Genes Are Not The Problem, It's The Food Genius

Prevent Disease
by Karen Foster

Two-thirds of disease would vanish if society could revert to the way it did certain things just 100 years ago. The emphasis on faulty genes is misplaced and a misguided attempt to cast blame on a culture that has lost its way in terms of survival. Genes are not the problem since their products are largely dependent on lifestyle choices. Our quality of food, activity levels and family structure is essentially killing this generation of human beings.

Our food supply has been completely adulterated over the past few decades alone, more drastically than during any other time in history. Although our genes have hardly changed, our culture has been transformed almost beyond recognition during the past ten thousand years, especially in the last century. We have strayed so far from our ancestral diets and lifestyles that the human metabolism has been unable to adapt and modern diseases have flourished.

Food is the raw material for our cells and even our very thoughts could not have arisen without these building blocks. Food even controls the very expression of our genes. We are connected to our food and where it comes from in ways that we have not yet fathomed. The 'prophylactic' removal of of body parts due to what is considered faulty genes is a disturbingly popular trend, and despite the lack of scientific evidence for the effectiveness of this approach, it is increasingly being celebrated in the mainstream media and medical establishments as a reasonable choice. But genes are not the problem...it's the food!

Ancient peoples and even isolated hunter-gatherer cultures that still exist today ate wild, fresh foods in their natural state with minimal processing and certainly without synthetic chemicals. Their lifestyles were also very different from ours. They cooperated as family units to source and prepare food and with that came a level of activity that does not exist today. They did not suffer the same rates of degenerative diseases that plague modern society.

The majority of food we spend our money on is packaged, processed, sweetened, chemically-altered and genetically modified foods. It may resemble food, but it certainly is not real food. It is virtually devoid of nutrients. Food manufacturers oftentimes must add vitamins and minerals that have been lost during the processing back into the food. Enriched flour is really just refined flour that has had a few nutrients re-added to it, but not enough to make any food made from this nutritionally worthy. Enriched vitamins and minerals are artificial and unrecognizable by the body as nutrients that can be assimilated.

These synthetic vitamins and minerals, usually isolated from their natural forms, act more like anti-nutrients than nutrients in these foods, adding to the body’s chemical burden. Modern methods of food preparation and processing have effectively depleted many nutrients and co-factors necessary for the absorption and utilization of foods that in order for the body to process these modern foods, it must use its own store of nutrients.

When talking about our food system, we are referring to everything from the farm to the plate--food production, harvesting, processing, marketing and distribution. Industrialization describes the increasing tendency of economists, policymakers and agribusiness companies to treat farms as rural factories, with off-farm inputs (energy, antibiotics, synthetic fertilizers, genetically modified seed) marshaled in the service of producing caloric energy (feed corn and starches, soybeans and refined flour). Industrialization also describes a system in which economic return is paramount--more important than concern for the public’s health, the potential health effects of pesticide exposure, the long-term resilience of the land where crops are grown, and the methods by which food is processed and delivered.

Most of the calories we consume come from the added fats, sugars and refined grains commonly found in highly processed foods and junk foods. These specific types ofl calories have overwhelmingly come from genetically modified sources including corn (corn starches, corn syrup, high fructose corn syrup, feed corn fed to livestock), soybeans (soy proteins, vegetable oils, salad oils, partially hydrogenated oils, and fryer oils in fast-food restaurants) and wheat (refined flour) which has been defined as the perfect chronic poison by experts. These three crops account for the vast majority of crop acreage planted in the United States.

Factory farms and monoculture are responsible for most of the food that makes it to your plate. Consider factory farms -- the animals from these operations are given massive doses of drugs not only to stave off disease in such conditions but to increase their growth as well. They are fed unnatural diets and have little or no access to their natural environment leaving them prone to disease and suffering. Their meat is unhealthy and should not even be considered fit for human consumption. Agriculture has been around for thousands of years, but the way it exists now is a far cry from what has existed before this modern age. Intensive farming and monoculture has left our soil depleted resulting in poor quality plant foods, which then affect the nutrient composition of animal foods. Also, with today’s technology, we are able to manipulate the genes of plants and animals, something that nowhere near resembles selective breeding techniques used by our ancestors.

