Advertisements

Tag Archive: Syngenta


Global Community Report Banner photo FSPLogoGlobalCommunityFulloldworldmapbckgrnd_zps43d3059c.jpg           Health and Wellness Report Banner photo FSPLogoBannerHealthandWellness831x338Blogger_zps68b43460.jpg

……………………………………………………………………………………..

 

NaturalNews's profile photo
NaturalNews

Syngenta mixed GMOs into US crops to force the world to accept untested biotechnology, lawsuit claims

 

Syngenta

(NaturalNews) Agri- and biotech giant Syngenta is being sued by hundreds of farmers in at least 20 states for shocking business practices, including using the American people as GMO guinea pigs.

According to Arkansas Business, one of the lawsuits against the Swiss seed manufacturer, which has been filed on behalf of two Newport-area farms, alleges that Syngenta “has engaged in a criminal conspiracy to contaminate the U.S. corn crop to force China (and) other nations that buy U.S. corn and U.S. farmers to accept” GMO corn.

The publication further reported in online editions:

The suit, field by the Emerson Poynter law firm, which has offices in Little Rock and Houston, alleges that Syngenta violated the Racketeer Influenced & Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, which is usually used to fight organized crime.

The firm filed the class-action suit in January on behalf of Eagle Lake Farms and Kenny Falwell, both operating farms in the Newport area. The suit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. At least eight other suits have also been filed against the seed maker, the news report said.

In all, there are hundreds of pending suits against Syngenta that have been filed by American farmers since last fall. The suits claim that Syngenta caused financial losses of between $1 billion and $2.9 billion to U.S. corn farmers after selling them GMO corn that China had yet to approve for use. China is a major (and growing) importer of American corn and maize-related byproducts.

Drop in value

In particular, the suits identified the Agrisure Viptera seed, also known as MIR 162. The suits say the seeds have been genetically altered to resist corn pests including earworms and cutworms. The seed was approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 2010.

In November 2013, China began banning shipments of U.S. corn after its scientists detected the GMO trait, leading to a dramatic decrease in the price and value of U.S. corn. The suits allege that even farmers who did not use the GMO corn suffered economic losses as well.

Farmers in 20 states have filed suit. Together, they represent 86 percent of all corn planted in the United States last year, plaintiffs’ lawyers said.

Arkansas Business further reported:

China went on to approve Viptera in December, but plaintiffs’ lawyers say the development has little, if any, effect on their case. Scott Powell of Hare Wynn Newell & Newton of Birmingham, Alabama, is one of those lawyers.

China, with its rapidly expanding middle class, has “a voracious appetite for corn,” Powell said, and when it stopped buying U.S. corn, it found other vendors, like Brazil. And once a country finds a substitute vendor for a product, it rarely switches back.

It’s not just farmers lining up to sue Syngenta for its shady practice. Other agri-business giants are suing as well.

‘We don’t mess with China’

For example ADM, one of the world’s largest processors of corn, filed suit against the Swiss company in November. “Syngenta chose to sell a corn seed product with traits that were not approved in all major export markets, without undertaking reasonable stewardship practices to prevent the resulting crop from commingling with or otherwise tainting the rest of the U.S. corn supply,” an ADM spokeswoman told Arkansas Business.

For it’s part, Syngenta says the suits are baseless, saying it “believes that the lawsuits are without merit and strongly upholds the right of growers to have access to approved new technologies that can increase both their productivity and their profitability,” as reported by AgWeb.com.

The company added that it “commercialized the trait in full compliance with regulatory and legal requirements,” “obtained import approval from major corn importing countries,” and “has been fully transparent in commercializing the trait over the last four years.”

U.S. farmers take China’s business seriously.

“We don’t mess with China,” Deb Volnek, a Nebraska farmer involved in the suit against Syngenta, told Reuters. “When China buys something, the markets go up. When they don’t, the markets go down.”

Sources:

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com

http://www.agweb.com

http://www.reuters.com

 

………………………………………………………………………………

 

About NaturalNews

The NaturalNews Network is a non-profit collection of public education websites covering topics that empower individuals to make positive changes in their health, environmental sensitivity, consumer choices and informed skepticism. The NaturalNews Network is owned and operated by Truth Publishing International, Ltd., a Taiwan corporation. It is not recognized as a 501(c)3 non-profit in the United States, but it operates without a profit incentive, and its key writer, Mike Adams, receives absolutely no payment for his time, articles or books other than reimbursement for items purchased in order to conduct product reviews.

