Thanks to the flyingcuttlefish blog for this link … about that ‘philanthropist’ Bill doesn’t-vaccinate-his-own-kids Gates who told us vaccines would reduce the population:
Streamed live 7 hours ago
Thanks to the flyingcuttlefish blog for this link … about that ‘philanthropist’ Bill doesn’t-vaccinate-his-own-kids Gates who told us vaccines would reduce the population:
Streamed live 7 hours ago
“Aquaculture promotes itself as a sustainable solution to overfishing. But in reality, fish farms actually cause more problems than they solve. There’s really little difference, in terms of environmental pollution, between land-based feedlots and water-based ones.”
From Dr Mercola
Nicolas Daniel’s documentary “Fillet-Oh-Fish” takes a critical look at the fish industry, featuring exclusive footage from fish farms and factories across the globe. Many still have a rather romanticized view of fishing, but when it comes to large-scale food production, the picture is actually rather grim.
Today’s fisheries are faced with a range of severe problems, from overfishing to chemical pollution and genetic mutation from toxic exposures. As noted by the producers of the film, “through intensive farming and global pollution, the flesh of the fish we eat has turned into a deadly chemical cocktail.” 
Despite that, the fish business is booming, in part due to efforts to keep the dirty underbelly of modern fisheries from public sight.
Aquaculture promotes itself as a sustainable solution to overfishing. But in reality, fish farms actually cause more problems than they solve. There’s really little difference, in terms of environmental pollution, between land-based feedlots and water-based ones.
The film starts off in Norway, looking at the chemicals used in fish farms. Kurt Oddekalv is a respected Norwegian environmental activist, and he believes salmon farming is a disaster both for the environment and for human health.
Below the salmon farms dotted across the Norwegian fjords, there’s a layer of waste some 15 meters high, teeming with bacteria, drugs, and pesticides. In short, the entire sea floor has been destroyed, and since the farms are located in open water, the pollution from these farms is in no way contained.
READ MORE & SEE VIDEO:
Thanks to Lance for the link to this video on topic:
“With the past and present Chairwomen’s help, the pro-GMO forces have so far been successful in manipulating the biofortification definition…aided greatly in her dictatorial approach by those country delegates who very desperately wanted to be sure that the “Biofortification” definition could serve as cover for GMO foods so that consumers could be tricked into eating them in blissful ignorance. Australia and New Zealand of course, as nearly always, led the pro-GMO pack, egged on by their corporate masters. Brazil, Nigeria, Costa Rica, Uganda, Ghana, Thailand, the Philippines, China, and the United States supported marketing deception as well.
On the other hand, doughty Nepal opposed the definition, calling it, among other things, exactly what it is: marketing deception.”
GMO FOOD will soon be marked as “Biofortified” as the agenda to sneak GMOs into our foods advances
If you have ever been to Berlin, Germany in the late Fall, you know how miserably wet, cold, and windy it can be. The only real refuge from those elements is to be found indoors. But even then there can be events that drive you right back outdoors and into the elements. Such was the case with the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU), which was holding its 40th session during the week of November 26-30, 2018, in that city.
As most of you already know, the Codex Alimentarius Commission and its various committees spread throughout the World, establish food standards and guidelines after an eight-step process of consideration and debate that are then usually adopted by the Codex member states. The Codex Nutrition Committee is just one of the many committees that develop these food standards and guidelines. It is also one of the committees with the most controversial issues.
‘Biofortification’ is a method of increasing certain vitamin and mineral content of basic food crops by the time-honored, conventional way of cross-breeding and not through genetic engineering. Harvest Plus, the company behind biofortification, will for example increase the vitamin, or iron content of sweet potatoes, so that malnourished populations in developing nations will receive better nutrition. This is a very admirable goal, although I have argued at these meetings that perhaps it’s an unnecessary one if farmers would simply employ the proper farming techniques to prevent soil depletion and along with it the vitamin and mineral content of the foods grown in that soil.
For the last several years, the Codex Nutrition Committee has been crafting a definition for Biofortification. That definition would then be used uniformly around the World to apply to those foods conventionally fortified with higher levels of nutrients and everyone would be on the same page whenever the term “biofortified” was used. Indeed, the National Health Federation (NHF), a health-freedom organization accredited by Codex to participate in its meetings and the one whose delegation I led there, was an early supporter at Codex of this definition.
We have already gone through the sordid history, in detail, of how the draft definition of Biofortification had been infused with the disease of GMOs. I won’t repeat that history here. Just know that, now, the term Biofortification will have huge ramifications for the entire World. If the pro-GMO forces can succeed in continuing to hide their genetic-engineered foods within the definition of Biofortification and in using its appealing, natural-sounding name to sell their GMO foods, then consumers will be deceived on a worldwide scale.
The term “Biofortification,” at least within European countries, risks consumer confusion as to whether they are purchasing organic products or something else entirely. If Codex were to allow “any method of production” and “any source” to be part of the Biofortification definition, then Codex would be promoting marketing deception of the worst sort. Most consumers want GM foods labelled. In fact, consumer polls across the World have shown this to be true. In the United States alone, some 90% of consumers want such labelling and yet, here, the current, proposed definition will disguise GM foods under the term Biofortification. That is dishonest, disgraceful, and makes a mockery of Codexand its pretensions to credibility and transparency.
With the past and present Chairwomen’s help, the pro-GMO forces have so far been successful in manipulating the biofortification definition. And we are still living in the crater of that explosion that converted something good into something deliberately deceptive.
“The term ‘Biofortification,’ at least within european countries, risks consumer confusion as to whether they are purchasing organic products or something else entirely.” Scott C. Tips
New Leader, Same Story
So, as the Nutrition Committee was to edit once again the definition of Biofortification at this meeting, it was led by a new Chairwoman, Dr. Anja Brönstrup, a Policy Officer at the German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL). Replacing Dr. Pia Noble, who had chaired last year’s meeting, Dr. Brönstrup had been the former head of the German Codexdelegation. So, with such experience, we all had high hopes that she would be a more just and equitable chairwoman than the previous one, who had pretty much conducted her Codex meetings as if they were her own private fiefdom and without even a whiff of regard for whether she was following the Codex Procedural Manual.