The hallmark of any system is that--for better or for worse--it functions as a complex whole, making it impossible to easily divorce one part from another. The plethora of problems in and related to our food system do not exist in isolation. They are intimately connected. Put another way, the healthfulness of our food, the health of the natural world (the soil, water, bacteria and genetic resources that gives rise to it), and the health of our patients cannot be considered apart from one another.

More than 60% of disease would vanish if we would start focusing on food as our medicine. We don't have to live in a medicated world, but we certainly choose to even though there are natural counterparts to almost every prescribed drug in the world. At one time, it was thought that cancer was a “disease of civilization,” belonging to much the same causal domain as “neurasthenia” and diabetes, the former a nervous weakness believed to be brought about by the stress of modern life and the latter a condition produced by bad diet and indolence. It turns out all may be true since our food convenience is at the root of our health woes.

But we cannot place all the blame on food manufacturers because we play a part in the food system. We demand convenience and cheaper foods and that’s what we got. We must examine the cultural and socio-economic factors that spurred the demand for convenience foods. For example, considering the busy lives most people have nowadays, it often becomes difficult to prepare homemade meals for the family (much less yourself) every breakfast, lunch and dinner. It ultimately boils down to our priorities. If we place high priority on our health and understand that what we eat determines and shapes not just our physical characteristics but also our personalities as well, we’d all take what we eat much more seriously.

We have an abundance of food that is easily accessible at any time of the day whereas our ancestors did not have this luxury. They hunted and gathered their food and farmed later on, allowing nature to do most of the work but they also expended a certain amount of energy in food preparation. The family meal may be more important than ever and mothers play a critical role. Researchers speculate that maternal attitudes towards the importance of family meals may reflect a broader respect for good nutrition. This might extend to practices such as keeping healthy foods in the house or limiting the amount of times their children can eat "junk food." People who are more concerned about family meals are also more concerned about nutrition.

We have lost the family connection at it all starts there. A higher incidence of family meals is associated with a better nutrient intake and healthier meals. If we want to reverse the disease trend and stimulate a health trend, we must transform the food supply to one that relies on fresh nutrient dense foods free from chemical alteration, from start to finish, and place a greater emphasis on family which fosters a dependence on health rather than sickness.

Dick Van Dyke Traces Mystery Illness to Dental Implants

Newsmax Health

Legendary actor Dick Van Dyke says he has solved a medical mystery that has baffled him and his doctors for years. The cause of pounding headaches that have plagued him for seven years are his titanium dental implants, he says.

Fans and friends of the 87-year-old star had been concerned about his health ever since he canceled a public appearance in April and announced that he was fatigued and suffered from insomnia as a result of an undiagnosed neurological disorder.

Van Dyke was so desperate that he appealed for help from his fans through Twitter. "My head bangs every time I lay down," he said. "I've had every test come back that I'm perfectly healthy. Anybody got any ideas?"

The beloved star of TV's The Dick Van Dyke Show and the movie Mary Poppins added, "It's been going on for seven years. I've had every test you can think of, including an MRI and spinal tap."

Van Dyke took to Twitter again to announce that the source of his mystery illness had been discovered — titanium dental implants. "It seems that my titanium dental implants are the cause of my head pounding," he Tweeted. "Has anyone else experienced this?" he asked. "Thanks for all your replies."

Dental implants replace damaged or missing teeth. The "roots," which are usually made from titanium, are placed within the jawbone.

Dr. David Brownstein, holistic doctor and author of Dr. Brownstein's Natural Way to Health newsletter, says that problems with dental implants often cause patients to go from doctor to doctor for years without finding a solution. "As long as there's no infection, no one considers the implants as the source of the patient's problems," he tells Newsmax Health.

There are tests for titanium allergies, says Dr. Brownstein, but that doesn't explain what happened to Dick Van Dyke.

"Titanium is metal and it creates kind of a lightning rod in the head," he said. "It doesn't happen to everyone, and most doctors don't look for it. Most people have other metals in their mouths, like fillings, and saliva combines with the metal to give a battery-like effect.

"Any metal can do this, and it can be a big problem," he says. "I just had a patient with issues similar to Van Dyke's — headaches and facial pain that no one could identify."

