bought meat from a wide sampling of chain grocery stores across the country and analyzed the bacteria on the meat. Resistant microbes were found in 81% of ground turkey samples, 69% of pork chops, 55% of ground beef samples, and 39% of chicken parts. Of course, thoroughly cooking the meat will kill the germs, but if the meat is undercooked or contaminates other food with its bacteria — perhaps via a shared cutting board — the result could be an infection that can’t be cured with common medications. Such infections are a serious health concern — a strain of antibiotic resistant staph was recently estimated to cause nearly 20,000 deaths per year in the U.S. — and the problem seems to be getting worse. An evolutionary perspective helps us understand how antibiotic resistance arises in the first place and why the prevalence of resistant bugs in livestock has health professionals and scientists worried.
Where’s the evolution?
It should be no surprise that antibiotic resistant bacteria are the products of evolution via natural selection: as bacteria reproduce, small, random errors (i.e., mutations) occur as their DNA is copied. Just by chance, some of those mutations may help their bearers survive and reproduce better and so will increase in frequency in the bacterial population. Other mutations may be detrimental and will be weeded out of the population. Still others may have no impact at all to the bacterium’s fitness (i.e., neutral mutations) and will change in frequency through genetic drift. When antibiotics flood the environment of the bacteria, individuals that happen to carry random mutations that allow them to survive and reproduce despite the drug will be favored. Eventually, the entire lineage of bacteria may carry genes that confer antibiotic resistance.
This process seems to be inevitable. If a bacterial lineage is consistently exposed to a particular antibiotic, it will eventually evolve resistance to that drug, and this will occur in the soil, in livestock, in the human body — wherever bacteria are exposed to antibiotics. This same basic process is responsible for the evolution of advantageous traits in familiar organisms, like a hawk’s keen eyesight or a polar bear’s insulating fur. However, bacteria have a leg up on birds and bears when it comes to evolution. Most species rely on mutations somewhere in their historical lineage for their genetic variation — that is, an improved ability to spot prey will evolve in a lineage of hawks only if mutations conferring keener sight occurred somewhere in the hawk lineage and were then passed down to the generation of hawks experiencing natural selection. Bacteria, on the other hand, get their genetic variation both from their ancestral lineage and through a process known as horizontal transfer.
In horizontal transfer, organisms share genetic material with one another directly, as opposed to passing genetic material only to their offspring. In this way, genes from distantly related lineages of bacteria can wind up in the same individual. A gene version that first arose in Escherichia coli could easily be passed on to Salmonella.
Horizontal transfer represents a special danger when it comes to the evolution of resistance because, through gene sharing, antibiotic resistance genes that evolve and become common in one lineage of bacteria that is exposed to a particular antibiotic can be passed to distantly related bacterial lineages. In other words, a bacterial lineage can evolve resistance to a particular antibiotic even if its ancestors never carried a mutation that conferred resistance to that drug. With all this genetic variation being shared, antibiotic resistant bacterial strains can evolve quickly. Furthermore, different antibiotics often have similar modes of action (e.g., amoxicillin and methicillin both work by preventing bacteria from forming cell walls), so resistance to one drug often means partial resistance to a host of other medications. To make matters even worse, bacteria often transfer multiple genes for resistance to different antibiotics on the same piece of DNA. Since the genes are physically attached to one another, selecting for one of those resistance genes lets the others hitchhike to high frequency. So exposing a bacterial population to say, streptomycin, may also unintentionally favor the evolution of a strain that resists many other antibiotics as well — making for a particularly hard-to-cure infection.
Bacteria have many characteristics that allow them to evolve resistance to whatever antibiotics we throw their way — short generation times, high mutation rates, and horizontal transfer — and current agricultural practices (in particular, the heavy use of antibiotics in livestock) seem destined to speed this process even further. In the U.S., around 80% of antibiotics are destined for farm animals, not for treating human disease. The majority of those animal antibiotics are used preventatively and to promote faster growth and speed meat production, not to treat sick individuals. Unfortunately, this approach also encourages the evolution and proliferation of antibiotic resistant strains on factory farms. So, it should come as no surprise that a large percentage of supermarket meat carries antibiotic resistant bugs!
Clearly, the ubiquity of antibiotic resistant bacteria in livestock has implications far beyond highlighting the need to cook meat thoroughly. It suggests that, lurking in farm animals, is a vast pool of dangerous resistance genes that could easily make their way out of the bacteria in which they currently reside and into strains that would represent an even more significant human health threat. We have many lines of evidence suggesting that horizontal transfer of genes, including resistance genes, is commonplace among bacteria. What we have not had is a major outbreak of an antibiotic resistant infection that has been definitively linked to resistance from bacteria inhabiting livestock — yet. If the American Medical Association, the World Health Organization, and the National Academy of Sciences have their way, we may be able to avoid that fate, at least for certain antibiotics. These groups have all signed on to support new legislation that would prevent widespread use of certain antibiotics on livestock, helping to protect the effectiveness of these drugs in humans.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/15/health/the-selling-of-attention-deficit-disorder.html?src=me&ref=general
After more than 50 years leading the fight to legitimize attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, Keith Conners could be celebrating.
Severely hyperactive and impulsive children, once shunned as bad seeds, are now recognized as having a real neurological problem. Doctors and parents have largely accepted drugs like Adderall and Concerta to temper the traits of classic A.D.H.D., helping youngsters succeed in school and beyond.
But Dr. Conners did not feel triumphant this fall as he addressed a group of fellow A.D.H.D. specialists in Washington. He noted that recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that the diagnosis had been made in 15 percent of high school-age children, and that the number of children on medication for the disorder had soared to 3.5 million from 600,000 in 1990. He questioned the rising rates of diagnosis and called them “a national disaster of dangerous proportions.”
“The numbers make it look like an epidemic. Well, it’s not. It’s preposterous,” Dr. Conners, a psychologist and professor emeritus at Duke University, said in a subsequent interview. “This is a concoction to justify the giving out of medication at unprecedented and unjustifiable levels.”
billion
Sales of prescription stimulants have more than quintupled since 2002.
’07
’02
’12
$8
6
4
2
Source: IMS Health
Stimulant Sales
The rise of A.D.H.D. diagnoses and prescriptions for stimulants over the years coincided with a remarkably successful two-decade campaign by pharmaceutical companies to publicize the syndrome and promote the pills to doctors, educators and parents. With the children’s market booming, the industry is now employing similar marketing techniques as it focuses on adult A.D.H.D., which could become even more profitable.
Few dispute that classic A.D.H.D., historically estimated to affect 5 percent of children, is a legitimate disability that impedes success at school, work and personal life. Medication often assuages the severe impulsiveness and inability to concentrate, allowing a person’s underlying drive and intelligence to emerge.
But even some of the field’s longtime advocates say the zeal to find and treat every A.D.H.D. child has led to too many people with scant symptoms receiving the diagnosis and medication. The disorder is now the second most frequent long-term diagnosis made in children, narrowly trailing asthma, according to a New York Times analysis of C.D.C. data.
Behind that growth has been drug company marketing that has stretched the image of classic A.D.H.D. to include relatively normal behavior like carelessness and impatience, and has often overstated the pills’ benefits. Advertising on television and in popular magazines like People and Good Housekeeping has cast common childhood forgetfulness and poor grades as grounds for medication that, among other benefits, can result in “schoolwork that matches his intelligence” and ease family tension.
A 2002 ad for Adderall showed a mother playing with her son and saying, “Thanks for taking out the garbage.”
The Food and Drug Administration has cited every major A.D.H.D. drug — stimulants like Adderall, Concerta, Focalin and Vyvanse, and nonstimulants like Intuniv and Strattera — for false and misleading advertising since 2000, some multiple times.
Sources of information that would seem neutral also delivered messages from the pharmaceutical industry. Doctors paid by drug companies have published research and delivered presentations that encourage physicians to make diagnoses more often that discredit growing concerns about overdiagnosis.
Many doctors have portrayed the medications as benign — “safer than aspirin,” some say — even though they can have significant side effects and are regulated in the same class as morphine and oxycodone because of their potential for abuse and addiction. Patient advocacy groups tried to get the government to loosen regulation of stimulants while having sizable portions of their operating budgets covered by pharmaceutical interests.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/17/business/glaxo-says-it-will-stop-paying-doctors-to-promote-drugs.html?pagewanted=2&ref=general&src=me
Obesity is only the answer in SOME cases, if you read the case studies obviously you are going to jump to obesity as the main cause because that is in the vested interests of your industry and your lobbying groups and I am going to come at this from the medical profession’s viewpoint which is that there are a large percentage of extremely young children (starting at age 5) developing early puberty who are no where close to being obese:
Obviously a long term study is needed
http://thegrio.com/2013/02/12/hormones-in-food-may-lead-to-early-puberty/2/
Tropez-Sims oversaw Meharry’s participation in a national study, published by Pediatrics last November, of more than 4,000 boys, showing that they too are entering puberty earlier. As a physician and researcher, she agrees with most scientists that more study is needed on why increasingly younger children are growing breasts, pubic hair and so forth, and whether hormone-infused foods play a role.
Absent any rock-solid answers on that front, researchers have explored other causes. Some studies, including one in the February 2008 issue of Pediatrics, have suggested that obesity is a driver of early onset puberty. But that doesn’t explain what transpired with Kayla, who was a reed-thin second-grader. Now 15 and a liturgical dancer at her family’s church, she stands at 5’ 6” and weighs a lean 120 pounds.
“In the 19th Century, the age of menarche was 15,” Tropez-Sims said. “Today, we may be looking at environmental chemicals, steroids and so on that are causing puberty to begin in progressively younger kids. And it seems reasonable to ask this question: If they’re feeding pigs and cows and chickens growth hormones and other chemicals to make them plumper, bigger, is that also making our kids plumper, making them mature faster? … There’s not been enough science to fully link hormones in the meat, but some of us are extrapolating that that’s just what may be happening.”
Tracking children who eat no hormone-laden foods against those whose diets are full of them would provide the most conclusive proof of what’s going on, she said. But such a study has never been conducted. And doing one raises ethical concerns, given what some consider the potential risks faced by children in the latter group, Tropez-Sims added.
from an MD website (which proves my point about multiple causes)
http://avivaromm.com/preventing-early-puberty-and-hormone-problems-in-our-daughters-heres-the-why-and-how
The 3 biggest contributors to early puberty are:
1. Obesity: About 20% or more of US kids are now obese. This rate has tripled in the past 30 years, and this trend corresponds to earlier puberty.
2. Exposure to environmental toxins that act as estrogen in the body: Many substances used in flame retardant fabrics, cosmetics, plastics, pesticides, detergents and other common household and industrial products can mimic the effect of estrogen in our bodies. The CDC has linked a solvent used in some mothballs and solid blocks of toilet bowl deodorizers and air fresheners to earlier menstruation – they also found it in the bodies of nearly all the people tested in the U.S.! It doesn’t take much exposure to cause health effects, which may include increased risk of early puberty, diabetes, and cancer. These environmental chemicals accumulate over time and because they accumulate and are stored in fat cells, may be even more of a problem for overweight girls.
3. Stress: Stress can wreak havoc on the endocrine system. And most of us suffer from stress starting at any earlier age than ever. Inadequate sleep, school pressures, stress at home, peer pressure and bullying are just a few of the major stressors to which our girls are regularly exposed. Stress can also make us fatter; more fat means more estrogen and this can lead to earlier puberty.
While government, food companies, and industry also need to tackle these issues on a global scale, the factors leading to early puberty and endocrine disruption in our daughters can be prevented or mitigated through the diet and lifestyle choices we make and teach them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-pirello/is-the-early-onset-of-pub_b_677424.html
Dr. Stanley Korneman, an endocrinologist at the University of California, Los Angeles says that environmental exposure to estrogens in plastics, chemicals and foods has been going up and that estrogens stimulate breast development. And he says that could be the link to early onset of puberty. Makes sense.
What is really going on here? I can just imagine that the smoky back rooms in Washington where meat, dairy and poultry lobbyists make their dirty little deals and hide the real facts about what is in our food are in hyper-drive. The information in this study, if people connect the dots, could blow up in their faces, and who could afford that? Not the politicians on both sides of the aisle and certainly not their clients, those pirates who peddle hormone, antibiotic and steroid-laced food to our children. And we wonder why little girls look like very big girls far before their time.
The solution to this problem is easy and obvious. Our children are being destroyed in the name of profit by big industry and factory farms who feed their animals steroids, growth hormones and antibiotics to make them fatter, faster. More and more yield of meat from an animal means more and more profit, and if we need to sacrifice a generation of children along the way, so be it. And these are not just the rantings of some liberal, tree-hugging vegan. According to Cornell University, hormones “reduce the waiting time and the amount of feed eaten by an animal before slaughter in meat industries.” And that means bigger profit… faster.
While the childhood obesity problem is linked to the overconsumption of processed food, drive-through, dinner in a bucket and the sheer volume of sugar and other junk our kids are eating, we must also look at the role growth hormones play in the size of our kids and the age they reach puberty.
Wake up, people. If hormones can make an animal fat, what do you think will happen to us? We have always had access to junk food, but never in human history have we been the subjects of such an intense ingestion of chemicals and hormones. Dr. Andrew Weil states that more than two-thirds of the cattle raised in the U.S. are given hormones, usually testosterone and estrogen to boost growth. According to Cornell, there are actually six hormones commonly used in meat and dairy production: estradiol and progesterone (natural female sex hormones); testosterone (natural male sex hormone); zeranol, trenbolone acetate and melengesterol (synthetic growth promoters that make animals grow faster). Not used on poultry or pigs, (but only because they don’t promote meaningful growth in these animals), the FDA also allows the use of rbGH, another growth hormone, to promote more milk production in dairy cows.
And here’s where it gets really creepy. There is no monitoring of the female and male hormones, according to Cornell, because they are naturally produced by the animals so in theory, they can’t really tell what hormones were produced and which were administered, so why have limits? But they set tolerance levels for the synthetic hormones. I feel safer; how about you?
And finally, according to Cornell, the declining age in puberty’s link to hormones in meat and dairy has been of concern to experts for some time now because of the possible links to breast cancer.
What is it going to take for us to demand accountability from the people who produce our food and those government agencies that supposedly protect the health of the public? When will we pull our heads out of the sand and see the reality we face?
Cheap, commercially produced meat may be affordable, but the cost is far too high. Now hang on. I am not going all vegan on you. But this study is a reality check for us, to be sure. Early onset of puberty is no joke. Our girls are at greater risk of breast cancer, obesity and other life-threatening conditions. And while the environment and plastics may contribute to this problem, as may the overall abundance of food, the reality is that the growth hormones, steroids and antibiotics in our meat and dairy are the major players in this tragedy.
Dr. Biro suggests that families eat more produce (ya’ think?) and more family meals together as a way to begin to solve this very real crisis, along with regular physical activity. There is also the option of choosing certified, grass-fed organic meat and dairy as a way to avoid the ingestion of hormones, which also supports a sustainable way to produce healthy animal products for us to consume. And you get to support small family ranches that, along with family farms, are the backbone of this country’s food supply.
Good ideas all, but we also have to look at other options and invest in the health of our children before we lose an entire generation because we just want cheap, fast food. There are alternatives to meat and dairy that can nourish our families and children healthfully and affordably … and leave a lighter footprint on the planet in the process. A well-balanced, plant-based diet can provide all the nutrients our children need to thrive and to live in healthy, normal bodies. Yes, it’s more work and maybe even a bit more money, but these are our children — our future.
This kind of blog gets people’s noses out of joint. From cattle farmers to burger lovers who say they prefer a juicy steak to tofu, all the rationalizations come out. Ranchers need to make money to survive. People want what they want … and they want meat! But in the end, the truth cannot be denied.
We live in a culture of profit-seeking leeches that are only too happy to sell us compromised foods and line their pockets with the profits gained from pillaging our health. When are we going to stop them? All we need to do is say no. Vote with your dollar; demand better quality. Remember that they want your money. They do not care about the health of our young girls. It’s up to us. A collective voice demanding accountability and better food is the only way to reverse the trends that threaten to swallow and entire generation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/16/60-minutes-nsa_n_4452568.html
The pediatrician’s first reaction to then second-grader Kayla Haye’s budding breasts—a sign of the child’s premature puberty—was to consider placing her on therapeutic hormones.
“A 7-year-old on hormone medication? Well that’s not gonna happen,” said Adriane McDonald-Haye, Kayla’s mom, recalling her response to that suggestion eight years ago. “Just the idea of putting my child on hormones triggered all kinds of concerns.”
So the Brooklyn, N.Y. mother took a different course of action, scouring the web and probing other parents on the topic. Ultimately, she was persuaded by claims—including from some physicians—that consumption of hormone-laden meat and poultry was linked to early-onset puberty, which is on the rise in general and more prevalent among black children.
“I changed Kayla’s diet to one that is as organic as possible,” McDonald-Haye said. “I actually have a pack of organic chicken wings in my fridge right now. We cheat every so often, eating fast food. But, overall, I try to stay as natural as possible.”
McDonald-Haye is aware of the continuing debate over the effects of hormone-infused meat and dairy products on growing bodies. Nevertheless, she credits her better-safe-than-sorry dietary overhaul with delaying Kayla’s first period, which she got when she was 10. That’s roughly 2.5 years ahead of the national average.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/126/3/e583.full?sid=7f548e01-c073-4ec0-b7a9-a498344ddfaf
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7924542&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S1368980010001461
http://thegrio.com/2013/02/12/hormones-in-food-may-lead-to-early-puberty/2/
The case study of the girl who was underweight mentioned on grio.com (read the full story on the link, it covers multiple pages), not only proved that the cause of her early onset of puberty at the tender age of 7 wasn’t weight related, but her mother refused hormone regulation drugs and instead changed her little girl’s diet and her daughter’s breast growth ceased.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_(film)
Scientific accuracy[edit]
Theoretical physicist Kip Thorne was a scientific consultant for the film, to ensure the depictions of wormholes and relativity were as accurate as possible. “For the depictions of the wormholes and the black hole,” he said, “we discussed how to go about it, and then I worked out the equations that would enable tracing of light rays as they traveled through a wormhole or around a black hole—so what you see is based on Einstein’s general relativity equations.”[50]
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/172130-wormholes-are-just-quantum-entangled-black-holes-says-new-research
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_starship
Two separate research groups, one of which is from MIT, have presented evidence that wormholes — tunnels that may allow us to travel through time and space — are “powered” by quantum entanglement. Furthermore, one of the research groups also postulates the reverse — that quantum entangled particles are connected by miniature wormholes.
A wormhole, or Einstein-Rosen bridge to give its formal name, is a hypothetical feature of spacetime that exists in four dimensions, and somehow connects to another wormhole that’s located elsewhere in both space and time. The theory, essentially, is that a wormhole is a tunnel that isn’t restricted by the normal limitations of 3D Cartesian space and the speed of light, allowing you to travel from one point in space and time, to another point in space and time — theoretically allowing you to traverse huge portions of the universe, and travel in time.
Wormholes, though, have never been observed — and while we’ve done a lot of theorizing about how a wormhole might work, and how they fit into general relativity, we’re still talking in purely theoretical terms. We don’t even know if wormholes would be traversable. Those caveats aside, though, a ton of new research suggests that each end of the wormhole is connected through spacetime with quantum entanglement.
Both quantum entanglement and wormholes share a very important property: They appear to be linked through some kind of dimension or medium that we can’t yet discern. With quantum entanglement, two particles can be separated by an infinite amount of space, and yet they still seem to be able to communicate their quantum state instantly, much faster than the speed of light. Wormholes, if they exist, would bend the fabric of spacetime to allow faster-than-light travel between two arbitrary points — just like entangled particles.
Teleporting quantum entangled particles, via lasers
The researchers stipulate that wormholes are actually entangled black holes. This entanglement might be caused by two black holes being created simultaneously, or perhaps radiation emitted by one black hole could be captured by another black hole, creating some kind of entanglement. To be honest, because we’re dealing with an area of science that we know very little about, we can only guess at the process that would result in entangled black holes. Furthermore, though, related research also postulates that it’s actually wormholes that link entangled particles together — it is thanks to wormholes in space and time that quantum entanglement can create “spooky action at a distance.” Two of the researchers, Kristan Jensen and Andreas Karch, suggest that entanglement and wormholes are actually one and the same — just entanglement works in the fourth dimension, while wormholes need a model of the universe that has five dimensions.
For now, we’ll just have to keep doing more research into quantum entanglement here on Earth — and ideally, we need to probe some black holes as well. It might be a long time until we actually have a chance of traversing an entangled black hole (wormhole) — the nearest black hole is 1,600 light-years away — but if we build extremely powerful telescopes, we might be able to observe “wormholing” from a distance.
Now read: Chinese physicists achieve quantum teleportation over 60 miles
Research papers: DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.211603 – “Holographic Schwinger Effect and the Geometry of Entanglement” & DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.211602 – “Holographic Dual of an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Pair has a Wormhole”
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/129246-chinese-physicists-achieve-quantum-teleportation-over-60-miles

I dont like the Big Bang, but I like the idea of a Big Bounce and a recurring universe. While the speed of light might be absolute to our perception, there’s a pretty fair chance it’s not an “absolute absolute” meaning that something can be going faster than the speed of light through a “fold” in space-time (another universe) but if someone lived in that universe, they wouldn’t be able to perceive that because they were a part of that universe. The same thing applies to us. In addition, having a fold in space-time allows something to go slower than the speed of light and yet get from Point A to Point B in less time than light can get there (because it takes a shortcut.) Something like a spinning black hole or a cosmic string could cause this to happen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_singularity
An observer crossing the event horizon of a non-rotating (Schwarzschild) black hole cannot avoid the central singularity, which lies in the future world line of everything within the horizon. Thus one cannot avoid spaghettification by the tidal forces of the central singularity.
This is not necessarily true with a Kerr black hole. An observer falling into a Kerr black hole may be able to avoid the central singularity by making clever use of the inner event horizon associated with this class of black hole. This makes it possible for the Kerr black hole to act as a sort of wormhole, possibly even a traversable wormhole.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerr_metric#Kerr_black_holes_as_wormholes
Although the Kerr solution appears to be singular at the roots of Δ = 0, these are actually coordinate singularities, and, with an appropriate choice of new coordinates, the Kerr solution can be smoothly extended through the values of corresponding to these roots. The larger of these roots determines the location of the event horizon, and the smaller determines the location of a Cauchy horizon. A (future-directed, time-like) curve can start in the exterior and pass through the event horizon. Once having passed through the event horizon, the coordinate now behaves like a time coordinate, so it must decrease until the curve passes through the Cauchy horizon.
The region beyond the Cauchy horizon has several surprising features. The coordinate again behaves like a spatial coordinate and can vary freely. The interior region has a reflection symmetry, so that a (future-directed time-like) curve may continue along a symmetric path, which continues through a second Cauchy horizon, through a second event horizon, and out into a new exterior region which is isometric to the original exterior region of the Kerr solution. The curve could then escape to infinity in the new region or enter the future event horizon of the new exterior region and repeat the process. This second exterior is sometimes thought of as another universe. On the other hand, in the Kerr solution, the singularity is a ring, and the curve may pass through the center of this ring. The region beyond permits closed time-like curves. Since the trajectory of observers and particles in general relativity are described by time-like curves, it is possible for observers in this region to return to their past.
While it is expected that the exterior region of the Kerr solution is stable, and that all rotating black holes will eventually approach a Kerr metric, the interior region of the solution appears to be unstable, much like a pencil balanced on its point.[6] This is related to the idea of cosmic censorship.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_string
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-hole_cosmology
A black-hole cosmology (also called Schwarzschild cosmology or black-hole cosmological model) is a cosmological model in which the observable universe is the interior of a black hole. Such models were originally proposed by theoretical physicist Raj Pathria,[1] and concurrently by mathematician I. J. Good.[2]
Any such model requires that the Hubble radius of the observable universe is equal to its Schwarzschild radius, that is, the product of its mass and the Schwarzschild proportionality constant. This is indeed known to be nearly the case; however, most cosmologists consider this close match a coincidence.[3]
In the version as originally proposed by Pathria and Good, and studied more recently by, among others, Nikodem Popławski, [4] the observable universe is the interior of a black hole existing as one of possibly many inside a larger universe, or multiverse.
According to general relativity, the gravitational collapse of a sufficiently compact mass forms a singular Schwarzschild black hole. In the Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble theory of gravity, however, it forms a regular Einstein-Rosen bridge, or wormhole. Schwarzschild wormholes and Schwarzschild black holes are different, mathematical solutions of general relativity and the Einstein–Cartan theory. Yet for distant observers, the exteriors of both solutions with the same mass are indistinguishable. The Einstein–Cartan theory extends general relativity by removing a constraint of the symmetry of the affine connection and regarding its antisymmetric part, the torsion tensor, as a dynamical variable. Torsion naturally accounts for the quantum-mechanical, intrinsic angular momentum (spin) of matter. The minimal coupling between torsion and Dirac spinors generates a repulsive spin-spin interaction which is significant in fermionic matter at extremely high densities. Such an interaction prevents the formation of a gravitational singularity. Instead, the collapsing matter reaches an enormous but finite density and rebounds, forming the other side of an Einstein-Rosen bridge, which grows as a new universe.[5] Accordingly, the Big Bang was a nonsingular Big Bounce at which the universe had a finite, minimum scale factor.[6]
also, you might find cyclic cosmology interesting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bounce#Recent_developments_in_the_theory
Recent developments in the theory[edit]
Martin Bojowald, an assistant professor of physics at Pennsylvania State University, published a study in July 2007 detailing work somewhat related to loop quantum gravity that claimed to mathematically solve the time before the Big Bang, which would give new weight to the oscillatory universe and Big Bounce theories.[4]
One of the main problems with the Big Bang theory is that at the moment of the Big Bang, there is a singularity of zero volume and infinite energy. This is normally interpreted as the end of the physics as we know it; in this case, of the theory of general relativity. This is why one expects quantum effects to become important and avoid the singularity.
However, research in loop quantum cosmology purported to show that a previously existing universe collapsed, not to the point of singularity, but to a point before that where the quantum effects of gravity become so strongly repulsive that the universe rebounds back out, forming a new branch. Throughout this collapse and bounce, the evolution is unitary.
Bojowald also claims that some properties of the universe that collapsed to form ours can also be determined. Some properties of the prior universe are not determinable however due to some kind of uncertainty principle.
This work is still in its early stages and very speculative. Some extensions by further scientists have been published in Physical Review Letters.[5]
In 2003, Peter Lynds has put forward a new cosmology model in which time is cyclic. In his theory our Universe will eventually stop expanding and then contract. Before becoming a singularity, as one would expect from Hawking’s black hole theory, the Universe would bounce. Lynds claims that a singularity would violate the second law of thermodynamics and this stops the Universe from being bounded by singularities. The Big Crunch would be avoided with a new Big Bang. Lynds suggests the exact history of the Universe would be repeated in each cycle in an eternal recurrence. Some critics argue that while the Universe may be cyclic, the histories would all be variants.[citation needed] Lynds’ theory has been dismissed by mainstream physicists for the lack of a mathematical model behind its philosophical considerations.[6]
In 2011, Nikodem Popławski showed that a nonsingular Big Bounce appears naturally in the Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble theory of gravity.[7] This theory extends general relativity by removing a constraint of the symmetry of the affine connection and regarding its antisymmetric part, the torsion tensor, as a dynamical variable. The minimal coupling between torsion and Dirac spinors generates a spin-spin interaction which is significant in fermionic matter at extremely high densities. Such an interaction averts the unphysical Big Bang singularity, replacing it with a cusp-like bounce at a finite minimum scale factor, before which the Universe was contracting. This scenario also explains why the present Universe at largest scales appears spatially flat, homogeneous and isotropic, providing a physical alternative to cosmic inflation.
In 2012, a new theory of nonsingular big bounce was successfully constructed within the frame of standard Einstein gravity.[8] This theory combines the benefits of matter bounce and Ekpyrotic cosmology. Particularly, the famous BKL instability, that the homogeneous and isotropic background cosmological solution is unstable to the growth of anisotropic stress, is resolved in this theory. Moreover, curvature perturbations seeded in matter contraction are able to form a nearly scale-invariant primordial power spectrum and thus provides a consistent mechanism to explain the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB) observations alternative to inflation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikodem_Popławski
Popławski theorizes that torsion manifests itself as a repulsive force which causes fermions to be spatially extended and prevents the formation of a gravitational singularity within the black hole’s event horizon.[12] Because of torsion, the collapsing matter on the other side of the horizon reaches an enormous but finite density, explodes and rebounds, forming an Einstein-Rosen bridge (wormhole) to a new, closed, expanding universe.[13][14] Analogously, the Big Bang is replaced by the Big Bounce before which the Universe was the interior of a black hole.[15] This scenario also explains why the present Universe at largest scales appears spatially flat, homogeneous and isotropic, providing a physical alternative to cosmic inflation, and may explain the arrow of time and solve the black hole information paradox. Torsion may also be responsible for the observed asymmetry between matter and antimatter in the Universe.[16] The rotation of a black hole would influence the spacetime on the other side of its event horizon and result in a preferred direction in the new universe. Popławski suggests that the observed anomalies in the cosmic microwave background might thus provide evidence for his theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant#Cyclic_model
More recent work has suggested the problem may be indirect evidence of a cyclic universe possibly as allowed by string theory. With every cycle of the universe (Big Bang then eventually a Big Crunch) taking about a trillion (1012) years, “the amount of matter and radiation in the universe is reset, but the cosmological constant is not. Instead, the cosmological constant gradually diminishes over many cycles to the small value observed today.”[18] Critics respond that, as the authors acknowledge in their paper, the model “entails … the same degree of tuning required in any cosmological model”.[19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation#Experimental_results_and_records
Work in 1998 verified the initial predictions,[13] and the distance of teleportation was increased in August 2004 to 600 meters, using optical fiber.[14] The longest distance yet claimed to be achieved for quantum teleportation is 143 km (89 mi), performed in May 2012, between the two Canary Islands of La Palma and Tenerife off the Atlantic coast of north Africa.[15] In April 2011, experimenters reported that they had demonstrated teleportation of wave packets of light up to a bandwidth of 10 MHz while preserving strongly nonclassical superposition states.[16][17]
Researchers at the Niels Bohr Institute successfully used quantum teleportation to transmit information between clouds of gas atoms, notable because the clouds of gas are macroscopic atomic ensembles.[18][19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling#The_tunnelling_problem
Spontaneous DNA mutation[edit]
Spontaneous mutation of DNA occurs when normal DNA replication takes place after a particularly significant proton has defied the odds in quantum tunnelling in what is called “proton tunnelling”[14] (quantum biology). A hydrogen bond joins normal base pairs of DNA. There exists a double well potential along a hydrogen bond separated by a potential energy barrier. It is believed that the double well potential is asymmetric with one well deeper than the other so the proton normally rests in the deeper well. For a mutation to occur, the proton must have tunnelled into the shallower of the two potential wells. The movement of the proton from its regular position is called a tautomeric transition. If DNA replication takes place in this state, the base pairing rule for DNA may be jeopardised causing a mutation.[15] Per-Olov Lowdin was the first to develop this theory of spontaneous mutation within the double helix (quantum bio). Other instances of quantum tunnelling-induced mutations in biology are believed to be a cause of ageing and cancer.
It is possible for spin zero particles to travel faster than the speed of light when tunnelling.[3] This apparently violates the principle of causality, since there will be a frame of reference in which it arrives before it has left. However, careful analysis of the transmission of the wave packet shows that there is actually no violation of relativity theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrocausality
Retrocausality (also called retro-causation, retro-chronal causation, backward causation, and similar terms) is any of several hypothetical phenomena or processes that reverse causality, allowing an effect to occur before its cause.
Retrocausality is primarily a thought experiment in philosophy of science based on elements of physics, addressing the question: Can the future affect the present, and can the present affect the past?[1] Philosophical considerations of time travel often address the same issues as retrocausality, as do treatments of the subject in fiction, although the two terms are not universally synonymous.[2]
While some discussion of retrocausality is confined to fringe science or pseudoscience, a few physical theories with mainstream legitimacy have sometimes been interpreted as leading to retrocausality. This has been problematic in physics because the distinction between cause and effect is not made at the most fundamental level within the field of physics.[3]
Antimatter[edit]
Time runs left to right in this Feynman diagram of electron-positron annihilation. When interpreted to include retrocausality, the electron (marked e-) was not destroyed, instead becoming the positron (e+) and moving backward in time.
As the modern understanding of particle physics began to develop, retrocausality was at times employed as a tool to model then-unfamiliar or unusual conditions, including electromagnetism and antimatter.[citation needed]
The Wheeler–Feynman absorber theory, proposed by John Archibald Wheeler and Richard Feynman, uses retrocausality and a temporal form of destructive interference to explain the absence of a type of converging concentric wave suggested by certain solutions to Maxwell’s equations.[13] These advanced waves don’t have anything to do with cause and effect, they are just a different mathematical way to describe normal waves. The reason they were proposed is so that a charged particle would not have to act on itself, which, in normal classical electromagnetism leads to an infinite self-force.[14]
Feynman, and earlier Stueckelberg, proposed an interpretation of the positron as an electron moving backward in time,[15] reinterpreting the negative-energy solutions of the Dirac equation. Electrons moving backward in time would have a positive electric charge. Wheeler invoked this concept to explain the identical properties shared by all electrons, suggesting that “they are all the same electron” with a complex, self-intersecting worldline.[16] Yoichiro Nambu later applied it to all production and annihilation of particle-antiparticle pairs, stating that “the eventual creation and annihilation of pairs that may occur now and then is no creation or annihilation, but only a change of direction of moving particles, from past to future, or from future to past.”[17] The backwards in time point of view is nowadays accepted as completely equivalent to other pictures,[18] but it doesn’t have anything to do with the macroscopic terms “cause” and “effect”, which do not appear in a microscopic physical description.
Current topics[edit]
Open topics in physics, especially involving the reconciliation of gravity with quantum physics, suggest that retrocausality may be possible under certain circumstances.
Closed timelike curves, in which the world line of an object returns to its origin, arise from some exact solutions to the Einstein field equation. Although closed timelike curves do not appear to exist under normal conditions, extreme environments of spacetime, such as a traversable wormhole[19] or the region near certain cosmic strings,[20] may allow their formation, implying a theoretical possibility of retrocausality. The exotic matter or topological defects required for the creation of those environments have not been observed. Furthermore, Stephen Hawking has suggested a mechanism he describes as the chronology protection conjecture, which would destroy any such closed timelike curve before it could be used.[21] These objections to the existence of closed timelike curves are not universally accepted, however.[22]
Retrocausality is sometimes associated with the nonlocal correlations that generically arise from quantum entanglement,[23] which Albert Einstein famously[peacock term] called “spooky action at a distance”, including the notable special case of the delayed choice quantum eraser.[24] This is not generally[vague] agreed upon within the physics community because verifying nonlocal correlations requires ordinary subluminal communication, since the no communication theorem prevents the superluminal transfer of information, and because fundamental descriptions of matter and forces require the full framework of quantum field theory in which spacelike-separated operators commute. Accounts of quantum entanglement that do not involve retrocausality generally[vague] emphasize how the experiments demonstrating these correlations can equally well be described from different reference frames, that disagree on which measurement is a “cause” versus an “effect”, as necessary to be consistent with special relativity.[25][26] The description of such nonlocal quantum entanglements can be described in a way that is manifestly free of retrocausality if the states of the observers are included in the quantum treatment,[27] which is often but not exclusively associated with the many worlds interpretation.
Retrocausality is also associated with the two-state vector formalism (TSVF) in quantum mechanics, where the present is characterised by quantum states of the past and the future taken in combination.[28]
One physicist has reportedly presented the design for an experiment to test for backward causation in quantum entanglement to begin in 2007.[3][29][30][31]
Hypothetical superluminal particles called tachyons would have a spacelike trajectory, and thus move backward in time according to observers in some reference frames. Despite frequent depiction in science fiction as a method to send messages back in time, theories predicting tachyons do not permit them to interact with normal “tardyonic” matter in a way that would violate standard causality. Specifically, the Feinberg reinterpretation principle renders impossible construction of a tachyon detector capable of receiving information.[32] Within modern quantum field theory, tachyons (or particles with imaginary mass) are interpreted to signify that the theory has been expanded about a configuration that is a local maximum of potential energy, instead of a local minimum