She was aided greatly in her dictatorial approach by those country delegates who very desperately wanted to be sure that the “Biofortification” definition could serve as cover for GMO foods so that consumers could be tricked into eating them in blissful ignorance. Australia and New Zealand of course, as nearly always, led the pro-GMO pack, egged on by their corporate masters. Brazil, Nigeria, Costa Rica, Uganda, Ghana, Thailand, the Philippines, China, and the United States supported marketing deception as well.
On the other hand, doughty Nepal opposed the definition, calling it, among other things, exactly what it is: marketing deception. Revealing her own biases, the Chairwoman then quickly scrambled to do damage control, dismissing Nepal’s strong comments by claiming that a footnote allowing countries to include GMOs or not would address Nepal’s concerns. That made as much sense as claiming that because only some consumers would be deceived, we could still mislabel foods.
The European Union, Norway, Switzerland, Chile, Argentina, and India all opposed the GMO-inclusive definition, as did Russia, which sensibly stated its main concern was that if each member state could decide whether to include GMO foods within the definition, then this lack of a harmonized approach would lead to market confusion. Unfortunately, the very vocal Bangladesh delegate Dr. S.K. Roy had already left the meeting for the day, or else he would have lambasted the definition as well. All in all, there was significant opposition to the proposed definition.
Yet, Dr. Brönstrup ran the meeting with cool but soulless German efficiency, which in her case meant dispensing with, or else dismissing, the airing of any viewpoints that might in any possible way slow down her sprint to the finish line for each agenda item. With her allotting only 40 minutes for the delegates to discuss the Biofortification definition, this also meant that she did not call upon any of the INGOs that had signalled her that they wanted to speak. Only the sponsoring INGO, the International Food Policy Research Institute, which strangely enough opened the discussion on this topic, was able to speak out on the definition, and at length. Fortunately, NHF had submitted written comments stating its position against the proposed definition.2
“I am referring this definition back to the Codex Committee on Food Labelling,” the Chairwoman suddenly proclaimed at the end of the day, without giving NHF and other consumer organizations any chance to speak. With this peremptory proclamation that the GMO-inclusive definition would be sent to CCFL for its review and approval, I was furious (as were evidently the other ignored INGOs). But I was the only one to storm to the front table and condemn the Chairwoman face-to-face for having not only ignored NHF but the Codex Procedural Manual as well. It was not a pretty exchange. But I did make my point.
BY MIKE BARRETT
Two decades ago, genetically modified (GM) golden rice was touted as a way to save the world’s starving children. The hype didn’t last very long, however. It didn’t save any lives, farmers didn’t grow it, and nobody ate it. But in May, golden rice won the approval of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), with the agency declaring it safe to eat.
Golden rice, one of the oldest GMO crops, initially won high praise because it was engineered to produce vitamin A (beta-carotene), which would help children in poor countries get the required dose of the vitamin. About 250,000 to 500,000 children go blind each year from a lack of the vital nutrient.
Researchers began modifying rice DNA in 2000, and it won overwhelming support from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, both of which funded its progress. Even Pope Francis gave the GMO crop his blessing.
The U.S. is the 4th nation to approve golden rice, and more could follow. The U.S. is part of an international body that forms recommendations about food safety that other countries can adopt if they lack their own equivalent of the FDA.
Still, it could be a tough sell for the other 168 countries that chime in about international food standards. Golden rice crops aren’t necessarily field-ready, according to a 2016 Mother Jones report. The plants aren’t as efficient as they could be and don’t yield the crops that regular rice does, so many farmers might see golden rice as a waste of time and money.
The news media has been celebrating the FDA’s embrace of golden rice and the fact that more countries could also approve it, still framing golden rice as a savior of sick and dying children. Don’t be fooled.
Saturday, July 28th 2018 at 9:30 am
” Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal.” ~ Albert Einstein
Whereas the quote above could easily be dismissed as the ‘progress-denying’ sentiment of a disgruntled anti-GMO activist, the fact is that it came from a scientist representing the very epitome of Western rationality and accomplishment.
Perhaps Einstein was reflecting on the inevitable existential consequences of the so-called “technological imperative”–whatever can be done, will be done. Fundamentally amoral and irrational economic and political forces drive technology’s feverish pace, infusing a certain arbitrary cruelty and disequilibrium into everything it touches.
In our continual drive to ‘improve upon Nature’ in the name of much-hyped, ‘life-saving’ biotechnological innovations, the line between humane and inhumane eventually is crossed, and there seems no going back. Biopollution from defective or dangerous GMO genes, for example, is virtually impossible to undo once unreleased into the biosphere; you can’t “recall” a defective gene like you can an automobile. Nor can we remove from our bodies the surreptitious viruses (e.g. simian virus #40(SV40)) that contaminated millions of first-generation polio vaccines. In many ways our moral fiber suffers from the same susceptibilities. Once we have crossed a certain line – be it theft, lying, or worse, etc., – it is difficult, if not impossible to ‘go back’ and regain our innocence. Such is the human condition. And this is why we must carefully consider the medico-ethical implications of new technologies, whose developments we must first be aware of in order to guide, regulate and sometimes terminate.
The Scientific Community Moves To Embrace Embryo Cloning for Medical Purposes
For example, few are aware that the cloning of human embryos for ‘therapeutic purposes’ was made legal in the UK in January, 2001 through an amendment to the Human Embryology Act.[i] Not long after, in August 2004, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) approved the first license for cloning human embryos in the UK. Media reports at the time alleged the legal changes would result in the use of cloned human embryos to create “spare body parts.”
“© GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.”
Claims of “substantial equivalence” of GM plants again shown to be false
The myth of “substantial equivalence” between GM crops and their closest non-GM relatives (called “isolines”) has taken yet another scientific hit, this time from a new peer-reviewed paper discussed in an article on the website Hygeia Analytics.
The researchers from Mexico City published their meta-analysis of genetic data on rice, canola, maize, sunflower, and pumpkin. They looked at wild, GMO, and non-GMO cultivated varieties of these five crops, analyzing phenotypic change.
The phenotype of a crop is defined by a set of characteristics expressed by the crop’s genetic code (DNA). In theory, genetically engineered plants will show phenotypic changes only linked to the traits that scientists added to the GMO in the hope that they will be expressed. For example, a corn plant engineered to express the Bt toxin should not be different from normal corn in other ways.
© [Article Date] GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.