The vast majority of our content is freely given away at no charge. We offer thousands of articles and dozens of downloadable reports and guides (like the Honest Food Guide) that are designed to educate and empower individuals, families and communities so that they may experience improved health, awareness and life fulfillment.

Learn More About Natural News Here

Advertisements

 

democracynow democracynow

Published on Feb 21, 2014

http://www.democracynow.org – We speak with a University of California scientist Tyrone Hayes, who discovered a widely used herbicide may have harmful effects on the endocrine system. But when he tried to publish the results, the chemical’s manufacturer launched a campaign to discredit his work. Hayes was first hired in 1997 by a company, which later became agribusiness giant Syngenta, to study their product, Atrazine, a pesticide that is applied to more than half the corn crops in the United States, and widely used on golf courses and Christmas tree farms. When Hayes found results Syngenta did not expect — that Atrazine causes sexual abnormalities in frogs, and could cause the same problems for humans — it refused to allow him to publish his findings. A new article in The New Yorker magazine uses court documents from a class-action lawsuit against Syngenta to show how it sought to smear Hayes’ reputation and prevent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from banning the profitable chemical, which is already banned by the European Union.

Enhanced by Zemanta

 

 

 

Civil Beat  |  By Sophie Cocke Posted: 12/05/2013 10:21 pm EST

 

big island biotech ban

Big Island Mayor Billy Kenoi | Civil Beat

 

HONOLULU — Mayor Billy Kenoi signed Bill 113 into law on Thursday, prohibiting biotech companies from operating on the Big Island and banning farmers from growing any new genetically altered crops.

 

The bill exempts the island’s GMO papaya industry.

 

Kenoi said that the new law signals the county’s desire to encourage community-based farming and ranching, as opposed to playing host to global agribusiness corporations in a letter to council members announcing his decision to sign the bill.

 

None of the biotech companies that have taken up root in Hawaii in recent years, such as Monsanto, Syngenta and Pioneer, operate on Big Island. The new law makes sure that remains the case.

 

Read More Here

Enhanced by Zemanta

Reblogged from:   Blavatar   toolwielder

 

 

burnbeets

 

Though the controlled corporate media apparatus is suppressing the story, 40 tons of GMO crops were torched, prompting an FBI investigation. There has been a COMPLETE MEDIA BLACKOUT, outside of local circles has dared to mention it, perhaps because government fears that if the public learns that other people are getting fighting mad (literally), they might join in, and become an actual revolution. It was only reported locally live on KXL Radio and echoed by the Oregonian, where the ONLY web mention exists, hard to find because the headline wording is carefully avoids the most likely keywords for a search.

 

Here’s what happened — 40 Tons of GMO Sugar Beets were set ablaze in Eastern Oregon, yesterday. FORTY TONS — the entire acreage of two full fields of crops IN THE GROUND were set ablaze over a THREE NIGHT PERIOD OF TIME. That means ARSON.

 

Evidence is that 6,500 plants were destroyed BY HAND, ONE PLANT AT A TIME. That, in turn, implies A LOT OF PEOPLE were involved: would you want to stick around once a fire was going and wait to be discovered? No, someone (many someones) probably wanted to move as quickly as possible. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A MOVEMENT, a kind of ORGANIZED REVOLT — and this is exactly the kind of retribution that many have warned was coming; when lawmakers and corporations refuse to honor the Constitution and instead engage in ‘legalized’ criminal acts such as enabled by the ‘Monsanto Protection Act.’

 

More than decade ago, environmental saboteurs vandalized experimental crops across the country in a revolt against high-tech agriculture. Foes of genetic engineering also struck in 2000, when members of the Earth Liberation Front, with roots in Oregon, set fire to agriculture offices at Michigan State University. ELF’s position was that genetic engineering was “one of the many threats to the natural world as we know it.”

 

Read More  Here

Last-ditch lobbying to sway vote in Brussels to halt use of killer nerve agents

Beekeepers report higher loss rates In bee population

Bees are vital for pollination, and scientific studies have linked pesticides to huge losses in their numbers. Photograph: Sean Gallup/Getty

Europe is on the brink of a landmark ban on the world’s most widely used insecticides, which have increasingly been linked to serious declines in bee numbers. Despite intense secret lobbying by British ministers and chemical companies against the ban, revealed in documents obtained by the Observer, a vote in Brussels on Monday is expected to lead to the suspension of the nerve agents.