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/11/148290731/why-monsanto-thought-weeds-would-never-defeat-roundup
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/10/18/163034053/top-five-myths-of-genetically-modified-seeds-busted
On Tuesday, a group with backing from institutions in Russia, the United States and Europe said it would undertake the longest, largest and most definitive study of GMOs to date to try to settle the debate once and for all.
The $25 million study of 6,000 rats to be fed a GMO corn diet is designed as an independent examination of the health impacts of GMO corn and the herbicide used on it. The research is to be done in Russia and western Europe over two to three years. (factorgmo.com/en/)
“The science on these GMOs is not settled by a long shot,” said Bruce Blumberg, an endocrinology expert at the University of California, Irvine, who sits on the study review board. “Studies that were done by the manufacturers are the main ones showing safety, and those have an inherent conflict of interest.”

This is from a link right from Monsanto’s site that self-incriminates them:

http://www.fitnessmagazine.com/recipes/healthy-eating/nutrition/gmo-facts/

But less than 20 years later, over a dozen weeds have developed resistance to glyphosate, meaning that farmers have to use more of it, as well as other more hazardous chemicals such as 2,4-D, a powerful herbicide linked to reproductive problems and birth defects, says Chuck Benbrook, PhD, a research professor at Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources. On the basis of 16 years of pesticide data, collected since GMOs were introduced, Benbrook predicts that use of 2,4-D will increase more than fourfold in the next decade, spurred by new GMO crops. “Twenty years from now we will look back and deeply regret the misuse and mismanagement of current-generation GMO technology,” he says.

This is Agent Orange, the same carcinogen that Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, et. al, poisoned Vietnam and our soldiers with. Now they are trying to patent it as their new pesticide- this is the part everyone should be paying attention to

BTW about antibiotics and superbugs I ran into this article tonight:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/11/06/beyond-antibiotics-a-new-weapon-against-superbugs-shows-promise/

antibiotics alternatives that a new type of treatment had been effective at curing five out of six patients whose skin had been infected with MRSA or methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus — one of the scariest bugs around because it appears to shrug off even the most powerful antibiotics available. The initial trial was small and limited to those with eczema, contact dermatitis and other skin infections but the company said it is beginning clinical trials for other types of infections.

Antibiotics work by getting inside bacteria, but in recent years many bacteria that cause common illnesses such as tuberculosis or salmonella have mutated to have thicker membranes that stop the medicine from getting inside.

The new drug — which the company has dubbed Staphefket — works from the outside by latching on to the outer cell wall of bacteria. It uses an enzyme known as endolysins to degrade the wall and thereby kill the bacteria. Scientists theorize that bacteria will be less able to evolve to protect themselves against this type of attack because endolysins tend to evolve with their hosts. They are also believed to have another advantage over antibiotics: They can be targeted to only kill specific types of bacteria while antibiotics tend to kill a whole spectrum of them — both good and bad for the body.

Micreos said in May that it had tested the drug against 36 strains of bacteria, eight of them MRSA.

The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in September issued a long-awaited report on the matter warning that antibiotic resistance threatens to undue all the progress we’ve made in the past century in terms of controlling infectious diseases.

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/report-combating-antibiotic-resistance/1328/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/obama-directs-federal-agencies-to-ramp-up-efforts-to-deal-with-antibiotic-resistance/2014/09/18/581d2b70-3f56-11e4-9587-5dafd96295f0_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/antibiotic-resistant-genes-are-widespread-in-nature-study-finds/2014/05/08/ec608662-d53c-11e3-aae8-c2d44bd79778_story.html

A good argument can be made that, as our population and industrialization keeps increasing, our negative impact on the environment (by the number of other species we’ve caused to become extinct- starting another mass extinction event, climate change and polluting the environment), has caused runaway increases in several conditions.

The following study confirms the one that came from Stanford that linked both autism and ADHD to airborne pollutants, because that’s where the clusters are occurring, and NO not “everyone” in high pollution areas needs to have this for it to be true, there is obviously a genetic component, but the environment is favored 65% to 35% (per the Stanford study), obviously pollution puts those who are closer to getting it than others over the edge.

An interesting study from Columbia University.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/11/06/link-found-between-mothers-exposure-to-air-pollution-and-adhd/?wp_login_redirect=0

More than 11 percent of school-age children in the United States have been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, a rate markedly higher than a decade ago. Could air pollution be a cause?

A study, published in PLoS One this week and conducted by researchers at Columbia University’s Center for Children’s Environmental Health, of 233 non-smoking pregnant women in New York City found that children exposed to high levels of air pollution during pregnancy were five times more likely to have ADHD by age 9.

The researchers measured levels of a common pollutant called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons or PAHs in maternal and cord blood shortly after delivery and in the children’s urine at age 3 or 5. The team followed the children until 9 years of age and administered two tests which are the standard for diagnosing ADHD. Of the 33 who had high levels of exposure as measured by maternal blood, 13 were diagnosed as having the ADHD hyperactive-implusive subtype, seven the inattentive subtype and 13 both.

……

Scientists have previously linked high exposure to PAHs in the womb with a number of other childhood problems, including developmental delays, reduced IQ and symptoms of anxiety and depression. It has also been linked to cancer.

If the Columbia study is confirmed, it could help solve the mystery of what causes ADHD — whether it’s more genetic or more environmental — which could eventually lead to ways to prevent it.

“Fortunately,” the authors noted, “it is possible to reduce airborne PAH concentrations using currently available pollution controls, greater energy efficiency, the use of alternative energy sources, and regulatory intervention to control polluting sources.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-a-national-food-policy-could-save-millions-of-american-lives/2014/11/07/89c55e16-637f-11e4-836c-83bc4f26eb67_story.html?tid=collaborative_1.0_strip_1

The article (too long to quote) addresses how Pres. Obama has gone against his own promises while his wife is actually the one trying to promote a better diet, free from soy and corn and high fructose corn syrup.

even sadder

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/november_december_2012/features/obamas_game_of_chicken041108.php?page=all

The untold story of how the administration tried to stand up to big agricultural companies on behalf of independent farmers, and lost.

……

The message seemed to be clear: the highest brass in the Obama administration was listening closely to how America’s independent farmers are pushed around by big companies, and they were no longer going to tolerate it.

….

But today, two years on, almost nothing has changed. Big processing companies remain free to treat independent poultry, cattle, and dairy producers largely as they please. “You had farmer after farmer after farmer telling the same story, basically pleading for help, and absolutely nothing has come of it,” said Craig Watts, a poultry farmer from Fairmont, North Carolina, who drove 512 miles to attend the hearing in Alabama. Staples agreed. “We had really thought something might change.”

A generation ago, it seemed that Americans had solved the problem of monopoly in agriculture. Following the election of President Woodrow Wilson in 1912, the government gradually weakened the plutocrats’ stranglehold over most of America’s agricultural business.

…..

Over the last quarter century, this progress has been reversed. Today, the top four meatpacking companies control 82 percent of the beef market—an unprecedented share of the pie.

I would really like if they would transfer most of the farm subsidies to organic and small farms. That would make organic produce much cheaper and would boost the healthy diet considerably… GMO crops have been shown to be far less nutritious regardless of how you feel about their safety. I feel they are NOT safe to consume and I really am looking forward to GE labels.

“Organic foods are more nutritious, less residual pesticides and the toxic metal cadmium, according to review of 343 studies
http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-organic-food…
http://research.ncl.ac.uk/nefg/QOF/documents/14-06…

TIME.COM Why Organic Is the Right Choice for Parents
http://time.com/2914155/organic-food-children-heal…

President’s Cancer Panel: “Eat Organic” – 2010
http://www.rodalenews.com/presidents-cancer-panel

“PESTICIDE USE ON GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS Ramon J. Seidler, Ph.D. Former Senior Scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency September 2014
Co – authored with David Bronner, BA Biology, Harvard 1995, President, Dr. Bronner’s
http://static.ewg.org/agmag/pdfs/pesticide_use_on_…

“Dangerous Pesticides Showing Up More and More In Our Urine and Breast Milk.
More here: http://www.cornucopia.org/2014/06/dangerous-pestic…

How Much Pesticide Residue on Your Produce? FDA Doesn’t Know.. New GAO report reveals FDA doing scant testing for pesticides
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/11/07/how-mu…

Interview with Dr. Jeff Ritterman on Roundup & Chronic Kidney Disease
http://youtu.be/VuRtUDaq7Fg

Safe??? Since Genetic Engineered food hit our plates..

and now “A New Form of Genetic Engineering will soon be sold to unsuspecting consumers. Poorly Tested Gene Silencing Technology to Enter Food Supply with Simplot Potato”

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0111670

http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/wastemin/minimize/factshts/pahs.pdf

The fact is that medication is not needed in a large percentage of kids who have it, and moreover, medication can have a negative impact, including reducing creativity and performance on tests in those with high IQs. Some pediatricians have made the observation that other cultures have a much lower occurrence of ADHD, and that the recent rises here can be explained not just by bad parenting, but as both Columbia and Stanford studies have shown, both autism and ADHD can be linked to pesticides and pollutants taken in by the pregnant mother. Drug companies love to create new markets for their drugs, after all their main desire is to make money, not to help people, and they will bribe doctors and attempt to set up quotas to do it. But just like with not listening to Monsanto or Corn Industry hype for their products, we need to be extremely leery of Pharma’s covert reasons for marketing their drugs. After all, Monsanto is using Agent Orange, we dont want to be giving children the medical version of that- since PAH (which the Columbia study linked to ADHD) is actually in the very medications we give them!

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/823056?pa=3pRtLwpkZSrrflwefzFjDHWhLKz5D2YE8GLUK%2BvbA5ER9xIBMPq145ayliLHns%2Bs9Kk%2F9WzE0zNxlrMytuBbDQ%3D%3D
http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/may06/gmo_pipeline.php
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/823056?pa=3pRtLwpkZSrrflwefzFjDHWhLKz5D2YE8GLUK%2BvbA5ER9xIBMPq145ayliLHns%2Bs9Kk%2F9WzE0zNxlrMytuBbDQ%3D%3D

http://boards.medscape.com/forums/?128@@.2a5c1c0f!comment=1

http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-organic-foods-20140715-story.html

http://research.ncl.ac.uk/nefg/QOF/documents/14-06-12%20Final%20Crops%20Paper%20BJN5552.pdf

http://time.com/2914155/organic-food-children-health/

http://www.rodalenews.com/presidents-cancer-panel

http://static.ewg.org/agmag/pdfs/pesticide_use_on_genetically_engineered_crops.pdf

http://www.cornucopia.org/2014/06/dangerous-pesticides-showing-urine-breast-milk

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/11/07/how-much-pesticide-residue-your-produce-fda-doesnt-know

Truthout Interviews with Jeff Ritterman on Roundup & Chronic Kidney Disease

image

Truthout Interviews with Jeff Ritterman on Roundup & C…
View on youtu.be
Preview by Yahoo

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/09/antibiotic-resistance-agriculture-animals-superbugs_n_5953986.html?ir=Green&utm_campaign=100914&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-green&utm_content=Title

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/09/antibiotic-resistance-environment-livestock_n_1502749.html#closeOverlay

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/antibiotic-farm-animals-fda-regulation_n_1193680.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/11/pigs-pork-antibiotic-resistance-infections-mrsa_n_1270182.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/03/science/antibiotics-in-livestock-fda-finds-use-is-rising.html?_r=1

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/factory-farms-antibiotic-resistance-doctors_n_928140.html?page=1

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/23/turkey-antibiotics-drug-resistant-infections-thanksgiving_n_1110745.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/23/antibiotic-resistance-fda-livestock-animal-feed_n_1167851.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/15/gao-antibiotic-resistance-livestock-salmonella_n_964446.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/15/gao-antibiotic-resistance-livestock-salmonella_n_964446.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/23/turkey-antibiotics-drug-resistant-infections-thanksgiving_n_1110745.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/antibiotic-farm-animals-fda-regulation_n_1193680.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/us-gmo-science-idUSKCN0IV24C20141111

But critics of the products say that is not the last word on the issue.

Some international scientists are challenging the assertion and say many scientific studies show concerns with crops whose DNA has been spliced in ways not seen in nature.

http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/1881/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6981

http://motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/03/monsanto-scientists-superweeds-NPR

http://truefoodnow.org/2010/09/30/center-for-food-safety-testifies-at-congressional-oversight-hearing-on-%E2%80%98superweeds%E2%80%99-caused-by-biotech-crops/

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/09/148298678/is-it-safe-to-eat-pink-slime

http://www.nationofchange.org/new-study-proves-bt-toxins-gmos-toxic-mammalian-blood-1367936953

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/11/148290731/why-monsanto-thought-weeds-would-never-defeat-roundup

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/10/18/163034053/top-five-myths-of-genetically-modified-seeds-busted

On Tuesday, a group with backing from institutions in Russia, the United States and Europe said it would undertake the longest, largest and most definitive study of GMOs to date to try to settle the debate once and for all.

The $25 million study of 6,000 rats to be fed a GMO corn diet is designed as an independent examination of the health impacts of GMO corn and the herbicide used on it. The research is to be done in Russia and western Europe over two to three years. (factorgmo.com/en/)

“The science on these GMOs is not settled by a long shot,” said Bruce Blumberg, an endocrinology expert at the University of California, Irvine, who sits on the study review board. “Studies that were done by the manufacturers are the main ones showing safety, and those have an inherent conflict of interest.”