Kiwis love this product. They spray it everywhere, on their sections, garden edges, berms, parks, schools, their gardens even ready for new planting. And farmers, it’s whole fields since the Ag text books recommend it. Even though it’s produced large tumours in lab rats (independent research). Please read our Glyphosate pages on all of the above. You will be surprised. Farmers were told it was ‘safe as houses’ virtually.
Published on Aug 2, 2015
Published on May 23, 2013
When one of our world renowned professors uses the term “horrifying” in speaking about the widespread use of a chemical in our food supply, the prudent person would sit up and take notice.
That’s exactly the word Dr. Don Huber used. But are we listening? Calling glyphosate“the most toxic chemical we’ve ever had in our environment, he says that “future historians may well look back upon our time and write, not about how many pounds of pesticides we did or did not apply, but about how willing we were to sacrifice our children and jeopardize future generations for the massive experiment we call genetic engineering that is based on failed promises and flawed science, just to benefit the bottom line of a commercial enterprise.”
Photo: EnvirowatchRangitikei ©
Published on Jan 4, 2014
We are constantly faced with never ending lies from the biotech industry that GMOs are safe to eat. These lies will never end because the purpose of the biotech industry is to make money, make their shareholders happy and not to care about anyone’s health.
We know what happened to our servicemen in Viet Nam as well as the Vietnamese that were subjected to the fumes of Agent Orange. Even today, those Viet Nam servicemen are still being treated for their exposure to Agent Orange and the children of the Vietnamese exposed to Agent Orange are still dealing with their birth defects.
Today, in 2014, the cornfields in the contiguous United States are being sprayed with 2-4-D, the active ingredient in Agent Orange. Yet, despite what happened in Viet Nam, just from the fumes, Monsanto vehemently says that there is no danger in eating this. They are so full of shit their back teeth are brown.
So, in an effort to once and for all give people a heads up, the following is a comprehensive guide to readily discern what a GMO is. But, before getting into that, let me spell it out very simply. GMO means Genetically Modified Organism.
This means that the seed was not made by God but some f***ed up scientist in a lab, who’s chief inner desire is to continue to receive his high salary and keep his job. And these guys are no different that the Nazi scientists that spent only 5 to 7 years in prison for treating 6 million people like today’s lab rats and then getting hired by the U.S. and European pharmaceutical industries to create drugs to treat diseases, largely enhanced by crap foods bearing no nutrients.
Published on Sep 18, 2013
Here we go, let’s firstly kill off all the bees that we know are the 100% foolproof method of pollination with insecticides, pollution, EMFs, geoengineering and world wide pollution, then in order to keep polluting, let’s create bees that might not work. The insanity continues… until they’ve killed us all off of course.
Photo: a real bee from Pixabay
In an example of life imitating art, scientists have come up with a technology straight out of an episode of Black Mirror: Bee-like pollinating drones.
A team at the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) in Japan engineered the devices using a combination of horsehair, $USD 100 drones and a sticky ion gel.
It’s pretty simple really – first, the drones fly into flowers much like a bee would. Inside the flower, pollen gets stuck to the drone due to the combination of the ion gel and horsehair. That same pollen is then shaken off into the next flower, and so on. It’s just your run of the mill birds and the
Popular Mechanics reports that Eijio Miyako, a chemist at AIST actually created the sticky ion gel by accident in 2007. The gel, which Miyako considered a failure, sat unused for a decade. When Miyako picked it up again recently he was pleased to find that it was still sticky and figured it would be perfect for his new project.
Miyako is now the project leader behind the “Robo-bees”. In the video above, you can see the first time that a drone has successfully pollinated a flower, in this case Japanese lilies. Blink and you’ll miss it!
This is obviously quite old but worth a re visit. See how things were creeping in so very long ago? This is not that long after Corngate when the esteemed Helen Clarke let the secretly sown GE corn crops in various places throughout NZ be left to grow to harvest. She initially ordered them pulled up but I suspect corporate persuasion made her change her mind. How dishonest and treacherous can you get? Be aware Kiwis as the article says regarding animal feed, three years ago I rang two producers of chicken and pork here in NZ and neither would admit to GM feed for their livestock, however added they ‘couldn’t rule it out’ because the feed wasn’t labeled as GM. So much for GE free NZ. Like the green image it’s an illusion, a farce, a big LIE. EnvirowatchRangitikei
Press release – June 5, 2003
Greenpeace today released results that show an Ingham frozen chicken product on sale in New Zealand is contaminated with genetically engineered (GE) soy ingredients (1). Earlier in the year, tests also revealed the Aussie-owned brand uses GE soy in its feed (2).
“Inghams are showing a total disregard for their customers preference – which is for GE-free food,” said Greenpeace campaigner Steve Abel. “Inghams continue to import GE soy meal into New Zealand for use in animal feed – and this latest test shows that Inghams are using GE soy contaminated ingredients in their products too.”
Greenpeace also criticised lax labelling regulations which mean GE feed and many processed ingredients don’t require GE labelling and enter the food chain by stealth.
The environmental organisation is encouraging the public to phone Inghams on 0508 800 785 and express their opposition to GE food. Greenpeace volunteers will be distributing postcards addressed to Inghams and demanding that they remove GE feed and ingredients from the food chain.
“Supermarkets and other users of Inghams products and feed should also demand that the company commit to a GE free policy,” said Abel.
New Zealand’s biggest poultry producer Tegel and their feed subsidiary NRM, shifted to a non-GE feed policy in 2001 following a public campaign by Greenpeace.
“Tegel have set the standard for excluding GE ingredients in animal feed. It’s time for Inghams to clean up their act and stop contaminating New Zealand’s food chain with unwanted GE,” said Abel.
The growing of genetically engineered crops threatens conventional production and the environment and GE foods are insufficiently tested and labelled.
Notes to the Editor:
(1) Inghams “2 Chicken Cordon Bleu” product made and purchased in New Zealand tested positive for GMO Roundup Ready (RR) soy in tests carried out by GeneScan Australia (AgriQuality) on 16 May 2003.
(2) Soy meal destined for Ingham feed mills in New Zealand tested positive for RR soy after tests by GeneScan on 14 March 2003.
