It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: RancorXXX
a reply to: Harte
Harte, this went way beyond the retaliation seen in these cables, in fact there was a big case in the UK where a biotech scientist named Dr. Arpad Pusztai was retaliated against and driven out by the big US GMO companies.
Source
Unfortunately, Pusztai's analyses of the chemical composition of the transgenic lines were rather superficial. And his quick leap to the conclusion that the variation he observed was attributable to the fact that they were transgenic was simply unwarranted. This mistake has proved costly to Pusztai himself. And unfortunately, the expertise battle that sprang up around the experiments has obscured the importance of carrying out well-designed experiments to evaluate the food qualities of transgenic crop plants expressing proteins that have the potential of affecting human health. Lectins are clearly in this category.
Pusztai has been criticized severely for the quality of his experiments. His experiments have been attacked for their small sample sizes, the use of inappropriate statistical procedures, and the fact that a diet of raw - or even cooked - potatoes is a bad diet for rats (people too), even when supplemented with a bit of extra protein. But oddly enough, in all that has been written about these experiments, no one seems to have seen their central flaw, which was that he did not use appropriate controls. A "control" is the part of an experiment that allows the researcher to examine the consequences of just the change (in this case) or the treatment (in the case of a drug) under study. In Pusztai's experiments, the control potatoes had a different history than the transgenic potatoes and, in particular, that history included a culture procedure that induces somaclonal variation. The likeliest source of the variation he detected - and of the differences he attributed to the fact that they contained foreign DNA - was the culture procedure itself. In order to be able to attribute the deleterious effects of the transgenic potatoes to the newly introduced gene or to some other part of the introduced DNA, he would have had to make a comparison between potatoes that had the very same history, but either had or lacked the transgenic construct. This can be done, but the study that Pusztai participated in was simply not designed for such a test.
Better yet, Pusztai's own studies showed that purified GNA wasn't toxic to rats (Pusztai 1990). In fact, he and his colleagues had shown that GNA had a protective effect against bacterial infection with Salmonella, a nasty intestinal bug (Naughton et al., 2000).
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: sheepslayer247
Let's take corn for example.
That is one of the worse examples possible.
Those that are pushing with 'organic' are messing with farmers BIGTIME.
It is only because of the current yields that gmo give do farmers even 'make' a living anymore.
Take a good look at the chart there.
From 1860 to the 1970s would be the 'era' of organic.
The way 'grandpa' use to do it.
With hybrids of today aka GMO corn bushells are now pushing 350 bushels.
Less land is being used.
More food is being grown.
Like I said organic isn't the way.
Because thousands of farmers are going out of the business every year.
Less land is being used every year.
The increase in yields is the only way farmers still compete with the rising land costs,rising machinery costs.
People are free to disagree.
originally posted by: aboutface
That is absolute criminal behaviour and if we want to turn things around for ourselves we must begin charging and prosecuting these traitors that have undermined our various peoples throughout the world.
originally posted by: Sump3
Just to heat it up guys. In english gematria "Monsanto" equals 666.
ETA: - And to topic:
Though it seems that some strings within our gov. are trying to fight back as most products are labelled with GMO in the ingredients list.
Is it that way in the States, ie. labelled?
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: sheepslayer247
Which brings us to:
If the never ending demagoguery of GMO keeps going like it is.
What are the 'poor' going to be eating ?
If it wasn't for GMO food ?
It would be more expensive than it already is with no means to keep up with population growth, and demand.
Sure some people say 'organic' can.
I don't think so feeding 7 billion every day not to mention that food that is now fueling autos.