http://www.fitnessmagazine.com/recipes/healthy-eating/nutrition/gmo-facts/
But less than 20 years later, over a dozen weeds have developed resistance to glyphosate, meaning that farmers have to use more of it, as well as other more hazardous chemicals such as 2,4-D, a powerful herbicide linked to reproductive problems and birth defects, says Chuck Benbrook, PhD, a research professor at Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources. On the basis of 16 years of pesticide data, collected since GMOs were introduced, Benbrook predicts that use of 2,4-D will increase more than fourfold in the next decade, spurred by new GMO crops. “Twenty years from now we will look back and deeply regret the misuse and mismanagement of current-generation GMO technology,” he says.
This is Agent Orange, the same carcinogen that Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, et. al, poisoned Vietnam and our soldiers with. Now they are trying to patent it as their new pesticide- this is the part everyone should be paying attention to
These are also interesting reads- illustrative of what may happen in the future
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/08/148227668/insect-experts-issue-urgent-warning-on-using-biotech-seeds
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/12/05/143141300/insects-find-crack-in-biotech-corns-armor
Note how scientists differed with Monsanto’s assessments and guess who the “regulators” listened to (and you can probably guess why- conflict of interest when they are allowed to be on the regulatory agencies.)
http://fieldquestions.com/2012/02/12/bt-cotton-remarkable-success-and-four-ugly-facts/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/us-gmo-science-idUSKCN0IV24C20141111
But critics of the products say that is not the last word on the issue.
Some international scientists are challenging the assertion and say many scientific studies show concerns with crops whose DNA has been spliced in ways not seen in nature.
On Tuesday, a group with backing from institutions in Russia, the United States and Europe said it would undertake the longest, largest and most definitive study of GMOs to date to try to settle the debate once and for all.
The $25 million study of 6,000 rats to be fed a GMO corn diet is designed as an independent examination of the health impacts of GMO corn and the herbicide used on it. The research is to be done in Russia and western Europe over two to three years. (factorgmo.com/en/)
“The science on these GMOs is not settled by a long shot,” said Bruce Blumberg, an endocrinology expert at the University of California, Irvine, who sits on the study review board. “Studies that were done by the manufacturers are the main ones showing safety, and those have an inherent conflict of interest.”
he program is implemented by farmers to assess non-GMO product performance compared to the dominant GMO products on their farms. “Buying seed is an investment and we understand our seed products must offer additional returns. Last year, based on 120 replications of farmer-generated data, we found non-GMO hybrids out-yielded GMO hybrids by an average of 4.7 bushels per acre,” says Odle. And he adds, “This is why we see our PlotPak™ program as a critical component of our story. The purpose is to empower farmers and re-engage them in the decision making process.”
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/genetic-engineering-match-weed-resistance/
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110628006520/en/non-GMO-Corn-Farmers-Discover-Yield-Profits-Promote
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/why-do-g-m-o-s-need-protection/
https://ksj.mit.edu/tracker/2014/11/some-gmo-advocates-say-bill-nye-isnt-the-science-guy/
hm maybe if Monsanto, with its sordid background and all removed itself from the GMO field, they’d be more accepted. Even GMO supporters dont like Monsanto, its background or its tactics.
While GMO have been proven not to be dangerous overall, Monsanto and their prior history and agenda IS in question. Especially since glyphosate is no longer as effective as it once was (for the same reason that bacteria have gained immunity against many antibiotics and we need to get them out of our farms). Even GMO supporters see the dangers of a Monsanto monopoly, and want no part of it. I took this off of Monsanto’s own website (dont they ever read?) while the article is pro GMO it does poke holes in Monsanto’s propaganda that their products need less dangerous pesticides. As a matter of fact, Dow and Monsanto could have used much less dangerous pesticides than one of the two main ingredients of Agent Orange, but they chose to use the one they can make the most money from (patent):
http://www.fitnessmagazine.com/recipes/healthy-eating/nutrition/gmo-facts/
But less than 20 years later, over a dozen weeds have developed resistance to glyphosate, meaning that farmers have to use more of it, as well as other more hazardous chemicals such as 2,4-D, a powerful herbicide linked to reproductive problems and birth defects, says Chuck Benbrook, PhD, a research professor at Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources. On the basis of 16 years of pesticide data, collected since GMOs were introduced, Benbrook predicts that use of 2,4-D will increase more than fourfold in the next decade, spurred by new GMO crops. “Twenty years from now we will look back and deeply regret the misuse and mismanagement of current-generation GMO technology,” he says.
This is Agent Orange, the same carcinogen that Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, et. al, poisoned Vietnam and our soldiers with. Now they are trying to patent it as their new pesticide- this is the part everyone should be paying attention to
These are also interesting reads- illustrative of what may happen in the future
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/08/148227668/insect-experts-issue-urgent-warning-on-using-biotech-seeds
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/12/05/143141300/insects-find-crack-in-biotech-corns-armor
Note how scientists differed with Monsanto’s assessments and guess who the “regulators” listened to (and you can probably guess why- conflict of interest when they are allowed to be on the regulatory agencies.)
http://fieldquestions.com/2012/02/12/bt-cotton-remarkable-success-and-four-ugly-facts/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/us-gmo-science-idUSKCN0IV24C20141111
But critics of the products say that is not the last word on the issue.
Some international scientists are challenging the assertion and say many scientific studies show concerns with crops whose DNA has been spliced in ways not seen in nature.
On Tuesday, a group with backing from institutions in Russia, the United States and Europe said it would undertake the longest, largest and most definitive study of GMOs to date to try to settle the debate once and for all.
The $25 million study of 6,000 rats to be fed a GMO corn diet is designed as an independent examination of the health impacts of GMO corn and the herbicide used on it. The research is to be done in Russia and western Europe over two to three years. (factorgmo.com/en/)
“The science on these GMOs is not settled by a long shot,” said Bruce Blumberg, an endocrinology expert at the University of California, Irvine, who sits on the study review board. “Studies that were done by the manufacturers are the main ones showing safety, and those have an inherent conflict of interest.”
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=genetic-engineering-match-weed-resistance
http://grist.org/food/20-gmo-questions-animal-vegetable-controversy/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/genetic-engineering-match-weed-resistance/
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/04/26/1303884110
http://grist.org/food/20-gmo-questions-animal-vegetable-controversy/
http://grist.org/series/panic-free-gmos/
http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v31/n6/full/nbt.2597.html
http://grist.org/food/are-gmos-worth-their-weight-in-gold-to-farmers-not-exactly/
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110720/full/475274a.html
http://grist.org/food/roundup-ready-aim-spray-how-gm-crops-lead-to-herbicide-addiction/
http://grist.org/food/roundup-ready-aim-spray-how-gm-crops-lead-to-herbicide-addiction/
http://grist.org/food/in-the-insecticide-wars-gmos-have-so-far-been-a-force-for-good/
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/02/report-spread-monsantos-superweeds-speeds-12-0
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/a-simple-fix-for-food/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/gmo-poll_n_2807595.html
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/03/yet-again-agribiz-sneaks-friendly-riders-unrelated-bill
http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v31/n6/full/nbt.2597.html
http://grist.org/food/are-gmos-worth-their-weight-in-gold-to-farmers-not-exactly/
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110720/full/475274a.html
http://grist.org/food/roundup-ready-aim-spray-how-gm-crops-lead-to-herbicide-addiction/
http://grist.org/food/roundup-ready-aim-spray-how-gm-crops-lead-to-herbicide-addiction/
http://grist.org/food/in-the-insecticide-wars-gmos-have-so-far-been-a-force-for-good/
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/02/report-spread-monsantos-superweeds-speeds-12-0
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/a-simple-fix-for-food/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/gmo-poll_n_2807595.html
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/03/yet-again-agribiz-sneaks-friendly-riders-unrelated-bill
http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v31/n6/full/nbt.2597.html
http://grist.org/food/are-gmos-worth-their-weight-in-gold-to-farmers-not-exactly/
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110720/full/475274a.html
http://grist.org/food/roundup-ready-aim-spray-how-gm-crops-lead-to-herbicide-addiction/
http://grist.org/food/roundup-ready-aim-spray-how-gm-crops-lead-to-herbicide-addiction/
http://grist.org/food/in-the-insecticide-wars-gmos-have-so-far-been-a-force-for-good/
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/02/report-spread-monsantos-superweeds-speeds-12-0
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/a-simple-fix-for-food/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/gmo-poll_n_2807595.html
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/03/yet-again-agribiz-sneaks-friendly-riders-unrelated-bill
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0022629
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0922-0013
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0022629
These are also interesting reads- illustrative of what may happen in the future
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/08/148227668/insect-experts-issue-urgent-warning-on-using-biotech-seeds
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/12/05/143141300/insects-find-crack-in-biotech-corns-armor
Note how scientists differed with Monsanto’s assessments and guess who the “regulators” listened to (and you can probably guess why- conflict of interest when they are allowed to be on the regulatory agencies.)
http://fieldquestions.com/2012/02/12/bt-cotton-remarkable-success-and-four-ugly-facts/
http://fieldquestions.com/2012/02/12/bt-cotton-remarkable-success-and-four-ugly-facts/
http://cotton247.com/news/ci/?storyid=2159
http://www.nature.com/news/case-studies-a-hard-look-at-gm-crops-1.12907
he question is how much longer those benefits will last. So far, farmers have dealt with the proliferation of resistant weeds by using more glyphosate, supplementing it with other herbicides and ploughing. A study by David Mortensen, a plant ecologist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park, predicts that total herbicide use in the United States will rise from around 1.5 kilograms per hectare in 2013 to more than 3.5 kilograms per hectare in 2025 as a direct result of GM crop use3.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/08/148227668/insect-experts-issue-urgent-warning-on-using-biotech-seeds
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/12/05/143141300/insects-find-crack-in-biotech-corns-armor
npr insect experts issue urgent warning on using biotech seeds
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0022629
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0922-0013
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0022629
These are also interesting reads- illustrative of what may happen in the future
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/08/148227668/insect-experts-issue-urgent-warning-on-using-biotech-seeds
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/12/05/143141300/insects-find-crack-in-biotech-corns-armor
Note how scientists differed with Monsanto’s assessments and guess who the “regulators” listened to (and you can probably guess why- conflict of interest when they are allowed to be on the regulatory agencies.)
http://fieldquestions.com/2012/02/12/bt-cotton-remarkable-success-and-four-ugly-facts/
http://fieldquestions.com/2012/02/12/bt-cotton-remarkable-success-and-four-ugly-facts/
http://cotton247.com/news/ci/?storyid=2159
http://www.nature.com/news/case-studies-a-hard-look-at-gm-crops-1.12907
he question is how much longer those benefits will last. So far, farmers have dealt with the proliferation of resistant weeds by using more glyphosate, supplementing it with other herbicides and ploughing. A study by David Mortensen, a plant ecologist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park, predicts that total herbicide use in the United States will rise from around 1.5 kilograms per hectare in 2013 to more than 3.5 kilograms per hectare in 2025 as a direct result of GM crop use3.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/08/148227668/insect-experts-issue-urgent-warning-on-using-biotech-seeds
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2011/12/05/143141300/insects-find-crack-in-biotech-corns-armor
npr insect experts issue urgent warning on using biotech seeds
So-called “leaders” take notice when you higher investigators to trace their money trail to find out who gave them how much money so you see how the plutocratic system benefited them- and then you publish it all to make sure everyone knows how corrupt they really are. This is the public’s method of maintaining checks and balances on the gov’t…..like Thomas Jefferson once said, “A government that fears the people is democracy, one in which the people fear the government, is tyranny.)
It was ironic when I saw the new Monsanto ad on TV that I went to their site and I found out that even GMO supporters want Monsanto to leave the industry.
This is the commercial, and my responses (as well as those of others) are below it and I also sent you images of a list of politicians under Monsanto’s sway as well as the government finally trying to remove antibiotics from food (because they result in superbug resistance- but the industry is still resisting) and a needless experiment that resulted in the death of hundreds of animals:
Monsanto TV Commercial, ‘Food is Love’
image
Monsanto TV Commercial, ‘Food is Love’
At Monsanto, they believe in a healthy and balanced meal. To them, food is more than just a meal, it’s love. Be a part of the food conversation and visit Mon…
View on http://www.ispot.tv
Preview by Yahoo
This is from a link right from their site:
http://www.fitnessmagazine.com/recipes/healthy-eating/nutrition/gmo-facts/
But less than 20 years later, over a dozen weeds have developed resistance to glyphosate, meaning that farmers have to use more of it, as well as other more hazardous chemicals such as 2,4-D, a powerful herbicide linked to reproductive problems and birth defects, says Chuck Benbrook, PhD, a research professor at Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources. On the basis of 16 years of pesticide data, collected since GMOs were introduced, Benbrook predicts that use of 2,4-D will increase more than fourfold in the next decade, spurred by new GMO crops. “Twenty years from now we will look back and deeply regret the misuse and mismanagement of current-generation GMO technology,” he says.
This is Agent Orange, the same carcinogen that Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, et. al, poisoned Vietnam and our soldiers with. Now they are trying to patent it as their new pesticide- this is the part everyone should be paying attention to
BTW about antibiotics and superbugs I ran into this article tonight:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/11/06/beyond-antibiotics-a-new-weapon-against-superbugs-shows-promise/
antibiotics alternatives that a new type of treatment had been effective at curing five out of six patients whose skin had been infected with MRSA or methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus — one of the scariest bugs around because it appears to shrug off even the most powerful antibiotics available. The initial trial was small and limited to those with eczema, contact dermatitis and other skin infections but the company said it is beginning clinical trials for other types of infections.
Antibiotics work by getting inside bacteria, but in recent years many bacteria that cause common illnesses such as tuberculosis or salmonella have mutated to have thicker membranes that stop the medicine from getting inside.
The new drug — which the company has dubbed Staphefket — works from the outside by latching on to the outer cell wall of bacteria. It uses an enzyme known as endolysins to degrade the wall and thereby kill the bacteria. Scientists theorize that bacteria will be less able to evolve to protect themselves against this type of attack because endolysins tend to evolve with their hosts. They are also believed to have another advantage over antibiotics: They can be targeted to only kill specific types of bacteria while antibiotics tend to kill a whole spectrum of them — both good and bad for the body.
Micreos said in May that it had tested the drug against 36 strains of bacteria, eight of them MRSA.
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in September issued a long-awaited report on the matter warning that antibiotic resistance threatens to undue all the progress we’ve made in the past century in terms of controlling infectious diseases.
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/report-combating-antibiotic-resistance/1328/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/obama-directs-federal-agencies-to-ramp-up-efforts-to-deal-with-antibiotic-resistance/2014/09/18/581d2b70-3f56-11e4-9587-5dafd96295f0_story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/antibiotic-resistant-genes-are-widespread-in-nature-study-finds/2014/05/08/ec608662-d53c-11e3-aae8-c2d44bd79778_story.html
A good argument can be made that, as our population and industrialization keeps increasing, our negative impact on the environment (by the number of other species we’ve caused to become extinct- starting another mass extinction event, climate change and polluting the environment), has caused runaway increases in several conditions.
The following study confirms the one that came from Stanford that linked both autism and ADHD to airborne pollutants, because that’s where the clusters are occurring, and NO not “everyone” in high pollution areas needs to have this for it to be true, there is obviously a genetic component, but the environment is favored 65% to 35% (per the Stanford study), obviously pollution puts those who are closer to getting it than others over the edge.
An interesting study from Columbia University.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/11/06/link-found-between-mothers-exposure-to-air-pollution-and-adhd/?wp_login_redirect=0
More than 11 percent of school-age children in the United States have been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, a rate markedly higher than a decade ago. Could air pollution be a cause?
A study, published in PLoS One this week and conducted by researchers at Columbia University’s Center for Children’s Environmental Health, of 233 non-smoking pregnant women in New York City found that children exposed to high levels of air pollution during pregnancy were five times more likely to have ADHD by age 9.
The researchers measured levels of a common pollutant called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons or PAHs in maternal and cord blood shortly after delivery and in the children’s urine at age 3 or 5. The team followed the children until 9 years of age and administered two tests which are the standard for diagnosing ADHD. Of the 33 who had high levels of exposure as measured by maternal blood, 13 were diagnosed as having the ADHD hyperactive-implusive subtype, seven the inattentive subtype and 13 both.
……
Scientists have previously linked high exposure to PAHs in the womb with a number of other childhood problems, including developmental delays, reduced IQ and symptoms of anxiety and depression. It has also been linked to cancer.
If the Columbia study is confirmed, it could help solve the mystery of what causes ADHD — whether it’s more genetic or more environmental — which could eventually lead to ways to prevent it.
“Fortunately,” the authors noted, “it is possible to reduce airborne PAH concentrations using currently available pollution controls, greater energy efficiency, the use of alternative energy sources, and regulatory intervention to control polluting sources.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-a-national-food-policy-could-save-millions-of-american-lives/2014/11/07/89c55e16-637f-11e4-836c-83bc4f26eb67_story.html?tid=collaborative_1.0_strip_1
The article (too long to quote) addresses how Pres. Obama has gone against his own promises while his wife is actually the one trying to promote a better diet, free from soy and corn and high fructose corn syrup.
even sadder
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/november_december_2012/features/obamas_game_of_chicken041108.php?page=all
The untold story of how the administration tried to stand up to big agricultural companies on behalf of independent farmers, and lost.
……
The message seemed to be clear: the highest brass in the Obama administration was listening closely to how America’s independent farmers are pushed around by big companies, and they were no longer going to tolerate it.
….
But today, two years on, almost nothing has changed. Big processing companies remain free to treat independent poultry, cattle, and dairy producers largely as they please. “You had farmer after farmer after farmer telling the same story, basically pleading for help, and absolutely nothing has come of it,” said Craig Watts, a poultry farmer from Fairmont, North Carolina, who drove 512 miles to attend the hearing in Alabama. Staples agreed. “We had really thought something might change.”
A generation ago, it seemed that Americans had solved the problem of monopoly in agriculture. Following the election of President Woodrow Wilson in 1912, the government gradually weakened the plutocrats’ stranglehold over most of America’s agricultural business.
…..
Over the last quarter century, this progress has been reversed. Today, the top four meatpacking companies control 82 percent of the beef market—an unprecedented share of the pie.
I would really like if they would transfer most of the farm subsidies to organic and small farms. That would make organic produce much cheaper and would boost the healthy diet considerably… GMO crops have been shown to be far less nutritious regardless of how you feel about their safety. I feel they are NOT safe to consume and I really am looking forward to GE labels.
“Organic foods are more nutritious, less residual pesticides and the toxic metal cadmium, according to review of 343 studies
http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-organic-food…
http://research.ncl.ac.uk/nefg/QOF/documents/14-06…
TIME.COM Why Organic Is the Right Choice for Parents
http://time.com/2914155/organic-food-children-heal…
President’s Cancer Panel: “Eat Organic” – 2010
http://www.rodalenews.com/presidents-cancer-panel
“PESTICIDE USE ON GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS Ramon J. Seidler, Ph.D. Former Senior Scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency September 2014
Co – authored with David Bronner, BA Biology, Harvard 1995, President, Dr. Bronner’s
http://static.ewg.org/agmag/pdfs/pesticide_use_on_…
“Dangerous Pesticides Showing Up More and More In Our Urine and Breast Milk.
More here: http://www.cornucopia.org/2014/06/dangerous-pestic…
How Much Pesticide Residue on Your Produce? FDA Doesn’t Know.. New GAO report reveals FDA doing scant testing for pesticides
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/11/07/how-mu…
Interview with Dr. Jeff Ritterman on Roundup & Chronic Kidney Disease
http://youtu.be/VuRtUDaq7Fg
Safe??? Since Genetic Engineered food hit our plates..
and now “A New Form of Genetic Engineering will soon be sold to unsuspecting consumers. Poorly Tested Gene Silencing Technology to Enter Food Supply with Simplot Potato”
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0111670
http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/wastemin/minimize/factshts/pahs.pdf
The fact is that medication is not needed in a large percentage of kids who have it, and moreover, medication can have a negative impact, including reducing creativity and performance on tests in those with high IQs. Some pediatricians have made the observation that other cultures have a much lower occurrence of ADHD, and that the recent rises here can be explained not just by bad parenting, but as both Columbia and Stanford studies have shown, both autism and ADHD can be linked to pesticides and pollutants taken in by the pregnant mother. Drug companies love to create new markets for their drugs, after all their main desire is to make money, not to help people, and they will bribe doctors and attempt to set up quotas to do it. But just like with not listening to Monsanto or Corn Industry hype for their products, we need to be extremely leery of Pharma’s covert reasons for marketing their drugs. After all, Monsanto is using Agent Orange, we dont want to be giving children the medical version of that- since PAH (which the Columbia study linked to ADHD) is actually in the very medications we give them!
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/823056?pa=3pRtLwpkZSrrflwefzFjDHWhLKz5D2YE8GLUK%2BvbA5ER9xIBMPq145ayliLHns%2Bs9Kk%2F9WzE0zNxlrMytuBbDQ%3D%3D
http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/may06/gmo_pipeline.php
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/823056?pa=3pRtLwpkZSrrflwefzFjDHWhLKz5D2YE8GLUK%2BvbA5ER9xIBMPq145ayliLHns%2Bs9Kk%2F9WzE0zNxlrMytuBbDQ%3D%3D
http://boards.medscape.com/forums/?128@@.2a5c1c0f!comment=1
http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-organic-foods-20140715-story.html
http://research.ncl.ac.uk/nefg/QOF/documents/14-06-12%20Final%20Crops%20Paper%20BJN5552.pdf
http://time.com/2914155/organic-food-children-health/
http://www.rodalenews.com/presidents-cancer-panel
http://static.ewg.org/agmag/pdfs/pesticide_use_on_genetically_engineered_crops.pdf
http://www.cornucopia.org/2014/06/dangerous-pesticides-showing-urine-breast-milk
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/11/07/how-much-pesticide-residue-your-produce-fda-doesnt-know
Truthout Interviews with Jeff Ritterman on Roundup & Chronic Kidney Disease
image
Truthout Interviews with Jeff Ritterman on Roundup & C…
View on youtu.be
Preview by Yahoo
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/09/antibiotic-resistance-agriculture-animals-superbugs_n_5953986.html?ir=Green&utm_campaign=100914&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-green&utm_content=Title
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/09/antibiotic-resistance-environment-livestock_n_1502749.html#closeOverlay
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/antibiotic-farm-animals-fda-regulation_n_1193680.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/11/pigs-pork-antibiotic-resistance-infections-mrsa_n_1270182.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/03/science/antibiotics-in-livestock-fda-finds-use-is-rising.html?_r=1
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/factory-farms-antibiotic-resistance-doctors_n_928140.html?page=1
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/23/turkey-antibiotics-drug-resistant-infections-thanksgiving_n_1110745.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/23/antibiotic-resistance-fda-livestock-animal-feed_n_1167851.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/15/gao-antibiotic-resistance-livestock-salmonella_n_964446.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/15/gao-antibiotic-resistance-livestock-salmonella_n_964446.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/23/turkey-antibiotics-drug-resistant-infections-thanksgiving_n_1110745.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/antibiotic-farm-animals-fda-regulation_n_1193680.html
http://l.facebook.com/l/8AQHqm0rQAQGD1w8QF8x9KC2C3Z7IHHAGIuqTDDOY41flHg/nutritionfacts.org/%E2%80%A6/are-gmos-safe-the-case-of-round
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/are-gmos-safe-the-case-of-roundup-ready-soy/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/chicken-salmonella-thanks-to-meat-industry-lawsuit/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/who-determines-if-food-additives-are-safe/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/who-says-eggs-arent-healthy-or-safe/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/are-gmos-safe-the-case-of-roundup-ready-soy/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/chicken-salmonella-thanks-to-meat-industry-lawsuit/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/salmonella-in-chicken-turkey-deadly-but-not-illegal/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/meat-borne-infection-risk-from-shopping-carts/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/poultry-and-paralysis/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/zero-tolerance-to-acceptable-risk/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/zero-tolerance-to-acceptable-risk/
http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/unsafe-at-any-feed
http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/
http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/
http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/us-gmo-science-idUSKCN0IV24C20141111
But critics of the products say that is not the last word on the issue.
Some international scientists are challenging the assertion and say many scientific studies show concerns with crops whose DNA has been spliced in ways not seen in nature.
http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/1881/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6981
http://motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/03/monsanto-scientists-superweeds-NPR
http://truefoodnow.org/2010/09/30/center-for-food-safety-testifies-at-congressional-oversight-hearing-on-%E2%80%98superweeds%E2%80%99-caused-by-biotech-crops/
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/09/148298678/is-it-safe-to-eat-pink-slime
http://www.nationofchange.org/new-study-proves-bt-toxins-gmos-toxic-mammalian-blood-1367936953
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/10/06/dangerous-toxins-from-gmo-foods.aspx#sdendnote1sym
http://esciencecentral.org/journals/hematotoxicity-of-bacillus-thuringiensis-as-spore-crystal-strains-cry1aa-cry1ab-cry1ac-or-cry2aa-in-swiss-albino-mice-2329-8790.1000104.php?aid=11822
http://www.gmoevidence.com/dr-mezzomo-bt-toxins-toxic-to-blood-of-mice/
http://www.nationofchange.org/new-study-proves-bt-toxins-gmos-toxic-mammalian-blood-1367936953
http://naturalsociety.com/5-things-gmo-corn-shouldnt/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/11/01/former-pro-gmo-biotech-scientist-admits-gmos-arent-safe-refutes-claims-monsanto/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/author/christina-sarich/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/11/10/kauai-county-rejects-federal-judges-ruling-gmos-upholds-gmo-pesticide-disclosure-5-1/
http://www.itsmomsense.com/oppose-mandatory-gmo-labeling/#comment-3339
http://www.itsmomsense.com/conversations-real-life-elections/
http://www.itsmomsense.com/can-opinions-facts/
http://www.itsmomsense.com/breaking-labels-series-eggs-part-1-3-feedsupplements-certifiers/
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7076455123022001652&postID=5665227955547966051&page=1&token=1415882232130
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7076455123022001652&postID=5524263507823586468&page=1&token=1415882201430
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/fda-must-define-and-enforce-the-term-natural
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/defining-natural-is-a-waste-of-fda-resources
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/ban-natural-as-a-marketing-label-on-foods
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/calling-gmos-unnatural-suggests-they-are-unhealthy
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/the-word-natural-like-our-food-has-become-polluted
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/consumers-must-pay-more-attention-to-agriculture-and-less-attention-to-labels
http://l.facebook.com/l/rAQF7jm4X/t.co/vekU5pHC7p
http://www.purefood.org/Monsanto/SeedSavingSuits.cfm)
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18563_162-4048288.html)
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/force-FDA-to-label-Pink-Slime-Ground-Beef/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/11/01/former-pro-gmo-biotech-scientist-admits-gmos-arent-safe-refutes-claims-monsanto/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/10/27/california-dept-food-agriculture-gives-blank-check-spray-pesticides-anywhere-anytime-public-input/
http://earthweareone.com/former-pro-gmo-scientist-speaks-out-on-the-real-dangers-of-genetically-engineered-food/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/us/31meat.html?ref=foodsafety
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2014/10/29/359836350/monsanto-hired-this-guy-to-help-it-win-over-millennials
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/11/148290731/why-monsanto-thought-weeds-would-never-defeat-roundup
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/10/18/163034053/top-five-myths-of-genetically-modified-seeds-busted
On Tuesday, a group with backing from institutions in Russia, the United States and Europe said it would undertake the longest, largest and most definitive study of GMOs to date to try to settle the debate once and for all.
The $25 million study of 6,000 rats to be fed a GMO corn diet is designed as an independent examination of the health impacts of GMO corn and the herbicide used on it. The research is to be done in Russia and western Europe over two to three years. (factorgmo.com/en/)
“The science on these GMOs is not settled by a long shot,” said Bruce Blumberg, an endocrinology expert at the University of California, Irvine, who sits on the study review board. “Studies that were done by the manufacturers are the main ones showing safety, and those have an inherent conflict of interest.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/eu-gm-idUSL6N0T143J20141111
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/10/usa-agriculture-china-dupont-idUSL1N0SX2G020141110
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/11/02/eus-chief-scientist-called-dumb-imbecile-gmo-stance-distinguished-professor/
http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.5787
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2014/10/29/359836350/monsanto-hired-this-guy-to-help-it-win-over-millennials
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/mrsa-in-u-s-retail-meat/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/u-s-meat-supply-flying-at-half-staph/
http://nutritionfacts.org/topics/
Doctor’s Note
Make sure to see the next two follow-up videos (can subscribe for free here): Is Monsanto’s Roundup Pesticide Glyphosate Safe? and GMO Soy and Breast Cancer.
What about the other GMO component of farm animal feed, Bt corn? See my last video Are GMOs Safe? The Case of Bt Corn
Why do we subsidize animal feed more than fruits and vegetables? Check out my video Taxpayer Subsidies for Unhealthy Foods.
What happens when food industries self-regulate? See, for example:
Chicken Salmonella Thanks to Meat Industry Lawsuit
Who Determines if Food Additives are Safe?
Who Says Eggs Aren’t Healthy or Safe?
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/are-gmos-safe-the-case-of-bt-corn/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/lowering-dietary-antibiotic-intake/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/antibiotics-agribusinesses-pound-of-flesh/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/11/06/beyond-antibiotics-a-new-weapon-against-superbugs-shows-promise/
antibiotics alternatives that a new type of treatment had been effective at curing five out of six patients whose skin had been infected with MRSA or methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus — one of the scariest bugs around because it appears to shrug off even the most powerful antibiotics available. The initial trial was small and limited to those with eczema, contact dermatitis and other skin infections but the company said it is beginning clinical trials for other types of infections.
Antibiotics work by getting inside bacteria, but in recent years many bacteria that cause common illnesses such as tuberculosis or salmonella have mutated to have thicker membranes that stop the medicine from getting inside.
The new drug — which the company has dubbed Staphefket — works from the outside by latching on to the outer cell wall of bacteria. It uses an enzyme known as endolysins to degrade the wall and thereby kill the bacteria. Scientists theorize that bacteria will be less able to evolve to protect themselves against this type of attack because endolysins tend to evolve with their hosts. They are also believed to have another advantage over antibiotics: They can be targeted to only kill specific types of bacteria while antibiotics tend to kill a whole spectrum of them — both good and bad for the body.
Micreos said in May that it had tested the drug against 36 strains of bacteria, eight of them MRSA.
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in September issued a long-awaited report on the matter warning that antibiotic resistance threatens to undue all the progress we’ve made in the past century in terms of controlling infectious diseases.
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/report-combating-antibiotic-resistance/1328/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/obama-directs-federal-agencies-to-ramp-up-efforts-to-deal-with-antibiotic-resistance/2014/09/18/581d2b70-3f56-11e4-9587-5dafd96295f0_story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/antibiotic-resistant-genes-are-widespread-in-nature-study-finds/2014/05/08/ec608662-d53c-11e3-aae8-c2d44bd79778_story.html
A good argument can be made that, as our population and industrialization keeps increasing, our negative impact on the environment (by the number of other species we’ve caused to become extinct- starting another mass extinction event, climate change and polluting the environment), has caused runaway increases in several conditions.
The following study confirms the one that came from Stanford that linked both autism and ADHD to airborne pollutants, because that’s where the clusters are occurring, and NO not “everyone” in high pollution areas needs to have this for it to be true, there is obviously a genetic component, but the environment is favored 65% to 35% (per the Stanford study), obviously pollution puts those who are closer to getting it than others over the edge.
An interesting study from Columbia University.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/11/06/link-found-between-mothers-exposure-to-air-pollution-and-adhd/?wp_login_redirect=0
More than 11 percent of school-age children in the United States have been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, a rate markedly higher than a decade ago. Could air pollution be a cause?
A study, published in PLoS One this week and conducted by researchers at Columbia University’s Center for Children’s Environmental Health, of 233 non-smoking pregnant women in New York City found that children exposed to high levels of air pollution during pregnancy were five times more likely to have ADHD by age 9.
The researchers measured levels of a common pollutant called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons or PAHs in maternal and cord blood shortly after delivery and in the children’s urine at age 3 or 5. The team followed the children until 9 years of age and administered two tests which are the standard for diagnosing ADHD. Of the 33 who had high levels of exposure as measured by maternal blood, 13 were diagnosed as having the ADHD hyperactive-implusive subtype, seven the inattentive subtype and 13 both.
……
Scientists have previously linked high exposure to PAHs in the womb with a number of other childhood problems, including developmental delays, reduced IQ and symptoms of anxiety and depression. It has also been linked to cancer.
If the Columbia study is confirmed, it could help solve the mystery of what causes ADHD — whether it’s more genetic or more environmental — which could eventually lead to ways to prevent it.
“Fortunately,” the authors noted, “it is possible to reduce airborne PAH concentrations using currently available pollution controls, greater energy efficiency, the use of alternative energy sources, and regulatory intervention to control polluting sources.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-a-national-food-policy-could-save-millions-of-american-lives/2014/11/07/89c55e16-637f-11e4-836c-83bc4f26eb67_story.html?tid=collaborative_1.0_strip_1
The article (too long to quote) addresses how Pres. Obama has gone against his own promises while his wife is actually the one trying to promote a better diet, free from soy and corn and high fructose corn syrup.
even sadder
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/november_december_2012/features/obamas_game_of_chicken041108.php?page=all
The untold story of how the administration tried to stand up to big agricultural companies on behalf of independent farmers, and lost.
……
The message seemed to be clear: the highest brass in the Obama administration was listening closely to how America’s independent farmers are pushed around by big companies, and they were no longer going to tolerate it.
….
But today, two years on, almost nothing has changed. Big processing companies remain free to treat independent poultry, cattle, and dairy producers largely as they please. “You had farmer after farmer after farmer telling the same story, basically pleading for help, and absolutely nothing has come of it,” said Craig Watts, a poultry farmer from Fairmont, North Carolina, who drove 512 miles to attend the hearing in Alabama. Staples agreed. “We had really thought something might change.”
A generation ago, it seemed that Americans had solved the problem of monopoly in agriculture. Following the election of President Woodrow Wilson in 1912, the government gradually weakened the plutocrats’ stranglehold over most of America’s agricultural business.
…..
Over the last quarter century, this progress has been reversed. Today, the top four meatpacking companies control 82 percent of the beef market—an unprecedented share of the pie.
I would really like if they would transfer most of the farm subsidies to organic and small farms. That would make organic produce much cheaper and would boost the healthy diet considerably… GMO crops have been shown to be far less nutritious regardless of how you feel about their safety. I feel they are NOT safe to consume and I really am looking forward to GE labels.
“Organic foods are more nutritious, less residual pesticides and the toxic metal cadmium, according to review of 343 studies
http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-organic-food…
http://research.ncl.ac.uk/nefg/QOF/documents/14-06…
TIME.COM Why Organic Is the Right Choice for Parents
http://time.com/2914155/organic-food-children-heal…
President’s Cancer Panel: “Eat Organic” – 2010
http://www.rodalenews.com/presidents-cancer-panel
“PESTICIDE USE ON GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS Ramon J. Seidler, Ph.D. Former Senior Scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency September 2014
Co – authored with David Bronner, BA Biology, Harvard 1995, President, Dr. Bronner’s
http://static.ewg.org/agmag/pdfs/pesticide_use_on_…
“Dangerous Pesticides Showing Up More and More In Our Urine and Breast Milk.
More here: http://www.cornucopia.org/2014/06/dangerous-pestic…
How Much Pesticide Residue on Your Produce? FDA Doesn’t Know.. New GAO report reveals FDA doing scant testing for pesticides
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/11/07/how-mu…
Interview with Dr. Jeff Ritterman on Roundup & Chronic Kidney Disease
http://youtu.be/VuRtUDaq7Fg
Safe??? Since Genetic Engineered food hit our plates..
and now “A New Form of Genetic Engineering will soon be sold to unsuspecting consumers. Poorly Tested Gene Silencing Technology to Enter Food Supply with Simplot Potato”
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0111670
http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/wastemin/minimize/factshts/pahs.pdf
The fact is that medication is not needed in a large percentage of kids who have it, and moreover, medication can have a negative impact, including reducing creativity and performance on tests in those with high IQs. Some pediatricians have made the observation that other cultures have a much lower occurrence of ADHD, and that the recent rises here can be explained not just by bad parenting, but as both Columbia and Stanford studies have shown, both autism and ADHD can be linked to pesticides and pollutants taken in by the pregnant mother. Drug companies love to create new markets for their drugs, after all their main desire is to make money, not to help people, and they will bribe doctors and attempt to set up quotas to do it. But just like with not listening to Monsanto or Corn Industry hype for their products, we need to be extremely leery of Pharma’s covert reasons for marketing their drugs. After all, Monsanto is using Agent Orange, we dont want to be giving children the medical version of that- since PAH (which the Columbia study linked to ADHD) is actually in the very medications we give them!
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/823056?pa=3pRtLwpkZSrrflwefzFjDHWhLKz5D2YE8GLUK%2BvbA5ER9xIBMPq145ayliLHns%2Bs9Kk%2F9WzE0zNxlrMytuBbDQ%3D%3D
http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/may06/gmo_pipeline.php
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/823056?pa=3pRtLwpkZSrrflwefzFjDHWhLKz5D2YE8GLUK%2BvbA5ER9xIBMPq145ayliLHns%2Bs9Kk%2F9WzE0zNxlrMytuBbDQ%3D%3D
http://boards.medscape.com/forums/?128@@.2a5c1c0f!comment=1
http://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-organic-foods-20140715-story.html
http://research.ncl.ac.uk/nefg/QOF/documents/14-06-12%20Final%20Crops%20Paper%20BJN5552.pdf
http://time.com/2914155/organic-food-children-health/
http://www.rodalenews.com/presidents-cancer-panel
http://static.ewg.org/agmag/pdfs/pesticide_use_on_genetically_engineered_crops.pdf
http://www.cornucopia.org/2014/06/dangerous-pesticides-showing-urine-breast-milk
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/11/07/how-much-pesticide-residue-your-produce-fda-doesnt-know
Truthout Interviews with Jeff Ritterman on Roundup & Chronic Kidney Disease
image
Truthout Interviews with Jeff Ritterman on Roundup & C…
View on youtu.be
Preview by Yahoo
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/09/antibiotic-resistance-agriculture-animals-superbugs_n_5953986.html?ir=Green&utm_campaign=100914&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-green&utm_content=Title
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/09/antibiotic-resistance-environment-livestock_n_1502749.html#closeOverlay
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/antibiotic-farm-animals-fda-regulation_n_1193680.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/11/pigs-pork-antibiotic-resistance-infections-mrsa_n_1270182.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/03/science/antibiotics-in-livestock-fda-finds-use-is-rising.html?_r=1
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/factory-farms-antibiotic-resistance-doctors_n_928140.html?page=1
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/23/turkey-antibiotics-drug-resistant-infections-thanksgiving_n_1110745.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/23/antibiotic-resistance-fda-livestock-animal-feed_n_1167851.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/15/gao-antibiotic-resistance-livestock-salmonella_n_964446.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/15/gao-antibiotic-resistance-livestock-salmonella_n_964446.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/23/turkey-antibiotics-drug-resistant-infections-thanksgiving_n_1110745.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/antibiotic-farm-animals-fda-regulation_n_1193680.html
http://l.facebook.com/l/8AQHqm0rQAQGD1w8QF8x9KC2C3Z7IHHAGIuqTDDOY41flHg/nutritionfacts.org/%E2%80%A6/are-gmos-safe-the-case-of-round
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/are-gmos-safe-the-case-of-roundup-ready-soy/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/chicken-salmonella-thanks-to-meat-industry-lawsuit/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/who-determines-if-food-additives-are-safe/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/who-says-eggs-arent-healthy-or-safe/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/are-gmos-safe-the-case-of-roundup-ready-soy/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/chicken-salmonella-thanks-to-meat-industry-lawsuit/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/salmonella-in-chicken-turkey-deadly-but-not-illegal/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/meat-borne-infection-risk-from-shopping-carts/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/poultry-and-paralysis/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/zero-tolerance-to-acceptable-risk/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/zero-tolerance-to-acceptable-risk/
http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/unsafe-at-any-feed
http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/
http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/
http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/us-gmo-science-idUSKCN0IV24C20141111
But critics of the products say that is not the last word on the issue.
Some international scientists are challenging the assertion and say many scientific studies show concerns with crops whose DNA has been spliced in ways not seen in nature.
http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/1881/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6981
http://motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/03/monsanto-scientists-superweeds-NPR
http://truefoodnow.org/2010/09/30/center-for-food-safety-testifies-at-congressional-oversight-hearing-on-%E2%80%98superweeds%E2%80%99-caused-by-biotech-crops/
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/09/148298678/is-it-safe-to-eat-pink-slime
http://www.nationofchange.org/new-study-proves-bt-toxins-gmos-toxic-mammalian-blood-1367936953
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/10/06/dangerous-toxins-from-gmo-foods.aspx#sdendnote1sym
http://esciencecentral.org/journals/hematotoxicity-of-bacillus-thuringiensis-as-spore-crystal-strains-cry1aa-cry1ab-cry1ac-or-cry2aa-in-swiss-albino-mice-2329-8790.1000104.php?aid=11822
http://www.gmoevidence.com/dr-mezzomo-bt-toxins-toxic-to-blood-of-mice/
http://www.nationofchange.org/new-study-proves-bt-toxins-gmos-toxic-mammalian-blood-1367936953
http://naturalsociety.com/5-things-gmo-corn-shouldnt/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/11/01/former-pro-gmo-biotech-scientist-admits-gmos-arent-safe-refutes-claims-monsanto/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/author/christina-sarich/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/11/10/kauai-county-rejects-federal-judges-ruling-gmos-upholds-gmo-pesticide-disclosure-5-1/
http://www.itsmomsense.com/oppose-mandatory-gmo-labeling/#comment-3339
http://www.itsmomsense.com/conversations-real-life-elections/
http://www.itsmomsense.com/can-opinions-facts/
http://www.itsmomsense.com/breaking-labels-series-eggs-part-1-3-feedsupplements-certifiers/
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7076455123022001652&postID=5665227955547966051&page=1&token=1415882232130
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7076455123022001652&postID=5524263507823586468&page=1&token=1415882201430
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/fda-must-define-and-enforce-the-term-natural
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/defining-natural-is-a-waste-of-fda-resources
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/ban-natural-as-a-marketing-label-on-foods
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/calling-gmos-unnatural-suggests-they-are-unhealthy
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/the-word-natural-like-our-food-has-become-polluted
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15/consumers-must-pay-more-attention-to-agriculture-and-less-attention-to-labels
http://l.facebook.com/l/rAQF7jm4X/t.co/vekU5pHC7p
http://www.purefood.org/Monsanto/SeedSavingSuits.cfm)
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18563_162-4048288.html)
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/force-FDA-to-label-Pink-Slime-Ground-Beef/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/11/01/former-pro-gmo-biotech-scientist-admits-gmos-arent-safe-refutes-claims-monsanto/
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/10/27/california-dept-food-agriculture-gives-blank-check-spray-pesticides-anywhere-anytime-public-input/
http://earthweareone.com/former-pro-gmo-scientist-speaks-out-on-the-real-dangers-of-genetically-engineered-food/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/us/31meat.html?ref=foodsafety
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2014/10/29/359836350/monsanto-hired-this-guy-to-help-it-win-over-millennials
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/11/148290731/why-monsanto-thought-weeds-would-never-defeat-roundup
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/10/18/163034053/top-five-myths-of-genetically-modified-seeds-busted
On Tuesday, a group with backing from institutions in Russia, the United States and Europe said it would undertake the longest, largest and most definitive study of GMOs to date to try to settle the debate once and for all.
The $25 million study of 6,000 rats to be fed a GMO corn diet is designed as an independent examination of the health impacts of GMO corn and the herbicide used on it. The research is to be done in Russia and western Europe over two to three years. (factorgmo.com/en/)
“The science on these GMOs is not settled by a long shot,” said Bruce Blumberg, an endocrinology expert at the University of California, Irvine, who sits on the study review board. “Studies that were done by the manufacturers are the main ones showing safety, and those have an inherent conflict of interest.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/eu-gm-idUSL6N0T143J20141111
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/10/usa-agriculture-china-dupont-idUSL1N0SX2G020141110
http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/11/02/eus-chief-scientist-called-dumb-imbecile-gmo-stance-distinguished-professor/
http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.5787
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2014/10/29/359836350/monsanto-hired-this-guy-to-help-it-win-over-millennials
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/mrsa-in-u-s-retail-meat/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/u-s-meat-supply-flying-at-half-staph/
http://nutritionfacts.org/topics/
Doctor’s Note
Make sure to see the next two follow-up videos (can subscribe for free here): Is Monsanto’s Roundup Pesticide Glyphosate Safe? and GMO Soy and Breast Cancer.
What about the other GMO component of farm animal feed, Bt corn? See my last video Are GMOs Safe? The Case of Bt Corn
Why do we subsidize animal feed more than fruits and vegetables? Check out my video Taxpayer Subsidies for Unhealthy Foods.
What happens when food industries self-regulate? See, for example:
Chicken Salmonella Thanks to Meat Industry Lawsuit
Who Determines if Food Additives are Safe?
Who Says Eggs Aren’t Healthy or Safe?
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/are-gmos-safe-the-case-of-bt-corn/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/lowering-dietary-antibiotic-intake/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/antibiotics-agribusinesses-pound-of-flesh/
Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