Although titanium is generally considered safe, one study showed that patients had severe health problems after receiving dental implants. Medical issues included neurological problems, depression, and chronic fatigue syndrome. Once the implants were removed, the patients' health improved dramatically.

Studies have also found that implanted titanium can cause abnormal cells to form, which could precede the beginning of oral cancer. Two articles published in the Journal of the American Dental Association indicated that dental implants either caused or aggravated oral cancers.

"There's no easy answer," Dr. Brownstein says. "If a patient has a hole in his mouth, his bite is going to be compromised. The dentist is going to have to do something to fix that space and most of the answers involve some kind of metal.

"I don't advise people not to have dental implants," he says. "I am just cautious and say that if problems develop, the implants should be considered as a possible cause."

Zirconium dental implants, which use high-impact ceramic (zirconium oxide), are more compatible with the human body and may be a safer choice. "Zirconium is an inert metal, and zirconium implants are becoming more widely available in this country," says Dr. Brownstein.

"I think zirconium would be a better choice than titanium.

"Putting any type of metal in the mouth can disrupt the electrical activity and result in a lot of problems," says Dr. Brownstein. "This includes fillings, root canals, caps, bridges, and implants.

"So, if you are suffering and not getting any answers, fillings, root canals, and implants should be considered as possibly upsetting the electrical activity of the head and neck causing headaches, brain fog, and other symptoms people don't ordinarily connect with dental implants."

Related:   Dick Van Dyke Undergoes Tests for "Cranial Throbbing"

Prostate Cancer-Fighting Compound Found in Jamaican Allspice

Science Blog

Essential to jerk seasoning, allspice is known for flavoring Jamaican and other cuisines around the world with a blend of cinnamon, cloves, nutmeg and pepper but, according to a new study by Miller School researchers, the aromatic spice could be known one day for impeding the growth of, or maybe even preventing, prostate cancer, the No. 2 cancer-killer of men in the U.S.

In the study published online May 8 in the Oxford Journals’ Carcinogenesis and led by Bal L. Lokeshwar, Ph.D., professor of urology and radiation oncology and Co-Director of Research in the Department of Urology, researchers demonstrated that Ericifolin, a complex compound in the allspice berry, significantly slows the growth of prostate cancer tumors by suppressing the androgen receptor (AR). A molecule central to the growth and metastasis of prostate cancer, AR enables prostate cancer cells to survive even after hormone therapy, which along with surgery and radiation is the standard treatment for prostate cancer.

“Androgen receptor, or AR for short, is the principal drug target for the treatment of prostate cancer, but there is no drug that completely eliminates AR. This complex compound in allspice seems to do that,” Lokeshwar said. “The most interesting data shows that it actually kills tumor cells which express the very specific prostate cancer marker, the androgen receptor. That is not to say that people should start eating allspice with every meal, but there exists the potential that the slow and steady consumption of this chemo-dietary agent may slow or even prevent prostate cancer.”

For now, Lokeshwar and his study team, including first author Shamaladevi Nagarajarao, Ph.D., a post-doctoral research associate, and Lei Zhang, a graduate student, have demonstrated that Ericifolin kills prostate cancer cells and reduces tumor growth by more than 50 percent in animal models, specifically mice that were injected with prostate cancer cells, then, either fed or injected daily doses of an aqueous allspice extract.

“To our surprise, it worked very well,” Lokeshwar said. “It was surprising because lots and lots of products kill cells in the test tube, but they are not effective when consumed or injected in animal models. In this case, the tumors did not disappear, but they grew about 50 percent more slowly with both methods. Further, these mice did not exhibit any obvious toxicity associated with other anticancer drugs.”

Next the researchers hope to determine whether Ericifolin, a member of the family of polyphenols, the richest source of antioxidants in our diet, can actually prevent prostate cancer from developing altogether. With a $1.5 million NIH grant, they are currently exploring Ericifolin’s anticancer activities — and its translational potential as a cancer chemopreventive agent for humans — in mice that have been genetically programmed to naturally develop prostate cancer at a certain age.

They also hope to begin a clinical trial in the near future with UHealth patients who are under active surveillance for early-stage or slow-growing prostate cancer, which does not yet warrant treatment. Since allspice is not toxic, Lokeshwar reasons those patients would be ideal candidates to take Ericifolin as a daily dietary supplement.

