Austrian scientist confirms GMO maize unsafe

I seem to have a problem parsing pesticide-tainted breasts with "feeding a starving world". PR I reckon.

"We are all hamsters on the wheel fueling this insanity."

The insanity is actually worse than this simple article would indicate - as JanforGore well knows. Corporate copyrighting of genomes has meant natural seeds practitioners can be sued : which means farmers in Canada and the U.S. as well as the Third World.
Our heritage seed stocks are in fact subject to destruction. GM crops do not reliably produce results either, even allowing for Terminator seeds which do not reproduce. Here's a horror story playing its way out around the planet.
http://www.thepanelist.net/opinions-culture-10084/1252-the-real-victor-in-iraq-m...
http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/05/monsanto-and-its-philanthropy/
Seeds of Destruction, The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1509
Context of '1980s-2004: Monsanto Secures Several Hundred Biotech Patents on Plants'
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=gm-18

Now you know why I call my blogs Opit's LinkFest!

Well, I'm not saying GMs are good or bad, what I am saying is that we have always genetically engineered our crops...each time you choose one variant over another for cultivation, you are genetically engineering, more or less. You are choosing that group of genes over another group of genes. I don't think it is realistic to expect that we will ever stop doing that, but I think the real negative effects of GM crops are the result of corporations like Monsanto attempting to take over, monopolize, control, and ultimately profit from the food supply. What I am attempting to argue is that we need to control corporations like Monsanto. They take over food production on a monumental scale, and they choose for crops based on profit, not health and well-being. You can genetically modify a crop to be more disease resistant and to provide a greater yield, but at what cost? It is that cost that is not being factored in, simply because Monsanto answers to no one, and what is worse, it has managed to back pocket the representatives who are supposed to be protecting the interests of the human beings who voted for them. Don't get me wrong, Monsanto no doubt has a great public relations department that does its level best to make it appear that Monsanto's real interest is in providing food to a starving world, but at the end of the day, the failure of governments to curb greed and regulate corporations has caused much of the starvation that they are now finding ways to make money off of, and we all end up the hamsters on a wheel fueling this insanity.

I don't know why they use mice so I assume no prisoners were willing to be the mice. They asked for volunteers and everybody backed up but the mouse?

Well don't worry, they are testing on humans too without our consent.

The problem has less to do with the GM corn than it does with the fact that NO ONE is regulating Monsanto or what they do around the world. If the corn is unsafe for human consumption, who is paying attention to where Monsanto cultivates it and how it effects the other strains of corn out there? When you have an unregulated corporation, rather than nature choosing for what should and should not survive and thrive, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that profit is going to be the motivating factor behind whatever decisions are made.

Many plants produce insecticide on their own without the help of GM, but there is something else in the genetic makeup of the plant that regulates how much insecticide the plant will produce. It will die before it will produce enough insecticide to make itself toxic, and if we shut that part of the plant's genetic code off in order to get it to produce more insecticide, well, yes, we create a toxic plant and an environment that is dominated by those toxic plants. The world is full of toxic plants, but the problem occurs when you no longer have nature or humanity choosing for which plants will be cultivated and thrive and which ones will not. Monsanto is neither natural nor human. Because we refuse to regulate corporations like Monsanto, they are making these decisions about what traits to choose for based solely upon a profit motive, and our idiot government, rather than grow a backbone and force Monsanto to be publicly accountable, passes laws that put caps on the amount of money people can recover when they are poisoned, maimed or killed by corporations. So you have to ask yourself, just who is being represented by what we have been falsely convinced is a representative government?

I don't think we are going to put a stop to the science behind GM, nor do I think we really want to. What we want is a government overseeing agency that is accountable to the people, not lobbyists and conscienceless Congressmen and women. We need to regulate who is making decisions about what genetic traits we choose for in crops, and as long as soul-less corporations are making these decisions, we are only going to get more and more fields of crops that have been GM orchestrated to create profit, not health and well-being.

Monsanto has poisoned us all long enough . They and blackkwater/xe are terrorist organizations .

Bt corn is registered as a pesticide with the Epa and yet people are eating it as well as other things poisoned by the Round Up run off. Also, even if one of their strains of Frankenstein crops is not meant to be eaten, such as is the case with pharma crops, it is still being grown in places where transgenic contamination can contaminate crops meant for consumption. And are you suggesting that just because a particular crop may not be meant for consumption that the science behind testing it can be compromised? Amazing the logic of some who think this is so black and white.

Maybe we can learn bee language soon and tell the bees not to eat the wrong corn....

Isn't it assumed that insecticide producing corn is used for industrial purposes and isn't supposed to be actually eaten? Who cares then? I doubt eating cotton plants is particularly good for you either but they make nice comfortable undies. Did this particular strain get OKed to be eaten? Why would they do that?

Also why is he seems to be saying that even though it may be bad science we should still consider it? seems like a strange little partial quote. Bad science is bad science, right?

Watch Food Inc. That's all I can say on this subject.

I'd like to know, however, if these GMO's are being produced in Canada... please tell me they aren't.

I add these articles to my website, too. Hopefully, the more people read this the more aware and angry they will become.
We never know what we're eating anymore.

This is out of context...but...when I want to let my contacts know when/what posts I have submitted, where is the button?
I tried emailing current, but have not received an answer, yet.

And don't begin to tell me Monsanto is not aware of this! AND WHERE IS OUR GOVT? Appointing MONSANTO lobbyists to chief world agricultural positions! Insanity.

Get this dangerous crap out of our food!

Excerpt:

NOTE: Many thanks to Akiko Frid for making available these comments on the safety of Monsanto's GMO-maize by the Austrian scientist Dr Alberta Velimirov
Available: http://hejdagmo.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/dr-velimirov-comments-on-austrian-st...

EXTRACT: "But whatever statistical analyses might or might not be used, the data are always the same and open for everybody to see. This study gives the first indication that the stacked event MON810xNK603 led to a reduced reproductive performance as compared to the non-GM line. This result should not be dismissed as 'bad science' but discussed on a scientific level and taken up as incentive to continue investigations in this direction with other GM crops." - Dr Alberta Velimirov

BACKGROUND: In November 2008 the Austrian Ministry of Health publicly released the results of a study it had commissioned to investigate long term reproductive effects in mice following dietary exposure to a genetically modified (GM) stacked maize NK603xMON810.

The study: summary of findings

Mice fed GM insecticide-producing maize over four generations showed a buildup of abnormal structural changes in various organs (liver, spleen, pancreas), major changes in the pattern of gene function in the gut, reflecting disturbances in the chemistry of this organ system (e.g. in cholesterol production, protein production and breakdown), and, most significantly, reduced fertility.

Ref: Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice. Velimirov A et al. Bundesministerium für Gesundheit, Familie und Jugend Report, Forschungsberichte der Sektion IV Band 3/2008, Austria, 2008. http://bmgfj.cms.apa.at/cms/site/attachments/3/2/9/ CH0810/CMS1226492832306/forschungsbericht_3-2008_letztfassung.pdf

Subsequently two hostile criticisms of the study by ‘regulators’ - EFSA GMO Panel and FSANZ - have been published. Here we present criticisms from each and then Dr. Velimirov's response.