After the policy was announced Tuesday, Consumers Union senior scientist Michael Hansen released a statement saying: “We wholeheartedly commend AMA for coming out in support of mandatory pre-market safety assessment of (genetically engineered) foods, but are disappointed that AMA did not also support mandatory labeling. … Studies in the scientific literature have suggested that genetic engineering could introduce new food allergens, increase the levels of known allergens, raise or lower nutrient levels and have adverse effects on the animals that eat such foods.”

Just Label It, the national campaign for the labeling of genetically engineered foods (www.justlabelit.org), issued a statement saying “just the fact that the AMA even considered this measure is a significant win for the vast majority (91%) of Americans (see the Mellman Poll findings) who believe they have the right to know about the foods they eat and feed their families — a fundamental right already enjoyed by citizens in more than 50 countries worldwide, including all of Europe, Japan, Russia and China.”

http://​www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/​articles/PMC2952409/

Abstract

We summarize the major points of international debate on health risk studies for the main commercialized edible GMOs. These GMOs are soy, maize and oilseed rape designed to contain new pesticide residues since they have been modified to be herbicide-tolerant (mostly to Roundup) or to produce mutated Bt toxins. The debated alimentary chronic risks may come from unpredictable insertional mutagenesis effects, metabolic effects, or from the new pesticide residues. The most detailed regulatory tests on the GMOs are three-month long feeding trials of laboratory rats, which are biochemically assessed. The tests are not compulsory, and are not independently conducted. The test data and the corresponding results are kept in secret by the companies. Our previous analyses of regulatory raw data at these levels, taking the representative examples of three GM maize NK 603, MON 810, and MON 863 led us to conclude that hepatorenal toxicities were possible, and that longer testing was necessary. Our study was criticized by the company developing the GMOs in question and the regulatory bodies, mainly on the divergent biological interpretations of statistically significant biochemical and physiological effects. We present the scientific reasons for the crucially different biological interpretations and also highlight the shortcomings in the experimental protocols designed by the company. The debate implies an enormous responsibility towards public health and is essential due to nonexistent traceability or epidemiological studies in the GMO-producing countries.
Keywords: GMOs, Health risks, Pesticides, Regulatory toxicology, Animal testsDebate on GMOs Health Risks after Statistical Findings in Regulatory Tests
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
We summarize the major points of international debate on health risk studies for…See More

http://​www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/​pubmed/17356802

Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2007 May;52(4):596-602. Epub 2007 Mar 13.
New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity.
Séralini GE, Cellier D, de Vendomois JS.
Source
Committee for Independent Information and Research on Genetic Engineering CRIIGEN, Paris, France. criigen@unicaen.fr
Abstract
Health risk assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) cultivated for food or feed is under debate throughout the world, and very little data have been published on mid- or long-term toxicological studies with mammals. One of these studies performed under the responsibility of Monsanto Company with a transgenic corn MON863 has been subjected to questions from regulatory reviewers in Europe, where it was finally approved in 2005. This necessitated a new assessment of kidney pathological findings, and the results remained controversial. An Appeal Court action in Germany (Münster) allowed public access in June 2005 to all the crude data from this 90-day rat-feeding study. We independently re-analyzed these data. Appropriate statistics were added, such as a multivariate analysis of the growth curves, and for biochemical parameters comparisons between GMO-treated rats and the controls fed with an equivalent normal diet, and separately with six reference diets with different compositions. We observed that after the consumption of MON863, rats showed slight but dose-related significant variations in growth for both sexes, resulting in 3.3% decrease in weight for males and 3.7% increase for females. Chemistry measurements reveal signs of hepatorenal toxicity, marked also by differential sensitivities in males and females. Triglycerides increased by 24-40% in females (either at week 14, dose 11% or at week 5, dose 33%, respectively); urine phosphorus and sodium excretions diminished in males by 31-35% (week 14, dose 33%) for the most important results significantly linked to the treatment in comparison to seven diets tested. Longer experiments are essential in order to indicate the real nature and extent of the possible pathology; with the present data it cannot be concluded that GM corn MON863 is a safe product.

PMID:

17356802

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx1001749?journalCode=crtoec

Tell EPA to Reject the Use of Toxic 2,4-D Herbicide for Dow Chemical’s “Agent Orange” GE Crops

EPA is deciding whether to allow the use of the herbicide 2,4-D for Dow Chemical’s genetically engineered “Agent Orange” corn and soybeans. Tell EPA to deny approval for these additional uses of toxic 2,4-D.

The Environmental Protection Agency has just opened a public comment period on the approval of the use of toxic 2,4-D specifically for Dow’s GE corn and soybeans. EPA is timing their approval process with that of USDA, with both agencies proposing approval of the Dow Agent Orange, GE crop system.

Dow Chemical, the same company that brought us Dursban, Napalm, and Agent Orange, is now in the food business and is pushing for an unprecedented government approval: genetically engineered (GE) versions of corn, soybeans and cotton that are designed to survive repeated dousing with 2,4-D, half of the highly toxic chemical mixture Agent Orange.

Agent Orange was the chemical defoliant used by the U.S. in Vietnam, and it caused lasting environmental damage as well as many serious medical conditions in both American veterans and the Vietnamese.

Tell EPA, USDA, and President Obama to stop Dow Chemical’s “Agent Orange” crops!

Wide scale use of Roundup with Roundup Ready GE crops has already led to an epidemic of resistant weeds, and the next step in the chemical arms race is 2,4-D — a chemical linked to major health problems including cancer, Parkinson’s disease, endocrine disruption, and reproductive problems. Industry tests show that 2,4-D is contaminated with dioxins—often referred to as the most toxic substances known to science.

EPA has reported that 2,4-D is the seventh largest source of dioxins in the U.S. Dioxin contamination in the rivers and soil around Dow Chemical’s headquarters in Midland, Michigan has led to the highest dioxin levels ever found by the EPA in fish, and has been linked to increased breast cancer rates in the contaminated areas.

EPA’s approval would lead to a massive increase in the use of this toxic, dioxin-contaminated herbicide on our farms!

If approved, Dow’s “Agent Orange” crops will trigger a large increase in 2,4-D use–and our exposure to this toxic herbicide—yet the government has completely failed to investigate the harms such increased use would cause. This is part of a growing problem, an escalating chemical arms race going on across America’s heartland.

Dow Chemical is hyping GE 2,4-D corn, soy and cotton as the “solution” to Roundup-resistant weeds caused by GE Roundup Ready crops. But by driving up 2,4-D use, Dow’s crops will generate even more intractable weeds resistant to 2,4-D and other herbicides. This GE crop system ensures a toxic spiral of ever-increasing chemical use on our land and food, which benefits no one but Dow.

Tell the government to reject Dow Chemical’s “Agent Orange” crops and the toxic chemicals they rely on!

SHARE THIS

For more information:

CFS’s Dow Campaign website: http://www.dow-watch.org

EPA’s Environmental Risk Assessment of Proposed Label for Enlist (2,4-D Choline Salt), New Uses on Soybean with DAS 68416-4 (2,4-D Tolerant) and Enlist (2,4-D + Glyphosate Tolerant) Corn and Field Corn: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0195

USDA’s draft environmental impact statement: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/24d_deis.pdf

CFS factsheet, “Agent Orange” Corn: The Next Stage in the Chemical Arms Race”: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/files/agent-orange-crops_fact-sheet_22481.pdf

CFS report, “Going Backwards: Dow’s 2,4-D-Resistant Crops and a More Toxic Future”: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/files/fsr_24-d.pdf

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.examiner.com%2Farticle%2Fmounting-evidence-that-gmo-crops-can-cause-infertility-and-birth-defects&h=TAQF4gASA

http://www.seattleorganicrestaurants.com/vegan-whole-foods/gmo-harms-dangers/

http://www.policymic.com/articles/15889/french-gmo-research-finds-monsanto-corn-causes-cancer-america-should-pay-attention_

http://www.english.rfi.fr/americas/20120920-monsanto-gm-maize-may-face-europe-ban-after-french-study-links-cancer

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/06/14/groundbreaking-study-links-monsantos-glyphosate-to-cancer/

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/06/14/groundbreaking-study-links-monsantos-glyphosate-to-cancer/

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx1001749?journalCode=crtoec

ttp://www.davidicke.com/headlines/47833-gmo-pesticides-linked-to-birth-defects-disruption-of-male-hormones-cancer-

http://www.english.rfi.fr/americas/20120920-monsanto-gm-maize-may-face-europe-ban-after-french-study-links-cancer

http://www.policymic.com/articles/15889/french-gmo-research-finds-monsanto-corn-causes-cancer-america-should-pay-attention_

http://www.policymic.com/profiles/21102/kaylin-greene

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512008149

Answers to critics: Why there is a long term toxicity due to a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize and to a Roundup herbicide
Gilles-Eric Séralinia, , , Robin Mesnagea, Nicolas Defargea, Steeve Gressa, Didier Hennequinc, Emilie Claira, Manuela Malatestab, Joël Spiroux de Vendômoisa
Show more
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2012.11.007
Get rights and content
Under a Creative Commons license
Refers To
Lúcia de Souza, Leila Macedo Oda
Letter to the editor
Food and Chemical Toxicology, Volume 53, March 2013, Page 440
PDF (211 K)
Open Access
Abstract
Our recent work (Séralini et al., 2012) remains to date the most detailed study involving the life-long consumption of an agricultural genetically modified organism (GMO). This is true especially for NK603 maize for which only a 90-day test for commercial release was previously conducted using the same rat strain (Hammond et al., 2004). It is also the first long term detailed research on mammals exposed to a highly diluted pesticide in its total formulation with adjuvants. This may explain why 75% of our first criticisms arising within a week, among publishing authors, come from plant biologists, some developing patents on GMOs, even if it was a toxicological paper on mammals, and from Monsanto Company who owns both the NK603 GM maize and Roundup herbicide (R). Our study has limits like any one, and here we carefully answer to all criticisms from agencies, consultants and scientists, that were sent to the Editor or to ourselves. At this level, a full debate is biased if the toxicity tests on mammals of NK603 and R obtained by Monsanto Company remain confidential and thus unavailable in an electronic format for the whole scientific community to conduct independent scrutiny of the raw data. In our article, the conclusions of long-term NK603 and Roundup toxicities came from the statistically highly discriminant findings at the biochemical level in treated groups in comparison to controls, because these findings do correspond in an blinded analysis to the pathologies observed in organs, that were in turn linked to the deaths by anatomopathologists. GM NK603 and R cannot be regarded as safe to date.

Keywords
GMO; Roundup; NK603; Rat; Glyphosate-based herbicides; Endocrine disrupting effects; Answers to critics
1. Introduction
Our recent publication of research evaluating the long term toxicity of a NK603 Roundup-tolerant genetically modified (GM) maize and of a Roundup (R) herbicide (Séralini et al., 2012) has provoked numerous positive and negative reactions throughout the world. This is the way science moves forward and here we provide a response to this intense debate. Our work is the most detailed study involving the life-long consumption of an agricultural genetically modified organism (GMO), and especially on NK603 for which only a 90-day safety test was previously conducted and using the same rat strain (Hammond et al., 2004). It is also the first long term detailed research on mammals exposed to a highly diluted pesticide in its total formulation with adjuvants. These adjuvants help to stabilize the active principles of pesticides, and promote a better penetration into organisms, and thus more side-effects. R is the most widely used herbicide in the world, which we tested from levels arising in tap water. Indeed in our study, its active principle glyphosate (G) was not studied alone, contrasting with the long term experiments conducted by the manufacturer as part of its application for regulatory approval. As such, the debate in question here is at the cornerstone of science and regulatory issues on this topic. This fact has major economic ramifications for the development of such products, which can explain the severe comments posted within hours of our publication becoming available online. This may explain why 75% of our first criticisms arising within a week, among publishing authors, come from plant biologists, some developing patents on GMOs, even if it was a toxicological paper on mammals, and from Monsanto Company who owns both the NK603 GM maize and R herbicide.

We must firstly focus on science. Our work is a research study; it has not a direct regulatory purpose and should not be considered as a final point in knowing the toxicological effects of NK603 and R. This is a first step in the iterative investigation of the long-term health effects on mammals of these commercial products that should be replicated independently, as well as on developing mammals. It has limits like any study, and here we carefully answer to all criticisms from agencies, consultants and scientists, that were sent to the Editor of Food & Chemical Toxicology or to ourselves. These challenged our results and the validity of our protocol, some letters even requested the withdrawal of the publication from the journal. All remarks and answers are summarized in Table 1 and with some explanatory details given below.

Table 1.
Summary of criticisms and responses on Séralini et al. long-term NK603 GM maize and Roundup toxicity rat study.
Criticisms Answers
Relevance of the scientific context
No scientific context This study addresses biological interpretations of early signs of toxicity in biochemistry after 90-day feeding trials (Spiroux de Vendomois et al., 2010)
OECD guidelines not respected No guidelines exist for GMO animal studies. Protocol based and adapted from OECD 408 and 452
Protocol not adapted to tumor findings This is not a carcinogenesis study, but a long term full toxicological study
GLP violation because of amendments Research protocols not adapted to GLP agreement because of amendments. The experiment was conducted under a GLP environment and conditions
History of flaw by the authors which are not toxicologists. Previous studies of the group rejected More than 26 international scientific peer reviewed papers by the team with the lead author on the topic in the last 5 years, and 11 in toxicological journals on the same period only in PubMed. One author, Malatesta, has also published on GMO/pesticide health risks. None of the papers was considered as flawed by the scientific community. Regulatory agencies or Monsanto are not scientific peer reviewed journal systems
Lack of signs in 90 days Statistical differences in biochemical parameters of liver and kidney function recognized by both industry and agencies
Not the first long term study First chronic investigation with NK603 GM maize; others of two years in farm animals are not over the entire lifespan; the most detailed study for all agricultural GMOs and a formulated pesticide

Originality and limits of the experimental design
Choice of the rat strain (sensitivity to mammary tumors and nephropathies in males) Necessity to have sensitive strains, recommended by the US National Toxicology Program (King-Herbert et al. 2010). Rats and mice have been preferred experimental models because of their susceptibility to tumor induction (OECD guidelines) Relevant comparisons to controls in this work
Number of rats per group OECD 408 (90-day toxicity study) 10 animals per group OECD 452 (Chronic toxicity study) 20 animals per group but at least 10 animals per group are studied for hematological and clinical biochemical function
Missing data: diet composition and process, PCR analysis of batches, contaminants (mycotoxins, pesticides), storage (R in water, BPA, feed), isogenic line, culture conditions Normally included in GLP environment studies. No possibility to detail all these data in this scientific study in this journal – in process of publication. Diet equilibrated for substantial equivalence between GMO and the closest isogenic line and other compounds. Other points detailed in the text
No blinding, not the knowledge to interpret tumors, no morphometric analyses, no use of PETO codes, no classification Independent and blinded analysis by GLP performed by professional regulatory anatomopathologists. Nature of most frequent tumors in Fig. 3 legend and results. A professional report for each rat indicates the cause of mortality
R formulations are different Depends on the country
Controls not sufficient (number of rats per group, 4 groups 11 and 22%, no drinking water control group) Number of rats approved in guidelines, best in the world at this level of details for these products. All the animals have eaten 33% of maize and substantially equivalent diets. Only R treated rats had received R in water
No reference groups, no lab historical data Reference groups add irrelevant variability with non-substantially equivalent diets; historical data contain diets not controlled for pesticides and GMOs, thus not relevant
Ad Libitum feeding In accordance to guidelines and usual practices
Diurnal variations All samplings were taken at the same time

Focus on statistics
Not enough statistical power
No Kaplan Meier’s curves
Variability expected by chance
Only raw data in Figs. 1–3 and Table 2 Statistics do not tell the truth, but may help in understanding results. The biological interpretations and the crossing of methodologies are the key. Enough and high statistical power for OPLS-DA, and this is why raw data only were presented in Figs. 1 and 2 and Table 2; no statistical power of Kaplan Meier’s analyses for a conclusion demonstrating effects or no effects.
No means and standard deviations in Table 3 OPLS-DA is not a method to compare mean differences which were presented for understanding of biochemical measurements with highly discriminant parameters in bold

Pertinence of the results
Missing data (Behavioral studies, ophthalmology, microbiology in feces and in infectious nodules, G in tissues, body and organ weights, feed and water consumptions, transgene in tissues, time effects) All measures cannot be presented in one paper and will be the subject of other publications. The other analyses are not relevant for the conclusions presented
No isoflavones in maize Testing the diets for phytoestrogens is relevant because the equilibrated diet (non-GM) contains other components
Phenolic acids in the normal range Used as biomarkers indicative of change in the metabolism of the GMO. This does not exclude the presence of unknown toxic compounds
No incidence / severity Lack of histopathology data Taken into account as indicated in the legend of Table 2 which consists in a summary of the most relevant data
Endocrine disruption not sufficiently supported Convergent body of evidence stemming from mammary tumors, pituitary dysfunctions, histopathology and sex hormone biochemistry
Wilm’s tumors are only of genetic origin Promotion by pesticide exposure is plausible and as evidenced by gestational exposure described in the literature
Feeding state explains glycogen in electron microscopy No difference in feed consumption; experience in the domain by M. Malatesta
Pictures of control rat not shown Rats representative of each group shown, controls do not present tumors in majority during the experiment, pictures non necessary

Discussion: findings in regard with the contradictory hypotheses
R is not a sex endocrine disruptor This is still true at a regulatory but not at a scientific research level. R endocrine disrupting properties are described in vivo and in vitro (references in the text). Regulatory classification should be in process
G is not toxic in two-year tests G is never used alone in agriculture, but in formulations with G far more toxic than G alone; G tests are not relevant, we used R
G is close in structure to amino acids and surfactant exposure is as soap exposure This is not supported by the scientific literature; the structural and activity comparisons are not scientifically relevant to predict with certainty toxicological effects or safety
No effects on farm animals and in human population of the USA No epidemiology, no life-long experimental studies; farms animals are generally killed too young to show development of long term diseases. No traceability and labeling of GMOs in USA, no epidemiological survey can be performed
Sakamoto et al. 2008 not reported This study does not use the same GMO (soy vs maize) and neither the same strain of rat. No effect for GM soy in F344 rats is claimed but does not imply the same for NK603 GM maize in SD rats
Raw data expected for our study Raw data also expected for regulatory accepted tests for this GMO and this pesticide to scientifically discuss details

Ethical issues and deontology
Maize illicitly grown Not at all; grown and imported with appropriate authorizations
Animal welfare problems, a veterinarian would not authorize such tumor development The work follows GLP conditions. All rats followed by veterinarians on the site, applying the rules of the ethical committee and guidelines
Conflicts of interests No conflict for us. Conflicts of interests for companies testing their own products
Role of funders See acknowledgments, funders identified. No interference in study or results; confidential up to the embargo
Publication released before for journalists Everything was released on the same day (September 19th), in accordance with the conditions set by the FCT editorial board.
Confidentiality agreement unusual The confidentiality of the work is a usual practice before embargo
The authors should alert agencies from the end of experiment instead of waiting for a publication The publication and reviewing of the work is the guarantee of quality with no interference
Table options
At this level, a full debate is biased if the toxicity tests on mammals of NK603 and R obtained by Monsanto Company remain confidential and thus unavailable for the scientific community to conduct independent scrutiny of their raw data. This is why, after several exchanges, we requested again from the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) on September 20th and October 18th 2012 the release on a public website of the raw data on health risks on the basis of which commercialization of these products was granted, in particular results from the longest study of NK603 and Roundup on mammals (Hammond et al., 2004). We ask for a free and transparent exchange of scientific findings, mainly when these are related to public health and environmental risks (Schreider et al., 2010). Examination of industry raw data previously evidenced divergence of regulatory decisions from scientific evidence underestimating toxicological features of G (Antoniou et al., 2012). We recall that the tests on rats are usually considered as a model for mammalian health before clinical trials (for example for pharmaceuticals) or for a direct market release (for novel food and feed, pesticides or chemicals). Moreover, tests on rats are also models for environmental risk assessment, since they are models for other wildlife mammals. The public release of these raw data will reveal if significant differences observed between test and control groups in both studies are coherent and if the statistics are of sufficient power in both cases, thereby allowing the design of appropriate follow-up experiments by others, perhaps through a publically discussed and agreed protocol.

2. Relevance of the scientific context
Some remarks emphasize a lack of context, claiming that the study was performed for non-scientific reasons. The establishment of this protocol was however the consequence of an intense debate about the biological relevance of numerous statistically significant differences compared to controls revealed and admitted to in 90-day feeding studies with agricultural GMOs (Spiroux de Vendomois et al., 2010). This is highly controversial, with companies and regulatory agencies having refuted findings, which were validated by a peer reviewed process in international journals (EFSA, 2007 and Séralini et al., 2007). Indeed, regulatory agencies such as EFSA appear to have their own criteria to judge the biological relevance of research findings (Doull et al., 2007), which is markedly at odds with some recent knowledge. This includes cases of sex specific non-linear endocrine disruptions, which were not admitted to as valid at a regulatory level although accepted at a scientific research level (Myers et al., 2009b). In order to overcome the divergence in biological interpretation of early signs of toxicity in blood biochemistry for GMOs, one solution was to prolong 90-day feeding tests to chronic periods. We therefore chose the R tolerant NK603 GM maize because R tolerance is the trait present in approximately 80% of agricultural GMOs (James, 2011) and because statistical differences in the 90-day feeding trial with this maize were admitted to by both the petitioner and regulatory agencies (EFSA, 2009).

3. Originality and limits of the experimental design
Due to the economic and regulatory issues of this topic, it is not surprising that our research study was confounded with pre-commercial regulatory assessments. This is why the most common criticism questions the following of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) guidelines. However, no guidelines exist for GMO toxicity studies in vivo, which are still not mandatory. Published reviews have confirmed that most of the studies conducted to date did not follow specific guidelines or were contradictory (Domingo, 2007 and Domingo and Giné Bordonaba, 2011). We compared our design (Table 1 of Séralini et al., 2012) to Hammond et al. (2004) inspired from OECD guideline 408 for chemicals. We have replicated, extended and thus improved the experiments conducted by Hammond and colleagues (Hammond et al., 2004) by measuring outcomes from 3 instead of 2 feed doses and more crucially for a period 8 times longer in duration (90-days vs 2 years), with 11 blood and urine measures of around 50 parameters, 34 organs instead of 17, etc., in order to ascertain if the statistical findings (observed at 90 days; Hammond et al., 2004), were biologically relevant or not in the long term. We thus biochemically measured 10 rats per sex per group as performed by Monsanto. Even for a study of up to two years, we had no reason to monitor biochemical effects on more than 10 animals per sex per group as this is the number recommended in OECD guideline 452 for chronic toxicity testing (OECD 1981 was in application when the study started in 2008), even if 20 animals per group or more are possible.

