Monday, December 20, 2010


The above photograph shows a baby with sores caused by agrochemicals spraying in a GM soy-producing region of Paraguay ( source: GM WATCH )

You people. We thought you folks had taken everything you
could. You took our land, you took our homes. You stole our
pottery and our songs and our blankets and our designs. You
took our language and, in some places, you even took our
children. You snatched at our religion and at our women. You
destroyed our history and now, now it seems you come to suck
the marrow from our bones.

Jeanette Armstrong, an indigenous woman from Canada at a meeting on the Human Genome Diversity Projecti

"The cultivation of GM RR soy endangers human and animal health, increases herbicide use, damages the environment, reduces biodiversity, and has negative impacts on rural populations. The monopolistic control by agribusiness companies over GM RR soy technology and production endangers markets, compromises the economic viability of farming, and threatens food security."

In Argentina and Paraguay, doctors and residents living in GM soy producing areas have reported serious health effects from glyphosate spraying, including high rates of birth defects as well as infertility, stillbirths, miscarriages, and cancers. Scientific studies collected in the new report confirm links between exposure to glyphosate and premature births, miscarriages, cancer, and damage to DNA and reproductive organ cells.

Residents have also reported environmental damage from glyphosate, including damage to food crops and streams strewn with dead fish. These accounts are backed by studies in the report that show glyphosate is toxic to the environment.

Monsanto and the agro-industrial multinationals ( Cargill, ADM,Bunge, etc.)are not the only criminals responsible for this GENOCIDE and Crime against Humanity and Nature. The GM soya being produced in Argentina, Paraguay, Brazil and in other south american countries is exported to the EU and to other affluent countries to feed cattle and other livestock. Thus, all those who eat meat (beef, pork, chicken, and other livestock) and their produce ( milk, cheese, eggs, etc.) fed with GM soya, GM maize and other GM crops, are directly supporting this genocidal industry/system - through ignorance or worse through indifference - and are thus equally responsible for the resulting socio-economic, health and enviromental GENOCIDE of GM soya production...

The solution

" A chain is only as strong as its weakest link..."

The weakest link in the GMO "chain" is the purchasing choice & power of the consumer.

If european & american consumers stopped buying and eating livestock ( and their produce) fed with GM soya/maize, then the whole industry/system would collapse...

Peaceful, non-violent, non-cooperation with the system...

Food for thought next time you buy/eat your hamburger, milk, pork chops, chicken or eggs...

note: Labelling of animals - and their produce - fed with GMO's is not legally required in both the US and in the EU. Thus, consumers do not realize that each time they purchase and consume meat ( beef, chicken, pork and their produce) fed with GMO's, they are directly supporting this genocidal industry/system.

Please watch the following documentaries for an overview of the health, environmental and socio-economic GENOCIDE of GM soy cultivation in South America:

Killing Fields

the battle to feed factory farms

A hidden chain of destruction stretches from the factory farms in Europe to the forests of South America - where huge soy plantations, grown to feed chickens, cows and pigs in Europe, are wiping out wildlife and making climate change worse.

To make way for soy plantations, thousands of people are being forced from their land. Indigenous people are being evicted and forests are being cleared.

This ground breaking film investigates the impacts of growing soy in South America and shows how small scale farming that is good for people and the environment is losing out to big business of pesticides – poisoning rural communities, water sources and nature.

Meanwhile in Europe small scale farming that is good for people and the environment is losing out to big business.

This ground breaking film investigates the impacts of growing soy in South America to feed factory farms in Europe. Our campaign gives people unwittingly caught up in this damaging chain hope that they can break out of it.

Link to download/view documentary:

Also watch following BBC documentary on the same subject:

Paraguay’s painful harvest :

New scientific report on the health hazards and the socio-economic and environmental consequences of GM Round Up Ready Soya

A group of international scientists have released a report detailing health and environmental hazards from the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) Roundup Ready soy and the use of glyphosate (Roundup®) herbicide.

