GMOs are they hazardous to health? The study accuses

[dedeleco]

It involves tens to hundreds of millions of deaths, so the second degree is almost criminal !!
Especially when all families are affected by this scourge of junk food of all kinds, with obese, cancer, heart attacks, etc ...

[sen-no-sen]

It involves tens to hundreds of millions of deaths, so the second degree is almost criminal !!

So they could almost put me in prison for my comments!
You will have to put water in your dedicated wine, or rather water in your reactor vessel!



It's been more than 10 years since we know that GMOs represent a threat to health, we can obviously be delighted by the bad publicity that this does in Monsanto, but we have to understand that we must not be soothsayer to imagine that modifying the genomes of a plant or animal could be done without consequences.

It should be remembered that Monsanto, Bayer, Syngenta and others are chemical tankers.
Their only goal is to sell fertilizers and other chemical pesticides in order to phagocytose agriculture and maximize their profits.

The big concern is that nobody really dares to ask THE question about GMOs, namely: What is it used for?.
Without even addressing ecological and health issues, it appears that food GMOs are strictly used for NOTHING.

[Obamot]

Nothing ... except to enrich Montsanto and make the agricultural sector even more dependent ...

And above all dependent on agro-business up to the large retail ...

We missed the "fait accompli", Which was to relegate the classic girl to the background: we have escaped beautiful for the moment. But it is certain and certain that they will do it again.

The main point I note is that for the first time, scientists worthy of the name have charged health authorities! Something that has been said in the columns of the fo-fo for ages ... But where has the courage of the Attorney General gone, who should go to court to make an investigation !!!

It is moving slowly!

[sen-no-sen]

But where has the courage of the Attorney General gone, who should go to court to make an investigation !!!

In the United States, there are many cases of collusion between Monsanto and the FDA, one can imagine the same thing in France.
It would hardly surprise me if political figures were involved ...

[Ahmed]

It would hardly surprise me if political figures were involved ...

Is it second degree?

[sen-no-sen]

It would hardly surprise me if political figures were involved ...

Is it second degree?

Having no evidence to investigate a case, I can only assume!
Considering that some of our politicians fricoten with arms dealers in exchange for hidden financing by means of tax relief, I thought to myself that perhaps, it would be possible that there are "cases" of collusion between the health authorities and the lobbies, but hey I say it like that ...

[Ahmed]

It proves at least that you have good background!
But hey, power relations are power relations, and these things cannot be explained by chance ...

Why would lobbies exist if they were devoid of effects?

[Superform]

The big concern is that nobody really dares to ask THE question about GMOs, namely: What is it used for?.
Without even addressing ecological and health issues, it appears that food GMOs are strictly used for NOTHING.

For me, this is what I understand. I specify that I am not a specialist, and that my remarks can be incomplete or completely false, but that is what I understood by being interested in it A MINIMUM.

- The petrochemical industries, discovering GMOs, have taken it over
- Different things you can do with GMOs are: prevent them from reproducing, make them resistant to pesticides and other junk, increase their productivity, increase their potential for benefits. (and I certainly forget about it)

- GMOs focused on what they call first generation GMOs, namely the first 2 points. They sold the non-reproduction as a side effect, but in my opinion it was entirely intended. The first point therefore allows them to sell seeds every year, the second point allows them to sell "compatible" GMO pesticides.

- They are now announcing that they want to look into 2nd generation GMOs, GMO drugs, productivity, etc ... but if they go, it will be backwards ...

- Some organic farmers have better productivity than GMO farmers

The only point that could be positive in GMOs is that from one year to the next, production is more stable, therefore less risk of loss of turnover compared to BIO or a bad season can make lose 70% of the crop.

This is also why agri BIOS, in general, diversify their cultures. Do not put all your eggs in one basket ...

[Obamot]

Indeed...

And every time I hear that we associate: GMO with productivity and / or yields, it bristles my hairs (but I do not understand why, if someone can explain it )

Research on GMOs would be fully interesting and well inspired if it were only to study what nature does, and to detect how these transformations take place and to understand why certain genetic modifications occur "spontaneously" !? In short, if the man was not satisfied just with badly imitating nature, if she was wise and not greedy.

Until he understands this on his fingertips, he does not know what he is doing or where he is going, he is playing sorcerer's apprentices! He is looking "an effect" without presupposing multifactorial causes that emerge upstream, saying to themselves: "We'll see ... later" ...

As long as it is only to increase yields, he goes to the front of big ... emments. It can be said if he is going into the wall with great strides, since he is already there.

[sen-no-sen]

They sold non-reproduction as a side effect, but in my opinion it is fully wanted.

The sterile genes, called the "Terminator" gene by detractors, were not accidental, it was about building customer loyalty and making them completely dependent on the distributors ($$$$).

They are now announcing that they want to look into 2nd generation GMOs, GMO drugs, productivity, etc ... but if they do, it will be backwards ...

GMO drugs have been used for several years by the pharmaceutical industry.
It is however necessary to differentiate GMO drug and GMO for food purpose, because the ends are not quite the same.

The goal of GMOs is global food subjugation.
The world food market is not centralized, each producer has relative autonomy, the goal of GMOs is to centralize profits towards a few multinational entities; apart from the only way to achieve such domination is to patent the living.
The food market could thus greatly exceed that of energy, that is to say several thousands of billions of dollars, one can thus understand that all the blows are allowed to arrive at such a domination.

Make no mistake, the goal of GMO food is clearly mercantile, the humanitarian and progressive aspect is a smokescreen aimed at justifying the activity.
There have never been so many hungry people in the world since the appearance of this technological drift.

Some organic farmers have better productivity than GMO farmers

High yield organic (still little practiced ... but dating from the Incas!) Is very much higher in productivity than chemical or biotechnological agriculture, in particular through symbiotic culture (two different species planted in the same area: Corn + bean for example).