The purpose of the addition of R treated groups was not to assess R long term carcinogenesis, which needs to follow OECD 453 guideline with at least 50 rats per sex per group (even if 10 rats are then still measured at a biochemical level). The aim of our study was to test R under similar conditions to the GM maize in order to try and understand if residues of R in the feed could explain the possible pathologies that may arise. There were two main potential sources of harm tested in our study: (i) effects from the GM maize itself, treated or not with R, and (ii) herbicide residues alone in drinking water, using 3 doses for each treatment. We recall that the initial investigation published by Hammond and colleagues (Hammond et al., 2004) used 2 doses for each treatment group despite that fact that 3 doses are recommended by OECD guideline 408, which they reported to have followed.

In addition, one of the criteria for biological relevance employed by Monsanto and other critics of our study is the linearity or lack thereof in response to the dose. Such a dose–response relationship cannot be claimed from a trial using only 2 doses of test material as employed in the initial NK603 assessment (Hammond et al., 2004). We therefore find it surprising that the relevance of Monsanto’s and the agencies’ conclusion of safety was not challenged due to such protocol insufficiencies. A recent review of the literature is often cited as a proof of the safety of GMO consumption on a long-term basis (Snell et al., 2012). However, of the 24 studies they evaluated, only 2 are long-term on rodents, since a 2 year feeding period with pigs or cows do not constitute a life-long experiments. The 2 rodent studies quoted by Snell and colleagues are from Sakamoto et al. (2008) where not all rats fed transgenic soy were analyzed, and Malatesta et al. (2008a) in mice fed again GM soy, which showed at an electronic microscopy level effects of this product on hepatic function. Moreover, of the 24 studies cited, 16 did not mention the use of the closest isogenic non-GM line as a control, many did not describe the methods in detail, and contained additional deficiencies (Snell et al., 2012). However, all these studies were accepted as proof of safety regardless of the inadequacies highlighted here. It would appear that conclusions of safety seem to need fewer requirements than conclusions of toxicity. However, scientifically it is easier to conclude an outcome of toxicity than safety. This was not the first time regulatory agencies used such double standards to minimize independent research findings in regard to industry findings (Hilbeck et al., 2012 and Myers et al., 2009a). Our control groups were also questioned and this needs some clarification. Some claimed that controls are lacking for all 4 test groups (GMO+R and GMO alone at 11% and 22%). We compared all treated groups to the control group containing 33% of the closest available isogenic maize, as all diets were equilibrated to 33% maize; that is, for example the 11% GM maize diet was supplemented with non-GM control maize to reach 33%. More accurately the closest available isogenic line was the DKC2675 variety compared to the DKC2978 GM maize (NK603). Regulatory agencies also questioned the conditions under which the maize was grown. One R treatment was applied 4 months before harvest. Fungicides were applied similarly. We were unable to use the same R formulation in the field (Canada) and in the drinking water of the rats (France) because authorized formulations vary between nations. The diet was nutritionally equilibrated from substantially equivalent maize and was then checked by PCR for GMO content. A major concern was the potential presence of mycotoxins. Fumonisin B1 and B2, zearalenone, deoxynivalenol (DON), nivalenol, 3-acetyl-DON, 15-acetyl-DON, fusarenone X, T2 toxin, HT2 toxin and diacetoxyscirpenol were all under recommended limits in food/feed used in this study. We did not present details of each of these substances when no particular changes affecting the understanding of the results were noticed.

As a research protocol, Good Laboratory Practice (GLP, OECD, 1997; 2004/10/EC regulation) was followed, meaning that housing conditions, manufacturing process, diet composition and storage, stability of solutions and dietary contaminants were assessed by approved laboratories. Anatomopathology was performed in a blind manner (without knowing the treatments) by professional anatomopathologists approved for regulatory purposes. An electronic chip was inserted in each rat for identification. However, the technicians employed for the care and sampling of the animals did not know either the nature of the diets or the drinking water prepared independently, or which was the control group. The cages housing the animals were moved within holding rooms regularly and similarly for all animals. The blood (1 mL) and urine samples were coded and the measurement of biochemical parameters also blind, as were the decisions of euthanasia to avoid suffering in accordance with precise regulatory ethical rules (hemorrhages, impossibility to drink and eat, large tumors over 25% body weight because they provoke mortality). All the animals were monitored during the experiment by professional veterinarians. The statistical analysis was also undertaken on coded groups. However, we have made research amendments adding additional analyses (tissue and biochemical parameters) adapted to the findings in order to improve the understanding of the pathologies, thus we are only in a GLP environment. Generally, it is standard practice that a regulatory agency does not take note of research studies because they are not conducted under GLP conditions (Myers et al., 2009a). By its very nature, a research protocol is rarely compatible with GLP agreements. GLP agreement is a good tool to normalize regulatory assessment but research studies need a greater degree of freedom, in test protocols, models, etc.

4. Rat strain
We would like to explain the choice of the strain of rat. This is another redundant remark made by critics of our study design. We recall that OECD norms (408, 452 and 453) are not prescriptive for the strain of rat to be used. Sprague Dawley (SD) rats are subject to spontaneous neoplasms and this property is supposed to invalidate them being used as a model for carcinogenesis. However, on the contrary, the fact that the SD strain develops tumors, hence has led to it is preferentially used by some agencies such as for the National Toxicology Program using it for 2-year carcinogenicity and other long-term studies (King-Herbert et al., 2010). Indeed, it would be a non-sense to study pathologies in a strain insensitive to tumor formation. Long-term OECD guideline 452 even states that rats and mice have been preferred as experimental model systems because of their susceptibility to tumor induction. The same reasoning is used for chronic progressive nephropathies (CPN) developed by SD rats. The fact that the strain developed spontaneous CPN with age (Hard and Khan, 2004) does not invalidate the model as we looked at the difference in the chronology, age, number and severity of CPN in comparison to controls.

To assess the biological relevance of results, many authors make comparisons with historical data of control rats, either within the laboratory or the breeding company from which animals are sourced. However, this clearly greatly enhances control variability and heightens the risk of false negative findings (Cuffe, 2011). It is now established that this concept should be used with caution. There are several reasons for this. Control diets for rats are generally not monitored, neither for pesticides (Hayes, 2004), nor for chemicals leaching from cages or other environmental sources (Howdeshell et al., 2003). This artificially enhances background effects. The supplier even recognizes that their historical data come from rats potentially fed GMOs since this was not controlled for (Harlan communication), except in our experiment. Thus, it was not appropriate for us to use historical control data. This is also the reason why we did not use reference groups fed different non-substantially equivalent diets, as they increase the standard deviation of the control groups, hiding differential effects due to treatments.

Many non-relevant remarks have also been noticed. Among others, some criticized the use of ad libitum feed to explain the increase of tumor incidence. Guidelines on the design and conduct of chronic toxicity studies state that rodents should be fed and watered ad libitum (OECD, Guidance Document No. 116). The hormonal imbalances were criticized to be due to diurnal or cyclic variations. However, sampling was performed at the same time each day in the morning.

5. Focus on statistical analytical methods and outcomes
Statistics do not tell the truth, but may assist in our understanding of experimental outcomes. The biological interpretations and the crossing of methodologies are the key (Cooper and Kavlock, 1997). We have applied the most modern statistical methods (OPLS-DA, see below) for multivariate data analysis of approximately 50 parameters measured 11 times for 200 rats. This allowed, in a blinded manner, to obtain results significantly discriminant at 99% confidence levels. These discriminant biochemical markers were, for example in the case of sexual hormones (at 95% for females at month 15), when the differences in hormone-dependent tumor incidence with the control group began. Disability in pituitary function was characteristic of this second most affected organ as certified independently by the pathologists in a blinded manner in treated female groups in comparison to controls. Such a disturbance in hormonal function is known to elicit mammary tumors in rats with the pituitary being a target of endocrine disrupting chemicals (Wozniak et al., 2005). The pathologists employed in our study explained that most of the mortality in females resulted from tumors, which led to euthanasia independently of the grade of cancer. This is why we did not detail the grade of tumors in our research but with the cancerous nature of the major tumor growths described in our study (Fig. 3 legend and results section (Par. 3.2)). These observations together with microscopic analysis reinforced our conclusions.

We believe all this was more pertinent than the study of statistically non-powerful Kaplan–Meiers’ curves on survival (because of the groups of 10 animals per sex dying progressively) that cannot allow any conclusion on mortality linked or not to the treatment. Taking into account these limits, we decided to be simply factual in our presentation and thus describe the chronology and incidence of tumors and deaths. In comparison, statisticians from agencies could evaluate the power of the statistical analyses of the tests conducted by Hammond et al. (2004), which gave a score of safety, and that were used for market release. For us, the power of statistics used in Hammond et al. (2004) is extremely low to conclude to safety.

In our study, case PLS-regression (Projections to Latent Structures by means of partial least squares) is of particular relevance because, unlike conventional multivariate data analytical methods, it can analyze data sets with variables more numerous than observations, which can be strongly correlated (Wold et al., 2001). In the case of Orthogonal Partial Least Squares Discriminant Analysis (OPLS-DA) there is separation between the inter-group variation (represented on the predictive component) and the intra-group variation (variability of the samples, represented on the first Y-orthogonal components). OPLS-DA is thus not an appropriate method with which to compare mean differences. However, for providing biochemical understanding, we have presented and highlighted those in Table 3 of our study, with highly discriminant parameters in bold text. OPLS-DA renders it possible to identify which variables are responsible for the separation of the groups. For instance, we also indicate in Fig. 5B that estradiol and testosterone are significantly discriminant at 95% confidence levels in some groups (not at 99% like other parameters presented).

Moreover, the SIMCA-P (V12) software (UMETRICS AB Umea, Sweden) for the multivariate analysis of biochemical data uses a method of validation of models, which is a k-fold cross-validation. The Q2(Y) parameter which measures the predictive ability of the models is calculated according to this cross-validation method. Only valid models with a satisfactory predictive quality Q2 index were retained for the selection of the discriminant variables (bold in figures, Table 3). Furthermore, all models retained are significant (CV-ANOVA test with p-value <5%). One of the authors of our paper (D.H.) previously used this method and published their results in international peer-reviewed journals ( Ledauphin et al., 2010, Malzert-Freon et al., 2010a and Malzert-Freon et al., 2010b).

6. Pertinence of the results
The first major criticisms that were raised concerned the results and their format of presentation. A scientific publication is by necessity limited in figures/tables and only shows the data necessary to understand and discuss the conclusions. This is why behavioral studies, ophthalmology, microbiology in feces and in infectious nodules, G in tissues, body and organ weights, feed and water consumptions, transgene in tissues, time effects will be the subject of future publications. The inclusion of these data at this stage would neither add to the main message nor would it improve the understanding of this first publication. Indeed, the peer review process has controlled the logic of the body of data presented. Additional sets of results were included in the revision of the manuscript in response to issues raised by the reviewers prior to publication.

The second major criticism of the results is that we attached too much importance to findings related to mortality and tumor relative to their scientific significance. We are aware of the limitations of these findings as discussed above in relation to the statistical analysis undertaken. The body of evidence for our conclusions comes from the converging methodologies and data (see Focus on Statistics). The variability in rates of mortality can indeed, if looked at in isolation, arise in principle by chance. However, statistical analysis for Figs. 1 and 2 is not of sufficient power to conclude that this is the case or the contrary. This is why we have presented the raw data for these sets of observations. For instance, males presented up to 4 times (2 times of the mean) more large palpable tumors than controls, similarly to that observed in female animals. As these observations may represent a potential risk for the human population, this cannot simply be disregarded so rapidly with non-potent statistics. This is also why we emphasized statistically discriminant biochemical effects at the 15th month, when most of animals were still alive (in treated groups 90% males, 94% females, and 100% controls). The significantly discriminant biochemical markers disrupted do correspond to the organic markers linked to the pathologies in a blinded analysis for the pathologists, who in turn linked that to the deaths. The two nephroblastomas in GMO fed groups linked to premature deaths was criticized for bringing confusion to the results, because these tumors are often of embryonic and/or genetic origin. However, these tumors are also known to be promoted by pesticide exposure (Fear et al., 1998).

The summary of the major histopathological findings in Table 2 was subject to the same criticisms. In fact, we indicated the severities of the CPN and only marked or severe CPN were shown. Indeed, elderly rats are subject to CPN and taking into account all CPN could hide interesting and important differences. The power of statistics may be discussed as for Figs. 1 and 2. However, all these data need to be seen in the context of all the significant results presented in the paper, as previously underlined.

For the findings obtained from the electron microscopy analysis, it is important to compare our results with those reported previously. Several studies have shown ultrastructural abnormalities in the liver of mice fed with GM soy (Malatesta et al., 2002) and that this structural disturbance was reproduced by adding the herbicide R directly to rat hepatocytes (Malatesta et al., 2008b). We thus wanted to test if the same disruptions can be seen in the liver of the rats in our experiment. This was indeed the case, and furthermore these observations conform with ours and others published in vitro effects of R (Gasnier et al., 2010 and Gasnier et al., 2011). Glycogen dispersion or appearance in lakes found by electron microscopy was attributed to the feeding state by some critics. However, differences in feed consumption were not observed during the course of our study. Not only appearance of glycogen in lakes was noticed, but also a reduced rate of transcription of mRNA and rRNA, which is not normally known to be due to the feeding state, but rather to a toxic insult. Ultrastructural patterns revealed by of electron microscopy were coherent with an increase in detoxifying activity in liver, and this is corroborated by differences in cytochrome enzyme activities.

A major gap in some toxicological assessments is the lack of measurements investigating endocrine disrupting effects (Birnbaum, 2012). As noted previously, the central dogma in toxicology is that effects vary linearly to dose. This is true for standard poison intoxication. However, toxins with endocrine disruptive properties can give response curves that are U, inverted U or J in shape and are frequently observed in the case of exposure to environmental pollutants (Vandenberg et al., 2012). Endocrine disturbance is supported by observations in human (Gasnier et al., 2009) and rat testicular cells for R residues (Clair et al., 2012). In our study it is demonstrated by statistically significant sex hormone imbalances and disabled pituitary function. Moreover, doses varied from 50 ng/L to 2.5 g/L of glyphosate in R; that is, a factor 50 million, from which we cannot expect linear effects with such a wide range of doses tested, characteristic of the range of different kinds of environmental exposures (tap water, GM food and feed, diluted agricultural use). The kidneys and liver are also sensitive to endocrine disruptors. As the two major detoxifying organs, containing cytochrome P450 or other enzymes involved in xenobiotic or sex steroid metabolism, they often react with steroid sex hormone and related compounds (Pascussi et al., 2008).

Last but not least, we have identified phenolic acids as potential biomarkers of metabolic disturbances in the GM diet. We have also measured isoflavones in the diet even though maize does not produce these compounds. Rats indeed did not eat only maize but also other plants in an equilibrated diet. Even OECD 452 guidelines on chronic toxicity ask for testing phytoestrogen content of the diet. Importantly, decrease in phenolic acids is a good indicator of change in the metabolism of the GMO that could in turn lead to a reduced protection against the pathologies observed in the animals fed the NK603 GM maize. However, this does not exclude the possibility of other toxic effects of the GMO alone, which have not been identified in the experiment.

7. Discussion
7.1. Findings in regard with the contradictory hypotheses
Critics have claimed that no argument exists for R to be a sex hormone endocrine disruptor, which is based on a review by Williams et al. (2000), where most of the studies cover G effects alone and not R. We wish to draw attention again to the fact that G is never used as such, but in formulations with other substances allowing toxicity, both of target and non-target species. This is extensively described for G-based herbicides, but also for other pesticides (Eddleston et al., 2012). This is why, in our opinion, all discussion of our study referring to testing of G alone is not relevant. Furthermore, we find it incomprehensible that non-scientific assertions justify R innocuousness by the structural homology of G with non-toxic amino acids. In addition adjuvants in the R formulation cannot be judged harmless by a comparison of their activity to soap. There is no scientific basis to use these assertions to predict with certainty toxicological effects or safety. The fact that G alone is neither a carcinogen nor an endocrine disruptor in regulatory tests is not a proof of the safety of whole R formulations, especially when some formulations contained toxic compounds (Cox, 2004). The unexpected finding of new active principles with human cell toxicity capabilities in G-based herbicides has challenged the relevance of testing G alone as the active principle in R (Mesnage et al., 2012). R has already been demonstrated to be an endocrine disruptor in vivo (Dallegrave et al., 2007, Oliveira et al., 2007, Romano et al., 2010 and Romano et al., 2012) with the underlying mechanism understood in vitro.

Several studies have shown significant endocrine disrupting effects of R, such as decrease in progesterone production, decreased levels of Steroidogenic Acute Regulatory (StAR) mRNA production in MA-10 mouse Leydig cells (Walsh et al., 2000), decrease in aromatase mRNA and activity levels in JEG3 cells and placental and equine testicular microsomes (Richard et al., 2005 and Benachour et al., 2007), inhibition of transcriptional activities of androgens and of both α- and β-estrogen receptors in cells (Gasnier et al., 2009), and a decrease in testosterone production in rat Leydig cells (Clair et al., 2012). All these studies reinforce the biological relevance of our findings.

Some critics have emphasized that no adverse effects have been reported on either farm animals or in the human population of the USA who have consumed an unknown mixture GMO crop derived food. Such claims are scientifically unsound for the following reasons. First, it is important to note that there have been neither epidemiological studies of the human population nor monitoring of farm animals in an attempt to correlate any ill-health observed with the consumption of a given GM crop. Second, it should be recalled that farm animals are not reared to live for the entire duration of their natural lifespan, and thus usually do not live long enough to develop long-term chronic diseases, which contrasts with the rats in our life-long experiment. If any studies in lactating cows are conducted, biological analyses performed are far less complete than those done in regulatory tests using rodents including in our study. Third, as there is no labeling of GMO food and feed in the USA, the amount consumed is unknown, and no “control group” exists. Thus, without a clear traceability or labeling, no epidemiological survey can be performed.

7.2. Ethical issues
Many critics argue against our refusal to release all the raw data generated in our study. This is a very unusual request when we clearly stated that we plan several other papers out of this data set. Our study was not performed for regulatory purposes. However, due to the social impact and for full scientific understanding of the potential risks associated NK603 GM maize and R, we will release our raw data if the regulatory agencies that have taken industry data into account in their approval of their products also release the data pertinent for environmental and health risk assessments, in particular their longest toxicological tests on mammals, as we have indicated in our correspondence with EFSA. As a first step to this end, we have communicated the raw data underlying the data presented in Figs. 1 and 2 to the French food safety agency (ANSES), and answered their questions on experimental design and results, including analysis of food composition and mycotoxin content, etc.

Most of the criticisms on the topic of ethical conduct relate to animal welfare, some thinking that we overpassed the threshold in size of tumors above which animals should be euthanized, with the purpose of taking shocking photographs. However, it should be recalled that in a GLP environment, animal welfare is of major concern and that we fully respected the threshold in tumor size before euthanasia. Pictures of every animal and organ were taken. We presented those related to the most observed pathologies, including those of a microscopic nature, for illustrative purposes in Fig. 3, with rats representative of each group.

Some critics raised concerns about the role of the funders of this work, and possible conflicts of interest. Of course, the funders neither played a role in the design and conduct of the experiment, and nor in its interpretation. The data remained confidential to the funders. We recall that in the regulatory assessment of GMOs, chemicals and medicines, tests are conducted by the applying companies themselves, often in their own laboratories. As a result, conflicts of interest exist in these cases. These are even not claimed by authors from the company defending the safety of the tested products (Hammond et al., 2012). Our study does not aim to request commercialization of a new product. In contrast, we wanted to estimate the health risk of these products. It is the most detailed test conducted to date that is also independent from biotechnology and pesticide companies. We encourage others to replicate such chronic experiments, with greater statistical power. What is now urgently required is for the burden of proof to be obtained experimentally by studies conducted independent from industry. This was recommended by regulatory agencies in France that have assessed our work, even though their objective is more to regulate products than to review research. GM NK603 and R cannot be regarded as safe to date.

Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments
We would like to acknowledge again our funders as already stated in our original publication (FPH, CERES, Ministry of Research, CRIIGEN structural help). We warmly thank also fellowships for S.G. (Léa Nature, Nature Vivante), and all supports, constructive and positive comments coming from almost 300 scientists from more than 33 countries from 5 continents (November 2012).

References
Antoniou et al., 2012
M. Antoniou, M.E.M. Habib, C.V. Howard, R.C. Jennings, C. Leifert, R.O. Nodari, C.J. Robinson, J. Fagan
Teratogenic effects of glyphosate-based herbicides: divergence of regulatory decisions from scientific evidence
J. Environ. Anal. Toxicol., S4:006 (2012) http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2161-0525.S4-006

Benachour et al., 2007
N. Benachour, H. Sipahutar, S. Moslemi, C. Gasnier, C. Travert, G.E. Seralini
Time- and dose-dependent effects of roundup on human embryonic and placental cells
Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 53 (2007), pp. 126–133

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (52)
Birnbaum, 2012
L.S. Birnbaum
Environmental chemicals: evaluating low-dose effects
Environ. Health Perspect., 120 (4) (2012), pp. a143–a144

Full Text via CrossRef
Clair et al., 2012
E. Clair, R. Mesnage, C. Travert, G.E. Seralini
A glyphosate-based herbicide induces necrosis and apoptosis in mature rat testicular cells in vitro and testosterone decrease at lower levels
Toxicol. In Vitro, 26 (2) (2012), pp. 269–279

Article | PDF (1285 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (19)
Cooper and Kavlock, 1997
R.L. Cooper, R.J. Kavlock
Endocrine disruptors and reproductive development: a weight-of-evidence overview
J. Endocrinol., 152 (1997), pp. 159–166

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (211)
Cox, 2004
C. Cox
Herbicide factsheet – glyphosate
J. Pestic. Reform, 24 (2004), pp. 10–15

View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (30)
Cuffe, 2011
R.L. Cuffe
The inclusion of historical control data may reduce the power of a confirmatory study
Stat. Med., 30 (2011), pp. 1329–1338

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (4)
Dallegrave et al., 2007
E. Dallegrave, F.D. Mantese, R.T. Oliveira, A.J. Andrade, P.R. Dalsenter, A. Langeloh
Pre- and postnatal toxicity of the commercial glyphosate formulation in Wistar rats
Arch. Toxicol., 81 (2007), pp. 665–673

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (26)
Domingo, 2007
J.L. Domingo
Toxicity studies of genetically modified plants: a review of the published literature
Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr., 47 (2007), pp. 721–733

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (31)
Domingo and Giné Bordonaba, 2011
J.L. Domingo, J. Giné Bordonaba
A literature review on the safety assessment of genetically modified plants
Environ. Int., 37 (2011), pp. 734–742

Article | PDF (261 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (34)
Doull et al., 2007
J. Doull, D. Gaylor, H.A. Greim, D.P. Lovell, B. Lynch, I.C. Munro
Report of an Expert Panel on the reanalysis by of a 90-day study conducted by Monsanto in support of the safety of a genetically modified corn variety (MON 863)
Food Chem. Toxicol., 45 (2007), pp. 2073–2085

Article | PDF (244 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (24)
Eddleston et al., 2012
M. Eddleston, J.M. Street, I. Self, A. Thompson, T. King, N. Williams, G. Naredo, K. Dissanayake, L.M. Yu, F. Worek, H. John, S. Smith, H. Thiermann, J.B. Harris, R. Eddie Clutton
A role for solvents in the toxicity of agricultural organophosphorus pesticides
Toxicology, 294 (2012), pp. 94–103

Article | PDF (678 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (15)
EFSA, 2007
EFSA, 2007. EFSA review of statistical analyses conducted for the assessment of the MON 863 90-day rat feeding study.
EFSA, 2009
EFSA
Applications (references EFSA-GMO-NL-2005-22, EFSA-GMO-RX-NK603) for the placing on the market of the genetically modified glyphosate tolerant maize NK603 (…) under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto
EFSA J., 1137 (2009), pp. 16–50

Fear et al., 1998
N.T. Fear, E. Roman, G. Reeves, B. Pannett
Childhood cancer and paternal employment in agriculture: the role of pesticides
Br. J. Cancer, 77 (1998), pp. 825–829

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (52)
Gasnier et al., 2009
C. Gasnier, C. Dumont, N. Benachour, E. Clair, M.C. Chagnon, G.E. Seralini
Glyphosate-based herbicides are toxic and endocrine disruptors in human cell lines
Toxicology, 262 (2009), pp. 184–191

Article | PDF (602 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (83)
Gasnier et al., 2010
C. Gasnier, N. Benachour, E. Clair, C. Travert, F. Langlois, C. Laurant, C. Decroix-Laporte, G.E. Séralini
Dig1 protects against cell death provoked by glyphosate-based herbicides in human liver cell lines
J. Occup. Med. Toxicol., 5 (2010), p. 29

Full Text via CrossRef
Gasnier et al., 2011
C. Gasnier, C. Laurant, C. Decroix-Laporte, R. Mesnage, E. Clair, C. Travert, G.E. Séralini
Defined plant extracts can protect human cells against combined xenobiotic effects
J. Occup. Med. Toxicol., 6 (1) (2011), p. 3

Full Text via CrossRef
Hammond et al., 2004
B. Hammond, R. Dudek, J. Lemen, M. Nemeth
Results of a 13 week safety assurance study with rats fed grain from glyphosate tolerant corn
Food Chem. Toxicol., 42 (2004), pp. 1003–1014

Article | PDF (470 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (53)
Hammond et al., 2012
Hammond, B., Goldstein, D.A., Saltmiras, A., 2012. Letter to the editor. Food Chem. Toxicol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2012.10.044.
Hard and Khan, 2004
G.C. Hard, K.N. Khan
A contemporary overview of chronic progressive nephropathy in the laboratory rat, and its significance for human risk assessment
Toxicol. Pathol., 32 (2004), pp. 171–180

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (70)
Hayes, 2004
T.B. Hayes
There is no denying this: defusing the confusion about atrazine
Biosciences, 54 (2004), pp. 1139–1149

Hilbeck et al., 2012
A. Hilbeck, M. Meier, M. Trtikova
Underlying reasons of the controversy over adverse effects of Bt toxins on lady beetle and lacewing larvae
Environ. Sci. Eur., 24 (2012), p. 9

Full Text via CrossRef
Howdeshell et al., 2003
K.L. Howdeshell, P.H. Peterman, B.M. Judy, J.A. Taylor, C.E. Orazio, R.L. Ruhlen, F.S. Vom Saal, W.V. Welshons
Bisphenol A is released from used polycarbonate animal cages into water at room temperature
Environ. Health Perspect., 111 (2003), pp. 1180–1187

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (125)
James, 2011
C. James
Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2011
ISAAA Brief (2011), p. 43

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef
King-Herbert et al., 2010
A.P. King-Herbert, R.C. Sills, J.R. Bucher
Commentary: update on animal models for NTP studies
Toxicol. Pathol., 38 (2010), pp. 180–181

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (18)
Ledauphin et al., 2010
J. Ledauphin, C. Lemilbeau, D. Barillier, D. Hennequin
Differences in the volatile compositions of French labeled brandies using GC-MS and PLS-DA
J. Agric. Food Chem., 58 (2010), pp. 7782–7793

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (13)
Malatesta et al., 2002
M. Malatesta, C. Caporaloni, S. Gavaudan, M.B. Rocchi, S. Serafini, C. Tiberi, G. Gazzanelli
Ultrastructural morphometrical and immunocytochemical analyses of hepatocyte nuclei from mice fed on genetically modified soybean
Cell Struct. Funct., 27 (2002), pp. 173–180

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (59)
Malatesta et al., 2008a
M. Malatesta, F. Boraldi, G. Annovi, B. Baldelli, S. Battistelli, M. Biggiogera, D. Quaglino
A long-term study on female mice fed on a genetically modified soybean: effects on liver ageing
Histochem. Cell Biol., 130 (2008), pp. 967–977

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (21)
Malatesta et al., 2008b
M. Malatesta, F. Perdoni, G. Santin, S. Battistelli, S. Muller, M. Biggiogera
Hepatoma tissue culture (HTC) cells as a model for investigating the effects of low concentrations of herbicide on cell structure and function
Toxicol. In Vitro, 22 (2008), pp. 1853–1860

Article | PDF (806 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (19)
Malzert-Freon et al., 2010a
A. Malzert-Freon, D. Hennequin, S. Rault
Partial least squares analysis and mixture design for the study of the influence of composition variables on lipidic nanoparticle characteristics
J. Pharm. Sci., 99 (2010), pp. 4603–4615

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (6)
Malzert-Freon et al., 2010b
A. Malzert-Freon, G. Saint-Lorant, D. Hennequin, P. Gauduchon, L. Poulain, S. Rault
Influence of the introduction of a solubility enhancer on the formulation of lipidic nanoparticles with improved drug loading rates
Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm., 75 (2010), pp. 117–127