Published on Dec 18, 2012
Awesome. A president with some intestinal fortitude… read more about GMOs at our GMO page, main menu. See also the Glyphosate pages. They’re related. GMOs aren’t safe according to independent research & no they won’t feed the world as claimed, we need nature untampered with and less greed by agribiz … EnvirowatchRangitikei
President Museveni has declined to sign into law the National Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill, 2012.
The bill seeks to provide a regulatory framework that facilitates the safe development and application of biotechnology, research, development and release of genetically modified organisms.
Biotechnology is any technique that uses living organisms or substances from living organisms to make or modify a product, improve plant, animal breeds or micro-organisms for specific purposes while biosafety is the safe development, transfer, application and use of biotechnology and its products.
The Government of Uganda, through the National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO), is already conducting research on crop plants produced through modern biotechnology. The research aims at overwhelming chronic problems such as insect and disease epidemics, drought stress, and malnutrition.
Uganda which has a National Biotechnology and Biosafety Policy (2008) needed a law to guide implementation of this policy and before the improved varieties from biotechnology could be made available to farmers but the bill has since 2012 left the science world divided on the place of genetic engineering of crops and animals using modern science and the role of indigenous technology built over centuries by Africans.
Photo: President Musevini, Wikipedia
There are good reasons to be skeptical about the hype behind the GBiRd project, the programme coordinated by Landcare research in collaboration with overseas partner the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) with funding from the Gates Foundation.  – GE Free NZ
There are good reasons to be skeptical about the hype behind the GBiRd project, the programme coordinated by Landcare research in collaboration with overseas partner the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) with funding from the Gates Foundation. 
Research has found that gene drive technology has many problems; immune systems in wild populations could override the sterility gene after a few generations. With no control over the ability of the genetic technology to be contained there are risks that sterility could spread to other countries. There is the potential that, as TB spreads, so could the sterility technology, which could severely affect farmers who have livestock. The only gene drive technology that has been developed is in mosquitoes. Promoters nevertheless continue to hype unrealistic promises about gene drive applications to the public.
The New Zealand Herald reported that Minister Sage “elbowed out” the gene drive project.  That project was looking at New Zealand islands to introduce sterile genetically modified small mammals like mice and rats to see if they were able to breed.
GE animal experiments at AgResearch refute promises of animal genetic engineering that have produced disasters for animal welfare. These experiments show the need for much more caution before allowing genetically engineered organisms outside containment.
“New Zealanders were softened up by promises of medical benefits. GE animals were funded instead of a focus on research funding for issues that farmers are desperate to address. AgResearch annual reports reveal data on animal euthanasia and deformity,” said Claire Bleakley, president of GE Free NZ.
‘Daisy’, the calf that made headlines because she carried a gene that knocked out an allergy protein in milk called beta-lacto globulin, had to be euthanised after living only three years. She was born without a tail and suffered from skeletal deformities that eventually forced her to be killed on humanitarian grounds. 
The original experiment on transgenic cows that expressed the human gene Myelin Basic Protein for Multiple Sclerosis has ended with the last cow being euthanised due to chronic lameness from hip problems that did not respond to treatment.
There are also transgenic goats being bred at the Ruakura site. The goat experiments started in 2010, since then many hundreds of embryos have been created, carrying GE genes for synthetic pharmaceutical drugs already readily available on the market. Only 46 goats survive. This year, seventy-nine goats of varying ages were euthanised due to being surplus or killed following veterinary advice, and 9 goats were found dead in the paddock. 
“This disastrous experiment in genetic engineering of animals must be a warning against ignoring and underplaying the risks when gene drive experiments are being discussed,” said Claire Bleakley.
 Gene Drive Files http://genedrivefiles.synbiowatch.org
 Conservation Minister opposes GM-rodent plan http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11952990
 AgResearch Annual Reports to EPA 2017 – http://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/pdf/Annual-Report-ERMA200223-2017.pdf
 GE Animals in New Zealand –the first 15 years. http://www.gefree.org.nz/assets/pdf/GE-Animals-in-New-Zealand.pdf
Claire Bleakley06 3089842/ 027348 6731
Jon Carapiet 0210507681
“… the rise of the predator-free movement has intersected neatly with the bold new frontier of gene drive technology.” NZ Herald
This NZ Herald article, as is common with mainstream media material, likely flew under the radar on 4th December. Judging by the disbelief from the public at our recent posts on this topic, it clearly didn’t get noticed. The article is basically an expanded version of the last one on topic here, and straight from the horse’s mouth so to speak. It is coaxing you into the up sides of GE. GE Free NZ however has now issued a warning about gene drive tech, that post is coming tomorrow. Read our previous posts on topic over the past week (in archives for December 2017, left column of News page, or search GMO in categories also to the left). Particularly also, search the GE Free NZ site for further info on the GE topic. GE is being sold to the NZ public as good for our health and environment among other things while the down sides are quickly dismissed, swept under the carpet or downplayed by media. As GE Free NZ points out, these GM animals end up euthanised with all kinds of health problems. We need to proceed (if at all) with extreme caution. Why ever does man think he can improve on nature?
From the NZ Herald
“Overseas researchers interested in pest control or eradication are all looking at New Zealand,” says Forest & Bird chief executive Kevin Hague.
‘When Kiwi rat killing expert Doctor James Russell was told his research was being sized up for United States military funding, he wasn’t surprised.
“The US military – they have very long fingers. Even through the universities in New Zealand, they have a representative that comes around and just asks, ‘hey, what are you guys up to’.
“And obviously we’re in the business of eradicating entire populations of animals from an island and so they have cocked their ear towards me once or twice.
“You don’t have to be a genius to see that there’s potential military application in that.”
In this instance, Russell’s work was being measured for suitability against a US$100 million research pot made available by the United States’ Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa)
Also being evaluated were remote islands around New Zealand, sized up for live trials of genetically modified rodents.
The interest in Russell and New Zealand emerged during an investigation into the activities of a multi-national science advocacy and gene drive research body called Gbird.
It has a US$6.5m slice of that Darpa money and has been considering how to spend that in New Zealand.
The detail was revealed in a database of emails and documents charting Gbird’s growing focus on New Zealand – and the involvement of a taxpayer-owned Crown Research Institute which told the consortium it would make gene drive research a focus of “NZ Inc”.
It shows how the rise of the predator-free movement has intersected neatly with the bold new frontier of gene drive technology.