Bees and other insects are vital for global food production as they pollinate three-quarters of all crops. The plummeting numbers of pollinators in recent years has been blamed on disease, loss of habitat and, increasingly, the near ubiquitous use of neonicotinoid pesticides.

The prospect of a ban has prompted a fierce behind-the-scenes campaign. In a letter released to the Observer under freedom of information rules, the environment secretary, Owen Paterson, told the chemicals company Syngenta last week that he was “extremely disappointed” by the European commission‘s proposed ban. He said that “the UK has been very active” in opposing it and “our efforts will continue and intensify in the coming days”.

Publicly, ministers have expressed concern for bees, with David Cameron saying: “If we do not look after our bee populations, very serious consequences will follow.”

The chemical companies, which make billions from the products, have also lobbied hard, with Syngenta even threatening to sue individual European Union officials involved in publishing a report that found the pesticides posed an unacceptable risk to bees, according to documents seen by the Observer. The report, from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), led the commission to propose a two-year ban on three neonicotinoids. “EFSA has provided a strong, substantive and scientific case for the suspension,” a commission spokesman said.

A series of high-profile scientific studies has linked neonicotinoids to huge losses in the number of queens produced and big increases in “disappeared” bees – those that fail to return from foraging trips. Pesticide manufacturers and UK ministers have argued that the science is inconclusive and that a ban would harm food production, but conservationists say harm stemming from dying pollinators is even greater.

“It’s a landmark vote,” said Joan Walley MP, chairwoman of parliament’s green watchdog, the environmental audit committee, whose recent report on pollinators condemned the government’s “extraordinary complacency”. Walley said: “You have to have scientific evidence, but you also have to have the precautionary principle – that’s the heart of this debate.”

A ban has been supported by petitions signed by millions of people and Paterson has received 80,000 emails, an influx that he described as a “cyber-attack“. “The impact of neonicotinoids on the massive demise of our bees is clear, yet Paterson seems unable to escape the haze of sloppy science and lobbying by powerful pesticide giants,” said Iain Keith of the campaign group Avaaz. “Seventy per cent of British people want these poisons banned. Paterson must reconsider or send the bees to chemical Armageddon.” Andrew Pendleton of Friends of the Earth said a ban would be “a historic moment in the fight to save our bees”.

A spokeswoman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: “As the proposal currently stands we could not support an outright ban. We have always been clear that a healthy bee population is our top priority, that’s why decisions need to be taken using the best possible scientific evidence and we want to work with the commission to achieve this. Any action taken must be proportionate and not have any unforeseen knock-on effects.”

“This plan is motivated by a quite understandable desire to save the beleaguered bee and concern about a serious decline in other important pollinator species,” said the government’s chief scientific adviser, Sir Mark Walport, “but it is based on a misreading of the currently available evidence.” He said the EC plan was a serious “mistake”.

Julian Little, a spokesman for Bayer Cropscience, said: “Call me an optimist, but I still believe the commission will see sense. There is so much field evidence to demonstrate safe use [and] an increasing number of member states who reject the apparent drive towards museum agriculture in the European Union.” However, Bulgaria is the only nation known to have changed its voting intention and it will reverse its opposition.

Read Full Article Here

****************************************************************************************************

Bee-harming pesticides banned in Europe

EU member states vote ushers in continent-wide suspension of neonicotinoid pesticides

A bee collects pollen from a sunflower in Utrecht

A bee collects pollen from a sunflower in Utrecht, the Netherlands. EU states have voted in favour of a proposal to restrict the use of pesticides linked to serious harm in bees. Photograph: Michael Kooren/Reuters

Europe will enforce the world’s first continent-wide ban on widely used insecticides alleged to cause serious harm to bees, after a European commission vote on Monday.

The suspension is a landmark victory for millions of environmental campaigners, backed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), concerned about a dramatic decline in the bee population. The vote also represents a serious setback for the chemical producers who make billions each year from the products and also UK ministers, who voted against the ban. Both had argued the ban would harm food production.

Although the vote by the 27 EU member states on whether to suspend the insect nerve agents was supported by 15 nations, but did not reach the required majority under voting rules. The hung vote hands the final decision to the European commission, which will implement the ban.