The report, GM Soy: Sustainable? Responsible?,[1] highlights new research by Argentine government scientist, Professor Andrés Carrasco,[2] which found that glyphosate causes malformations in frog and chicken embryos at doses far lower than those used in agricultural spraying.

The findings in the lab are compatible with malformations observed in humans exposed to glyphosate during pregnancy,” said Carrasco.

Carrasco, director of the Laboratory of Molecular Embryology, University of Buenos Aires Medical School and lead researcher of the National Council of Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET), Argentina, is a co-author of the new report. The report is released with testimonies of Argentine villagers whose lives have been radically disrupted by the cultivation of GM soy.[3]

In Argentina and Paraguay, doctors and residents living in GM soy producing areas have reported serious health effects from glyphosate spraying, including high rates of birth defects as well as infertility, stillbirths, miscarriages, and cancers. Scientific studies collected in the new report confirm links between exposure to glyphosate and premature births, miscarriages, cancer, and damage to DNA and reproductive organ cells.

Carrasco said people living in soy-producing areas of Argentina began reporting problems in 2002, two years after the first big harvests of GM Roundup Ready soy. He said, "I suspect the toxicity classification of glyphosate is too low ... in some cases this can be a powerful poison."

Residents have also reported environmental damage from glyphosate, including damage to food crops and streams strewn with dead fish. These accounts are backed by studies in the report that show glyphosate is toxic to the environment.

Scientists and others who speak out against Argentina’s GM soy agricultural model report censorship and harassment. In August 2010 Amnesty International called for an investigation into a violent attack by an organized mob on an audience assembled to hear Carrasco talk about his research in the agricultural town of La Leonesa.

“Responsible” soy?

GM Soy: Sustainable? Responsible? challenges commercial claims that GM soy cultivation is sustainable and that the glyphosate herbicide it is sprayed with is safe. In 2011 the Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS), a multi-stakeholder forum on sustainable soy production, will launch a voluntary label for “responsible” soy that will reassure ethically minded traders and consumers that the soy was produced with consideration for people and the environment.[4] It will label GM soy sprayed with glyphosate as responsible.[5]

RTRS members include multinational companies such as ADM, Bunge, Cargill, Monsanto, Syngenta, Shell, and BP, and NGOs such as WWF and Solidaridad.

Claire Robinson of GMWatch, a group that campaigns against GM foods and crops, said, “It is a cruel farce to call the GM soy with glyphosate farming model sustainable and responsible.

“The RTRS criteria are so weak that they don’t protect people from the known health hazards of GM soy and glyphosate shown in the new report.[6][7]

“The RTRS also ignores serious social problems caused by GM soy monocultures. Livelihoods and food security have been lost as land that used to grow food for people to eat is given over to toxic GM soy monocultures.

“Over 200 civil society organizations have condemned the RTRS criteria as corporate greenwash.[8] It’s time for responsible members of the RTRS to abandon this discredited body.”

Europe imports around 38 million tons of soy per year, which mostly goes into animal feed.[9] Food products from GM-fed animals do not have to carry a GM label.

The maximum glyphosate residue limit allowed in soy in the EU is 20 mg/kg. Carrasco found malformations in embryos injected with 2.03 mg/kg glyphosate, nearly 10 times lower.[10] Soybeans have been found to contain glyphosate residues at levels up to 17mg/kg.[11]

The summary & full report can be downloaded at the following link:

About the authors and publishers of GM Soy: Sustainable? Responsible?

