The New York Times publishes two major pro-GMO articles in one week while ignoring the 93% of Americans that want them labeled. One article by Amy Harman, who never met a GMO she didn’t like, is another lightweight substance free cheerleading fest about “Golden Rice” which can supposedly cure blindness (She doesn’t mention that a vitamin A deficiency is easily handled with a very inexpensive supplement pill, as the WHO advises, or that it is being pushed hard by the Bill and Melinda Gtes Foundation who just bought 300,000 shares of Monsanto stock!) The other article is about building a better tomato so that Americans will eat more of them and be healthier. Seriously! Does the tomato really need to be improved? Amy Harman’s hero-scientists have gone from Clint Eastwood-like bravery to now acting like Jesus, curing the blind and feeding the multitudes. Who could resist such an allure? Since the introduction of GMOs into America’s food chain in 1996, many major diseases have skyrocketed, including obesity, Parkinson’s, gastro-intestinal disorders, ADHD and autism. All of which are linked to gut bacteria and digestion. GMOs create strange and unpredictable proteins that result in inflammation of the gut. Chronic Inflammation can lead to any major degenerative disease.
“In the only authenticated feeding trial of GM food on human volunteers carried out by scientists in the UK, the complete transgene DNA of Roundup Ready soybean was recovered from the colostomy bag in 6 out of 7 subjects after a single meal, at levels up to 3.7 % of intake. In 3 subjects, about 1 to 3 per million bacteria cultured from the contents of the colostomy bag were positive for the GM soybean transgene, showing that horizontal transfer of GM DNA had occurred; but no bacteria were found to have taken up the vastly more abundant non-transgenic soybean DNA. This is direct evidence that GM DNA has a much greater propensity for horizontal gene transfer, as I have maintained from the start” .
So why is the New York Times pushing the GMO propaganda so hard while ignoring the GMO labeling campaign right here in New York and especially in Washington State? GMOs are proven to be allergenic and people with sensitivities to them should at least be able to avoid them by reading a label. The New York Times editorial board even came out against labeling GMOs!!!
“Just when public opposition to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is at an all-time high, the biotech and junk food industries are once again pouring millions of dollars into a campaign in Washington State to defeat laws that would require labels on foods containing GMO ingredients.
Coincidence? Industry spokespeople say the suspiciously timed resurrection of Golden Rice isn’t a public relations stunt designed to convert GMO skeptics. But absent any new news on a crop that hasn’t gained traction in more than a decade, the move looks more like an act of desperation than a legitimate defense of biotechnology.
… the real issue is this. Golden Rice is no closer to saving the world’s kids than it was 13 years ago. Because then, as now, there is still no proof that it can. And better alternatives exist.” OCA
NY Times Board of Directors: out of 14 members, nine are involved in finance and investment or pharmaceuticals or big food. No health and nutrition experts, no environmentalists. Probably the most important field in investment capital right now is in bio-tech, with thousands of projects spread across the world, with potential profits in the trillions. Bio-tech is huge in medicine, energy and food. A story in the NY Times that actually told the truth, the scientific truth about GMOs could ruin an investment profile overnight.
Educate yourself and protect the health of your children. Remember that there is not a food shortage in the world. There is a distribution problem. Organic farming produces higher yields and is more drought tolerant, and according to an international study published at the University of Michigan it can feed 9 billion people. But organic crops cannot be patented like GMOs and bring in billions of dollars in profit.. And organic farming does not use super-profitable petroleum-based substances like pesticides and chemical fertilizers. So why would big business support it? Organic farming also means an end to unemployment and a vastly more healthy population. I wonder why the NY Times doesn’t mention all these things. It’s just real hard to make billions selling really good food. So do yourself and the world a favor and buy organic food. Avoid CAFO meat. Find a restaurant that serves grass-fed free range meat.
Other news the NY Times ignored:
Good news (from the NY TIMES!)