A biologist who began exploring the feasibility of natural anticancer agents about seven years ago, Lokeshwar turned his sights on allspice at the suggestion of a former research associate, Dominic A. Lyn. A co-author on the study, Lyn happened to be from Jamaica, the world’s No. 1 exporter of allspice, which is the dried, unripe berry of Pimenta dioica, an evergreen tree native to Jamaica. “He said, ‘Let’s try allspice. It’s from Jamaica, and it’s unique,’” Lokeshwar recalled.

At the time, there were — and still are — few scientific studies on allspice, but the researchers were intrigued by what they learned: Not only is allspice a popular folk medicine remedy for a number of maladies, but “pound for pound,” Lokeshwar said, “it has the highest amount of antioxidants of any food we know.”

Their interest would escalate when they performed some rudimentary experiments with a jar of allspice powder Lyn borrowed from his wife’s kitchen. Turning the powder into a water extract, they applied it to cancer cells and found it inhibited their growth. More elaborate and sophisticated experiments with allspice purified and liquefied in the Lokeshwar lab would produce the same results, first in cells, then in mice.

The next step, which would prove harder, was pinpointing which of the hundreds of compounds in allspice blocked the antigen receptor. Fortunately, Nagarajarao mistakenly knocked on Lokeshwar’s door inquiring about a job in a different lab. When Lokeshwar learned she was a chemist and biophysicist, he enlisted her in the hunt. With analysis provided by collaborators in the University of Kentucky’s College of Pharmacy, the team eventually isolated Ericifolin as the anticancer agent.

In an intriguing footnote, Zhang, a student in the Sheila and David Fuente Graduate Program in Cancer Biology, has since demonstrated that their aqueous allspice extract also impedes the growth of breast cancer cells, but with a different polyphenol, not Ericifolin. They are not sure yet which one but, in Lokeshwar’s mind, that discovery raises the possibility that allspice may have many anticancer properties worth exploring.

In addition to Lokeshwar, Nagarajarao, Lyn and Zhang, other co-authors of the study, “Ericifolin: a novel antitumor compound from allspice that silences androgen receptor in prostate cancer,” are Khaled A. Shaaban, Ph.D., and Jurgen Rohr, Ph.D., of the University of Kentucky, and Susana Villate, a former research associate in the Department of Urology.

Top 5 Alkaline Foods and Why You Should Care

Natural Society
by Elizabeth Renter

We’ve all heard the term pH balance before, but do you know what it actually means? The pH scale is one that measures the acidity or alkalinity of something. In the case of alkaline foods, we are concerned with the pH of your body. Eating certain foods may affect this measurement, which can lead to several potentially negative health effects.

Ph levels are measured on a scale of 0 to 14. 7.0 is considered neutral; 0 is completely acidic, and 14 is completely alkaline. Your blood needs to be slightly alkaline, with a pH somewhere between 7.35 and 7.45. Generally, your body adjusts its pH levels automatically, keeping your blood right within that target area. However, some argue that many of today’s processed and unhealthy foods are acid-forming and throw off that natural balance.

Too much acid, and your body begins to experience some negative health effects including: fatigue, dental issues, compromised immune function, pain and inflammatory conditions, and even premature aging. By eating foods that are alkaline-producing, you are not depending on your body to balance the acidity, and therefore can avoid some of these health problems.

Alkaline Foods for Better Health

Fortunately, eating a diet rich in alkaline-forming foods is quite simple. Sticking with fresh produce is a good place to start. Here are 5 alkaline foods to get you started.

1. Lemons are possibly the most alkaline foods around, plus, they offer many health benefits. Starting your day with a glass of lemon water is a good way to work towards balancing your pH levels first thing. While lemons are initially acidic, the end result is alkaline.

2. Watermelons are another great alkaline-forming food, and are a great diuretic to boot. Check out some other health benefits of watermelons here.

3. Cayenne peppers have numerous benefits even beyond being alkaline-forming. From their antioxidant concentration to their potential added benefits in weight loss ventures, these peppers should be a part of every diet.