Tonio Borg, health and consumer commissioner, said: “Our proposal is based on a number of risks to bee health identified by the EFSA, [so] the European commission will go ahead with its plan in coming weeks.”

Friends of the Earth‘s head of campaigns, Andrew Pendleton, said: “This decision is a significant victory for common sense and our beleaguered bee populations. Restricting the use of these pesticides could be an historic milestone on the road to recovery for these crucial pollinators.”

The UK, which abstained in a previous vote, was heavily criticised for switching to a “no” vote on Monday.

Joan Walley MP, chair of parliament’s green watchdog, the environmental audit committee, whose investigation had backed a ban and accused ministers of “extraordinary complacency”, said the vote was a real step in the right direction, but added: “A full Commons debate where ministers can be held to account is more pressing than ever.”

Greenpeace‘s chief scientist, Doug Parr, said: “By not supporting the ban, environment secretary, Owen Paterson, has exposed the UK government as being in the pocket of big chemical companies and the industrial farming lobby.”

On Sunday, the Observer revealed the intense secret lobbying by Paterson and Syngenta.

Read Full Article Here

*******************************************************************************************************

Crossroads News : Changes In The World Around Us And Our Place In It

Genetically Modified Mosquitoes Release in the Millions with No Risk Assessment

 

Natural Society

mosquitoinlight 250x156 Genetically Modified Mosquitoes Release in the Millions with No Risk AssessmentIn case you didn’t know, genetically modified mosquitoes have been unleashed numerous times on planet Earth. Thus far, millions mosquitoes were released in various locations; Cayman Islands, Malaysia, and Brazil. Now, the GM mosquito creator Oxitec may release millions of genetically modified mosquitoes in the fields of crops, including olives, citrus fruits, cabbage, tomatoes, and cotton.

A UK-based company, Oxitec is the maker of all genetically modified insects. The company’s goal is to create a global market, where GM insects will be released around the world in order to take over natural insect populations. With the replacement of natural insects, the company hopes to wipe out disease carried by insects as well as those insects feeding on farmers’ crops. As scary as it might sound, thousands of insect species could be genetically altered in the near future.

Interestingly, Oxitec is supported by and very close with multinational pesticide and seed company, Syngenta. Syngenta, in addition to providing the world with destructive pesticides, has also been charged with covering up the deaths of many animals consuming the company’s GM corn. Being mainly interested in the market for GM agricultural pests, Syngenta as well as Oxitec are planning to commercialize GM insects around the world.

What’s especially scary about the release and future modification of thousands of species is that all of this will be done with little risk assessment. Not to mention not knowing of the vast number of negative outcomes that could occur from genetically modifying parts the biosphere.

Dr Helen Wallace, Director of GeneWatch UK said “The public will be shocked to learn that GM insects can be released into the environment without any proper oversight. Conflicts-of-interest should be removed from all decision-making processes to ensure the public have a proper say about these plans.”

To help release the GM insects, Oxitec is influencing regulation around the world. One example of influence revolves around the European Food Safety Authority, established to help the risk assessment of GM insects. As reported by FarmWars, there seems to be numerous instances of conflict of interested, which includes experts with links to Oxitec. The connection of those in EFSA and Oxitec is very similar to that of the Monsanto-FDA connection, where several government officials have hard-links to biotech giant Monsanto.

The draft Guidance on risk assessment of GM insects shows some significant deficiencies: for example it does not consider the impacts of GM insects on the food chain. Oxitec’s GM insects are genetically engineered to die mostly at the larval stage so dead GM larvae will enter the food chain inside food crops such as olives, cabbages and tomatoes. Living GM insects could also be transported on crops to other farms or different countries. EFSA has excluded any consideration of these important issues from its draft guidance. Many other issues are not properly addressed.

A briefing shows how Oxitec is trying to influence regulatory processes for GM insects. Oxitec:

  • Doesn’t want to be liable for any complications.
  • Tries to avoid any regulation of GM agricultural pests on crops appearing in the food chain.
  • Excludes important issues from risk assessments, such as the impact on human immunity and disease, and the possible outcomes arising from surviving GM mosquitoes.
  • Releases large amount of GM mosquitoes prior to regulations.
  • Attempts to define ‘biological containment’ of the insects (which are programmed to die at the larval stage) as contained use, by-passing requirements for risk assessments and consultation on decisions to release GM insects into the environment.
  • Undermining the requirement to obtain informed consent for experiments involving insect species which transmit disease.
  • Ignores any labeling using products produced from GM insects and how insects can be contained where released.