Gene drive research is the latest, greatest frontier in science as scientists grapple with the implications of genetic manipulation to remove inherited characteristics from subsequent generations. For example, wiping out one gender from a population of rats means no more rats.’
The database of more than 2000 documents released by North Carolina State University (NCSU) reveal Gbird’s interest in New Zealand as a possible test site and its efforts to get alongside those leading our fight against predators.
The documents show careful efforts by Gbird – Genetic Biocontrol of Invasive Rodents – to shape its image and manage possible fallout associated with the US$6.5m pool of Darpa cash.
Among the documents is the report of the meeting with Russell’s meeting in mid-2017 with Gbird’s co-ordinator Royden Saah.
After the meeting, Saah reported to Gbird members: “Co-ordinating with James Russell. Appears no NZ islands meet the strict criteria used within Darpa grant.
“We are now considering small NZ islands that don’t have rodents present that could be used as trial sites, with mice sourced from remote NZ islands larger than our 300ha cut-off that may be future targets themselves.”
First it’s important to understand where New Zealand sits in the world of pest eradication.
Our national goal of wiping out possums, rats and stoats roughly sits with the research focus of leading thinkers on gene drive technology.
That’s because it’s not just about being able to create new technology but what you do with it. And in a world of potential – agricultural or medical benefits – conservation has become a core area of interest to gene drive researchers.
Gene drive technology appeared to offer definite answers to those seeking to eradicate predators. It also offered a permissive, public-friendly area in which to explore new technology.
A critical aspect of new technology is the willingness of society to allow new frontiers to be explored.
Professor Emeritus Don Huber, formerly of Purdue University states that there are three facts that everyone needs to understand about GE or GMOs:
Don Huber who spoke with me at the PlanetFM studios two months ago, here in Auckland opens with the statement that NZ farmland is still basically free of GE and GMO’s and relatively unpolluted with its attendant spray – glyphosate, however he states we need to make sure GMO’s don’t breach our borders, and that we need to keep NZ – GE Free and to make every effort to scale back our use of glyphosate – urgently.
READ MORE & LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW (60mins)
For further info see also our GMO and Glyphosate pages at the main menu.
I’ve heard a few nay sayers on the authenticity of this claim which set me to reading more of the links and particularly the synbiowatch site. It does indeed appear that discussions are ongoing with this. I was not aware that the gene drive proposal was all over the media during this year 2017 & prior (been a busy year). Have a search & you will see, preferably a non google search, you will find more. There’s indeed been a media drive to capture public ‘consent’ sugar coated with all the pluses. I will add some of those links but really it deserves another whole post. Then I see on some of their conference papers, ads etc. (synbiowatch) the familiar names Monsanto, DuPont, Rockefeller Bill & Melinda Gates and more. Those names alone are cause for caution. The emphasis on the drive seems more on animals at this point although the trials for insects have (?) been in Hawaii & are proposed (?) for Africa. I’m sure I saw reference to release of GM insects in Christchurch this year but cannot find a link anywhere. Could be wrong on that, unfortunately I didn’t keep the link. Overall anyway, it is tied in very much with NZ’s predator free 2050 plan basically. So that’s government & will Jacinda oppose it? I doubt it personally as she is globalist isn’t she? Even if she did personally oppose it I doubt she would be able to reverse this tide. Interesting timing wasn’t it? Right on the year of election & we know who was steering the ship prior to that. I’ve ceased to be amazed now at the arrogance of these people to imagine they can improve on the ecosystem. As if it has not survived perfectly well for thousands of years without the help of GM. Seems to me the biggest pestilent threat to the survival of the ecosystem is them. Humankind. The original polluters of the planet.
The files reveal how far along the two leading gene drive teams (Target Malaria for the UK and GBIRD, based in North Carolina) have proceeded towards building gene drive organisms and are preparing for open field trials, including steps to select test sites in Australia, New Zealand, Burkina Faso, Uganda, Mali and Ghana, and to create government and community acceptance of the use of gene drives in key testing sites. SOURCE
But don’t worry, they are also preparing a PR package aimed to “create government and community acceptance”. The main funder of gene drive technology is the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). With virtually unlimited funding imagine what the folks at DARPA can come up with. For the betterment of humanity, as Bill Gates would like us to believe, or for America’s military/corporate complex with global dominance as the real goal?
Gates Foundation paid $1.6 million to influence UN on gene drives
Over 1,200 emails released under open records requests reveal that the US military is now the top funder and influencer behind a controversial genetic extinction technology known as “gene drives” – pumping $100 million into the field. The trove of emails, obtained via open records requests, also shed light on a $1.6 million dollar UN gene drive lobbying operation paid for by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
“Emerging Ag,” a private PR firm funded by the Gates Foundation, is working behind the scenes to stack key UN advisory processes with gene drive-friendly scientists, and has recruited ostensibly independent academics and public officials into a private collaboration to counteract proposed regulations and to resist calls by scientists and conservationists for an international moratorium. Some of those recruited entered into the UN discussions without divulging their conflicts of interest or the role that paid political consultants played in shaping their inputs.
The files, dubbed “The Gene Drive Files,” additionally cast a spotlight on the central role of the shadowy US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) as the key funder now accelerating gene drive development. For example, DARPA is now revealed as the major financial backer of efforts to develop gene drive mammals (mice) that are led by a US environmental NGO, although DARPA has no biodiversity conservation mission, raising questions about the defence agency’s intent. These revelations come on the heels of a public warning issued by a leading gene drive researcher Dr Kevin Esvelt that current gene drives are too powerful to be used in conservation.
“Gene drives are a powerful and dangerous new technology and potential biological weapons that could have disastrous impacts on peace, food security and the environment, especially if misused,” said Jim Thomas of ETC Group. “The fact that gene drive development is now being primarily funded and structured by the US military raises alarming questions about this entire field.”
“Gene drives could have profound global impacts, and these emails reveal a secretive attempt to game the system by gene drive proponents aiming to minimize essential regulations and oversight,” said Dana Perls of Friends of the Earth US. “We need more transparency about who is influencing critical decisions about the future of global ecosystems, people’s livelihoods, or our food system.”
“In response to this news that the integrity of technical processes under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) may have been compromised, civil society groups will urgently raise the need for better disclosure of interests within a framework for addressing conflict of interest at the CBD,” said Lim Li Ching of Third World Network.