Article | PDF (694 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (11)
Mesnage et al., 2012
R. Mesnage, B. Bernay, G.E. Seralini
Ethoxylated adjuvants of glyphosate-based herbicides are active principles of human cell toxicity
Toxicology (2012) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2012.09.006

Myers et al., 2009a
J.P. Myers, F.S. vom Saal, B.T. Akingbemi, K. Arizono, S. Belcher, T. Colborn, I. Chahoud, et al.
Why public health agencies cannot depend on good laboratory practices as a criterion for selecting data: the case of bisphenol A
Environ. Health Perspect., 117 (2009), pp. 309–315

View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (102)
Myers et al., 2009b
J.P. Myers, R.T. Zoeller, F.S. vom Saal
A clash of old and new scientific concepts in toxicity, with important implications for public health
Environ. Health Perspect., 117 (2009), pp. 1652–1655

View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (61)
OECD, 1997
OECD
OECD series on principles of good laboratory practice and compliance monitoring
ENV/MC/CHEM (98) (1997), p. 17

Oliveira et al., 2007
A.G. Oliveira, L.F. Telles, R.A. Hess, G.A. Mahecha, C.A. Oliveira
Effects of the herbicide Roundup on the epididymal region of drakes Anas platyrhynchos
Reprod. Toxicol., 23 (2007), pp. 182–191

Article | PDF (1671 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (22)
Pascussi et al., 2008
J.M. Pascussi, S. Gerbal-Chaloin, C. Duret, M. Daujat-Chavanieu, M.J. Vilarem, P. Maurel
The tangle of nuclear receptors that controls xenobiotic metabolism and transport: crosstalk and consequences
Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol., 48 (2008), pp. 1–32

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (140)
Richard et al., 2005
S. Richard, S. Moslemi, H. Sipahutar, N. Benachour, G.E. Seralini
Differential effects of glyphosate and roundup on human placental cells and aromatase
Environ. Health Perspect., 113 (2005), pp. 716–720

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (134)
Romano et al., 2012
M.A. Romano, R.M. Romano, L.D. Santos, P. Wisniewski, D.A. Campos, P.B. de Souza, P. Viau, M.M. Bernardi, M.T. Nunes, C.A. de Oliveira
Glyphosate impairs male offspring reproductive development by disrupting gonadotropin expression
Arch. Toxicol., 86 (4) (2012), pp. 663–673

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (16)
Romano et al., 2010
R.M. Romano, M.A. Romano, M.M. Bernardi, P.V. Furtado, C.A. Oliveira
Prepubertal exposure to commercial formulation of the herbicide glyphosate alters testosterone levels and testicular morphology
Arch. Toxicol., 84 (4) (2010), pp. 309–317

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (24)
Sakamoto et al., 2008
Y. Sakamoto, Y. Tada, N. Fukumori, K. Tayama, H. Ando, H. Takahashi, Y. Kubo, A. Nagasawa, N. Yano, K. Yuzawa, A. Ogata
A 104-week feeding study of genetically modified soybeans in F344 rats
Shokuhin Eiseigaku Zasshi., 49 (2008), pp. 272–282

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (13)
Schreider et al., 2010
J. Schreider, C. Barrow, N. Birchfield, K. Dearfield, D. Devlin, S. Henry, M. Kramer, S. Schappelle, K. Solomon, D.L. Weed, M.R. Embry
Enhancing the credibility of decisions based on scientific conclusions: transparency is imperative
Toxicol. Sci., 116 (1) (2010), pp. 5–7

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (10)
Séralini et al., 2007
G.E. Séralini, D. Cellier, J.S. de Vendomois
New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity
Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 52 (2007), pp. 596–602

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (71)
Séralini et al., 2012
G.E. Séralini, E. Clair, R. Mesnage, S. Gress, N. Defarge, M. Malatesta, D. Hennequin, J.S. de Vendomois
Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize
Food Chem. Toxicol., 50 (2012), pp. 4221–4231

Article | PDF (2236 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (59)
Snell et al., 2012
C. Snell, A. Bernheim, J.B. Berge, M. Kuntz, G. Pascal, A. Paris, A.E. Ricroch
Assessment of the health impact of GM plant diets in long-term and multigenerational animal feeding trials: a literature review
Food Chem. Toxicol., 50 (2012), pp. 1134–1148

Article | PDF (269 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (40)
Spiroux de Vendomois et al., 2010
J. Spiroux de Vendomois, D. Cellier, C. Velot, E. Clair, R. Mesnage, G.E. Séralini
Debate on GMOs health risks after statistical findings in regulatory tests
Int. J. Biol. Sci., 6 (2010), pp. 590–598

Vandenberg et al., 2012
L.N. Vandenberg, T. Colborn, T.B. Hayes, J.J. Heindel, D.R. Jacobs Jr., D.H. Lee, T. Shioda, A.M. Soto, F.S. Vom Saal, W.V. Welshons, R.T. Zoeller, J.P. Myers
Hormones and endocrine-disrupting chemicals: low-dose effects and nonmonotonic dose responses
Endocr. Rev., 33 (2012), pp. 378–455

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (321)
Walsh et al., 2000
L.P. Walsh, C. McCormick, C. Martin, D.M. Stocco
Roundup inhibits steroidogenesis by disrupting steroidogenic acute regulatory (StAR) protein expression
Environ. Health Perspect., 108 (2000), pp. 769–776

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (139)
Williams et al., 2000
G.M. Williams, R. Kroes, I.C. Munro
Safety evaluation and risk assessment of the herbicide Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, for humans
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 31 (2000), pp. 117–165

Article | PDF (360 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (227)
Wold et al., 2001
S. Wold, M. Sjöström, L. Eriksson
PLS-regression: a basic tool of chemometrics
Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst., 58 (2001), pp. 109–130

Article | PDF (424 K) | View Record in Scopus | Citing articles (2035)
Wozniak et al., 2005
A.L. Wozniak, N.N. Bulayeva, C.S. Watson
Xenoestrogens at picomolar to nanomolar concentrations trigger membrane estrogen receptor-alpha-mediated Ca2+ fluxes and prolactin release in GH3/B6 pituitary tumor cells
Environ. Health Perspect., 113 (2005), pp. 431–439

View Record in Scopus | Full Text via CrossRef | Citing articles (178)

Yannick Chenet, a French winegrower, died after contracting leukemia, becoming the first farmer to have his illness officially linked to the pesticides he used for years on his crops. He is among 40 or so farmers in France whose illnesses have now been officially linked to their profession and the pesticides they have sprayed on the land. More than a quarter of the roughly 220,000 tons of pesticides used in Europe per year is sprayed onto French soil.

Yannick started working at 14 or 15 years of age and, like many children around the world, has been heavily exposed to pesticides and many other noxious chemicals. In April 2004, he inadvertently breathed in noxious fumes from his agricultural spraying machine without a mask on. Immediately admitted to hospital, he fell into a coma. Since then his illness continues to affect his kidneys and nervous system and he has again fallen into comas on several occasions.

Research by the European Union claims pesticides used on
fruits, vegetables and cereals harms fetuses and young
children. Since pesticides attack the brains of insects, experts
insist they're also "very likely" to damage human brains.

Dramatic deficits in brain function are seen in rural children with long-term exposure to pesticides compared with children not similarly exposed. Contamination has been documented in many studies from populations around the world, with breastmilk containing concentrations of lindane, heptachlor, benzene hexachloride, aldrin and endrin all above limits established by the U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization.

According to pediatrician Philip Landrigan of Mount Sinai Medical Center, we should have "very important concerns about the toxic effects of pesticides on children's nervous systems." Bernard Weiss of the Department of Environmental Medicine at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry stated, "It doesn't seem a surprise that you would see an effect, knowing what we know about pesticides and the elevated vulnerability of the developing brain."

According to Dr. Maryse Bouchard, "Pesticides act on a set of brain chemicals closely related to those involved in ADHD."

Children face higher risks from pesticides than adults and need greater protection against these chemicals, particularly in developing countries, according to a joint report published by FAO, the U.N. Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Children who were exposed to organophosphate pesticides while still in their mother's womb were more likely to develop attention disorders years later, according to researchers at the University of California, Berkeley's School of Public Health.

Findings published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP) examine the influence of prenatal organophosphate exposure on the later development of attention problems. The researchers found that prenatal levels of organophosphate metabolites were significantly linked to attention problems at age five, with the effects apparently stronger among boys. The organophosphate family of chemicals damages the nervous system (which includes the brain), so scientists are particularly concerned about children's exposure because their bodies are still developing. Chlorpyrifos is one of the many insecticides in this chemical family.

Different researchers at Harvard University have also associated greater exposure to organophosphate pesticides in school-aged children with higher rates of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms.

"These studies provide a growing body of evidence that organophosphate pesticide exposure can impact human neurodevelopment, particularly among children," said the study's principal investigator, Brenda Eskenazi, UC Berkeley professor of epidemiology and of maternal and child health. "We were especially interested in prenatal exposure because that is the period when a baby's nervous system is developing the most."

Reduce and Eliminate Exposure with Organic Food
President Obama's Cancer Panel recommends consumers choose food grown without chemical fertilizers or pesticides, antibiotics and growth hormones to decrease exposure to environmental chemicals that can increase the risk of cancer.

The journal Pediatrics published a study that concludes that children exposed to organophosphate pesticides at levels common among America's children are more likely to develop attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a disorder becoming more and more common in today's children. Researchers at Emory University [1] have found that switching children to an organic diet provides a "dramatic and immediate protective effect" against exposures to two organophosphate pesticides that are commonly used in U.S. agricultural production – malathion and chlorpyrifos. The results were published in the September 2005 issue of the scientific journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

"Immediately after substituting organic food items for the children's normal diets, the concentration of the organophosphorus pesticides found in their bodies decreased substantially to non-detectable levels until the conventional diets were re-introduced," says Dr. Lu, an assistant professor in the department of environmental and occupational health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University.

Twenty-three elementary-school-age children participated in a 15-day study that was divided into three parts. First the children ate their usual diet of conventionally-grown food for three days. Then they were switched to organically-grown substitutes for five days. For the final seven days, they were switched back to conventional food. The organic substitutes were mainly fruits, vegetables, juices and grain products (such as wheat) because these foods are often contaminated with organophosphates. Urine samples were collected twice a day for each child. Researchers tested the urine for signs of pesticides.

In the case of two organophosphate insecticides – malathion and chlorpyrifos – the results were startling. Signs of these two chemicals were found in the urine in the first part of the study. Almost immediately after the children switched to an organic diet, these chemicals could not be detected. The chemicals showed up again when the children switched back to their normal diet.

The researchers said, "We were able to demonstrate that an organic diet provides a dramatic and immediate protective effect against exposures to organophosphorus pesticides that are commonly used in agriculture."

Danger Warning
A tractor sprays pesticides on a food crop. A new UC Berkeley study finds a linkbetween prenatal exposure to pesticides and attention problems at age 5.

Pesticides are widely used for many purposes, including home, garden, commercial, and agricultural pest control. Thus, the potential for some degree of exposure to these chemicals is great. In general, pesticides can enter the body through the lungs, the mouth, and the skin. Of course, each class of pesticide will differ somewhat in the specific way it is absorbed. Recent studies have shown that young children may be at particularly increased risk of pesticide exposure for several reasons:

Their tendency to explore their environment with their mouths
Their closeness to the ground
Their increased time playing outdoors.

Kids may be exposed to pesticides in the following ways:

In Food:

The diet is clearly an important potential route of pesticides exposure in children and adults.

The small amounts of pesticides present on our food are called pesticide residues. Both adults and children consume these residues regularly to some degree.

Children's diets are relatively higher in fruits and vegetables than adults. Thus, they may be at increased risk of exposure from their diet.

According to the National Research Council, differences in diet between children and adults are responsible for most of the differences in the possible health effects of pesticides.

Children and infants tend to eat fewer types of foods and eat more processed foods than adults (infant formula, baby food, etc.). There is very little current evidence about the amount of pesticide residues in processed foods. However, the limited available evidence shows that processed foods in general may actually have fewer residues than unprocessed foods.

In the Home:

It is estimated that over 90% of U.S. homes use some form of pesticide.

In fact, most toxic pesticide exposure in humans occurs from misuse or accidents in the setting of the home or garden.

Infants may be exposed to pesticides in household dust by skin contact, breathing, and eating of the dust.

One study has found that pesticide residues may remain on toys, pillows, and other surfaces for up to two weeks after the house has been sprayed for bugs.

In Drinking Water:

Since children consume more water than any other substance, the water supply is clearly an important possible route of exposure to environmental chemicals.

Several scientific studies have examined the relative amounts of various pesticides in the drinking water supply in different parts of the country. Except in a few areas where dramatic pesticide contamination has occurred, most studies have concluded that the levels of pesticide in the drinking water supply in the U.S. is extremely low.

Outside the Home:

This category would include school, playground, daycare, and commercial settings.

These settings are probably not as important as the home in terms of pesticide exposure to children. However, exposure is possible in these settings especially if there has been recent pesticide application.

In Agricultural Settings:

Agricultural settings may be a risk factor for pesticide exposure in children, especially when one or both parents are agricultural workers.

Children may be exposed while playing in fields sprayed with agricultural pesticides.

Also, pesticide residues may be tracked into the home by parents who are agricultural workers.

One study looked at specific activities that might increase the chances of exposure to children of agricultural workers. These include, a delay in changing clothing after spraying pesticides, mixing pesticide-contaminated clothing with the family wash, applying pesticides within 50 yards of the well.

It is important to remember that some of the pesticides used in agriculture may still remain on the fruits and vegetables in the supermarket.

After trucking across the high plains for five hours, and casting my eyes over perhaps 100,000 acres or more of winter's still deathly gray industrial farmland, I came face to face with the newly famous Dr. Don M. Huber in the cave-dark meeting room of the Black Horse Inn just outside the American Heartland village of Creighton, Nebraska.

On the morning of March 24, along with about 80 farmers and Extension agents, I listened as Huber discoursed with erudition and eloquence upon industrial farming practices that may be impacting nearly every morsel of food produced on the planet, and that subsequently may also be having staggeringly serious health consequences for plants, animals, and human beings.

Huber is emeritus soil scientist of Purdue University, and a retired U.S. Army Colonel who served as an intelligence analyst, for 41 years, active and reserves. In Nebraska, he stood ramrod straight for three hours with no notes and spoke with an astonishing depth and range of knowledge on crucial, controversial matters of soil science, genetic engineering, and the profound impact of the widely used herbicide glyphosate upon soil and plants, and ultimately upon the health of animals and human beings.

Dressed in a conservative dark suit and tie, Huber set the stage for his presentation by observing that he has been married for 52 years, and has 11 children, 36 grandchildren, and a great-grandchild on the way. He then began his formal talk framed by a PowerPoint slide bearing a Biblical quote: "All flesh is grass." – Isaiah 4:6. With this he emphasized the foundational reality that the biotech grains we eat, as well as the biotech grains eaten by cows, hogs, and chickens, are grown in vast herbicide-treated fields.

For the domineering giants of industrial agriculture – multinational corporations, universities, and governments – Huber's assertions about the impact of glyphosate, and the mounting scientific questions about GMO crops, may be as significant and disrupting as Martin Luther's "heretical" act in 1517. That's when Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany to challenge the systemic problems in the almighty institutions of his era.

Luther disputed the claim that spiritual forgiveness from sins could be legitimately sold for money. Huber and other researchers say they are accumulating evidence that – along with the 2010 report of the U.S. President's Cancer panel which bluntly blames chemicals for the staggering prevalence of cancers – raises profoundly challenging questions about the chemical and genetic-engineering practices of industrial agriculture. The challenge, if it holds up, has implications not just for agricultural institutions, but also for the primary food chain serving the Earth's population.

Not an altogether new controversy, the complex matters of industrial agriculture, genetic engineering and the far-flung use of herbicides has been ominously and exponentially accentuated in the last year by virtue of its ominous context: last summer's epic oil catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico, the nation-ripping 9.0 earthquake in Japan earlier this month, with its subsequent tsunami and nuclear meltdown which is contaminating the nation's water and food chain, in combination with the statistical reality that on our planet of nearly seven billion people, over a billion human beings – one of every six of us – is hungry.

All of this was brought into prominent public focus – both sharp and fuzzy – in January of this year by the unlikely matter of alfalfa.

Challenges to the Web of Life

The seminar with Dr. Huber, sponsored by Knox County Extension and the Center for Rural Affairs, commenced on a somber note. The moderator announced that Terry Gompert, 66, a veteran Extension educator and respected advocate for sustainable agriculture, and a man who had played a key role in organizing the conference, had just suffered a massive heart attack. A moment of silence followed before Dr. Huber began his presentation. Mr. Gompert died on March 25, the day after the conference he organized.

At the conference, Huber's talk was highly technical, yet he had easy command of voluminous technical detail. For many, it must have sounded like an alien language as he spun out the esoteric terms: zwitterion, desorbtion, translocation, rhizosphere, meristemic, speudomanads, microbiocidae, bradyrhizobium, shikimate, and more.

Huber spoke about a range of key factors involved in plant growth, including sunlight, water, temperature, genetics, and nutrients taken up from the soil. "Any change in any of these factors impacts all the factors," he said. "No one element acts alone, but all are part of a system…When you change one thing," he said, "everything else in the web of life changes in relationship."

That brought him to the subject of glyphosate, the most widely used herbicide, most commonly recognized in the product named Roundup®. Because it is so widely used, Huber said, it is having a profound impact upon mega millions of farm acres around the world. More than 155 million acres of cropland were treated with glyphosate during the 2008 growing season, and even more by now. Subsequently, Huber said, this chemical is having a sweeping impact on the food chain.

http://thecalloftheland.wordpress.com/2011/03/29/latter-day-luther-nails-troubling-thesis-to-gm-farm-food-citadels/

After trucking across the high plains for five hours, and casting my eyes over perhaps 100,000 acres or more of winter’s still deathly gray industrial farmland, I came face to face with the newly famous Dr. Don M. Huber in the cave-dark meeting room of the Black Horse Inn just outside the American Heartland village of Creighton, Nebraska.

On the morning of March 24, along with about 80 farmers and Extension agents, I listened as Huber discoursed with erudition and eloquence upon industrial farming practices that may be impacting nearly every morsel of food produced on the planet, and that subsequently may also be having staggeringly serious health consequences for plants, animals, and human beings.

Huber is emeritus soil scientist of Purdue University, and a retired U.S. Army Colonel who served as an intelligence analyst, for 41 years, active and reserves. In Nebraska, he stood ramrod straight for three hours with no notes and spoke with an astonishing depth and range of knowledge on crucial, controversial matters of soil science, genetic engineering, and the profound impact of the widely used herbicide glyphosate upon soil and plants, and ultimately upon the health of animals and human beings.

Dressed in a conservative dark suit and tie, Huber set the stage for his presentation by observing that he has been married for 52 years, and has 11 children, 36 grandchildren, and a great-grandchild on the way. He then began his formal talk framed by a PowerPoint slide bearing a Biblical quote: “All flesh is grass.” – Isaiah 4:6. With this he emphasized the foundational reality that the biotech grains we eat, as well as the biotech grains eaten by cows, hogs, and chickens, are grown in vast herbicide-treated fields.

Martin Luther nails his theses to the church door.

For the domineering giants of industrial agriculture — multinational corporations, universities, and governments — Huber’s assertions about the impact of glyphosate, and the mounting scientific questions about GMO crops, may be as significant and disrupting as Martin Luther’s “heretical” act in 1517. That’s when Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany to challenge the systemic problems in the almighty institutions of his era.

Luther disputed the claim that spiritual forgiveness from sins could be legitimately sold for money. Huber and other researchers say they are accumulating evidence that — along with the 2010 report of the U.S. President’s Cancer panel which bluntly blames chemicals for the staggering prevalence of cancers — raises profoundly challenging questions about the chemical and genetic-engineering practices of industrial agriculture. The challenge, if it holds up, has implications not just for agricultural institutions, but also for the primary food chain serving the Earth’s population.

Not an altogether new controversy, the complex matters of industrial agriculture, genetic engineering and the far-flung use of herbicides has been ominously and exponentially accentuated in the last year by virtue of its ominous context: last summer’s epic oil catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico, the nation-ripping 9.0 earthquake in Japan earlier this month, with its subsequent tsunami and nuclear meltdown which is contaminating the nation’s water and food chain, in combination with the statistical reality that on our planet of nearly seven billion people, over a billion human beings — one of every six of us — is hungry.

All of this was brought into prominent public focus — both sharp and fuzzy — in January of this year by the unlikely matter of alfalfa.

Challenges to the Web of Life

The seminar with Dr. Huber, sponsored by Knox County Extension and the Center for Rural Affairs, commenced on a somber note. The moderator announced that Terry Gompert, 66, a veteran Extension educator and respected advocate for sustainable agriculture, and a man who had played a key role in organizing the conference, had just suffered a massive heart attack. A moment of silence followed before Dr. Huber began his presentation. Mr. Gompert died on March 25, the day after the conference.

Dr. Huber discusses food and safety concerns at the Black Horse Inn, Creighton, Nebraska. (Photo by S. McFadden)

At the conference, Huber’s talk was highly technical, yet he had easy command of voluminous detail. For many in the audience, it must have sounded like an alien language as he spun out the esoteric terms: zwitterion, desorbtion, translocation, rhizosphere, meristemic, speudomanads, microbiocidae, bradyrhizobium, shikimate, and more.

Huber spoke about a range of key factors involved in plant growth, including sunlight, water, temperature, genetics, and nutrients taken up from the soil. “Any change in any of these factors impacts all the factors,” he said. “No one element acts alone, but all are part of a system.”

“When you change one thing,” he said, “everything else in the web of life changes in relationship.”

That brought him to the subject of glyphosate, the most widely used herbicide around the world, and a chemical most commonly recognized in the product named Roundup®. Because it is so widely used, Huber said, it is having a profound impact upon mega millions of farm acres around the world. More than 155 million acres of cropland were treated with glyphosate during the 2008 growing season, and even more by now. Subsequently, Huber said, this chemical is having a sweeping impact on the food chain.

He asserted that glyphosate compromises plant defense mechanisms and thereby increases their susceptibility to disease. He said that it reduces the availability and uptake of essential nutrients, and that it increases the virulence of pathogens that attack plants. Ultimately, Huber said, all of these factors reduce crop vigor and yield (Yield Drag).

Most dramatically, Huber reported on what he described as a newly discovered pathogen. While the pathogen is not new to the environment, Huber said, it is new to science. This pathogen apparently increases in soil treated with glyphosate, he said, and is then taken up by plants, later transmitted to animals via their feed, and onward to human beings by the plants and meat they consume. The pathogen is extraordinarily small. It can be observed only via an electron microscope operating at 38,000 power of magnification. The pathogen has yet to be phenotyped (descrubed) or named, though that work is almost complete, Huber said. He specified that all the research and data would be published in a matter of weeks.

Huber warned that ignoring these emerging realities may have dire consequences for agriculture such as rendering soils infertile, crops non-productive, and plants less nutritious. He said it could also, and apparently already is, compromising the health and well-being of animals and humans.

The Stratosphere of Controversy

Alfalafa

What propelled Huber, glyphosate and biotech crops into the stratosphere of public attention earlier this year was a pending decision on alfalfa (hay) by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). The “queen of forages,” alfalfa is the principal feedstock for the dairy industry. The USDA was being asked to approve unrestricted use of genetically engineered alfalfa seeds, which could result in as many as 20 million more acres of land being sprayed with up to 23 million more pounds of toxic herbicides each year.

Because alfalfa is pollinated by bees that fly and cross-pollinate between fields many miles apart, the biotech crop will inevitably contaminate natural and organic alfalfa varieties.

Dr. Huber wrote a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack asking for a delay in making the decision, and for the resources to do further research. In his letter, Huber raised questions about the safety of glyphosate. Huber’s letter also warned of the new pathogen, apparently related to the use of glyphosate, which appears to significantly impact the health of plants, animals, and probably human beings. He said laboratory tests have confirmed the presence of the organism in pigs, cattle and other livestock fed these crops, and that they have experienced sterility, spontaneous abortions, and infertility.

“I believe the threat we are facing from this pathogen is unique and of a high-risk status,” Huber wrote. “In layman’s terms, it should be treated as an emergency.” Vilsack set Huber’s letter aside for later consideration, and on January 27 he authorized the unrestricted commercial cultivation of genetically modified alfalfa. Immediately thereafter, the Center for Food Safety and Earthjustice filed a lawsuit against the USDA, charging that the agency’s approval of genetically engineered alfalfa was unlawful.

While Huber’s letter of warning was not intended for public consumption, it was leaked and immediately went viral on the Internet. In a matter of days Huber became a lightning rod, attracting intense attention from both the scientific community, and the general public, which is understandably concerned about the genetically engineered food it has never wanted and — since GM food is unlabeled — never been able to identify. The prospect of a new and virulent pathogen sweeping through the food chain was profoundly unsettling

Meanwhile, researchers were deeply upset that they were not first notified by Huber of the new pathogen — as is customary — before the matter became public knowledge. They felt they had been blindsided. Huber says that his letter to USDA Secretary Vilsack was leaked, and thus its publication was not his doing.

Huber became the focus of tremendous pushback. His message of urgent concern and the need for delay until more research was completed was unwelcome in many corporate and university citadels, and was deemed heresy by some vested in the multi-billion dollar industry of GMO crops.

The biggest beef researchers have with Huber — who is well known in his field as a member of the American Phytopathological Society and as part of the USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System – is that he has not yet made data available for scientific scrutiny. Many researchers, including some at Purdue, say Huber’s data and hypotheses, when studied, are not likely to hold up to peer review, and that in general his allegations are exaggerated.

When contacted for comment on Huber’s concerns, Monsanto, maker of Roundup ® (glyphosate) and producer of Roundup Ready® seeds, sent a link to a host of professional criticisms of Huber’s work as well as to their official corporate statement: “Independent field studies and lab tests by multiple U.S. universities and by Monsanto prior to, and in response to, these allegations,” the statement reads in part, “do not corroborate his claims.”

Consequences

Glyphosate is a particularly strong broad-spectrum toxin with the power to kill many kinds of plants that have been designated as weeds. As a chelator, or binder, glyphosate changes the physiology and thereby makes plants susceptible to plant pathogens. Roundup Ready® plants are tolerant of glyphosate because technology inserts a new gene. While the RR plants do not die after the toxic herbicide is sprayed over farm fields, the plants do suffer a reduced efficiency in some crucial regards, according to some researchers, changing the nutrient balance in plants. When that change occurs, all subsequent relationships — including the diet of livestock and humans — is changed.

The extensive use of glyphosate and the rapid, widespread use of GM crops resistant to it, have intensified the deficiencies of essential micronutrients, and some macronutrients. This is leading, Huber argues, to weaker and more disease-prone plants, animals, and people. In his presentation, he offered a list of about 40 diseases that, he says, tend to increase in farm fields where glyphosate is used. Those plant diseases include Sun Scald, Leaf Chlorosis, Tomato Wilt, Apple Canker, Barley Root Rot, Bean Root Rot, Wheat Take All, Wheat Head Scab, Wheat Glume, and Grape Black Goo.

Subsequently, he hypothesized, the decrease in nutrients and the increase in the new pathogen in food lead to empty calories, which likely explains increases in allergies, and chronic diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s.

The list of diseases that Huber suspects may be affected by glyphosate and the new pathogen is, he said, increasing as growers and pathologists recognize the cause-effect relationship:
o Increase in cancers of the liver, thyroid, kidneys, tests, and skin melanomas.
o Increase in allergic reactions in general, and an increase of up to 50% in soybean allergies in the USA in the last three years.
o Increase on an epidemic-scale in the incidence of Alzheimer’s disease, perhaps as much as 9,000% over the last 30 years. Specialists say they expect the incidence of Alzhiemer’s to spike far higher over the next four years.
o Increase in the incidence of Parkinson’s disease, which researchers say, is being provoked in part by the factor of chemical pesticides.

What Has Changed?

As if it were a mantra, during his three-hour talk Dr. Huber often raised a rhetorical question: What has changed? If all of these troubling conditions are on the rise for plants, animals and humans in recent years, then what has changed to bring it about?

The most apparent change, he answered, is that glyphosate and genetically engineered plants are out widely in the world. According to Huber, farm animals, including cattle, pigs, horses and chickens that are fed GM crops grown on glyphosate-treated fields have shown an alarming increase in sterility, spontaneous abortions, and stillbirths. By way of anecdotal evidence, he said he gets two to three communications a week from farmers and veterinarians about this troubling phenomenon. “We can no longer ignore the increase in livestock infertility, stillbirths, and spontaneous abortions over the last three to four years,” he said.

GMO feed grown on glyphosate treated fields tends to irritate the stomach of livestock, such that many farm animals are fed daily rations of bicarbonate of soda in an attempt to sooth their stomach lining. Huber showed a slide bearing images of dissected hog stomachs; one from a hog fed GMO feed and the other conventional feed. The GMO hog had a rudely inflamed mass of stomach and intestinal tissue.

A handout from Dr. Huber that was made available at the Nebraska seminar cited 117 peer-reviewed scientific studies that raise serious questions about the impact of glyphosate. These studies have reached critical mass, Huber said, and they could no longer be discounted or ignored. Yet, there are also a substantial number of studies stating that glyphosate and GMO crops are safe and ought to be the cause of no concern.