Additional Sources:

The Briefing: Genetically-Modified Insects: Under Whose Control?

About Mike Barrett:
Google Plus Profile| Mike is the co-founder, editor, and primary researcher behind Natural Society. Studying the work of top natural health activists, and writing special reports for top 10 alternative health websites, Mike has written hundreds of articles and pages on how to obtain optimum wellness through natural health.

 Other Important Stories

Barbara H. Peterson ~ Millions Of GMO Mosquitoes Released On General Public

  by

Shift Frequency

Barb writes ~ Look out people of planet earth, genetically engineered bugs are here. Just in case you haven’t figured it out yet, our technocracy is working ever diligently on genetically engineering every last living cell on the planet – WITHOUT EXCEPTION. What does this mean for life here on earth? Ever hear the expression “soup sandwich?” Well, after these “scientific” geniuses are through with us, that is exactly what all life will be – a genetic soup sandwich, made in a lab, and stamped with a corporate logo embedded in our DNA.

If the following report from Testbiotech doesn’t send chills up your spine, I don’t know what will. Get ready world, because nothing will ever be the same. Ever. There is no remediation technique available to clean up genetically engineered mutations released into the wild and spread through horizontal gene transfer.

Regulatory decisions on releasing genetically modified (GM) insects biased by corporate interests

Dr Helen Wallace, Director of GeneWatch UK said “The public will be shocked to learn that GM insects can be released into the environment without any proper oversight. Conflicts-of-interest should be removed from all decision-making processes to ensure the public have a proper say about these plans.”

London/ Munich Thursday 8th November 2012 A briefing published today by public interest groups highlights how regulatory decisions on GM insects in Europe and around the world are being biased by corporate interests.

The briefing shows how UK biotech company Oxitec has infiltrated decision-making processes around the world. The company has close links to the multinational pesticide and seed company, Syngenta. Oxitec has already made large-scale open releases of GM mosquitoes in the Cayman Islands, Malaysia and Brazil and is developing GM agricultural pests, jointly with Syngenta. Plans to commercialise GM insects would result in many millions of GM insects being released in fields of crops, including olives, tomatoes, citrus fruits, cabbages and cotton. In future, any insect species might be genetically modified……..

 

Read Full Article Here

Crossroads News : Changes In The World Around Us And Our Place In It

Environmental  :  GMO/ Poisons in Our Foods

6 New GMO Crops that May Soon Hit Your Dinner Table

Lisa Garber
NaturalSociety
August 30, 2012

geneticallymodifiedapple 235x147 6 New GMO Crops that May Soon Hit Your Dinner TableRemember when the USDA gave Monsanto’s new GMO crops the fast track to approval? Regardless of the numerous accounts of organ damage, pesticide-resistant weeds, and unintentionally mutated organisms like resistant insects, our own government is manipulating the game to let “biotech bullies” like Monsanto get speedier regulatory reviews. Consequently, the environment, livestock, and consumers will be exposed to even greater danger.

As stated in their press release, the Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, envisions transforming the USDA “into a high-performing organization that focuses on its customers.” We’d like to think that we, the consumers, are those customers. The likes of Monsanto, Dow, and Syngenta, however, would probably disagree.

Here’s your chance to tell the USDA otherwise. The first two crops on this list have been on the old, slower-track approval process, which allows 60 days for the public to comment. The remaining four are new additions but are on the fast track, meaning we still only have until September 11th of 2012 to have our say before these seeds hit the soil and, maybe, your dinner table.

6 New GMO Crops to Act Against

  • Dow 2,4-D and Glufosinate Tolerant Soybean – Since the US first began using GM crops, our herbicide usage has been boosted by 300 million pounds, despite claims by biotech behemoths that other plants like weeds would not grow resistant to glyphosate – commonly known as RoundUp. And now, we have “superweeds.” Of course, biotech (and seemingly the USDA) doesn’t care, and they plan on adding the 2,4-D herbicide and dicamba (see number 4) to the list. Take action here.
  • Syngenta Corn Rootworm Resistant Corn – Plenty of nations have banned Syngenta’s GM Bt crops—but not the US. This type of corn produces its own pesticides and kills all bugs, good or bad, which also means livestock can get sick from eating it. Research says that 80% of pregnant women have Bt toxins in their blood. Take action here.
  • Okanagan Non-Browning Apple – Conventional apples are covered in pesticides. That’s why we buy organic, but Okanagan has produced the first GM apple. Take action against genetically modified apples right here.
  • Monsanto Dicamba Tolerant Soybean – Take action here.
  • Dow 2,4-D, Dlyphosate and Glufosinate Tolerant Soybean – Take action here.
  • Genective Glyphosate Tolerant Corn

GM foods are bad news for the earth and all of us who live on it. Have your voice heard while you can.