“Mosquitoes containing gene drives are being proposed for malaria control in Africa. While claiming potential health benefits, any application of such powerful technologies should be subject to the highest standards of transparency and disclosure. Sadly, this doesn’t appear to be the case. Releasing risky GM organisms into the environments of these African countries is outrageous and deeply worrying,” said Mariam Mayet, Executive Director of The African Centre for Biodiversity.
Information revealed in the Gene Drive files includes:
● The US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is reported to have given approximately $100 million for gene drive research, $35 million more than previously reported. If confirmed, DARPA appears to be the largest single funder of gene drive research on the planet.
● Emerging Ag, a privately-held public relations firm, received over $1.6 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to work on gene drive topics and to focus on exerting influence on the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the key body for gene drive governance. Following calls in 2016 for a global moratorium on the use of gene drive technology, the CBD sought input from scientists and experts in an online forum. According to the Gene Drive Files, Emerging Ag recruited and coordinated over 65 experts, including a Gates Foundation senior official, a DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Project Agency) official, and government and university scientists, in an undercover attempt to flood the official UN process with their coordinated inputs.
● The attempt to covertly influence the UN process online centrally involved three members of an associated UN expert committee (The Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on Synthetic Biology). Two of them are from institutions that together received over $100 million in U.S. military and other funds expressly to develop and test gene drive systems. One served as “stakeholder engagement lead” for a Gene Drive development project. The Expert committee meets this week in Montreal Canada.
● The secretive JASON group of military advisors have undertaken two classified studies on genome editing and gene drives at the request of the US government. The gene drive study, which included input by a Monsanto executive, focuses on hostile use of gene drives and use of gene drives in agriculture.
● DARPA is revealed to be funding a high profile UK team of researchers targeting African communities with gene drive mosquitos. This funding was not previously made public.
● The files reveal how far along the two leading gene drive teams (Target Malaria for the UK and GBIRD, based in North Carolina) have proceeded towards building gene drive organisms and are preparing for open field trials, including steps to select test sites in Australia, New Zealand, Burkina Faso, Uganda, Mali and Ghana, and to create government and community acceptance of the use of gene drives in key testing sites.
ABOUT THE RECORDS
The Gene Drive Files can be accessed at: http://genedrivefiles.synbiowatch.org
The Gene Drive Files consist of records recently released in response to U.S. and Canadian open records requests. The bulk of the files are from North Carolina State University, and were released on 27 October 2017 under a request by Edward Hammond/Third World Network. The files also include records from Texas A&M University, also requested by Edward Hammond/Third World Network and released on 21 August 2017 (Request TAMU R001428). Additional records from an Access to Information request filed in Canada by ETC Group are also included at the same site.
Please take note of the information provided (readme file) on proper citation of the records.
Source: ETC Group
MEDIA ON GENE DRIVE
Search this topic for yourself, there are many more links. Little opposition published there by mainstream except GE Free NZ.
NZ GOVERNMENT’S STANCE ON GE
Another attack on free speech and democratic debate says Mike Adams, NaturalNews. This is serious folks. We have GE spuds approved here now (the growing of) and how much did we hear about that pre approval? This may not be NZ but be assured the creep is world wide. These folk aim to control the whole food supply & they’re well on target.
(Natural News) Big Ag has found a way to make genetically modified seeds permanent, by quietly writing in “preemptive seed laws” at the state level. In twenty-nine states, men and women at the local level will no longer be able to discuss, debate, or propose laws on the use of genetically modified seeds. The people will not have any voice in their individual cities and municipalities to protect their fields, crops, property, and water from biotech experimentation.
Corporations that genetically modify seeds have infiltrated the state legislatures to further secure their monopoly and prevent scientific scrutiny of their seed experimentation. By passing “seed preemption laws” they can bar public discourse on seed laws at the local level. This is a new attack on free speech and democratic debate. The corporate interests in the agriculture sector want to shut people up who desire natural, unmodified foods. These same corporate interests have been successful in the past with “ag-gag” laws that bar anyone from photographing the abuses of factory farms. Whistleblowers and journalists who tried to document unsanitary and inhuman animal feeding operations have had the law turned against them. In much the same way, these new “seed preemption laws” turn the law against the voices of the common man and woman working locally for change.
Oregon, California, Texas, Montana and Iowa are just a few of the states that have fallen prey to these new laws. These laws are “designed to block counties and cities from adopting their own rules on the use of seeds, including bans on GMOs” In many parts of the country, decisions on seed use are left up to individual counties, cities, and municipalities. Now, Big Ag is finding ways to snuff out the people’s voices in the matter.
The GM Contamination Register database is run by Genewatch and Greenpeace and contains cases of genetically modified (GM) contamination dating from 1997. The authors of a 2014 paper, published in the International Journal of Food Contamination, analysed 400 or so cases in the database by crop and country.
GM rice accounted for about a third of contamination cases, despite the fact there is officially no GM rice grown anywhere in the world. They also focused on cases of contamination arising from unauthorised GM crops: those without any authorisation for commercial growing anywhere in the world. Nine cases were discovered of GM contamination of these unauthorised (non-commercialised) GM crops that haven’t undergone any environmental or food safety analysis. The authors argue that once GM contamination has happened, it can be difficult to contain.
Don Westfall, biotech industry consultant and vice-president of Promar International back in 2001, was at the time quoted by the Toronto Star (9 January 2001) as saying that the hope of the GM industry is that over time the market is so flooded with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that there’s nothing you can do about it; you just sort of surrender.
It is not just a vague hope. It is an intentional strategy.
(Natural News) You might be aware that organic food is better for you than GMO options, but sometimes the price difference can be prohibitive. If you’ve ever stood in the produce section of the supermarket and asked yourself if the higher price tag on organic offerings is worth it, the results of a peer-reviewed study published recently in the International Journal of Human Nutrition and Functional Medicine will probably help make that decision a lot easier.
The survey of 3,256 people found that 28 conditions could be reversed by switching to a mostly non-GMO and organic diet. This research is consistent with physician reports that show the power of making this type of dietary improvement.
The respondents were asked, among other questions, what conditions or symptoms they have seen improve since making the switch to a GMO-free diet. For each of the 28 symptoms listed, they chose between “some mild improvement,” “moderate improvement,” “significant improvement,” “nearly gone,” “complete recovery” and “not applicable,” which was the default.