What Is this Stuff?

Glyphosate is the most used herbicide in the USA. Every year, 5 to 8 million pounds are used on lawns and yards, and another 85 to 90 million pounds are used in agriculture. It is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide used to kill weeds, especially weeds known to compete with crops grown widely across the Midwest. Initially sold by Monsanto in the 1970s under the trade name Roundup®, its U.S. patent expired in 2000, and thus glyphosate is now marketed in the U.S. and worldwide in different solution strengths under various trade names. Because these products may contain other ingredients, they may have different effects.

Glyphosate inhibits a key enzyme that is involved in the synthesis of amino acids in the plant. Many fungi and bacteria also have this same pathway. Aromatic amino acids in plants are the building blocks for many of their defense compounds.

Some crops have been genetically engineered to be resistant to it (i.e., Roundup Ready®). Such crops allow farmers to use glyphosate as a post-emergence herbicide against both broadleaf and cereal weeds, but the development of similar resistance in some weed species is emerging as a costly problem.

Glyphosate kills plants by interfering with the synthesis of the amino acids which are used by the plant as building blocks in for growth and for defense against disease and insects. Plants that are genetically engineered to tolerate the glyphosate contain a gene that provides an alternative pathway for nutrients that is not blocked by the glyphosate herbicide. But this duplicate pathway requires energy from the plant that could be used for yield, thus many GMO crops experience Yield Drag – a reduction in yield.

Huber had several recommendations for growers, especially a much more judicious use of glyphosate, as small a dose as possible. He said farmers also need to provide supplementary nutrients to counteract its effects and thereby to restore plant resistance to toxins and diseases.

He mentioned that there are other herbicide products on the market, but they are more specific to particular weeds and degrade more swiftly, whereas glyphosate is broad spectrum and thus kills many types of weeds, and also endures for a longer span of time in the soil and plants.

“Slow down,” Huber said. “It takes time to restore soil biota if a field has been treated with glyphosate. We have 30 years of accumulated damage, so it may take some time to remediate all of this.”

“There are a lot of serious questions about the impacts of glyphosate that we need answers for in order to continue using this technology,” he continued. “I don’t believe we can ignore these questions any more if we want to ensure a safe, sustainable food supply and abundant crop production.”

Primary Realities

In his presentation at the Black Horse Inn Huber was convincing in his demeanor, encyclopedic in his knowledge, precise and eloquent in his delivery. Late in the morning as he spoke of the fertility and yield issues, the complications for farmers, and the increased prevalence of disease, his eyes momentarily welled up with tears. Then as he concluded his talk he received a standing ovation from the assembly of about 80 Nebraska farmers and Extension staff.

Still, Huber’s personal integrity and his positive reception, at least at the Black Horse Inn, may be of small consequence in the face of a tsunami of criticism arising from the citadels of corporations and universities. None of that will be resolved until the data he and others have gathered passes peer review.

The primary realities in the GM and glyphosate debates are corporate avidity, scientific uncertainty, and overwhelming public disapproval. Many peer-reviewed articles suggest that biotech crops and foods are harmless; many suggest otherwise. The jury is still out. However, as Huber was arguing, the number of published articles showing that glyphosate and the biotech crops grown in its chemical soup cause harm to livestock is rising rapidly.

Studies showing the public has little taste for genetically engineered foods, and especially not for unlabeled and thus unidentifiable genetically engineered foods, remain convincing. According to reports from Food & Water Watch, 90% of Americans want GM foods labeled, and 91% say the FDA should not allow genetically modified pigs, chicken and cattle into the food supply. To date, the main parties keen about promoting unlabeled GM foods, and their herbicidal aides, are multinational corporations and their investors.

“Before we jump off the cliff,” Huber said, “we need to have more research done. It takes a lot to reverse the problems.” Many observers would argue, convincingly, that we have already jumped off the cliff.

Huber sought just $25,000 to do sequencing to establish the phenotype of the newly identified pathogen, and then to name it. But no government, university, or corporation would provide that relatively paltry amount of money. Finally, a private individual came forward and made the money available. Then the lab that was originally keen to do the phenotyping backed out. The issue had become a hot potato and they did not want the controversy. Still, Huber persevered, and he said they should have the phenotype established, and then be able to name the pathogen, in a matter of weeks.

“Let me emphasize that all of this is not a calamity,” Huber said, surprisingly, near the end of his talk. “Agriculture is the most critical infrastructure for any society. American agriculture has undergone a revolution and it will continue to progress.

“Still, I saw no reason to rush into the critical alfalfa decision and to thereby cause so many more acres to be treated with glyphosate,” he said. “Why take a chance until we get the answers? Research needs to be done…There is lots of new data that needs to be considered, lots of new studies that cannot be ignored.”

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_22875.cfm

Monsanto is Poisoning Us All: Famous Scientist, Don Huber Exposes Hazards of Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide
Latter-Day Luther Nails Troubling Thesis to GM Farm & Food Citadels
By Steven McFadden
Latter-Day Luther Nails Troubling Thesis to GM Farm & Food Citadels, March 29, 2011
Straight to the Source

For related articles and more information, please visit OCA's Genetic Engineering page, and our Millions Against Monsanto page.

AG CHEMICAL AND CROP NUTRIENT INTERACTIONS – CURRENT UPDATE

Don M. Huber, Emeritus Professor, Purdue University

ABSTRACT: Micronutrients are regulators, inhibitors and activators of physiological processes, and plants provide a primary dietary source of these elements for animals and people. Micronutrient deficiency symptoms are often indistinct (“hidden hunger”) and commonly ascribed to other causes such as drought, extreme temperatures, soil pH, etc. The sporadic nature of distinct visual symptoms, except under severe deficiency conditions, has resulted in a reluctance of many producers to remediate micronutrient deficiency. Lost yield, reduced quality, and increased disease are the unfortunate consequences of untreated micronutrient deficiency. The shift to less tillage, herbicide resistant crops and extensive application of glyphosate has significantly changed nutrient availability and plant efficiency for a number of essential plant nutrients. Some of these changes are through direct toxicity of glyphosate while others are more indirect through changes in soil organisms important for nutrient access, availability, or plant uptake. Compensation for these effects on nutrition can maintain optimum crop production efficiency, maximize yield, improve disease resistance, increase nutritional value, and insure food and feed safety.

INTRODUCTION

Thirty+ years ago, U.S. agriculture started a conversion to a monochemical herbicide program focused around glyphosate (Roundup®). The near simultaneous shift from conventional tillage to no-till or minimum tillage stimulated this conversion and the introduction of genetically modified crops tolerant to glyphosate. The introduction of genetically modified (Roundup Ready®) crops has greatly increased the volume and scope of glyphosate usage, and conversion of major segments of crop production to a monochemical herbicide strategy. Interactions of glyphosate with plant nutrition and increased disease have been previously over looked, but become more obvious each year as glyphosate residual effects become more apparent

The extensive use of glyphosate, and the rapid adoption of genetically modified glyphosate-tolerant crops such as soybean, corn, cotton, canola, sugar beets, and alfalfa; with their greatly increased application of glyphosate for simplified weed control, have intensified deficiencies of numerous essential micronutrients and some macronutrients. Additive nutrient inefficiency of the Roundup Ready® (RR) gene and glyphosate herbicide increase the need for micronutrient remediation, and established soil and tissue levels for nutrients considered sufficient for specific crop production may be inadequate indicators in a less nutrient efficient glyphosate weed management program.

Understanding glyphosate’s mode of action and impact of the RR gene, indicate strategies to offset negative impacts of this monochemical system on plant nutrition and its predisposition to disease. A basic consideration in this regard should be a much more judicious use of glyphosate. Glyphosate damage is often attributed to other causes such as drought, cool soils, deep seeding, high temperatures, crop residues, water fluctuations, etc. Table X provides some of the common symptoms of drift and residual glyphosate damage to crops. This paper is an update of information on nutrient and disease interactions affected by glyphosate and the RR gene(s), and includes recently published research in the European Journal of Agronomy and other international scientific publications.

UNDERSTANDING GLYPHOSATE

Glyphosate (N-(phosphomonomethyl)glycine) is a strong metal chelator and was first patented as such by Stauffer Chemical Co. in 1964 (U.S. Patent No. 3,160,632). Metal chelates are used extensively in agriculture to increase solubility or uptake of essential micronutrients that are essential for plant physiological processes. They are also used as herbicides and other biocides (nitrification inhibitors, fungicides, plant growth regulators, etc.) where they immobilize specific metal co-factors (Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Zn) essential for enzyme activity. In contrast to some compounds that chelate with a single or few metal species, glyphosate is a broadspectrum chelator with both macro and micronutrients (Ca, Mg, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Zn). It is this strong, broadspectrum chelating ability that also makes glyphosate a broad-spectrum herbicide and a potent antimicrobial agent since the function of numerous essential enzymes is affected (Ganson and Jensen, 1988).

Primary emphasis in understanding glyphosate’s herbicidal activity has been on inhibition of the enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) at the start of the Shikimate physiological pathway for secondary metabolism. This enzyme requires reduced FMN as a co-factor (catalyst) whose reduction requires manganese (Mn). Thus, by immobilizing Mn by chelation, glyphosate denies the availability of reduced FMN for the EPSPS enzyme. It also can affect up to 25 other plant enzymes that require Mn as a co-factor and numerous other enzymes in both primary and secondary metabolism that require other metal co-factors (Co, Cu, Fe, Mg, Ni, Zn). Several of these enzymes also function with Mn in the Shikimate pathway that is responsible for plant responses to stress and defense against pathogens (amino acids, hormones, lignin, phytoalexins, flavenoids, phenols, etc.). By inhibiting enzymes in the Shikimate pathway, a plant becomes highly susceptible to various ubiquitous soilborne pathogens (Fusarium, Pythium, Phytophthora, Rhizoctonia, etc.). It is this pathogenic activity that actually kills the plant as “the herbicidal mode of action” (Johal and Rahe, 1984; Levesque and Rahe, 1992, Johal and Huber, 2009). If glyphosate is not translocated to the roots because of stem boring insects or other disruption of the vascular system, aerial parts of the plant may be stunted, but the plant is not killed.

Recognizing that glyphosate is a strong chelator to immobilize essential plant micronutrients provides an understanding for the various non-herbicidal and herbicidal effects of glyphosate. Glyphosate is a phloem-mobile, systemic chemical in plants that accumulates in meristematic tissues (root, shoot tip, reproductive, legume nodules) and is released into the rhizosphere through root exudation (from RR as well as non-RR plants) or mineralization of treated plant residues. Degradation of glyphosate in most soils is slow or non-existent since it is not ‘biodegradable’ and is primarily by microbial co-metabolism when it does occur. Although glyphosate can be rapidly immobilized in soil (also spray tank mixtures, and plants) through chelation with various cat-ions (Ca, Mg, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Zn), it is not readily degraded and can accumulate for years (in both soils and perennial plants). Very limited degradation may be a “safety” feature with glyphosate since most degradation products are toxic to normal as well as RR plants. Phosphorus fertilizers can desorb accumulated glyphosate that is immobilized in soil to damage and reduce the physiological efficiency of subsequent crops. Some of the observed affects of glyphosate are presented in table 1.

TABLE 1. Some things we know about glyphosate that influence plant nutrition and disease.

1. Glyphosate is a strong metal chelator (for Ca, Co, Cu, Fe, Mn, Mg, Ni, Zn) – in the spray tank, in soil and in plants.

2. It is rapidly absorbed by roots, stems, and leaves, and moves systemically throughout the plant (normal and RR).

3. Accumulates in meristematic tissues (root, shoot, legume nodules, and reproductive sites) of normal and RR plants.

4. Inhibits EPSPS in the Shikimate metabolic pathway and many other plant essential enzymes.

5. Increases susceptibility to drought and disease.

6. Non-specific herbicidal activity (broad-spectrum weed control).

7. Some of the applied glyphosate is exuded from roots into soil.

8. Immobilized in soil by chelating with soil cat-ions (Ca, Co, Cu, Fe, Mg, Mn, Ni, Zn).

9. Persists and accumulates in soil and plants for extended periods (years) – it is not ‘biodegradable,’ but is rapidly immobilized by chelation generally.

10. Desorbed from soil particles by phosphorus and is available for root uptake by all plants.

11. Toxic to soil organisms that facilitate nutrient access, availability, or absorption of nutrients.

12. Inhibits the uptake and translocation of Fe, Mn, and Zn at very low, non-herbicidal rates.

13. Stimulates soilborne pathogenic and other soil microbes to reduce nutrient availability.

14. Reduces secondary cell wall formation and lignin in RR and non-RR plants.

15. Inhibits nitrogen fixation by chelating Ni for ureide synthesis and is toxic to Rhizoiaceae.

16. Reduces physiological availability and concentration of Ca, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, and Zn in plant tissues and seed.

17. Residual soil activity can damage plants through root uptake.

18. Increases mycotoxins in stems, straw, grain, and fruit.

19. Reduces photosynthesis (CO2 fixation).

20. Causes fruit (bud) drop and other hormonal effects.

21. Accumulates in food and feed products to enter the food chain as an item of food safety.

UNDERSTANDING THE ROUNDUP READY® GENE

Plants genetically engineered for glyphosate-tolerance contain the Roundup Ready® gene(s) that provide an alternate EPSPS pathway (EPSPS-II) that is not blocked by glyphosate. The purpose of these gene inserts is to provide herbicidal selectivity so glyphosate can be applied directly to these plants rather than only for preplant applications. As an additional physiological mechanism, activity of this duplicate pathway requires energy from the plant that could be used for yield. The RR genes are ‘silent’ in meristematic tissues where glyphosate accumulates so that these rapidly metabolizing tissues are not provided an active alternative EPSPS pathway to counter the physiological effects of glyphosate’s inhibition of EPSPS. Meristematic tissues also are areas of high physiologic activity requiring a higher availability of the essential micronutrients needed for cell division and growth that glyphosate immobilizes by chelation.

Residual glyphosate in RR plant tissues can immobilize Fe, Mn, Zn or other nutrients applied as foliar amendments for 8-35 days after it has been applied. This reduces the availability of micronutrients required for photosynthesis, disease resistance, and other critical physiological functions.The presence of the RR gene(s) reduces nutrient uptake and physiological efficiency and may account for some of the ‘yield drag’ reported for RR crops when compared with the ‘normal’ isolines from which they were derived. Reduced physiological efficiency from the RR gene is also reflected in reduced water use efficiency (WUE) and increased drought stress (table 2).

It should be recognized that:

1. There is nothing in the glyphosate-tolerant plant that operates on the glyphosate applied to the plant.

2. All the technology does is insert an alternative enzyme (EPSPS-II) that is not blocked by glyphosate in mature tissue.

3. When glyphosate enters the plant, it is not selective; it chelates with a host of elements influencing nutrient availability, disease resistance, and the plant’s other physiological functions.

4. Glyphosate is present for the life of the plant or until it is exuded into soil or groundwater through the roots. Degradation products are toxic to RR and non-RR plants.

TABLE 2. Some things we know about the glyphosate-tolerance (RR) gene(s).

1. Provides selective herbicidal activity for glyphosate.

2. Inserts an alternative EPSPS pathway that is not sensitive to glyphosate action in mature tissue.

3. Reduces the plant’s physiological efficiency of Fe, Mn, Ni, Zn, etc.

4. Inactive (silent) in meristematic tissues (root and shoot tips, legume root nodules, and reproductive tissues).

5. Reduces nutrient uptake and efficiency.

6. Increases drought stress.

7. Reduces N-fixation.

8. Lowers seed nutrient content.

9. Transferred in pollen to plants, and from degrading plant tissues to microbes.

10. Generally causes a yield ‘drag’ compared with near-isogenic normal plants from which it was derived.

11. Has greatly increased the application of glyphosate.

12. Permanent in plants once it is introduced.

INTERACTIONS OF GLYPHOSATE WITH PLANT NUTRITION

Glyphosate can affect nutrient efficiency in the plant by chelating essential nutrient co-factors after application since there is many times more ‘free’ glyphosate in the plant than all of the unbound cat-ions. Chelation of Mn and other micronutrients after application of glyphosate is frequently observed as a ‘flashing’ or yellowing that persists until the plant can ‘resupply’ the immobilized nutrients. The duration of ‘flashing’ is correlated with the availability of micronutrients in soil. Symptom remission indicates a resumption of physiological processes, but is not an indicator of plant nutrient sufficiency since micronutrient deficiencies are commonly referred to as ‘hidden hunger.’ As a strong nutrient chelator, glyphosate can reduce physiological efficiency by immobilizing elements required as components, co-factors or regulators of physiological functions at very low rates. Thus, plant uptake and or translocation of Fe, Mn and Zn are drastically reduced (up to 80 %) by commonly observed ‘drift’ rates of glyphosate (<1/40 the herbicidal rate). This is reflected in reduced physiological efficiency, lower mineral nutrient levels in vegetative and reproductive tissues, and increased susceptibility to disease. Microbial and plant production of siderophores and ferric reductase in root exudates under nutrient stress are inhibited by glyphosate to exacerbate plant nutrient stress common in low-available micronutrient soils.

Glyphosate is not readily degraded in soil and can probably accumulate for many years chelated with soil cat-ions. Degradation products of glyphosate are as damaging to RR crops as to non-RR crops. Persistence and accumulation of glyphosate in perennial plants, soil, and root meristems, can significantly reduce root growth and the development of nutrient absorptive tissue of RR as well as non-RR plants to further impair nutrient uptake and efficiency. Impaired root uptake not only reduces the availability of specific nutrients, but also affects the natural ability of plants to compensate for low levels of many other nutrients. Glyphosate also reduces nutrient uptake from soil indirectly through its toxicity to many soil microorganisms responsible for increasing the availability and access to nutrients through mineralization, reduction, symbiosis, etc.

Degradation of plant tissues through growth, necrosis, or mineralization of residues can release accumulated glyphosate from meristematic tissues in toxic concentrations to plants. The most damaging time to plant wheat in ryegrass ‘burned down’ by glyphosate is two weeks after glyphosate application to correspond with the release of accumulated glyphosate from decomposing meristematic tissues. This is contrasted with the need to delay seeding of winter wheat for 2-3 weeks after a regular weed burn-down’ to permit time for immobilization of glyphosate from root exudates and direct application through chelation with soil cat-ions. The Roundup® label for Israel lists recommended waiting times before planting a susceptible crop on that soil.

One of the benefits of crop rotation is an increased availability of nutrients for a subsequent crop in the rotation. The high level of available Mn (130 ppm) after a normal corn crop is not observed after glyphosate-treated RR corn. The lower nutrient availability after specific RR crop sequences may need to be compensated for through micronutrient application in order to optimize yield and reduce disease in a subsequent crop.

THE INFLUENCE OF GLYPHOSATE ON SOIL ORGANISMS IMPORTANT FOR ACCESS, MINERALIZATION, SOLUBILIZATION, AND FIXATION OF ESSENTIAL PLANT NUTRIENTS

Glyphosate is a potent microbiocide and is toxic to earthworms, mycorrhizae (P & Zn uptake), reducing microbes that convert insoluble soil oxides to plant available forms (Mn and Fe, Pseudomonads, Bacillus, etc.), nitrogen-fixing organisms (Bradyrhizobium, Rhizobium), and organisms involved in the ‘natural,’ biological control of soilborne diseases that reduce root uptake of nutrients. Although glyphosate contact with these organisms is limited by rapid chelation-immobilization when applied on fallow soil; glyphosate in root exudates, or from decaying weed tissues or RR plants, contacts these organisms in their most active ecological habitat throughout the rhizosphere. It is not uncommon to see Cu, Fe, Mg, Mn, Ni, and Zn deficiencies intensify and show in soils that were once considered fully sufficient for these nutrients. Increasing the supply and availability of Co, Cu, Fe, Mg, Mn, Ni, and Zn have reduced some of the deleterious effects of glyphosate on these organisms and increased crop yields.

In contrast to microbial toxicity, glyphosate in soil and root exudates stimulates oxidative soil microbes that reduce nutrient availability by decreasing their solubility for plant uptake, immobilize nutrients such as K in microbial sinks to deny availability for plants, and deny access to soil nutrients through pathogenic activity. Plant pathogens stimulated by glyphosate (table 3) include ubiquitous bacterial and fungal root, crown, and stalk rotting fungi; vascular colonizing organisms that disrupt nutrient transport to cause wilt and die-back; and root nibblers that impair access or uptake of soil nutrients.

TABLE 3. Some plant pathogens stimulated by glyphosate.

Botryospheara dothidea Gaeumannomyces graminis

Corynespora cassicola Magnaporthe grisea

Fusarium species Marasmius spp.

F. avenaceum Monosporascus cannonbalus

F. graminearum Myrothecium verucaria

F. oxysporum f.sp. cubense Phaeomoniella chlamydospora

F. oxysporum f.sp. (canola) Phytophthora spp.

F. oxysporum f.sp. glycines Pythium spp.

F. oxysporum f.sp. vasinfectum Rhizoctonia solani

F. solani f.sp. glycines Septoria nodorum

F. solani f.sp. phaseoli Thielaviopsis bassicola

F. solani f.sp. pisi Xylella fastidiosa

Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. nebraskensis (Goss’ wilt)

HERBICIDAL MODE OF ACTION OF GLYPHOSATE

As a strong metal micronutrient chelator, glyphosate inhibits activity of EPSPS and other enzymes in the Shikimate metabolic pathway responsible for plant resistance to various pathogens. Plant death is through greatly increased plant susceptibility of non-RR plants to common soilborne fungi such as Fusarium, Rhizoctonia, Pythium, Phytophthora, etc. that are also stimulated by glyphosate (Johal and Rahe, 1984; Levesque and Rahe, 1992; Johal and Huber, 2009). It is very difficult to kill a plant in sterile soil by merely shutting down the Shikimate pathway (secondary metabolism) unless soilborne pathogens are also present. It is the increased susceptibility to soilborne pathogens, and increased virulence of the pathogens, that actually kills the plants after applying glyphosate. Disease resistance in plants is manifest through various active and passive physiological mechanisms requiring micronutrients. Those metabolic pathways producing secondary anti-microbial compounds (phytoalexins, flavenoids, etc.), pathogen inhibiting amino acids and peptides, hormones involved in cicatrisation (walling off pathogens), callusing, and disease escape mechanisms can all be compromised by glyphosate chelation of micronutrient co-factors critical for enzyme function. Genetic modification of plants for glyphosate tolerance partially restores Shikimate pathway function to provide a selective herbicidal effect.

INTERACTIONS OF GLYPHOSATE WITH PLANT DISEASE

Micronutrients are the regulators, activators, and inhibitors of plant defense mechanisms that provide resistance to stress and disease. Chelation of these nutrients by glyphosate compromises plant defenses and increases pathogenesis to increase the severity of many abiotic (bark cracking, nutrient deficiencies) as well as infectious diseases of both RR and non-RR plants in the crop production system (table 4). Many of these diseases are referred to as ‘emerging’ or reemerging’ diseases because they rarely caused economic losses in the past, or were effectively controlled through management practices.

Non-infectious (Abiotic) Diseases: Research at Ohio State University has shown that bark cracking, sunscald, and winter-kill of trees and perennial ornamentals is caused by glyphosate used for under-story weed control, and that glyphosate can accumulate for 8-10 years in perennial plants. This accumulation of glyphosate can be from the inadvertent uptake of glyphosate from contact with bark (drift) or by root uptake from glyphosate in weed root exudates in soil. Severe glyphosate damage to trees adjacent to stumps of cut trees treated with glyphosate (to prevent sprouting in an effort to eradicate citrus greening or CVC) can occur through root translocation and exudation several years after tree removal.

Infectious Diseases: Increased severity of the take-all root and crown rot of cereals (Gaeumannomyces graminis) after prior glyphosate usage has been observed for over 20 years and take-all is now a ‘reemerging’ disease in many wheat producing areas of the world where glyphosate is used for weed control prior to cereal planting. A related disease of cereals, and the cause of rice blast (Magnaporthe grisea), is becoming very severe in Brazil and is especially severe when wheat follows a RR crop in the rotation. Like take-all and Fusarium root rot, this soilborne pathogen also infects wheat and barley roots, and is a concern for U.S. cereal production.

Fusarium species causing head scab are common root and crown rot pathogens of cereals everywhere; however, Fusarium head scab (FHB) has generally been a serious disease of wheat and barley only in warm temperate regions of the U.S. With the extensive use of glyphosate, it is now of epidemic proportions and prevalent throughout most of the cereal producing areas of North America. Canadian research has shown that the application of glyphosate one or more times in the three years previous to planting wheat was the most important agronomic factor associated with high FHB in wheat, with a 75 % increase in FHB for all crops and a 122 % increase for crops under minimum-till where more glyphosate is used. The most severe FHB occurs where a RR crop precedes wheat in the rotation for the same reason. Glyphosate altered plant physiology (carbon and nitrogen metabolism) increasing susceptibility of wheat and barley to FHB and increased toxin production, is also associated with a transient tolerance of wheat and soybeans to rust diseases.

The increased FHB with glyphosate results in a dramatic increase in tricothecene (deoxynivalenol, nivalenol, ‘vomitoxins’) and estrogenic (zaeralenone) mycotoxins in grain; however, the high concentrations of mycotoxin in grain are not always associated with Fusarium infection of kernels. Quite often overlooked is the increase in root and crown rot by FHB Fusaria with glyphosate and the production of mycotoxins in root and crown tissues with subsequent translocation to stems, chaff and grain. Caution has been expressed in using straw and chaff as bedding for pigs or roughage for cattle because of mycotoxin levels that far exceeded clinically significant levels for infertility and toxicity. This also poses a health and safety concern for grain entering the food chain for humans. The list of diseases affected by glyphosate (see reference No. 18) is increasing as growers and pathologists recognize the cause-effect relationship.

SPECIAL NUTRIENT CONSIDERATIONS IN A GLYPHOSATE-DOMINANT WEED MANAGEMENT ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM

There are two things that should be understood in order to remediate nutrient deficiencies in a glyphosate usage program: 1) the effects of glyphosate on nutrient availability and function and 2) the effect of the RR gene on nutrient efficiency. With this understanding, there are four objectives for fertilization in a glyphosate environment – all of which indicate a more judicious use of glyphosate as part of the remediation process. These four objectives are to:

1. Provide adequate nutrient availability for full functional sufficiency to compensate for glyphosate and RR reduced availability or physiological efficiency of micronutrients (esp. Mn and Zn but also Cu, Fe, Ni).

2. Detoxify residual glyphosate in meristematic and other tissues, in root exudates, and in soil by adding appropriate elements for chelation with the residual glyphosate.

3. Restore soil microbial activity to enhance nutrient availability, supply, and balance that are inhibited by residual glyphosate in soil and glyphosate in root exudates.

4. Increase plant resistance to root infecting and reemerging diseases through physiological plant defense mechanisms dependent on the Shikimate, amino acid, and other pathways that are compromised by micronutrient inefficiency in a glyphosate environment.

Meeting Nutrient Sufficiency: Extensive research has shown that increased levels and availability of micronutrients such as Mn, Zn, Cu, Fe, Ni, etc can compensate for reduced nutrient efficiency and the inefficiency of RR crops. This need may not be manifest in high fertility or nutrient toxic soils for a few years after moving to a predominantly monochemical strategy. The timing for correcting micronutrient deficiencies is generally more critical for cereal plants (barley, corn, wheat) than for legumes in order to prevent irreversible yield and/or quality loss. Nutrient sufficiency levels from soil and tissue analysis that are considered adequate for non-GM crops may need to be increased for RR crops to be at full physiological sufficiency. Since residual ‘free’ glyphosate in RR plant tissues can immobilize most regular sources of foliar-applied micronutrients for 8-15 days, and thereby reduce the future availability of these materials, it may be best to apply some micronutrients 1-2 weeks after glyphosate is applied to RR crops.

The expense of an additional trip across the field for foliar application frequently deters micronutrient fertilization for optimum crop yield and quality. There are newly available micronutrient formulations (nutrient phosphites) that maintain plant availability without impacting herbicidal activity of the glyphosate in a tank-mix, and plants have responded well from these micronutrient-glyphosate mixes. Simultaneous application of some micronutrients with glyphosate might provide an efficient means to overcome deficiencies in low fertility soils, as well as mitigate the reduced physiological efficiency inherent with the glyphosate-tolerant gene and glyphosate immobilization of essential nutrients in the plant.

Under severe micronutrient deficiency conditions, selecting seed high in nutrient content or a micronutrient seed treatment to provide early nutrient sufficiency, establish a well-developed root system, and insure a vigorous seedling plant with increased tolerance to glyphosate applied later, has been beneficial even though excess nutrient applied at this time may be immobilized by glyphosate from root exudates and not available for subsequent plant uptake. Micronutrients such as Mn are not efficiently broadcast applied to soil for plant uptake because of microbial immobilization to non-available oxidized Mn, but could be applied in a band or to seed or foliage.

Detoxifying Residual Glyphosate: Some nutrients are relatively immobile in plant tissues (Ca, Mn) so that a combination of micronutrients may be more beneficial than any individual one to chelate with residual glyphosate and ‘detoxify’ it in meristematic and mature tissues. Thus, foliar application of Mn could remediate for glyphosate immobilization of the nutrient; however, it may be more effective when applied in combination with the more mobile Zn to detoxify sequestered glyphosate in meristematic tissues even though Zn levels may appear sufficient. Gypsum applied in the seed row has shown some promise for detoxifying glyphosate from root exudates since Ca is a good chelator with glyphosate (one of the reasons that ammonium sulfate is recommended in spray solutions with hard water is to prevent chelation with Ca and Mg which would inhibit herbicidal activity).

