GMO, our food supply and our health

You, your spouse, your children, your grandchildren, your friends and community are exposed to the corruption of the "modern processed food supply" and it's killing the nation, all in the name of increased corporate profit:

This movie on GMO's is available for a limited time to view free:


Genetic Roulette

Edited by Chilidawgz, 18 September 2012 - 04:38 PM.

Authors of study linking GM corn with rat tumors manipulated media to prevent criticism of their work

A recent paper that claims to have found a link between eating genetically modified corn and the growth of tumors in rats. Short version: The research sucked. It's a terribly done study

The authors of the study (and their financial sponsor, The Sustainable Food Trust) manipulated the media to ensure that the first news stories published about the study would not be critical of its methods or results.

As the AFP noted:

Breaking with a long tradition in scientific journalism, the authors allowed a selected group of reporters to have access to the paper, provided they signed confidentiality agreements that prevented them from consulting other experts about the research before publication.

Reuters described the embargo agreement in a similar way:

In an unusual move, the research group did not allow reporters to seek outside comment on their paper before its publication in the peer-reviewed journal Food and Chemical Toxicology and presentation at a news conference in London.

So did the BBC:

In a move regarded as unusual by the media, the French research group refused to provide copies of the journal paper to reporters in advance of its publication, unless they signed non-disclosure agreements. The NDAs would have prevented the journalists from approaching third-party researchers for comment.


http://boingboing.ne...mment-658299606

http://boingboing.ne...tumors-why.html

The "Research"

One immediate problem, Newell-McGloughlin said, is that the line of rodents used in the study, known as Sprague-Dawley rats, are frequently used in cancer research because a large majority of them naturally develop tumors at a high rate, regardless of what they eat or how they're raised. What's more, the rats were allowed to eat an unlimited amount of food, which increases their chances of developing tumors. And two is a very old age for these rats, which could account for the large rate of cancer seen across all groups, including the controls.

The small size of the control group also raised red flags. Even experienced scientists in the field had trouble interpreting data in the study, as seen in comments collected by the UK's Science Media Center, but it appears that the study included just 10 or 20 control animals. That means there were at least nine times more test animals than control animals. If anything, studies of this kind usually include two or three times more controls than experimental animals.

The results don't make a lot of sense, either. No matter how much of either herbicide-laden or genetically modified maize the rats ate in proportion to their other food, rates of cancer and premature death remained the same. However, to be meaningful, toxicology studies like this should show a dose-dependent response, which means that if something is toxic, more of it should be more toxic.

Looking at the data, it appears that the study authors never tested their results to see if the numbers they turned up could have occurred by random chance, said David Tribe, a microbiologist at the University of Melbourne in Australia. And given the small numbers of animals used in the study, that's a real possibility.

Evolution teaches us that all living organizations have been genetically modified "accidentally" over eons of time.
So I would ask if these so called Frankenfish might not actually be a better source of food than the wilds ones which are said to be full of mercury and irradiated by the Japanese nuclear power disaster.

'Frankenfish on the Menu? FDA Gives Initial Approval


Genetically modified Atlantic salmon — known by critics as "Frankenfish" — may soon be available in your local grocer's seafood aisle. The Food and Drug Administration has given initial approval to the biotech developers of the salmon, clearing the last big hurdle before consumers can purchase the fish.

But consumers won't know if the salmon they're buying is genetically engineered or not — U.S. regulations don't require food made from a genetically modified organism (GMO) to be labeled. That fact, plus the impact the engineered salmon could have on wild salmon stocks, human health and the fishing industry, has critics raising a stink with the FDA.