Some of the most common conditions to note improvements from making the switch to non-GMO were digestive problems like fatigue and leaky gut, along with obesity.
In total, 85.2 percent of respondents with digestive problems noted they were severely reduced or reversed by switching to non-GMO food. More than 60 percent with fatigue and low energy reported improvements, while 54.6 percent said it turned around weight problems such as being obese or overweight. This is not surprising when you consider that a GMO diet has been linked to excessive cell growth in the lining of the stomach and intestines along with other physiological issues.
More than half of people said a non-GMO diet eliminated that feeling of “brain fog” that is familiar to many people, while a similar amount noted that the change helped them avoid food allergies and sensitivities.
Mood problems also benefited from the switch, with 51.1 percent saying it helped with anxiety and depression, and 48.1 percent noting improvements in memory and concentration.
Meanwhile, 47.5 percent of people said their joint pain improved, and 46.6 percent said a non-GMO diet meant the end of their seasonal allergies.
What a farce. Having also just posted on checking what’s in your food and where it’s from. NZ the clean green illusion, along with the GE free illusion … APPROVING GE potatoes. Please see our GMO pages for independent info on the safety of GE food. Watch Dr Stephanie Seneff on the topic (video below the article). And see also our Glyphosate pages. Glyphosate & GM go hand in glove. And grow your own potatoes or buy organic. People are sicker now than they’ve ever been. Something is wrong here. Their so called progress is failing us. What can you do? Get informed for starters. There are other sites with up to date information to do this with recommendations for action. GE Free NZ can be found here, and on their site is a page with individual districts that may include yours.
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), a trans-Tasman regulatory body, has approved 6 lines of GE potatoes (A1139) carrying genes from viruses and bacteria to stop discoloration and alter vital nutritional components . The NZ Minister for Food Safety has let down NZ consumers yet again by failing to carry out a thorough public safety evaluation.
The joint submission from GE-Free NZ and Soil and Health highlighted many studies that show harm from eating GE foods, which FSANZ has dismissed and ignored. 
The FSANZ decision states, “No public health and safety concerns have been identified in relation to food derived from the potatoes developed by the Applicant.” This statement is highly misleading and contravenes a “duty of care” to the consumer. FSANZ openly acknowledges it does not require feeding trials or genomics testing.
“How can FSANZ give consumers an assurance of safety when they do not require any animal or human feeding studies? There is no evidence that the potatoes are safe to eat,” said Claire Bleakley, president of GE-Free NZ.
By Dr. Mercola
“Experts warned that eating this GE wheat could lead to significant changes in the way glucose and carbohydrates are stored in the human body, which could be potentially deadly for children and lead to serious illness in adults. Yet despite the seriousness of these findings, regulators are ignoring and dismissing such warnings. According to the Institute of Science in Society,10 the Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has approved at least five such GE food products already.”
The more we learn about genetically engineered (GE) foods, the clearer the dangers become. I’ve warned you of the potential dangers of GE foods for many years now, as I was convinced that the artificial combining of plants with genes from wildly different kingdoms is bound to cause problems.
As the years roll on, such suspicions are becoming increasingly validated. In recent weeks, we’ve not only learned that GE corn is in no way comparable to natural corn in terms of nutrition, we’re also discovering the ramifications of dousing our crops with large amounts of glyphosate — the active ingredient in Monsanto’s broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup.
GE crops are far more contaminated with glyphosate than conventional crops, courtesy of the fact that they’re engineered to withstand extremely high levels of Roundup without perishing along with the weed.
A new peer-reviewed report authored by Anthony Samsel, a retired science consultant, and a long time contributor to the Mercola.com Vital Votes Forum and Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has fortunately received quite a bit of mainstream media attention.
Their findings, along with the development of another breed of “gene silencing” crops, makes the need for labeling all the more urgent, and the advice to buy certified organic all the more valid.
Check out our Glyphosate pages for local info on that chemical. It is an integral part of the whole GMO package. NZ is not GE free.
NZ used to be GE free until 2000 when GM corn was planted in several locations throughout NZ. Helen Clarke then PM found out about it and ordered them pulled up … (corn gate it was known as) then through corporate persuasion presumably she caved. The crops were left til full term and harvest and who knows how many of our own crops were contaminated? They then raised the percentage bar of acceptance in our country. By increments is how these people work. For a full exposé read Nicky Hager’s ‘Seeds of Distrust’. (See also Foreword & Chapter 1).
When you’re done watching the video below, check out our Glyphosate pages for local info on that chemical in your (not) GE free NZ’s favourite farming and garden herbicide Roundup. It is an integral part of the whole GMO package. The stuff is slathered over everything everywhere here in NZ like there is no tomorrow… roadsides, berms, parks, gardens, you name it. And no warning signs posted either. It’s now been deemed safe (again) after a short foray into official recognition of the health risks courtesy of WHO saying it was ‘probably carcinogenic’. However, the tumours on the rats in the ground breaking study by Professor Séralini are evidence enough for me to decline. The video of that experiment is on our Glyphosate page. And by the way, because Monsanto are telling us it is safe to eat, they’re not required to label it in many places. It is already in our food chain because it’s fed to animals and is in many processed foods. Soy and corn that is not labeled organic is likely GM. Here is a short video that tells you the top 12 foods to avoid if you want to avoid GMOs.
The world’s leading Scientists, Physicians, Attorneys, Politicians and Environmental Activists expose the corruption and dangers surrounding the widespread use of Genetically Modified Organisms in the new feature length documentary, “Seeds of Death: Unveiling the Lies of GMOs”.
Senior Executive Producer / Writer / Director: Gary Null PhD
Executive Producer/Writer/Co-Director: Richard Polonetsky
Producers: Paola Bossola, Richard Gale, James Spruill, Patrick Thompson, Valerie Van Cleve
Editors: James Spruill, Patrick Thompson, Richie Williamson, Nick Palm
Music: Kevin MacLeod (Incompetech.com), Armando Guarnera
Graphics: Jay Graygor
Monsanto who like to present themselves as the benevolent corporation that is set to solve the hunger problems of the world … is imprisoning people for sharing their seed?
Their previous foray into that department with the production of Golden Rice that was genetically modified and supposed to be enriched with Vitamin A didn’t cut the mustard it seems.