Although bioremediation of accumulating glyphosate in soil may be possible in the future, initial degradation products of glyphosate are toxic to both RR and non-RR plants. This is an area that needs greater effort since the application of phosphorus fertilizers can desorb immobilized glyphosate to be toxic to plants through root uptake. Micronutrient seed treatment can provide some detoxification during seed germination, and stimulate vigor and root growth to enhance recovery from later glyphosate applications.

Biological Remediation: The selection and use of plants for glyphosate-tolerance that have greater nutrient efficiency for uptake or physiological function has improved the performance of some RR crops, and further improvements are possible in this area. Enhancing soil microbial activity to increase nutrient availability and plant uptake has been possible through seed inoculation, environmental modification to favor certain groups of organisms, and implementation of various management practices. There are many organisms that have been used to promote plant growth, with the most recognized being legume inoculants (Rhizobia, Bradyrhizobia species); however, glyphosate is toxic to these beneficial microorganisms. Continued use of glyphosate in a cereal-legume rotation has greatly reduced the population of these organisms in soil so that annual inoculation of legume seed is frequently recommended.

Biological remediation to compensate for glyphosate’s impact on soil organisms important in nutrient cycles may be possible if the remediating organism is also glyphosate-tolerant and capable of over coming the soils natural biological buffering capacity. This would be especially important for nitrogen-fixing, mycorrhizae, and mineral reducing organisms, but will be of limited benefit unless the introduced organisms are also tolerant of glyphosate. Modification of the soil biological environment through tillage, crop sequence, or other cultural management practices might also be a viable way to stimulate the desired soil biological activity.

Increasing Plant Resistance to Stress and Root-Infecting Pathogens: Maintaining plant health is a basic requirement for crop yield and quality. Plant tolerance to stress and many pathogens is dependent on a full sufficiency of micronutrients to maintain physiological processes mediated through the Shikimate or other pathways that are compromised in a glyphosate environment. Sequential application(s) of specific micronutrients (esp. Ca, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn) may be required to compensate for those nutrients physiologically lost through glyphosate chelation. Breeding for increased nutrient efficiency and disease resistance will be an important contributor to this objective.

SUMMARY

Glyphosate is a strong, broad-spectrum nutrient chelator that inhibits plant enzymes responsible for disease resistance so that plants succumb from pathogenic attack. This also predisposes RR and non-RR plants to other pathogens. The introduction of such an intense mineral chelator as glyphosate into the food chain through accumulation in feed, forage, and food, and root exudation into ground water, could pose significant health concerns for animals and humans and needs further evaluation. Chelation immobilization of such essential elements as Ca (bone), Fe (blood), Mn, Zn (liver, kidney), Cu, Mg (brain) could directly inhibit vital functions and predispose to disease. The lower mineral nutrient content of feeds and forage from a glyphosate-intense weed management program can generally be compensated for through mineral supplementation. The various interactions of glyphosate with nutrition are represented in the following schematic:

Table X. Some symptoms of glyphosate damage to non-target plants.

1. Micronutrient (and often some macronutrient) deficiency

2. Low vigor, slow growth, stunting

3. Leaf chlorosis (yellowing) – complete or between the veins

4. Leaf mottling with or without necrotic spots

5. Leaf distortion – small, curling, strap-like, wrinkling, or ‘mouse ear’

6. Abnormal bud break, stem proliferation – witches broom

7. Retarded, slow regrowth after cutting or running (alfalfa, perennial plants)

8. Lower yields, lower mineral value – vegetative parts and reproductive (grain, seeds)

9. Early fruit, bud, or leaf drop

10. Early maturity, death before physiological maturity, tip die-back

11. Predisposition to infectious diseases and extended infection/susceptible period– numerous

12. Predisposition to insect damage

13. Induced abiotic diseases – drought, winter kill, sun scald, bark cracking (perennial plants)

14. Root stunting, inefficient N-fixation and uptake

15. Poor root nodulation in legumes

Proceedings Fluid Fertilizer Forum, Scottsdale, AZ February 14-16, 2010. Vol. 27. Fluid Fertilizer Foundation, Manhattan, KS.

DOWNLOAD FULL PAPER HERE INCLUDING REFERENCES

Also: Some Selected References on Glyphosate

http://www.greenpasture.org/utility/showArticle/index.cfm?objectID=7213

http://​www.independent.co.uk/​environment/​gm-food-banned-in-monsanto-​canteen-737948.html

Monsanto, the biggest promoter of genetically modified food, was hoist with its own petar when it was disclosed that it has a staff canteen in which GM produce is banned.
Monsanto, the biggest promoter of genetically modified food, was hoist with its own petar when it was disclosed that it has a staff canteen in which GM produce is banned.
The firm running the canteen at Monsanto's pharmaceuticals factory at High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, serves only GM-free meals, Friends of the Earth said. In a notice in the canteen, Sutcliffe Catering, owned by the Granada Group, said it had taken the decision "to remove, as far as practicable, GM soya and maize from all food products served in our restaurant. We have taken the above steps to ensure that you, the customer, can feel confident in the food we serve."
Monsanto confirmed the position. "Yes, this is the case, and it is because we believe in choice," said the company's spokesman, Tony Coombes. But employees at Monsanto's agribusiness plant at Cambridge were happy to eat GM produce, he said. "The notice in the restaurant there says some products may contain GMOs [genetically modified organisms] – because our staff are happy to eat food sprayed with fewer chemicals."
Monsanto says crops engineered to be tolerant of its own weedkillers need less pesticide, but critics say that though the dosage may be less, the impact on the environment of these pesticides is much greater. Adrian Bebb, Friends of the Earth's food campaigner, said: "The public has made its concerns about GM ingredients very clear – now it appears that even Monsanto's own catering firm has no confidence in this new technology."GM food banned in Monsanto canteen
http://www.independent.co.uk

http://​topdocumentaryfilms.com/​the-world-according-to-mons​anto/

Lots of research done in Europe (non monetarily biased research I might add) that shows the side effects of the pesticides used on GMO crops (and now we add Agent Orange to the list? That speaks for itself.) These products have been linked to infertility, birth defects, Parkinson's Disease and Leukemia. Not just in consumers, but farm workers also. Even the NIH published a study showing the metabolic cycle that lends itself to this outcome. Monsanto is also the single most litigated against corporation in the world, having lost notable cases of dumping PCBs and Mercury in Anniston, Alabama, for example. Here is the study:

Concerns about the best-selling herbicide Roundup® are running at an all-time high. Scientific research published in 2010 showed that Roundup and the chemical on which it is based, glyphosate, cause birth defects in frog and chicken embryos at dilutions much lower than those used in agricultural and garden spraying. The EU Commission dismissed these findings, based on a rebuttal provided by the German Federal Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety, BVL. BVL cited unpublished industry studies to back its claim that glyphosate was safe. The Commission has previously ignored or dismissed many other findings from the independent scientific literature showing that Roundup and glyphosate cause endocrine disruption, damage to DNA, reproductive and developmental toxicity, neurotoxicity, and cancer, as well as birth defects.

However, shortly after the Commission was notified of the latest research showing that glyphosate and Roundup cause birth defects, it quietly passed a directive delaying the review of glyphosate and 38 other dangerous pesticides until 2015. This delay is being challenged in a lawsuit brought against the Commission by Pesticides Action Network Europe and Greenpeace. Delaying the review of glyphosate until 2015 is serious enough. But in reality, the Commission’s slowness in preparing the new data requirements for the incoming regulation mean that glyphosate may well not be re-assessed in the light of up-to-date science until 2030. The beneficiary will be the pesticide industry; the victim will be public health.

The need for a review of glyphosate is particularly urgent in the light of the shortcomings of the existing review of the pesticide, on which its current approval rests. In this report, we examine the industry studies and regulatory documents that led to this approval. We show that industry and regulators knew as long ago as the 1980s and 1990s that glyphosate causes malformations – but that this information was not made public.

The industry studies and regulatory documents on which the current approval of glyphosate tests reveal that:

I dont like the Big Bang, but I like the idea of a Big Bounce and a recurring universe. While the speed of light might be absolute to our perception, there’s a pretty fair chance it’s not an “absolute absolute” meaning that something can be going faster than the speed of light through a “fold” in space-time (another universe) but if someone lived in that universe, they wouldn’t be able to perceive that because they were a part of that universe. The same thing applies to us. In addition, having a fold in space-time allows something to go slower than the speed of light and yet get from Point A to Point B in less time than light can get there (because it takes a shortcut.) Something like a spinning black hole or a cosmic string could cause this to happen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_singularity
An observer crossing the event horizon of a non-rotating (Schwarzschild) black hole cannot avoid the central singularity, which lies in the future world line of everything within the horizon. Thus one cannot avoid spaghettification by the tidal forces of the central singularity.
This is not necessarily true with a Kerr black hole. An observer falling into a Kerr black hole may be able to avoid the central singularity by making clever use of the inner event horizon associated with this class of black hole. This makes it possible for the Kerr black hole to act as a sort of wormhole, possibly even a traversable wormhole.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerr_metric#Kerr_black_holes_as_wormholes
Although the Kerr solution appears to be singular at the roots of Δ = 0, these are actually coordinate singularities, and, with an appropriate choice of new coordinates, the Kerr solution can be smoothly extended through the values of corresponding to these roots. The larger of these roots determines the location of the event horizon, and the smaller determines the location of a Cauchy horizon. A (future-directed, time-like) curve can start in the exterior and pass through the event horizon. Once having passed through the event horizon, the coordinate now behaves like a time coordinate, so it must decrease until the curve passes through the Cauchy horizon.
The region beyond the Cauchy horizon has several surprising features. The coordinate again behaves like a spatial coordinate and can vary freely. The interior region has a reflection symmetry, so that a (future-directed time-like) curve may continue along a symmetric path, which continues through a second Cauchy horizon, through a second event horizon, and out into a new exterior region which is isometric to the original exterior region of the Kerr solution. The curve could then escape to infinity in the new region or enter the future event horizon of the new exterior region and repeat the process. This second exterior is sometimes thought of as another universe. On the other hand, in the Kerr solution, the singularity is a ring, and the curve may pass through the center of this ring. The region beyond permits closed time-like curves. Since the trajectory of observers and particles in general relativity are described by time-like curves, it is possible for observers in this region to return to their past.
While it is expected that the exterior region of the Kerr solution is stable, and that all rotating black holes will eventually approach a Kerr metric, the interior region of the solution appears to be unstable, much like a pencil balanced on its point.[6] This is related to the idea of cosmic censorship.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_string
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-hole_cosmology
A black-hole cosmology (also called Schwarzschild cosmology or black-hole cosmological model) is a cosmological model in which the observable universe is the interior of a black hole. Such models were originally proposed by theoretical physicist Raj Pathria,[1] and concurrently by mathematician I. J. Good.[2]
Any such model requires that the Hubble radius of the observable universe is equal to its Schwarzschild radius, that is, the product of its mass and the Schwarzschild proportionality constant. This is indeed known to be nearly the case; however, most cosmologists consider this close match a coincidence.[3]
In the version as originally proposed by Pathria and Good, and studied more recently by, among others, Nikodem Popławski, [4] the observable universe is the interior of a black hole existing as one of possibly many inside a larger universe, or multiverse.
According to general relativity, the gravitational collapse of a sufficiently compact mass forms a singular Schwarzschild black hole. In the Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble theory of gravity, however, it forms a regular Einstein-Rosen bridge, or wormhole. Schwarzschild wormholes and Schwarzschild black holes are different, mathematical solutions of general relativity and the Einstein–Cartan theory. Yet for distant observers, the exteriors of both solutions with the same mass are indistinguishable. The Einstein–Cartan theory extends general relativity by removing a constraint of the symmetry of the affine connection and regarding its antisymmetric part, the torsion tensor, as a dynamical variable. Torsion naturally accounts for the quantum-mechanical, intrinsic angular momentum (spin) of matter. The minimal coupling between torsion and Dirac spinors generates a repulsive spin-spin interaction which is significant in fermionic matter at extremely high densities. Such an interaction prevents the formation of a gravitational singularity. Instead, the collapsing matter reaches an enormous but finite density and rebounds, forming the other side of an Einstein-Rosen bridge, which grows as a new universe.[5] Accordingly, the Big Bang was a nonsingular Big Bounce at which the universe had a finite, minimum scale factor.[6]
also, you might find cyclic cosmology interesting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bounce#Recent_developments_in_the_theory
Recent developments in the theory[edit]
Martin Bojowald, an assistant professor of physics at Pennsylvania State University, published a study in July 2007 detailing work somewhat related to loop quantum gravity that claimed to mathematically solve the time before the Big Bang, which would give new weight to the oscillatory universe and Big Bounce theories.[4]
One of the main problems with the Big Bang theory is that at the moment of the Big Bang, there is a singularity of zero volume and infinite energy. This is normally interpreted as the end of the physics as we know it; in this case, of the theory of general relativity. This is why one expects quantum effects to become important and avoid the singularity.
However, research in loop quantum cosmology purported to show that a previously existing universe collapsed, not to the point of singularity, but to a point before that where the quantum effects of gravity become so strongly repulsive that the universe rebounds back out, forming a new branch. Throughout this collapse and bounce, the evolution is unitary.
Bojowald also claims that some properties of the universe that collapsed to form ours can also be determined. Some properties of the prior universe are not determinable however due to some kind of uncertainty principle.
This work is still in its early stages and very speculative. Some extensions by further scientists have been published in Physical Review Letters.[5]
In 2003, Peter Lynds has put forward a new cosmology model in which time is cyclic. In his theory our Universe will eventually stop expanding and then contract. Before becoming a singularity, as one would expect from Hawking’s black hole theory, the Universe would bounce. Lynds claims that a singularity would violate the second law of thermodynamics and this stops the Universe from being bounded by singularities. The Big Crunch would be avoided with a new Big Bang. Lynds suggests the exact history of the Universe would be repeated in each cycle in an eternal recurrence. Some critics argue that while the Universe may be cyclic, the histories would all be variants.[citation needed] Lynds’ theory has been dismissed by mainstream physicists for the lack of a mathematical model behind its philosophical considerations.[6]
In 2011, Nikodem Popławski showed that a nonsingular Big Bounce appears naturally in the Einstein-Cartan-Sciama-Kibble theory of gravity.[7] This theory extends general relativity by removing a constraint of the symmetry of the affine connection and regarding its antisymmetric part, the torsion tensor, as a dynamical variable. The minimal coupling between torsion and Dirac spinors generates a spin-spin interaction which is significant in fermionic matter at extremely high densities. Such an interaction averts the unphysical Big Bang singularity, replacing it with a cusp-like bounce at a finite minimum scale factor, before which the Universe was contracting. This scenario also explains why the present Universe at largest scales appears spatially flat, homogeneous and isotropic, providing a physical alternative to cosmic inflation.
In 2012, a new theory of nonsingular big bounce was successfully constructed within the frame of standard Einstein gravity.[8] This theory combines the benefits of matter bounce and Ekpyrotic cosmology. Particularly, the famous BKL instability, that the homogeneous and isotropic background cosmological solution is unstable to the growth of anisotropic stress, is resolved in this theory. Moreover, curvature perturbations seeded in matter contraction are able to form a nearly scale-invariant primordial power spectrum and thus provides a consistent mechanism to explain the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB) observations alternative to inflation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikodem_Popławski
Popławski theorizes that torsion manifests itself as a repulsive force which causes fermions to be spatially extended and prevents the formation of a gravitational singularity within the black hole’s event horizon.[12] Because of torsion, the collapsing matter on the other side of the horizon reaches an enormous but finite density, explodes and rebounds, forming an Einstein-Rosen bridge (wormhole) to a new, closed, expanding universe.[13][14] Analogously, the Big Bang is replaced by the Big Bounce before which the Universe was the interior of a black hole.[15] This scenario also explains why the present Universe at largest scales appears spatially flat, homogeneous and isotropic, providing a physical alternative to cosmic inflation, and may explain the arrow of time and solve the black hole information paradox. Torsion may also be responsible for the observed asymmetry between matter and antimatter in the Universe.[16] The rotation of a black hole would influence the spacetime on the other side of its event horizon and result in a preferred direction in the new universe. Popławski suggests that the observed anomalies in the cosmic microwave background might thus provide evidence for his theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant#Cyclic_model
More recent work has suggested the problem may be indirect evidence of a cyclic universe possibly as allowed by string theory. With every cycle of the universe (Big Bang then eventually a Big Crunch) taking about a trillion (1012) years, “the amount of matter and radiation in the universe is reset, but the cosmological constant is not. Instead, the cosmological constant gradually diminishes over many cycles to the small value observed today.”[18] Critics respond that, as the authors acknowledge in their paper, the model “entails … the same degree of tuning required in any cosmological model”.[19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation#Experimental_results_and_records
Work in 1998 verified the initial predictions,[13] and the distance of teleportation was increased in August 2004 to 600 meters, using optical fiber.[14] The longest distance yet claimed to be achieved for quantum teleportation is 143 km (89 mi), performed in May 2012, between the two Canary Islands of La Palma and Tenerife off the Atlantic coast of north Africa.[15] In April 2011, experimenters reported that they had demonstrated teleportation of wave packets of light up to a bandwidth of 10 MHz while preserving strongly nonclassical superposition states.[16][17]
Researchers at the Niels Bohr Institute successfully used quantum teleportation to transmit information between clouds of gas atoms, notable because the clouds of gas are macroscopic atomic ensembles.[18][19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling#The_tunnelling_problem
Spontaneous DNA mutation[edit]
Spontaneous mutation of DNA occurs when normal DNA replication takes place after a particularly significant proton has defied the odds in quantum tunnelling in what is called “proton tunnelling”[14] (quantum biology). A hydrogen bond joins normal base pairs of DNA. There exists a double well potential along a hydrogen bond separated by a potential energy barrier. It is believed that the double well potential is asymmetric with one well deeper than the other so the proton normally rests in the deeper well. For a mutation to occur, the proton must have tunnelled into the shallower of the two potential wells. The movement of the proton from its regular position is called a tautomeric transition. If DNA replication takes place in this state, the base pairing rule for DNA may be jeopardised causing a mutation.[15] Per-Olov Lowdin was the first to develop this theory of spontaneous mutation within the double helix (quantum bio). Other instances of quantum tunnelling-induced mutations in biology are believed to be a cause of ageing and cancer.
It is possible for spin zero particles to travel faster than the speed of light when tunnelling.[3] This apparently violates the principle of causality, since there will be a frame of reference in which it arrives before it has left. However, careful analysis of the transmission of the wave packet shows that there is actually no violation of relativity theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrocausality
Retrocausality (also called retro-causation, retro-chronal causation, backward causation, and similar terms) is any of several hypothetical phenomena or processes that reverse causality, allowing an effect to occur before its cause.
Retrocausality is primarily a thought experiment in philosophy of science based on elements of physics, addressing the question: Can the future affect the present, and can the present affect the past?[1] Philosophical considerations of time travel often address the same issues as retrocausality, as do treatments of the subject in fiction, although the two terms are not universally synonymous.[2]
While some discussion of retrocausality is confined to fringe science or pseudoscience, a few physical theories with mainstream legitimacy have sometimes been interpreted as leading to retrocausality. This has been problematic in physics because the distinction between cause and effect is not made at the most fundamental level within the field of physics.[3]
Antimatter[edit]
Time runs left to right in this Feynman diagram of electron-positron annihilation. When interpreted to include retrocausality, the electron (marked e-) was not destroyed, instead becoming the positron (e+) and moving backward in time.
As the modern understanding of particle physics began to develop, retrocausality was at times employed as a tool to model then-unfamiliar or unusual conditions, including electromagnetism and antimatter.[citation needed]
The Wheeler–Feynman absorber theory, proposed by John Archibald Wheeler and Richard Feynman, uses retrocausality and a temporal form of destructive interference to explain the absence of a type of converging concentric wave suggested by certain solutions to Maxwell’s equations.[13] These advanced waves don’t have anything to do with cause and effect, they are just a different mathematical way to describe normal waves. The reason they were proposed is so that a charged particle would not have to act on itself, which, in normal classical electromagnetism leads to an infinite self-force.[14]
Feynman, and earlier Stueckelberg, proposed an interpretation of the positron as an electron moving backward in time,[15] reinterpreting the negative-energy solutions of the Dirac equation. Electrons moving backward in time would have a positive electric charge. Wheeler invoked this concept to explain the identical properties shared by all electrons, suggesting that “they are all the same electron” with a complex, self-intersecting worldline.[16] Yoichiro Nambu later applied it to all production and annihilation of particle-antiparticle pairs, stating that “the eventual creation and annihilation of pairs that may occur now and then is no creation or annihilation, but only a change of direction of moving particles, from past to future, or from future to past.”[17] The backwards in time point of view is nowadays accepted as completely equivalent to other pictures,[18] but it doesn’t have anything to do with the macroscopic terms “cause” and “effect”, which do not appear in a microscopic physical description.
Current topics[edit]
Open topics in physics, especially involving the reconciliation of gravity with quantum physics, suggest that retrocausality may be possible under certain circumstances.
Closed timelike curves, in which the world line of an object returns to its origin, arise from some exact solutions to the Einstein field equation. Although closed timelike curves do not appear to exist under normal conditions, extreme environments of spacetime, such as a traversable wormhole[19] or the region near certain cosmic strings,[20] may allow their formation, implying a theoretical possibility of retrocausality. The exotic matter or topological defects required for the creation of those environments have not been observed. Furthermore, Stephen Hawking has suggested a mechanism he describes as the chronology protection conjecture, which would destroy any such closed timelike curve before it could be used.[21] These objections to the existence of closed timelike curves are not universally accepted, however.[22]
Retrocausality is sometimes associated with the nonlocal correlations that generically arise from quantum entanglement,[23] which Albert Einstein famously[peacock term] called “spooky action at a distance”, including the notable special case of the delayed choice quantum eraser.[24] This is not generally[vague] agreed upon within the physics community because verifying nonlocal correlations requires ordinary subluminal communication, since the no communication theorem prevents the superluminal transfer of information, and because fundamental descriptions of matter and forces require the full framework of quantum field theory in which spacelike-separated operators commute. Accounts of quantum entanglement that do not involve retrocausality generally[vague] emphasize how the experiments demonstrating these correlations can equally well be described from different reference frames, that disagree on which measurement is a “cause” versus an “effect”, as necessary to be consistent with special relativity.[25][26] The description of such nonlocal quantum entanglements can be described in a way that is manifestly free of retrocausality if the states of the observers are included in the quantum treatment,[27] which is often but not exclusively associated with the many worlds interpretation.
Retrocausality is also associated with the two-state vector formalism (TSVF) in quantum mechanics, where the present is characterised by quantum states of the past and the future taken in combination.[28]
One physicist has reportedly presented the design for an experiment to test for backward causation in quantum entanglement to begin in 2007.[3][29][30][31]
Hypothetical superluminal particles called tachyons would have a spacelike trajectory, and thus move backward in time according to observers in some reference frames. Despite frequent depiction in science fiction as a method to send messages back in time, theories predicting tachyons do not permit them to interact with normal “tardyonic” matter in a way that would violate standard causality. Specifically, the Feinberg reinterpretation principle renders impossible construction of a tachyon detector capable of receiving information.[32] Within modern quantum field theory, tachyons (or particles with imaginary mass) are interpreted to signify that the theory has been expanded about a configuration that is a local maximum of potential energy, instead of a local minimum

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/

http://news.discovery.com/human/health/autism-pesticide-link-found-in-calif-study-140623.htm

MIT Researcher’s New Warning: At Today’s Rate, Half Of All U.S. Children Will Be Autistic By 2025

It's Everywhere: MIT Scientist Presents Dire Portrait of Damage from Monsanto's Roundup

USDA report says pesticide residues in food nothing to fear

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/glyphosate/Groton_Seneff.pdf

Half of All Children Will Be Autistic by 2025, Warns Senior Research Scientist at MIT

December 23, 2014
Print This Post Print This Post
Close up of tractor spraying pesticides on cropWhy? Evidence points to glyphosate toxicity from the overuse of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide on our food.
For over three decades, Stephanie Seneff, PhD, has researched biology and technology, over the years publishing over 170 scholarly peer-reviewed articles. In recent years she has concentrated on the relationship between nutrition and health, tackling such topics as Alzheimer’s, autism, and cardiovascular diseases, as well as the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health.
At a conference last Thursday, in a special panel discussion about GMOs, she took the audience by surprise when she declared, “At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.”She noted that the side effects of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity, and presented data showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the use of Roundup on crops (and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds) with rising rates of autism. Children with autism have biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder.
A fellow panelist reported that after Dr. Seneff’s presentation, “All of the 70 or so people in attendance were squirming, likely because they now had serious misgivings about serving their kids, or themselves, anything with corn or soy, which are nearly all genetically modified and thus tainted with Roundup and its glyphosate.”
Dr. Seneff noted the ubiquity of glyphosate’s use. Because it is used on corn and soy, all soft drinks and candies sweetened with corn syrup and all chips and cereals that contain soy fillers have small amounts of glyphosate in them, as do our beef and poultry since cattle and chicken are fed GMO corn or soy. Wheat is often sprayed with Roundup just prior to being harvested, which means that all non-organic bread and wheat products would also be sources of glyphosate toxicity. The amount of glyphosate in each product may not be large, but the cumulative effect (especially with as much processed food as Americans eat) could be devastating. A recent study shows that pregnant women living near farms where pesticides are applied have a 60% increased risk of children having an autism spectrum disorder.
Other studies now show a link between children’s exposure to pesticides and autism. Children who live in homes with vinyl floors, which can emit phthalate chemicals, are more likely to have autism. Children whose mothers smoked were also twice as likely to have autism. Research now acknowledges that environmental contaminants such as PCBs, PBDEs, and mercury can alter brain neuron functioning even before a child is born.
This month, the USDA released a study finding that although there were detectable levels of pesticide residue in more than half of food tested by the agency, 99% of samples taken were found to be within levels the government deems safe, and 40% were found to have no detectable trace of pesticides at all. The USDA added, however, that due to “cost concerns,” it did not test for residues of glyphosate. Let’s repeat that: they never tested for the active ingredient in the most widely used herbicide in the world. “Cost concerns”? How absurd—unless they mean it will cost them too much in terms of the special relationship between the USDA and Monsanto. You may recall the revolving door between Monsanto and the federal government, with agency officials becoming high-paying executives—and vice versa! Money, power, prestige: it’s all there. Monsanto and the USDA love to scratch each others’ backs. Clearly this omission was purposeful.
The same correlations between applications of glyphosate and autism show up in deaths from senility.
Of course, autism is a complex problem with many potential causes. Dr. Seneff’s data, however, is particularly important considering how close the correlation is—and because it is coming from a scientist with impeccable credentials. Earlier this year, she spoke at the Autism One conference and presented many of the same facts; that presentation is available on YouTube.
Monsanto claims that Roundup is harmless to humans. Bacteria, fungi, algae, parasites, and plants use a seven-step metabolic route known as the shikimate pathway for the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids; glyphosate inhibits this pathway, causing the plant to die, which is why it’s so effective as an herbicide. Monsanto says humans don’t have this shikimate pathway, so it’s perfectly safe.
Dr. Seneff points out, however, that our gut bacteria do have this pathway, and that’s crucial because these bacteria supply our body with crucial amino acids. Roundup thus kills beneficial gut bacteria, allowing pathogens to grow; interferes with the synthesis of amino acids including methionine, which leads to shortages in critical neurotransmitters and folate; chelates (removes) important minerals like iron, cobalt and manganese; and much more.
Even worse, she notes, additional chemicals in Roundup are untested because they’re classified as “inert,” yet according to a 2014 study in BioMed Research International, these chemicals are capable of amplifying the toxic effects of Roundup hundreds of times over.
Glyphosate is present in unusually high quantities in the breast milk of American mothers, at anywhere from 760 to 1,600 times the allowable limits in European drinking water. Urine testing shows Americans have ten times the glyphosate accumulation as Europeans.
“In my view, the situation is almost beyond repair,” Dr. Seneff said after her presentation. “We need to do something drastic.”

The face of a poisoned man – the human cost of pesticides

image

The face of a poisoned man – the human cost of pesticide…
The face of a poisoned man – the human cost of pesticides
View on http://www.naturalnews.com
Preview by Yahoo

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/11/eu-gm-idUSL6N0T143J20141111

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/10/usa-agriculture-china-dupont-idUSL1N0SX2G020141110

http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v31/n6/full/nbt.2597.html

http://grist.org/food/are-gmos-worth-their-weight-in-gold-to-farmers-not-exactly/

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110720/full/475274a.html

http://grist.org/food/roundup-ready-aim-spray-how-gm-crops-lead-to-herbicide-addiction/

http://grist.org/food/roundup-ready-aim-spray-how-gm-crops-lead-to-herbicide-addiction/

http://grist.org/food/in-the-insecticide-wars-gmos-have-so-far-been-a-force-for-good/
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/02/report-spread-monsantos-superweeds-speeds-12-0

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/a-simple-fix-for-food/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/gmo-poll_n_2807595.html

Sen. Tester: Who Put These Agribiz-Friendly Riders into This Unrelated Bill?

Advertisements