This report was compiled by an international coalition of scientists who hold the view that the complete body of evidence on GM soy and glyphosate herbicide should be made accessible to everyone – government, industry, the media, and the public. The

scientists and their contact details are as follows:

Michael Antoniou Michael Antoniou is reader in molecular genetics and head, Nuclear Biology Group, King’s College London School of Medicine, London, UK. Mobile +44 7852 979 548. +44 20 7188 3708. Skype: michaelantoniou. Email:

Paulo Brack is professor, Institute of Biosciences, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Brazil; and member, CTNBio (National Technical Commission on Biosafety), Brazil. +55 51 9142 3220. Email:

Andrés Carrasco is professor and director of the Laboratory of Molecular Embryology, University of Buenos Aires Medical School, Argentina; and lead researcher of the National Council of Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET), Argentina. Mobile +54 9 11 6826 2788. +54 11 5950 9500 ext 2216. Email:
John Fagan founded one of the first GMO testing and certification companies. He co-founded Earth Open Source, which uses open source collaboration to advance environmentally sustainable food production. Earlier, he conducted cancer research at the US National Institutes of Health. He holds a PhD in biochemistry and molecular and cell biology from Cornell University. Mobile +1 312 351 2001. +44 20 3286 7156. Email:

Mohamed Ezz El-Din Mostafa Habib is professor and former director, Institute of Biology, UNICAMP, São Paulo, Brazil, and provost for extension and community affairs, UNICAMP. He is an internationally recognized expert on ecology, entomology, agricultural pests, environmental education, sustainability, biological control, and agroecology. +55 19 3521 4712. Email:

Paulo Yoshio Kageyama is professor, department of forest sciences, University of São Paulo, Brazil; a Fellow of the National Council of Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) of the ministry of science and technology, Brazil; and former director, National Programme for Biodiversity Conservation, ministry of the environment, Brazil. +55 19 2105 8642. Email:

Carlo Leifert is professor of ecological agriculture at the School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (AFRD), Newcastle University, UK; and director of the Stockbridge Technology Centre Ltd (STC), UK, a non-profit company providing R&D support for the UK horticultural industry. +44 1661 830222. Email:

Rubens Onofre Nodari is professor, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Brazil; former manager of plant genetic resources, ministry of environment, Brazil; and a Fellow of the National Council of Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) of the ministry of science and technology, Brazil. +55 48 3721 5332. Skype: rnodari. Email:

Walter A. Pengue is professor of agriculture and ecology, University of Buenos Aires, Argentina; and scientific member, IPSRM International Panel for Sustainable Resource Management, UNEP, United Nations. Mobile +54 911 3688 2549. +54 11 4469 7500 ext 7235. Skype: wapengue. Email:


GM-Soy: Destroy the Earth and Humans for Profit

Wednesday, May 27, 2009 by: Dr. Gregory Damato, Ph.D., citizen journalist

(NaturalNews) Genetically modified (GM) soy accounts for 91 percent of soybeans planted in the US and is rapidly growing throughout the world [1]. The dangerous biotech created science behind the introduction of GMOs (genetically modified organisms) is rapidly mounting and can no longer be ignored by scientists or the public. The biotech propaganda of increasing crop yield and ending world hunger have been proven false, and attempts to skew the simple fact that the sole reasoning for the mass introduction of untested, toxic and dangerous GMOs into our plants, soil, animals and genes is to increase profits at any expense for the large multinational biotech companies.

Transgenic or GM soy is created by haphazardly blasting a gene into the soybean that allows the bean to be resistant to the cytotoxic effects of Roundup (glyphosate). Farmers are able to dose their entire soybean fields with glyphosate and only kill the weeds. But, wouldn't it make sense that if something kills anything (including weeds) it also would be killing human cells? Also, what health effects are evident from consuming soybeans which have been genetically altered with a promoter virus to ensure the gene slips past the immune system of the plant?

Monsanto created Roundup in the 1970's to kill weeds and has since catapulted this product to be the world's number one selling herbicide. Before the patent on Roundup was set to expire in 2000, Monsanto needed a surefire way to keep the profits of Roundup from bottoming out. Monsanto quickly began purchasing the majority of the world's seed companies while simultaneously creating GMOs that farmers needed to sign contractual agreements to only use Roundup. Subsequently, revenue from Roundup never dropped and in fact topped more than $4 billion in 2008, up 59% from 2007 [2].