Additional Sources:

I-sis.org.uk

Organic Consumers

Biolsci.org

Explore More:

  1. Monsanto’s GMO Crops Ravage US, USDA Ignores Dangers
  2. Report: Nature May Soon Overcome Monsanto as ‘Super Rootworms’ Destroy Crops
  3. USDA to Give Monsanto’s New GMO Crops Special ‘Speed Approval’
  4. Gates Foundation Gives $10 Million to Support Genetically Modified Cereal Crops
  5. 4 Proofs the USDA Doesn’t Care About Your Health
  6. GMO Crops Continually Banned Around the World in Display of Health Freedom

If You Were Eating Food that Could Kill You – Want to Know?

Published on Aug 29, 2012 by

If you were eating something completely unnatural – something that
could make you sick – give you cancer – make your testicles shrink –
heck, even kill you – wouldn’t you want to know? If you answered yes –
then you’re on the same side as over 90% of your fellow Americans.
Poll after poll over the last few years – has shown that more than 90%
of Americans support specific labeling of genetically modified foods
that they buy in grocery stores. And European and other developed
countries require labeling of GMOs — genetically modified foods. But
even though for years Americans have been demanding the right to know
what’s in their food – and whether or not it’s franken-food – not a
single piece of state or federal legislation has ever been passed to
make it happen. Which brings us to California. Efforts to force the
state legisature to pass laws to require labeling of genetically
modified foods have failed – so now citizens of the state have taken
matters into their own hands. After collecting more than a million
signatures – the citizens of California put proposition 37 on the
ballot for November – which will force all genetically modified foods
to have special labels. Good news, right? Well…now the fight is just
starting. That’s because the biggest purveyors of genetically modified
foods – giant corporations like Monsanto, DuPont, Coca-Cola, Pepsi,
Nestle – all of them are spending enormous amounts of money to defeat
Prop 37. They don’t want you to know what’s in your food. Monsanto
alone has spent more than 4 million bucks – so too has Dupont – and in
total the GMO industry has raised $25 million to kill prop 37 – and to
kill your right to know what’s in the food you eat. On the other hand
– the supporters of Prop 37 – have only raised $2 million. This is
going to be an uphill battle.

Jeffrey M. Smith: The GMO Threat 1/4

Uploaded by on Nov 10, 2010

Jeffrey M. Smith, author of the #1 GMO bestseller Seeds of Deception, talks about his campaign to force mass rejection of genetically modified foods in order to expunge them form the market entirely. Smith explains how the FDA allowed GMO foods to enter the market with no safety testing whatsoever, and that the man primarily responsible for this is now food safety czar in the Obama administration.

Smith notes how Obama has broken his pre-election promise that every GMO food should be properly labeled, and also installed pro-GMO executives in the USDA and FDA who have close ties to Monsanto and the biotechnology industry.

Smith documents how consumption of genetically modified foods has been directly linked with reproductive problems, immune system deficiencies, accelerated ageing, organ damage and gastrointestinal problems. The immune system problem has been seen consistently in mice and rats who are fed GMO food, explains Smith, and now since humans have started consuming genetically modified foods, auto-immune diseases and allergies have increased.

Smith explains how research exposing the dangers of genetically modified food has been censored and shut down by the establishment, with scientists involved in such studies finding themselves blacklisted and shunned by their peers before being fired from their jobs in many cases as big agriculture throws its weight around.

Smith covers a plethora of vital issues in this one hour interview, and offers workable solutions to phase GMO out of the market, by pushing for proper labeling standards and an intensive education outreach that will help people realize how big a threat genetically modified food poses to their health.

Jeffrey M. Smith: The GMO Threat 2/4

Jeffrey M. Smith: The GMO Threat 3/4

Jeffrey M. Smith: The GMO Threat 4/4

Millions Against Monsanto