4. Leafy Greens, like many other alkalizing foods, have a wealth of health benefits. Things like spinach, kale, chard, and collards are rich in folate and vitamin K. They are also great helpers for the digestive system.

5. Apples have a pH level of about 8.0. They are also rich in fiber, which makes them great for digestion.

Related:  TOP 10 ALKALINE FOODS

FDA Trying to Ban Compounding Pharmacies

Dr. Brownstein's Blog

To My Blog Subscribers,

I need to bring to your attention what has been going on in Washington as it relates to your ability to have access to compounded medications. I have been prescribing compounded substances including bioidentical, natural hormones for nearly 20 years. I can assure you that if the FDA removes compounded substances from the marketplace, we all will suffer.

The FDA has been looking for an opening in order to eliminate compounding pharmacies. Unfortunately, they found their opening when a rogue compounding pharmacy’s products killed and injured hundreds of patients. This pharmacy and the people who did this should be held accountable. However, that doesn’t mean we should get rid of compounding. The FDA should concentrate on regulating prescription drugs–which kill hundreds of thousands of patients per year. The FDA has not done too well regulating prescription drugs.

What makes you think they will do better with compounding pharmacies? Big Pharma is behind this push as they want compounding pharmacies to be a thing of the past. If we don’t make our voices heard, compounding pharmacies will be a thing of the past. I am encouraging each of you to read this post and send your comments to your Senators and Congressmen and women. Access to your bioidentical hormones is at risk again! Take action immediately at www.MyMedsMatter.com to oppose the provisions contained in S.959 that give the FDA the authority to restrict or even eliminate the bioidentical hormone replacement therapy (BHRT) that women depend on. Five years ago, FDA tried to ban the most commonly compounded BHRT treatments. The agency failed because it did not have the authority to do so. This bill gives the FDA the authority to do that and much more. It’s that simple.

Here’s what is happening. On May 22, 2013, a powerful Senate Committee approved legislation, S.959, which would give FDA unprecedented control over compounding pharmacies and the medications that patients depend on. This legislation is in response to the tragedy caused by the New England Compounding Center in which a rogue pharmacy acted like a manufacturer and violated numerous laws that ultimately killed many people and made even more gravely ill. We all agree that patient safety is of utmost importance. Like us, I’m sure you would support legislative efforts to improve quality and assure safety. But this legislation has turned into a bill that can deny men and women access to the medications they rely on.

Here’s the short version on how S.959 can affect you and the BHRT you take: FDA would be able to ban certain components of compounded BHRT if, in the opinion of the FDA, they pose “public health concerns.” That’s exactly what a drug company asked FDA to do with BHRT containing estriol back in 2005. Estriol is one of the most common components of BHRT, so this action would have disrupted the lives of countless women. The FDA ignored the voices and comments of more than 77,000 patients and physicians and three years later in 2008 they sided with the drug company, even though the FDA could not document a single adverse event with estriol. Fortunately, the FDA did not have the authority to enforce its decision in 2008. S.959 would give the FDA that authority. •FDA would be given the authority to declare your BHRT to be “copies” of drug-company products that cannot be compounded, even though the products you use are not commercially available.

A doctor could use an “exception” in the bill to continue a woman’s prescription, but he or she could be required to document a clinical difference in using compounded BHRT as opposed to drug-company products. Many women have trouble finding the personalized, natural treatment they need to control their menopause symptoms. This could make it even harder. FDA has been openly hostile to BHRT. According to its literature, “’BHRT’ is a marketing term not recognized by the FDA.” With a hostile attitude that refuses to even recognize the important medication that countless women take as legitimate, what do you think FDA will do when they get full authority to determine whether women can have access to BHRT? And the drug companies would love to eliminate the competition for their synthetic hormones. Please take action today at www.MyMedsMatter.com. Email your Senators and Congressmen and demand that they remove these dangerous provisions from this bill. We are all for increased safety, but the NECC tragedy should not be used to deny you the medications you need. Tell Congress what you think!
 -DrB

Dr. David Brownstein is a Board-Certified family physician and is one of the foremost practitioners of holistic medicine. He is the Medical Director of the Center for Holistic Medicine in West Bloomfield, MI
Related:  Senate bill aimed at tighter regulation of compounding pharmacies

Nestlé is sucking an Ontario town dry for bottled water.