Don’t be fooled, this company is about everything but feeding the hungry. Corporations have no qualms about lying and their uppermost concern is profits not people. This is what will happen if they get their foot in the door of your country. Unfortunately for NZ the foot got in the door decades ago with Roundup which farmers here love & won’t have a bar of any independent research about in my experience. Hence according to directions it’s sprayed all over fields and eaten by stock so non organic meat has to be full of it. That being in addition to GE food which is in our food chain Kiwis, no small wonder tests everywhere are finding it in breast milk and urine even. To have your water tested here is in the vicinity of $550 so that is fairly cost prohibitive. They have all bases covered. Your only real out is eat organic. An expensive exercise. Or grow your own without pesticides.
So back to the topic of the seeds, currently we are allowed to keep our seed but seeds for years have been treated so as they won’t reproduce (hybridized). Which is why it’s important to get heirloom and save that seed for future years when they have hybridized and patented everything. You will have to buy their seed & saving it will be pointless or illegal or both.
And go figure on the ‘feeding the world’ claims. Watch the featured video on Monsanto and what they are really about.
Find further related articles under ‘categories’ and explore our Glyphosate pages at the main menu for the extensive independent research on glyphosate (particularly that of Professor Séralini) and further info on GMOs (Genetically modified plants have been genetically altered to tolerate the glyphosate present in Roundup so you get to ingest it, unlabeled because they consider you don’t need to know, it being safe and all). Enjoy the video! You’ll be shocked at the lengths this company go to to protect their profits. They even have their own seed police. And read what the Tanzanian people have been subjected to by the world bullies.
READ THE ARTICLE ON TANZANIA:
In order to receive development assistance, Tanzania has to give Western agribusiness full freedom and give enclosed protection for patented seeds. “Eighty percent of the seeds are being shared and sold in an informal system between neighbors, friends and family. The new law criminalizes the practice in Tanzania,” says Michael Farrelly of TOAM, an organic farming movement in Tanzania.
‘If you buy seeds from Syngenta or Monsanto under the new legislation, they will retain the intellectual property rights. If you save seeds from your first harvest, you can use them only on your own piece of land for non-commercial purposes. You’re not allowed to share them with your neighbors or with your sister-in-law in a different village, and you cannot sell them for sure. But that’s the entire foundation of the seed system in Africa’, says Michael Farrelly.
Under the new law, Tanzanian farmers risk a prison sentence of at least 12 years or a fine of over €205,300, or both, if they sell seeds that are not certified.
‘That’s an amount that a Tanzanian farmer cannot even start to imagine. The average wage is still less than 2 US dollars a day’, says Janet Maro, head of Sustainable Agriculture Tanzania (SAT).
Unfortunately, Vitamin A rice is a hoax; the problem is that vitamin A rice will not remove vitamin A deficiency (VAD). It will seriously aggravate it. It is a technology that fails in its promise.
Source: “THE ‘GOLDEN RICE’ HOAX – When Public Relations replaces Science,” by Vandana Shiva, Seed Freedom1
“Golden Rice”: A technology for creating Vitamin A deficiency.
Golden rice has been heralded as the miracle cure for malnutrition and hunger of which 800 million members of the human community suffer.
Herbicide resistant and toxin producing genetically engineered plants can be objectionable because of their ecological and social costs. But who could possibly object to rice engineered to produce vitamin A, a deficiency found in nearly 3…
View original post 1,949 more words
A short (5 minute) video clip providing you with the quintessential info on genetically modified foods that we are already eating due to the failure of the authorities to label. They consider we don’t need to know. If it is so safe please ask yourself why it is they won’t label it? Remember also, the glyphosate that they spray on your GM food has been found by independent scientists to be carcinogenic. EnvirowatchRangitikei
http://gmo.mercola.com/?x_cid=youtube Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are detrimental to your overall health. Discover why these genetically modified foods are NOT safe to consume.
It just gets sillier doesn’t it? Reminds me of the pregnant woman recently who declined the TDAP vaccination … whose Doctor had never read the insert saying it had neither been tested for the unborn nor proven safe for under 10 year olds ! The astute young mother demanded to see the insert then read it out slowly to her Doc and his nursing staff. The Doc was very shocked as indeed he should be with the fees he charges and the lives he’s trusted with protecting.
Similar scenario here. They’re recommending you can eat 1080 while the manufacturer warns quite clearly to wear goggles and a mask while handling it … ‘may cause reproductive or developmental damage’. They don’t always though (wear protective apparatus). See the workers in the video further down. And DOC (those people entrusted with protecting our wildlife among other things) write on their signs, ‘deadly to dogs’.
Hmmm. Same again as the glyphosate debacle, the product that we’re told is drinkable. Harmless as dishwash liquid farmers were told back in the 1970s when they first sold it to them. (Same people who made DDT and Agent Orange and told us it was safe). And have you seen the employees handling the product? Full overalls, gloves and masks (at least if you’re not in a Third World country … they’re poisoned there … by Western corporations, with impunity). If you doubt this read ‘The Corporate Crime of the Century’.
They spray it on your food. You know, the GE variety that’s so safe there’s no need to label it? Just how gullible can people be? The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies 1080 as ‘Extremely Hazardous’, most countries ban it outright. DOC’s signs certainly don’t indicate it’s safe as crisps. ‘Do not touch’ let alone eat. WHO also labeled glyphosate as being a probable carcinogen … for a while at least … until corporate persuasion convinced them Prof Séralani’s rats would’ve probably got cancerous tumours anyway.
What else would you expect? This from the same scientific/corporate club that told us smoking was good for us! Good for corporate pockets would be more to the point. If it weren’t so serious it would be laughable. Crisps with your ciggies anybody? (Do watch the video & research 1080 for yourself … check out our 1080 pages for links to what mainstream media isn’t telling you … under ‘Chemicals’ on the menu).
New Zealand Forest and Bird believe that one of the worlds worst poisons is as safe to eat as a packet of crisps.
We are allowing fools to destroy our beautiful environment. The New Zealand government dumps enough 1080 poison to kill 20 million people every year.
Help us save the environment and our native Kea Parrot.
SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP DUMPING 1080 POISON
FURTHER LINKS FOR RESEARCHING 1080:
NZ WEBSITES :
AUSTRALIAN WEBSITES :
http://www.1080actiongroup.org/ Still in development. Perth, Australia. Contact – Aaron Mortimer