| You sound an awful lot like the uninformed fear mongering Health Ranger (Mike Adams).
Do you have a link to studies on GMO's outside the US that indicates health issues?
I have no idea who the Health Ranger is, but I was uninformed before I started reading on GMOs, not just on Monsanto.
I read all I could find, not just books from critics of the technology, or rather of its current lawless implementation.
For instance, books that university students in replicant DNA would read, like "An Introduction to Genetic Engineering" by Desmond S.T. Nicholl.
As for links, these are books, not web pages, so go to your local library and check the references in these books out.
Most of these books and another one I haven't mentioned earlied, "Uncertain Peril" by Claire Hope Cummings, contain references to Dr. Arpad Pusztai's health studies. Before the study could even be published, the guy was discredited and sacked from the Rowett Institute in Scotland after Monsanto got the U.S. president puppet of the time to talk harshly to the U.K. government. The study was eventually published, peer-reviewed and D. Pusztai's reputation restored, apologies were made, but it took all of 8 years of constant battle against Monsanto to do so. A later Russian study confirmed the impact on health.
If the books don't contain actual references for everything, you can search these names.
The main reason there are few health studies is because Monsanto lobbied and pressured the U.S. and other government, wrote directly to scientific magazines such as Nature asking not to publish certain negative studies, even have their PR agencies discredit pose as specialists and discredit commenters in forums like this one (apparently proven by the IP addresses used by these shills in the books I mentioned,) etc.
No doubt if I were a shill working against GMOs I would have lots of links to show you.
Check also books from Michael Pollan. True, all these books strongly oppose GMOs, but not all are written by green commies.
Read them critically, as I said and as I do, and make up your own mind.
I don't believe everything I read, but the health studies s were conducted by scientists, some who actually thought they would prove GMOs were just like normal organisms (it's just food, right?) and the effects reported were so serious that it would at least require some counter studies and an immediate suspension of GMOs. I am not talking just degenerative tissue on rats, but on things like double death rate.
Well, that suspension or moratorium is already in effect in many countries, and it's certainly not because of anti-American opinions, it's a decision taken by informed governments based on these multiple serious issues.
When even the USDA (yes, they do a few studies on GMO after all) found out that GMO pollen could travel over a dozen miles, it's a real concern for biodiversity. Even wild plants seem much more susceptible to DNA contamination from GMO plants than from non-GMOs. It's not just the traditional varieties grown and tested for thousand of years, it's also the wild ancestors of corn, wheat, cotton, and soy for instance, that are threatened. Well, probably more like already extinct in the case of maize. These plants and traditional varieties were used by breeders to create new varieties with a more resistant or adapted trait. If the DNA of these plants is contaminated by GMOs, the whole field of seed selection disappears. And don't count on Monsanto to be able to replace that. |
Why does Monsanto have such a negative public image compared to the other seed companies?