WC Native News

Last month, Nestlé tried to patent a flower used by billions of people as a natural remedy and a video was widely shared with Nestle’s chairman saying that water is a commodity and not a human right. And now, we have discovered that Nestlé is sucking a Canadian community dry during drought conditions — just to sell bottled water.

Nestlé has won a permit to drain the local aquifer dry at any time, while the community of Hillsburg, Ontario has to restrict its water use during dry conditions every summer. This just isn’t right, and Maude Barlow, Council of Canadians, and Ecojustice are fighting back, taking Nestlé and Ontario Ministry of the Environment to court. However, it shouldn’t take a lawsuit for Nestlé to do the right thing. Lets tell Nestlé that community water access is more important than its profits. Demand Nestle to stop draining Hillsburgh’s water source during dry conditions for the sake of profits.

Currently, Nestlé has a permit through 2017 to take about 1.1 million litres of water per day from Hillsburgh for its bottling operations in Aberfoyle, even during drought conditions when households are put on water restrictions. A number of groups are fighting back. “Ontario must prioritize communities’ right to water above a private company’s thirst for profit,” says Maude Barlow, National Chairperson for the Council of Canadians.

Nestlé has been in the news a lot lately for attempting to profit from our natural resources. Last month, over 220,000 SumOfUs supporters have signed our petition against Nestlé’s greedy grab to patent fennel flower, a cure-all remedy for over a thousand years for billions of people in impoverished communities across the Middle East and Asia. Several days after we send out our petition, a video emerged showed Nestlé’s chairperson claiming that the idea water is a human right comes from “extremist” NGOs and that water is a foodstuff that should have a market value. So it’s no surprise that Nestlé is now trying to drain water from an Ontario town for the sake of profit.

Nestlé’s appetite to commodify water and flowers is a recurring strategy by a corporation with a pattern of seeking to privatize and profit from traditional knowledge and our natural resources. By speaking out against the draining of our watersheds, you will be taking a stand against Nestlé’s evil strategy to commodifying everything in nature in the name of profit.

Demand that Nestlé stop commodifying everything in nature. Stop draining Ontario’s watersheds to bottle water.

Former Pro-GMO Scientist Speaks Out on the Real Dangers of Genetically Engineered Food

Mercola . com
by Dr. Mercola

Who better to speak the truth about the risks posed by genetically modified (GM) foods than Thierry Vrain, a former research scientist for Agriculture Canada? It was Vrain’s job to address public groups and reassure them that GM crops and food were safe, a task he did with considerable knowledge and passion.

But Vrain, who once touted GM crops as a technological advancement indicative of sound science and progress, has since started to acknowledge the steady flow of research coming from prestigious labs and published in high-impact journals - research showing that there is significant reason for concern about GM crops – and he has now changed his position.

Former Pro-GMO Scientist Cites GM Food Safety Concerns

Vrain cites the concerning fact that it is studies done by Monsanto and other biotech companies that claim GM crops have no impact on the environment and are safe to eat. But federal departments in charge of food safety in the US and Canada have not conducted tests to affirm this alleged “safety.”

Vrain writes:

“There are no long-term feeding studies performed in these countries [US and Canada] to demonstrate the claims that engineered corn and soya are safe. All we have are scientific studies out of Europe and Russia, showing that rats fed engineered food die prematurely.

These studies show that proteins produced by engineered plants are different than what they should be. Inserting a gene in a genome using this technology can and does result in damaged proteins. The scientific literature is full of studies showing that engineered corn and soya contain toxic or allergenic proteins.

… I refute the claims of the biotechnology companies that their engineered crops yield more, that they require less pesticide applications, that they have no impact on the environment and of course that they are safe to eat.”

“The Whole Paradigm of Genetic Engineering Technology is Based on a Misunderstanding”

This misunderstanding is the “one gene, one protein” hypothesis from 70 years ago, which stated that each gene codes for a single protein. However, the Human Genome project completed in 2002 failed dramatically to identify one gene for every one protein in the human body, forcing researchers to look to epigenetic factors -- namely, "factors beyond the control of the gene" – to explain how organisms are formed, and how they work.