GM-soy is estimated to be present in up to 70% of all food products found in US supermarkets, including cereals, breads, soymilk, pasta and most meat (as animals are fed GM-soy feed). Although Monsanto has consistently relied on industry-funded data to declare the safety of GM-soy and glyphosate, objective research published in peer-reviewed journals tells another story.

Toxicity of Glyphosate

A recently published study by Italian researchers [3] examined the toxicity of four popular glyphosate based herbicide formulations on human placental cells, kidney cells, embryonic cells and neonate umbilical cord cells and surprisingly found total cell death of each of these cells within 24 hours. The researchers reported several mechanisms by which the herbicides caused the cells to die including: cell membrane rupture and damage, mitochondrial damage and cell asphyxia. Following these findings, the researchers tested G, AMPA and POEA by themselves and concluded that, "It is very clear that if G, POEA, or AMPA has a small toxic effect on embryonic cells alone at low levels, the combination of two of them at the same final concentration is significantly deleterious".

Although previous researchers have proposed that the supposed "inert ingredients" alter the role of cell membrane disruptors in fish, amphibians, microorganisms [4] and plants [5], independent of G, this study is the first of its kind to report similar findings in human cells. The researchers concluded that, "the proprietary mixtures available on the market could cause cell damage and even death around residual levels to be expected, especially in food and feed derived from R [Roundup] formulation-treated crops" which are pervasive in GM-soya.

Furthermore, a recent study presently being prepared for publication by embryologists and biologists in Argentina found that glyphosate induced malformations in amphibian embryos [6]. Reduced head size, genetic alterations in the central nervous system, an increase in the death of cells that help form the skull, and deformed cartilage were effects that were repeatedly found in the laboratory experiments, said lead researcher, Carrasco. Carrasco explained that in the first phase of the experiment, amphibian embryos were submerged in a solution of herbicide diluted in water in a proportion that was 1,500 times weaker than that used today on genetically modified soybeans. The embryos subsequently suffered head deformations. In the second stage, embryonic cells were injected with glyphosate diluted with water, alone. The deleterious impact was multiplied, showing that the active ingredient accounts for the toxicity, rather than the additives, Carrasco said.

"One should be able to suppose, with certainty, that the same thing that happens to amphibian embryos can happen to humans," said Carrasco, whose team of specialists in biology, biochemistry and genetics has been working on the study for 15 months. The researchers concluded that, "It is clear that glyphosate is not innocuous and that it does not degrade or break down, but accumulates in cells".

Dangers of GM-Soy

In addition to the toxicity of glyphosate, several animal studies have found several health issues directly related to the consumption of GM-soybean. Rabbits fed GM-soy were found to have altered enzymatic activity in their livers as well as a higher metabolic activity [7]. Microscopic analyses of the livers of mice fed Roundup Ready soybeans revealed altered gene expression and structural and functional changes [8]. Much of these changes reversed after the mice diet was switched to non-GM soy, indicating that GM soy was the culprit.

Molecular geneticist Michael Antoniou, Ph.D., described that the findings "are not random and must reflect some 'insult' on the liver by the GM soy." Antoniou, who does human gene therapy research in King's College London, said that although the long-term consequences of the GM soy diet are not known, it "could lead to liver damage and consequently general toxemia" [9].

A study presented in December of 2005 by Dr. Ermakova found that rats fed a GM-soy flour diet had 56 percent of their offspring die at birth compared to only 8 percent in the control group [10]. Ermakova (2005) also reported that, "From the data it is evident, that 36% of the pups from the GM soya group weighed less than 20 g, in comparison with the 6% in the positive control group, and with the 6.7% found in the traditional soya supplemented diet group. Study of pups' organs mass showed that the organs of small pups from GM group were tiny in comparison with the same of other groups except the brain mass. This fact indicated that the pups from the GM group were the same age as others, but changes were occurred with the development of internal organs" [10]. Furthermore, Ermakova found that the male rats who were fed GM soy had their testicles change color from normal pink to dark blue.