According to Vrain:

“Genetic engineering is 40 years old. It is based on the naive understanding of the genome based on the One Gene – one protein hypothesis of 70 years ago, that each gene codes for a single protein. The Human Genome project completed in 2002 showed that this hypothesis is wrong.

The whole paradigm of the genetic engineering technology is based on a misunderstanding. Every scientist now learns that any gene can give more than one protein and that inserting a gene anywhere in a plant eventually creates rogue proteins. Some of these proteins are obviously allergenic or toxic.”

In other words, genetic engineering is based on an extremely oversimplified model that suggests that by taking out or adding one or several genes, you can create a particular effect or result. But this premise, which GMO expert Dr. Philip Bereano calls “the Lego model,” is not correct. You cannot simply take out a yellow piece and put in a green piece and call the structure identical because there are complex interactions that are still going to take place and be altered, even if the initial structure still stands.

Serious Problems May Arise From Horizontal Gene Transfer

GE plants and animals are created using horizontal gene transfer (also called horizontal inheritance), as contrasted with vertical gene transfer, which is the mechanism in natural reproduction. Vertical gene transfer, or vertical inheritance, is the transmission of genes from the parent generation to offspring via sexual or asexual reproduction, i.e., breeding a male and female from one species.

By contrast, horizontal gene transfer involves injecting a gene from one species into a completely different species, which yields unexpected and often unpredictable results. Proponents of GM crops assume they can apply the principles of vertical inheritance to horizontal inheritance, but according to Dr. David Suzuki, an award-winning geneticist, this assumption is flawed in just about every possible way and is “just lousy science.”

Genes don’t function in a vacuum — they act in the context of the entire genome. Whole sets of genes are turned on and off in order to arrive at a particular organism, and the entire orchestration is an activated genome. It’s a dangerous mistake to assume a gene’s traits are expressed properly, regardless of where they’re inserted. The safety of GM food is based only on a hypothesis, and this hypothesis is already being proven wrong.

Leading Scientists Disprove GMO Safety

Vrain cites the compelling report "GMO Myths and Truths" as just one of many scientific examples disputing the claims of the biotech industry that GM crops yield better and more nutritious food, save on the use of pesticides, have no environmental impact whatsoever and are perfectly safe to eat. The authors took a science-based approach to evaluating the available research, arriving at the conclusion that most of the scientific evidence regarding safety and increased yield potential do not at all support the claims. In fact, the evidence demonstrates the claims for genetically engineered foods are not just wildly overblown – they simply aren't true.

The authors of this critical report include Michael Antoniou, PhD, who heads the Gene Expression and Therapy Group at King's College at London School of Medicine in the UK. He's a 28-year veteran of genetic engineering technology who has himself invented a number of gene expression biotechnologies; and John Fagan, PhD, a leading authority on food sustainability, biosafety, and GE testing. If you want to get a comprehensive understanding of genetically engineered foods, I strongly recommend reading this report.

Not only are GM foods less nutritious than non-GM foods, they pose distinct health risks, are inadequately regulated, harm the environment and farmers, and are a poor solution to world hunger. Worse still, these questionable GM crops are now polluting non-GM crops, leading to contamination that cannot ever be “recalled” the way you can take a bad drug off the market … once traditional foods are contaminated with GM genes, there is no going back! Vrain expanded:

“Genetic pollution is so prevalent in North and South America where GM crops are grown that the fields of conventional and organic grower are regularly contaminated with engineered pollen and losing certification. The canola and flax export market from Canada to Europe (a few hundreds of millions of dollars) were recently lost because of genetic pollution.”

American Academy of Environmental Medicine Called for Moratorium on GM Foods FOUR Years Ago

In 2009, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine called for a moratorium on GM foods, and said that long-term independent studies must be conducted, stating:

“Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food, including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. …There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation…"

Despite this sound warning, GM foods continue to be added to the US food supply with no warning to the Americans buying and eating this food. Genetic manipulation of crops, and more recently food animals, is a dangerous game that has repeatedly revealed that assumptions about how genetic alterations work and the effects they have on animals and humans who consume such foods are deeply flawed and incomplete. Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant claims genetically engineered crops are “the most-tested food product that the world has ever seen.” What he doesn’t tell you is that:

Industry-funded research predictably affects the outcome of the trial. This has been verified by dozens of scientific reviews comparing funding with the findings of the study. When industry funds the research, it’s virtually guaranteed to be positive. Therefore, independent studies must be done to replicate and thus verify results.

The longest industry-funded animal feeding study was 90 days, which recent research has confirmed is FAR too short. In the world’s first independently funded lifetime feeding study, massive health problems set in during and after the 13th month, including organ damage and cancer.

Companies like Monsanto and Syngenta rarely if ever allow independent researchers access to their patented seeds, citing the legal protection these seeds have under patent laws. Hence independent research is extremely difficult to conduct. There is no safety monitoring. Meaning, once the GM item in question has been approved, not a single country on earth is actively monitoring and tracking reports of potential health effects.

It Might Take More Than One Bite to Kill You …

“One argument I hear repeatedly is that nobody has been sick or died after a meal (or a trillion meals since 1996) of GM food,” Vrain said. “Nobody gets ill from smoking a pack of cigarettes either. But it sure adds up, and we did not know that in the 1950s before we started our wave of epidemics of cancer. Except this time it is not about a bit of smoke, it’s the whole food system that is of concern. The corporate interest must be subordinated to the public interest, and the policy of substantial equivalence must be scrapped as it is clearly untrue.”

Remember, Vrain used to give talks about the benefits of GM foods, but he simply couldn’t ignore the research any longer … and why, then, should you? All in all, if GM foods have something wrong with them that potentially could cause widespread illness or environmental devastation, Monsanto would rather NOT have you find out about it. Not through independent research, nor through a simple little label that would allow you to opt out of the experiment, should you choose not to take them on their word. As Vrain continued:

“The Bt corn and soya plants that are now everywhere in our environment are registered as insecticides. But are these insecticidal plants regulated and have their proteins been tested for safety? Not by the federal departments in charge of food safety, not in Canada and not in the U.S.

… We should all take these studies seriously and demand that government agencies replicate them rather than rely on studies paid for by the biotech companies … Individuals should be encouraged to make their decisions on food safety based on scientific evidence and personal choice, not on emotion or the personal opinions of others.”

At present, the only way to avoid GM foods is to ditch processed foods from your grocery list, and revert back to whole foods grown according to organic standards.

Keep Fighting for Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

While California Prop. 37 failed to pass last November, by a very narrow margin, the fight for GMO labeling is far from over. The field-of-play has now moved to the state of Washington, where the people's initiative 522, "The People's Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act," will require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it contains genetically engineered ingredients. As stated on LabelitWA.org:

"Calorie and nutritional information were not always required on food labels. But since 1990 it has been required and most consumers use this information every day. Country-of-origin labeling wasn't required until 2002. The trans fat content of foods didn't have to be labeled until 2006. Now, all of these labeling requirements are accepted as important for consumers. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also says we must know with labeling if our orange juice is from fresh oranges or frozen concentrate.

Doesn't it make sense that genetically engineered foods containing experimental viral, bacterial, insect, plant or animal genes should be labeled, too? Genetically engineered foods do not have to be tested for safety before entering the market. No long-term human feeding studies have been done. The research we have is raising serious questions about the impact to human health and the environment.

I-522 provides the transparency people deserve. I-522 will not raise costs to consumers or food producers. It simply would add more information to food labels, which manufacturers change routinely anyway, all the time. I-522 does not impose any significant cost on our state. It does not require the state to conduct label surveillance, or to initiate or pursue enforcement. The state may choose to do so, as a policy choice, but I-522 was written to avoid raising costs to the state or consumers."

Remember, as with CA Prop. 37, they need support of people like YOU to succeed. Prop. 37 failed with a very narrow margin simply because we didn't have the funds to counter the massive ad campaigns created by the No on 37 camp, led by Monsanto and other major food companies. Let's not allow Monsanto and its allies to confuse and mislead the people of Washington and Vermont as they did in California. So please, I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can, regardless of what state you live in.

No matter where you live in the United States, please donate money to these labeling efforts through the Organic Consumers Fund.

If you live in Washington State, please sign the I-522 petition. You can also volunteer to help gather signatures across the state.

For timely updates on issues relating to these and other labeling initiatives, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.

Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the Washington initiative.