Researchers also found that the cells in the pancreatic cells of mice fed Roundup Ready soy had profound changes and produced significantly less digestive enzymes [11]. Furthermore, mice fed GM soy were found to have altered young sperm [12] and even the embryos of GM fed parent mice had significant changes in their DNA [13]. Clearly, GMOs are either an arrogant blend of controlling life through food or an insidious plot for population control.

Learn more:


By Jeffrey Smith, Executive Director, Institute of Responsible Technology

"This study was just routine," said Russian biologist Alexey V. Surov, in what could end up as the understatement of this century. Surov and his colleagues set out to discover if Monsanto's genetically modified (GM) soy, grown on 91% of US soybean fields, leads to problems in growth or reproduction. What he discovered may uproot a multi-billion dollar industry.

After feeding hamsters for two years over three generations, those on the GM diet, and especially the group on the maximum GM soy diet, showed devastating results. By the third generation, most GM soy-fed hamsters lost the ability to have babies. They also suffered slower growth, and a high mortality rate among the pups.

And if this isn't shocking enough, some in the third generation even had hair growing inside their mouths—a phenomenon rarely seen, but apparently more prevalent among hamsters eating GM soy.

The study, jointly conducted by Surov's Institute of Ecology and Evolution of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the National Association for Gene Security, is expected to be published in three months (July 2010)—so the technical details will have to wait. But Surov sketched out the basic set up for me in an email.

He used Campbell hamsters, with a fast reproduction rate, divided into 4 groups. All were fed a normal diet, but one was without any soy, another had non-GM soy, a third used GM soy, and a fourth contained higher amounts of GM soy. They used 5 pairs of hamsters per group, each of which produced 7-8 litters, totally 140 animals.

Surov told The Voice of Russia,

"Originally, everything went smoothly. However, we noticed quite a serious effect when we selected new pairs from their cubs and continued to feed them as before. These pairs' growth rate was slower and reached their sexual maturity slowly."
He selected new pairs from each group, which generated another 39 litters. There were 52 pups born to the control group and 78 to the non-GM soy group. In the GM soy group, however, only 40 pups were born. And of these, 25% died. This was a fivefold higher death rate than the 5% seen among the controls. Of the hamsters that ate high GM soy content, only a single female hamster gave birth. She had 16 pups; about 20% died.

Surov said "The low numbers in F2 [third generation] showed that many animals were sterile."

The published paper will also include measurements of organ size for the third generation animals, including testes, spleen, uterus, etc. And if the team can raise sufficient funds, they will also analyze hormone levels in collected blood samples.

Hair Growing in the Mouth

Earlier this year, Surov co-authored a paper in Doklady Biological Sciences showing that in rare instances, hair grows inside recessed pouches in the mouths of hamsters.

"Some of these pouches contained single hairs; others, thick bundles of colorless or pigmented hairs reaching as high as the chewing surface of the teeth. Sometimes, the tooth row was surrounded with a regular brush of hair bundles on both sides. The hairs grew vertically and had sharp ends, often covered with lumps of a mucous."

At the conclusion of the study, the authors surmise that such an astounding defect may be due to the diet of hamsters raised in the laboratory. They write, "This pathology may be exacerbated by elements of the food that are absent in natural food, such as genetically modified (GM) ingredients (GM soybean or maize meal) or contaminants (pesticides, mycotoxins, heavy metals, etc.)." Indeed, the number of hairy mouthed hamsters was much higher among the third generation of GM soy fed animals than anywhere Surov had seen before.

Preliminary, but Ominous

Surov warns against jumping to early conclusions. He said, "It is quite possible that the GMO does not cause these effects by itself." Surov wants to make the analysis of the feed components a priority, to discover just what is causing the effect and how.

In addition to the GMOs, it could be contaminants, he said, or higher herbicide residues, such as Roundup. There is in fact much higher levels of Roundup on these beans; they're called "Roundup Ready." Bacterial genes are forced into their DNA so that the plants can tolerate Monsanto's Roundup herbicide. Therefore, GM soy always carries the double threat of higher herbicide content, couple with any side effects of genetic engineering.

Years of Reproductive Disorders from GMO-Feed

Surov's hamsters are just the latest animals to suffer from reproductive disorders after consuming GMOs. In 2005, Irina Ermakova, also with the Russian National Academy of Sciences, reported that more than half the babies from mother rats fed GM soy died within three weeks. This was also five times higher than the 10% death rate of the non-GMO soy group. The babies in the GM group were also smaller (see photo) and could not reproduce.

In a telling coincidence, after Ermakova's feeding trials, her laboratory started feeding all the rats in the facility a commercial rat chow using GM soy. Within two months, the infant mortality facility-wide reached 55%.

When Ermakova fed male rats GM soy, their testicles changed from the normal pink to dark blue! Italian scientists similarly found changes in mice testes (PDF), including damaged young sperm cells. Furthermore, the DNA of embryos from parent mice fed GM soy functioned differently.

An Austrian government study published in November 2008 showed that the more GM corn was fed to mice, the fewer the babies they had (PDF), and the smaller the babies were.

Central Iowa Farmer Jerry Rosman also had trouble with pigs and cows becoming sterile. Some of his pigs even had false pregnancies or gave birth to bags of water. After months of investigations and testing, he finally traced the problem to GM corn feed. Every time a newspaper, magazine, or TV show reported Jerry's problems, he would receive calls from more farmers complaining of livestock sterility on their farm, linked to GM corn.

Researchers at Baylor College of Medicine accidentally discovered that rats raised on corncob bedding "neither breed nor exhibit reproductive behavior." Tests on the corn material revealed two compounds that stopped the sexual cycle in females "at concentrations approximately two-hundredfold lower than classical phytoestrogens." One compound also curtailed male sexual behavior and both substances contributed to the growth of breast and prostate cancer cell cultures. Researchers found that the amount of the substances varied with GM corn varieties. The crushed corncob used at Baylor was likely shipped from central Iowa, near the farm of Jerry Rosman and others complaining of sterile livestock.

In Haryana, India, a team of investigating veterinarians report that buffalo consuming GM cottonseed suffer from infertility, as well as frequent abortions, premature deliveries, and prolapsed uteruses. Many adult and young buffalo have also died mysteriously.

Denial, Attack and Canceled Follow-up

Scientists who discover adverse findings from GMOs are regularly attacked, ridiculed, denied funding, and even fired. When Ermakova reported the high infant mortality among GM soy fed offspring, for example, she appealed to the scientific community to repeat and verify her preliminary results. She also sought additional funds to analyze preserved organs. Instead, she was attacked and vilified. Samples were stolen from her lab, papers were burnt on her desk, and she said that her boss, under pressure from his boss, told her to stop doing any more GMO research. No one has yet repeated Ermakova's simple, inexpensive studies.

In an attempt to offer her sympathy, one of her colleagues suggested that maybe the GM soy will solve the over population problem!

Surov reports that so far, he has not been under any pressure.

Opting Out of the Massive GMO Feeding Experiment

Without detailed tests, no one can pinpoint exactly what is causing the reproductive travesties in Russian hamsters and rats, Italian and Austrian mice, and livestock in India and America. And we can only speculate about the relationship between the introduction of genetically modified foods in 1996, and the corresponding upsurge in low birth weight babies, infertility, and other problems among the US population. But many scientists, physicians, and concerned citizens don't think that the public should remain the lab animals for the biotech industry's massive uncontrolled experiment.

Alexey Surov says, "We have no right to use GMOs until we understand the possible adverse effects, not only to ourselves but to future generations as well. We definitely need fully detailed studies to clarify this. Any type of contamination has to be tested before we consume it, and GMO is just one of them."

For more info on the scientifically documented health dangers of GMO's, please visit The Institute for Responsible Technology website at:


No comments: