(Natural News) As far as sweeteners go, honey has been around for thousands of years and has been used as a food and a potent natural remedy. Unfortunately, like most foods produced today, the potency has been greatly diminished through various processing techniques and profitable short cuts that have left many honeys devoid of enzymes and nutrients and filled with GMOs like high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).
The good news is there are high quality honeys on the market today, that are raw and sustainably sourced so they benefit you and the bee population. Arguably, the most potent honey with the most medicinal benefits is Manuka honey, and there are several health benefits to using it internally and topically.
Health benefits and uses for Manuka honey
Put simply, Manuka honey is from bees that pollinate the Manuka bush. What makes it unique is the naturally occurring methylglyoxal (MGO) which forms in the flower’s nectar and is believed to be primarily responsible for its magnificent health benefits. Some of those benefits include:
Relieves occasional sleeplessness – Manuka honey supports a more deep and restful sleep. Add some to a warm tea like chamomile in the evening to help usher you into a more peaceful bedtime routine.
May help support healing of minor burns or scratches – For centuries, Manuka honey has been used as a remedy for minor scratches and mild burns. Simply apply directly to the affected area, and cover with a bandage or dressing.
Helps boost your vitality – The nutrient-dense profile of Manuka honey can help boost your overall energy. Combine with bee pollen and put on oatmeal or in a smoothie.
Supports good oral health – Put a little bit directly on your toothbrush!
The United States stands almost entirely alone among developed nations in adding industrial silicofluorides to its drinking water—imposing the community-wide measure without informed consent. Globally, roughly 5% of the population consumes chemically fluoridated water, but more people in the U.S. drink fluoride-adulterated water than in all other countries combined. Within the U.S., just under a third (30%) of local water supplies are not fluoridated; these municipalities have either held the practice at bay since fluoridation’s inception or have won hard-fought battles to halt water fluoridation.
Dozens of studies and reviews—including in top-tier journals such as The Lancet—have shown that fluoride is neurotoxic and lowers children’s IQ.
The fluoride chemicals added to drinking water are unprocessed toxic wasteproducts—captured pollutants from Florida’s phosphate fertilizer industry or unregulated chemical imports from China. The chemicals undergo no purification before being dumped into drinking water and often harbor significant levels of arsenic and other heavy metal contamination; one researcher describes this unavoidable contamination as a “regulatory blind spotthat jeopardizes any safe use of fluoride additives.”
Dozens of studies and reviews—including in top-tier journals such as The Lancet—have shown that fluoride is neurotoxic and lowers children’s IQ. Fluoride is also associated with a variety of other health risks in both children and adults. However, U.S. officialdom persists in making hollow claims that water fluoridation is safe and beneficial, choosing to ignore even its own research! A multimillion-dollar longitudinal study published in Environmental Health Perspectives in September, 2017, for example, was largely funded by the National Institutes of Health and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences—and the seminal study revealed a strong relationship between fluoride exposure in pregnant women and lowered cognitive function in offspring. Considered in the context of other research, the study’s implications are, according to the nonprofit Fluoride Action Network, “enormous”—“a cannon shot across the bow of the 80 year old practice of artificial fluoridation.”
According to declassified government documents summarized by Project Censored, Manhattan Project scientists discovered early on that fluoride was a leading health hazard to bomb program workers and surrounding communities.
A little history
During World War II, fluoride (a compound formed from the chemical element fluorine) came into large-scale production and use as part of the Manhattan Project. According to declassified government documents summarized by Project Censored, Manhattan Project scientists discovered early on that fluoride was a “leading health hazard to bomb program workers and surrounding communities.” In order to stave off lawsuits, government scientists “embarked on a campaign to calm the social panic about fluoride…by promoting its usefulness in preventing tooth decay.”
To prop up its “exaggerated claims of reduction in tooth decay,” government researchers began carrying out a series of poorly designed and fatally flawed community trials of water fluoridation in a handful of U.S. cities in the mid-1940s. In a critique decades later, a University of California-Davis statistician characterized these early agenda-driven fluoridation trials as “especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain muddleheadedness and hebetude.” As one example, a 15-year trial launched in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1945 used a nearby city as a non-fluoridated control, but after the control city began fluoridating its own water supply five years into the study, the design switched from a comparison with the non-fluoridated community to a before-and-after assessment of Grand Rapids. Fluoridation’s proponents admitted that this change substantially “compromised” the quality of the study.
In 1950, well before any of the community trials could reach any conclusions about the systemic health effects of long-term fluoride ingestion, the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) endorsed water fluoridation as official public health policy, strongly encouraging communities across the country to adopt the unproven measure for dental caries prevention. Describing this astonishingly non-evidence-based step as “the Great Fluoridation Gamble,” the authors of the 2010 book, The Case Against Fluoride, argue that:
“Not only was safety not demonstrated in anything approaching a comprehensive and scientific study, but also a large number of studies implicating fluoride’s impact on both the bones and the thyroid gland were ignored or downplayed” (p. 86).
In 2015, Newsweek magazine not only agreed that the scientific rationale for putting fluoride in drinking water was not as “clear-cut” as once thought but also shared the “shocking” finding of a more recent Cochrane Collaboration review, namely, that there is no evidence to support the use of fluoride in drinking water.
Bad science and powerful politics
The authors of The Case Against Fluoride persuasively argue that “bad science” and “powerful politics” are primary factors explaining why government agencies continue to defend the indefensible practice of water fluoridation, despite abundant evidence that it is unsafe both developmentally and after “a lifetime of exposure to uncontrolled doses.” Comparable to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s book, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak, which summarizes studies that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and “credulous journalists swear don’t exist,” The Case Against Fluoride is an extensively referenced tour de force, pulling together hundreds of studies showing evidence of fluoride-related harm.
… death rates in the ten most fluoridated U.S. states are 5% to 26% higher than in the ten least fluoridated states, with triple the rate of Alzheimer’s disease.
The research assembled by the book’s authors includes studies on fluoride biochemistry; cancer; fluoride’s effects on the brain, endocrine system and bones; and dental fluorosis. With regard to the latter, public health agencies like to define dental fluorosis as a purely cosmetic issue involving “changes in the appearance of tooth enamel,” but the International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology (IAOMT)—a global network of dentists, health professionals and scientists dedicated to science-based biological dentistry—describes the damaged enamel and mottled and brittle teeth that characterize dental fluorosis as “the first visible sign of fluoride toxicity.”
The important 2017 study that showed decrements in IQ following fluoride exposure during pregnancy is far from the only research sounding the alarm about fluoride’s adverse developmental effects. In his 2017 volume, Pregnancy and Fluoride Do Not Mix, John D. MacArthur pulls together hundreds of studies linking fluoride to premature birth and impaired neurological development (93 studies), preelampsia (77 studies) and autism (110 studies). The book points out that rates of premature birth are “unusually high” in the United States. At the other end of the lifespan, MacArthur observes that death rates in the ten most fluoridated U.S. states are 5% to 26% higher than in the ten least fluoridated states, with triple the rate of Alzheimer’s disease. A 2006 report by the National Research Council warned that exposure to fluoride might increase the risk of developing Alzheimer’s.
The word is out
Pregnancy and Fluoride Do Not Mix shows that the Institute of Medicine, National Research Council, Harvard’s National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Toxicology Program all are well aware of the substantial evidence of fluoride’s developmental neurotoxicity, yet no action has been taken to warn pregnant women. Instead, scientists with integrity, legal professionals and the public increasingly are taking matters into their own hands. A Citizens Petitionsubmitted in 2016 to the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act requested that the EPA “exercise its authority to prohibit the purposeful addition of fluoridation chemicals to U.S. water supplies.” This request—the focus of a lawsuit to be argued in court later in 2019—poses a landmark challenge to the dangerous practice of water fluoridation and has the potential to end one of the most significant chemical assaults on our children’s developing bodies and brains.
Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.
(Natural News) While the tap seems like an easy and hassle-free way to drink water, it’s anything but. Tap water is filled to the brim with dangerous contaminants that have no business being anywhere near your body. Every time you turn on the tap and fill your glass, you risk drinking any of the thousands of chemical toxins that have been found in our nation’s tap water.
In California, sewer water is now being recycled into tap water. “New regulations approved Tuesday by the California State Water Resources Control Board allow treated recycled water to be added to reservoirs, the source of California municipal drinking water,” reports the San Francisco Gate. “The regulations specify the percentage of recycled water that can be added and how long it must reside there before being treated again at a surface water treatment facility and provided as drinking water.”
Listed below are some of the most common and prolific toxins found in municipal water:
Fluoride — Because it’s believed to prevent tooth decay, water fluoridation has been practiced for the last 50 years. Unfortunately, not only is fluoride totally unnecessary, it also does more damage than you think. According to FluorideAlert.org, fluoride can harm tooth enamel, negatively impact thyroid and pineal gland function, and weaken bones. The dose is not controlled, and it is known to accumulate in the body, interfering with digestion, hormones, and neurotransmitters. This array of health issues is why countries such as Belgium, Sweden, and Hungary have either banned or rejected water fluoridation.
Chlorine —Turns out chlorine isn’t just for the pool; water treatment facilities make use of this chemical as well. The problem with chlorine is that it’s so effective a disinfectant that drinking it destroys beneficial gut bacteria. In turn, this makes you more susceptible to digestive issues and ailments such as asthma and food allergies. Moreover, chlorine is believed to be highly carcinogenic in even small amounts.
Arsenic — This naturally-occurring element can seep into groundwater and water wells, which is usually how you become exposed to it. On top of it being extremely carcinogenic, arsenic has been known to raise the chances of developing cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cognitive development disorders in young children.
Heavy metals — Pipes contain heavy metals that make their way into our water whenever water passes through them. Lead is the most well-known of these heavy metals, and has been connected to neurological and developmental difficulties in young children. Other heavy metals like aluminum can damage your nerves, kidneys, and brain. And don’t make the mistake of thinking that having new plumbing fixtures makes you safe. As per NRDC.org, even new brass faucets and fixtures can still have a relevant amount of lead in them.
Pharmaceutical drugs — From being flushed down the toilet to being passed through bodily waste, there are several ways that pharmaceutical drugs can end up in our drinking water supply. And the kinds of medication that have been found in drinking water is nothing short of shocking: painkillers, antidepressants, blood thinners, antibiotics, and hormones are just some of them. This means that your local water supply could be harboring a deadly cocktail of pharmaceuticals with disastrous health effects.
Today information on curatives and healthy foods are constantly suppressed, and substances are even prohibited, like cannabis (which remains turmeric’s fiercest competition for its balancing and curative effects.) In fact, the systematic suppression of information concerning the curative effects of foods and herbs like cannabis, turmeric, garlic, ginger and habanero (for a few simple but powerful examples), as well as systems of herbalism, traditional medicine, and anything natural and not pharmacological, has been so successful during the rise of allopathy and Big Pharma that rejecting natural remedies as “alternative” has become an automatic response among most in our society — so much so that to suggest their powerful medicinal potential in public is to be labeled as crazy, a fringe-dweller, or some such parallel.
The following superfoods are adaptogenic balancers and curatives I have come across on my journey as a ‘crazy’ writer, health nut, truth seeker, and the son of a farmer and a nurse.
Chaga (pictured above) and other medicinal mushrooms are supremely powerful modes for increasing vitality and achieving healthy and balanced states. Chaga extract is one of the most powerful sources of antioxidants on the planet, and notably, has demonstrated anti-cancer properties. Chaga causes cell death of malformed cells without hurting the body otherwise, preventing the growth of cancer cells. It has also been shown to protect cellular DNA and stimulate the immune system.
In countries where the allopathic oligarchy has less of a stranglehold on the bounds of medicine and medical research, chaga is both well researched and medically prescribed, as is the reishi mushroom. In Russia in particular, chaga is widely utilized for its medicinal value, and is also being integrated with extracts of birch — the only tree chaga will grow on in nature — to potentially enhance the health effects of the chaga extract.
Personally, I very much enjoy consuming chaga with ginseng. If your needs are medicinal, I encourage you to do your own research to see if chaga, medicinal mushrooms, and/or ginseng might be appropriate for you.
Note: This is one of those times when tradition remains frustratingly ahead of science. The healing potential of mycotherapy (mushroom medicine) is vast, and while it is only just beginning to be understood by science, the scientific evidence is already inarguable, and yet psychoactive mushrooms remain widely prohibited by law regardless of their medicinal value. Even though chaga itself is not deemed illegal, the sense of ‘taboo’ surrounding mushroom medicine in our society has greatly diminished its therapeutic use.
2. Almonds and Apricots (in Combination)
I was in a Turkish Café in San Francisco, sometime after first learning about and experiencing internal alchemy of the almond and the apricot. They had a little apricot and almond pastry and I ordered one with my coffee. I said, “Oh, the almond and apricot, that’s the magic, I’ll have one of those.”
They looked at me like I just told them a secret in their native language. On picking up their jaws, they inquired how I knew about the magic of the almond and apricot.
The almond and apricot combination included in my pastry is used in Traditional Chinese Medicine. The simple combination has long been considered a cancer cure. It is associated with longevity, since one of the most well-aged peoples in the world, hun tzu in, eat almonds and apricots frequently. According to what I have experienced, it is also a powerful bowel cleanser! (Be advised, the combination does not cause diarrhea per se, but increases elimination.)
Western scientists have also utilized extracts to prove the effectiveness of the apricot and almond, however the curative properties could not be replicated by using only extracted compounds in isolation. Traditional Chinese Medicine noted that the alchemy of the digestion process potentiated their medicinal value, and extracts would thus not work.
Literally meaning “mountain tar”, Shilajit is a thick, sticky substance that seeps out of the rocks in the high mountains of Asia. Containing at least 85 minerals in their ionic form, it has been revered in Ayurveda for millennia as the best carrier of energy and nutrition into the human body.
A Vedic expression in regards to shilajit goes something like, “There is no disease which shilajit cannot defeat if consumed soon enough.” And from my own personal experience, I have started to think that shilajit is the actual philosopher’s stone for internal alchemy.
This stuff is straight-up illegal in Canada. Apparently there are a lot of poorly produced shilajit extracts on the global market, some containing lead. From what I understand it largely depends on how this extract is handled as to whether it contains toxins or not.
With an ancient history, legends of shilajit abound, and modern science still has many questions about shilajit — such as whether it is derived from a mineral or vegetable source, and how it behaves as an oil but is water soluble. What is undeniable is that shilajit is packed with minerals like no other substance on the planet, and generally has the effect of enhancing whatever herbal medicinal or food one consumes with it.
There are only a very few disorders I have come across which are not helped but hindered by the gentle inclusion of shilajit in one’s diet, however, again, I encourage you to do your own research about shilajit (also known as mumeo in Russia) and whether it is right for you.
4. Nothing But the Elements
The most powerful thing we can do for ourselves, often enough, is nothing! Being quiet in the four elements without trying to do anything is essentially one of the most powerful healing and strengthening practices you can undertake. Spend some time doing nothing and consuming nothing but the four elements in their purest form.
Fire: Go out and play in the Sun! Sunlight triggers healing potential in our bodies in hundreds of different ways. If you are sensitive to sunlight minimalize exposure and wear a hat. There is always the potential of using too much of any medicine, including heliotherapy.
Water: Drink pure water. Fast for a time and consume water only. Numerous immunological functions begin when we go without food for certain time periods; 16 hour, 1 day and 2 day water fasts can all be extremely beneficial.
Air: Breathe and play in the fresh air. Do nothing but breathe in nature — be it the mountaintop, beachhead, public park, or wherever is accommodating.
Earth: Take of your rubber shoes and connect with The Earth. The healing feel-good energy of the planet is as easy to connect with as removing your shoes! We are chemical electrical beings. Walking barefoot, or at least with shoes that do not disconnect us from literally being grounded into the electromagnetism of the earth, creates measurable chemical and electrical benefits. (Personally I recommend cotton soled tai chi/kung fu shoes for gentle walking.)
About the Author
Activist, author and Tai Chi teacher Ethan Indigo Smithwas born on a farm in Maine and lived in Manhattan for a number of years before migrating west to Mendocino, California. Guided by a keen sense of integrity and humanity, Ethan’s work is both deeply connected and extremely insightful, blending philosophy, politics, activism, spirituality, meditation and a unique sense of humour.
After being told by her doctor that genetically engineered (GE) food and pesticides could be responsible for her son’s food allergies, Ekaterina Yakovleva set out to investigate. Her quest for answers was captured by the Russian Times in the featured film, “The Peril on Your Plate: Genetic Engineering and Chemical Agriculture.”
The film shows Yakovleva and her team traveling the world to meet “the people who lift the lid on the perils of GMOs and the chemicals used in the industry,” as well as proponents of GMOs who argue that genetic engineering is a “high-tech” solution to feeding the world’s growing population. Advocates for genetic engineering tell Yakovleva that the technology is beneficial to farmers in that it increases resistance to pests and disease, as well as produces higher yields. But Yakovleva isn’t convinced.
She learns nothing could be further from the truth after witnessing the devastation caused by mass farmer suicides in India as a result of the failure of Monsanto’s Bt cotton. Yakovleva visits the U.K. where she meets Lady Margaret, Countess of Mar, a member of the House of Lords and a former farmer who suffered from chemical use, and then to the U.S. where she meets with Zen Honeycutt of Moms Across America about the link between GMOs, pesticides and chronic disease in humans.
What Is Genetic Engineering?
In order to better understand genetic engineering and its impact on human health, Yakovleva starts to research the technique and how it’s used. She learns that genetic engineering enables DNA to be transferred not only between different kinds of plants, but even between different kingdoms, meaning scientists can take DNA from an insect or animal and insert it into the genome of a plant.
Many GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is just an extension of natural breeding methods, and just as safe. Nothing could be further from the truth — on both counts. Genetic engineering is radically different from conventional breeding techniques used to improve a crop. For starters, it’s a laboratory-based technique allowing scientists to create a food that could never be created by nature.
Claire Robinson, editor of GM Watch and coauthor of the book, “GMO Myths and Truths: A Citizen’s Guide to the Evidence on the Safety and Efficacy of Genetically Modified Foods and Crops,” says:
US Leads World in GM Crop Production
Yakovleva learns that an estimated 190 million hectares (469.5 acres) of GE crops1 — an area three times the size of France — are cultivated in 28 countries worldwide.2 The U.S. leads the world in GM crop production, growing about 40 percent,3 while Brazil grows 27 percent and Argentina 13 percent. Canada and India each grow 6 percent.4GE crops currently in production include squash/pumpkin, alfalfa, sugar beet, potato, papaya, rapeseed oil, corn, soy and cotton.
Monsanto, soon to forgo its name and merge with Bayer, controls a vast majority of GE crops including 80 percent of GE corn and 93 percent of GE soy in the U.S. The first GE crop to hit the market was tobacco. It was genetically modified in 1983 to be resistant to an antibiotic.5 It was later altered for other reasons, including to remove a gene that turns nicotine into a carcinogen in tobacco leaves,6and to increase the amount of nicotine in cigarettes.7
The first genetically engineered food crop was the Flavr Savr tomato, produced by Calgene, a California-based company later bought by Monsanto. The tomato was genetically modified to stay riper longer by inhibiting a gene responsible for producing a protein that makes a tomato soften.8 Calgene is reported to have been transparent in its marketing of the tomato, clearly labeling the product and adding an 800 number for people with questions. Monsanto later removed the Flavr Savr tomato from store shelves.
A Growing List of Countries Say No to GMOs
The film highlights regions that are completely GMO-free, including Romania, which stopped cultivating GE crops despite being the first country in geographical Europe to introduce them.9 Portugal and Spain have reduced the amount of areas under GE crop cultivation,10while a number have enacted a total ban including France, Germany, Austria, Poland, Greece, Switzerland, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
Russia forbids GE crop cultivation,11 but does not prevent GMOs from entering the country’s food chain, according to the film. Yakovleva travels to the Agrarian University in Moscow to meet GMO proponent Arkady Zlochevsky, chairman of the Russian Grain Union. She confronts him about the human health effects of eating GE foods.
“There is absolutely no risk to the human body associated with eating GM foods compared to traditional equivalents, not a single one,” he says, adding that GMOs are “high-tech” and have “significant advantages.” He even went so far as to say that glyphosate, the key active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller, is safer than 100 percent manure.
Glyphosate Doubles as Herbicide and Suicide Poison in India
Unconvinced, Yakovleva travels to India where glyphosate doubles as a lethal human poison. The Punjab region, formally known as the bread basket of India, is now known for colossal suicides among farmers, particularly young farmers between the ages of 20 and 35.
Yakovleva meets with families of farmers who committed suicide. She learns that thousands of farmers have taken their own lives after agriculture corporations granted them loans they could never repay to purchase seeds and pesticides that ultimately failed to provide the profits that were promised.
Inderjit Singh Jaijee, chairman of Punjab’s Baba Nanak Educational Society, says farmers who commit suicide often take drugs, drink alcohol or even take a swig of glyphosate to muster up the courage to go through with it. Singh Jaijee, who is on a mission to raise awareness about the serious issue of suicides in Punjab, says that young farmers are more susceptible because they don’t yet have the experience older people do to survive.
Thousands of Indian Farmers Commit Suicide Over Faulty GE Crops
The amount of suicides in the Punjab region is so massive that some people are making a profit removing dead bodies from a local canal. Ashu Malik, an underwater diver, uses surveillance cameras to monitor the canal for floating bodies. If a body is not claimed, it’s placed back into the water, he says. Ending up in the canal as a result of suicide is so common in this region that families built a house on the canal’s shoreline for them to stay in while they search for their loved ones who are missing.
The exact number of suicides occurring annually in the Punjab region remains unknown. One estimation found the annual suicide rate to be about 2,200. However, Singh Jaijee’s research estimates it to be closer to 4,000 suicides per year, while farmer organizations estimate up to 6,000. Shocked by what’s become a normality for agricultural communities in India, Yakovleva interviews agricultural scientist Kiran Kumar Vissa to learn more about Monsanto’s Bt cotton, the crop responsible for placing so many farmers into debt.
Monsanto’s Bt cotton was marketed as a solution to the challenges faced by cotton farmers, many of whom were in crisis; however, it ended up causing farmers more problems. There are many places where Bt cotton is not suitable for cultivation, including dry, nonirrigated areas, explains Vissa. The packaging says that Bt cotton is suitable for both irrigated and nonirrigated conditions, but it’s not true, says Vissa, adding, that it’s deceptive to farmers.
Big Ag Uses Images of Rich, American Farmers to Sell GMOs Abroad
Next, Yakovleva meets with renowned scholar and environmental activist Vandana Shiva, who blames the mass suicides solely on the corporations that sell the seeds and chemicals. Monsanto spends huge amounts of money on advertising. Between the fiscal years 2011 to 2017, Monsanto spent more than $500 million on advertising worldwide.12
Shiva explains that seed and chemical agents show farmers in India images of American farmers with big tractors and promise them that if they just take this seed, which they can pay for later, they will be rich. But what they don’t tell the farmer is that they can’t save the seed and that it might fail because the seeds aren’t meant for dry, nonirrigated areas, says Shiva.
So, the farmer takes it on credit, not having a good understanding of the costs involved, and the seed fails, Vandana explains, adding that in two years’ time the agents who sold the seed and pesticide return and repossess the farmer’s land because he could not pay his loan. Shiva tells Yakovleva that she has personally spoken to widows whose farmer husbands committed suicide and when she asked what their debt was, they showed her packages of Monsanto’s Bt cotton seed.
Are Farmers Risking Their Health by Using Chemicals?
Yakovleva’s investigation proceeds to the U.K. where she meets with Lady Margaret, Countess of Mar, a member of the House of Lords and a former farmer who suffered from chemical use.
While serving organic tea and pudding, Lady Margaret says she had to give up farming after she was exposed to harmful chemicals while dipping sheep. The sheep dip contained organophosphates, the same class of chemicals to which glyphosate belongs. The chemicals are used as both flame retardants and pesticides. According to National Geographic:
Within weeks of being exposed, Lady Margaret says she began to suffer from intense fatigue and neurological problems. She even felt suicidal. At one point, she was forced to rely on an oxygen tank for up to 16 hours a day. Lady Margaret was ill for three years before doctors diagnosed her with organophosphate poisoning.
Most of Americans Have Glyphosate in Their Bodies
Humans are increasingly testing positive for residues of glyphosate.14 In tests conducted by a University of California San Francisco lab, 93 percent of the participants tested positive for glyphosate residues.15 In the European Union, when 48 members of Parliament volunteered for glyphosate testing, everyone one of them tested positive.16Humans are exposed to glyphosate via the food they eat, the air they breathe, the water they drink and the lawns, gardens, parks and other environments they frequent.
What impact is this having on human health? To find out, Yakovleva and her team head to the U.S. to meet with Honeycutt, who blames chemicals in our food for the rise in chronic disease. A number of chronic diseases have been linked to pesticides, including autism, cancer, food allergies, endocrine disruption, diabetes and Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease.17
One in 4 females over the age of 30 now has a gluten intolerance, says Honeycutt; however, she believes it’s not gluten that’s the problem, but the glyphosate that’s applied to wheat as a drying agent prior to harvest.
“It’s destroying their gut lining. They can’t process it and then the body acknowledges it as a gluten intolerance,” says Honeycutt, adding that food today not only has more chemicals, but is also less nutritious. Chemical-intensive agriculture has depleted our soils of essential nutrients and has drawn out vitamins and minerals that make our food healthy, she adds.
Long-Term Safety Studies Are Sorely Lacking
Yakovleva and her team reached out to Monsanto regarding the public health concerns tied to its Roundup weed killer, but the company refused to comment, instead directing them to its website which, of course, states that all of their products are safe and environmentally friendly. The deceptive GMO talking points Yakovleva received from the seed and chemical industry failed to convince her that GE crops are safe for human consumption, as there’s no real evidence to support this claim.
While few in number, longer-term animal feeding studies have been published over the past several years showing there’s definite cause for concern. Liver and kidney toxicity and immune reactions tend to be the most prevalent. Digestive system, inflammation and fertility problems have also been seen. A major part of the problem is that safety studies conducted for regulatory purposes to gain market approval for a GE product are too short to show the damage that could occur from life-long consumption of the GE food.
Some independent studies looking at lifetime consumption of GMOs have found rather dramatic health effects, whereas the safety studies used to promote GE foods as safe have all been short-term. There seems to be an agreement among biotech scientists to not test GE foods longer than 90 days in rats, which is only about seven to nine years in human terms. That’s nothing when you consider the average human life span is somewhere in the 70s, and the current generation is fed GMO food from Day 1.
How to Protect Yourself From Toxic Agriculture
The biotech giants have deep pocketbooks and political influence and are fighting to maintain their position of dominance. At the end of the day, we must shatter Monsanto’s grip on the agricultural sector. There is no way to recall GMOs once they have been released into the environment. The stakes could not be higher. Will you continue supporting the corrupt, toxic and unsustainable food system that Monsanto and its industry allies are working so hard to protect?
For more and more people, the answer is no. Consumers are rejecting genetically engineered and pesticide-laden foods. Another positive trend is that there has been strong growth in the global organic and grass-fed sectors. This just proves one thing: We can make a difference if we steadily work toward the same goal.
One of the best things you can do is to buy your foods from a local farmer who runs a small business and uses diverse methods that promote regenerative agriculture. You can also join a community-supported agriculture (CSA) program, where you can buy a “share” of the vegetables produced by the farm, so that you get a regular supply of fresh food.
I believe that joining a CSA is a powerful investment not only in your own health, but in that of your local community and economy as well. In addition, you should also adopt preventive strategies that can help reduce the toxic chemical pollution that assaults your body. I recommend visiting these trustworthy sites for non-GMO food resources in your country as well:
Monsanto and its allies want you to think that they control everything, but they are on the wrong side of history. It’s you, the informed and empowered, who hold the future in your hands. Let’s all work together to topple the biotech industry’s house of cards. Remember — it all starts with shopping smart and making the best food purchases for you and your family.
Biotech Companies Are Gaining Power by Taking Over the Government
to read the rest of the article, go to: http://www.wakingtimes.com/2018/06/27/the-peril-on-your-plate-film-explores-the-human-health-effects-of-genetic-engineering-and-chemical-agriculture/
The Facts:35-year-old Tristan Beaudette, a scientist from Irvine was recently murdered. He was in the process of making some important vaccine discoveries.
Reflect On:Why are so many holistic Doctors, and those who are doing revolutionary research that could change our medicine, disappearing?
Having researched vaccines for more than a decade, it’s quite easy to see how the rhetoric we commonly hear from the mainstream is simply just not true. We are living in an age where hundreds, if not thousands of scientists are questioning the safety of multiple medications, including vaccinations. A new study published in the journal EbioMedicineoutlines this point, stating in the introduction:
Over the past two decades, several vaccine controversies have emerged in various countries, including France, inducing worries about severe adverse effects and eroding confidence in health authorities, experts, and science (Larson et al., 2011).
This is actually a big problem in science, I wrote an article a couple of years ago regarding the issues that currently plague a lot of peer-reviewed science, and how most of the findings have actually been proven false. It’s a heavily sourced article, you can check it out here.
The science showing vaccinations are safe is virtually non-existent, and there are a lot showing that they’ve been more harmful than we are aware of. The truth is, not all vaccines have been tested and are completely safe. The reason Congress exempted vaccine makers from liability in 1986 was that vaccines were causing harm. Since the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Act went into effect, the federal government program has paid out 3.8 billion dollars in vaccine injuries and death.
I’m going to link some articles at the bottom of this one that has a lot more detail in it as to why more parents are choosing not to vaccinate their kids.
It’s no secret that more and more people are choosing not to vaccinate, and an increasing number of parents are doing the same. This has come with no short response from the mainstream, who seem to enjoy making it appear ‘stupid’ and making one feel and seem ‘foolish’ for even questioning the safety of vaccines. Obviously, these people are growing in number, and they’re not stupid. In fact, I applaud them for doing their own research and putting their critical thinking caps on, the fact that a number of peer-reviewed scientific publications keep emerging, and scientists continue to raise concerns at various international conferences held throughout the year, don’t worry…You’re far from stupid and you’re in good company. Again, the articles with the science and information will be linked.
It’s odd how we are made to fear not vaccinating our children, especially when the herd immunity hypothesis is constantly pushed.
The problems with vaccines not only comes as a result of recent science but multiple disclosures of scientific fraud and other eye-opening revelations with regards to those whom we deem our ‘health authorities.’ There are too many examples to count from.
When it comes to choosing not to vaccinate your child, and why so many parents are refusing to do so, we need to start understanding instead of reacting and instantly pointing a finger. The science has not spoken, and anytime we stop questioning things, we are far from science. Both sides really need to come together in an open public, honest and most importantly, nice discussion and acknowledge the information that each other has.
This would be great on a global stage with scientists from all over the world getting to speak…
So just to get that clear, parents and individuals are more than justified in refusing to vaccinate.
When I came across this current story about the death, yeah, it’s speculation, but I’m not surprised. I’ve been told personally by a professor at a Canadian university in the field that labs being broken into and shut down in an illegal fashion does happen.
A tragic death has police searching for a killer and a motive in California this week as a beloved father was murdered early Friday morning while camping with his two daughters in Malibu Creek State Park. The victim was identified as 35-year-old Tristan Beaudette, a scientist from Irvine.
Beaudette had taken his two daughters, ages 2 and 4, camping over the weekend so his wife, who is a doctor, could study for an important exam. According to police, they responded to reports of gunfire around 4:44 a.m. at the campsite.
“It appears that the victim was camping at the site with family members and no other individuals were injured during the course of the shooting,” police said. “There is no suspect information. There is no known motive for the crime.”
According to his Linkedin page, Beaudette worked as a senior scientist for the pharmaceutical company Allergan where he worked on pharmaceutical drug product development. He was a father and a reputable scientists who was inside of the pharmaceutical world for years after obtaining his Ph.D in chemistry from Berkeley in 2005. He studied and worked extensively on research papers about vaccines.
While at Berkeley, Beaudette was a graduate student instructor and worked on several research projects that were focused on pharmaceuticals and vaccines, according to his Linkedin profile. He wrote that he, “Synthesized polyacrylamide, polyacetal, and polysaccharide-based acid-degradable microparticles and used in vitro and in vivo techniques to characterize their ability to elicit cell-mediated immune responses for applications in vaccines and cancer therapy.” He also wrote, he, “Developed methods for chemoselective particle functionalization for use in targeted drug and gene delivery.” And, “Led a multidisciplinary team of chemists, immunologists, and biologists in an NIH-funded collaborative project involving the design of novel protein-based vaccine formulations,” while also composing, “multiple scientific research proposals. Presented and published graduate work at national conferences and in peer-reviewed journals.”
One of the studies he published in the Journal of Molecular Pharmacology dealt with protein vaccines, which, according to the study, are “a safer alternative to traditional weakened or killed the whole organism based vaccination strategies and have been investigated for their ability to activate the immune system against certain cancers.”
The most recent example comes of this type of activity comes from Italy, when authorities broke into the home and lab of Dr. Antonietta Gatti discovered the relationship between micro- and nano particles as well as a great number of pathologies: cardiovascular diseases, many forms of cancer, multiple neurological diseases, and autoimmune diseases. Currently, she is the coordinator of the Italian Institute of Technology’s Project of Nanoecotoxicology, called INESE. She is also a selected expert of the FAO/WHO for the safety in nanotechnological food, and a Member of the NANOTOX Cluster of the European Commission and the author of a book titled “Nanopathology: the health impact of nanoparticles,” and on the Editorial Board of Journal of Biomaterials Applications and a member of the CPCM of the Italian Ministry of Defense.
Furthermore, her and her husband Dr. Stefano Montanari founded a laboratory called Nano-diagnostics for the evaluation of the pathological tissues of patients, it’s presently at the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Recently, the Italian police raided their home, the police took all digital assets that were owned by the two nano pathologists, including laptops, computers, and flash-drives, basically years of work and research.
I don’t know much about this man’s research, but to suggest he was murdered for his work might be a long leap, but it’s not out of the question. This is something that can happen, does happen, and has happened in the past. The fact that it happened so mysteriously is nothing new.
We’ve covered strange stories as such in the past, for example,
It’s one of many examples, and if you think about the take-over of medicine by chemical medicine and the Rockefeller initiative in the early 1920’s, again, it’s really not that far-fetched. We can’t say for sure, but at the same time, it doesn’t seem right to rule out foul play in the unfortunate passing of Beaudette.
Scientists Confirmed: This Is The World’s #1 Food For Hypertension, Heart Attack, Stroke and Cholesterol!
Dates are ones of the healthiest fruits you can consume, as they are rich in beneficial ingredients that treat various health issues, including hypertension, heart attacks, strokes, and high cholesterol.
They also accelerate the metabolism. Here are 8 of their health benefits:
Dates prevent diarrhea
Dates are high in potassium, which prevents diarrhea by the healthy bacteria and thus relieving the belly flora and the intestines.
Dates regulate cholesterol
Dates cleanse blood vessels and prevent the formation of blood clots, so they effectively regulate the unhealthy cholesterol or LDL.
Dates regulate blood pressure
Dates are high in potassium and contain no sodium, so they are perfect in the case of hypertension. Moreover, 5-6 dates contain 80 mg of magnesium, which boosts the blood flow and is spread through the blood vessels. To reduce blood pressure, you need about 370 mg of magnesium.
Dates for anemia
These fruits are a rich source of iron, so they are extremely useful in the case of anemia, pregnancy, and for children. 100 grams of dates daily will provide 0.9 mg of iron, which is about 11 % of the recommended daily intake of iron.
Iron has a beneficial effect on the red blood cells and hemoglobin and helps the oxygen flow through the blood.
Dates prevent strokes
The high potassium content in these fruits enhances the nervous system and prevents strokes. Hence, the daily intake of 400 mg of potassium successfully prevents strokes.
Dates for heart health
Soak the dates in water during the night, and in the morning eat them or add them to your smoothie to support heart health.
Dates soothe constipation
Dates are extremely useful in the case of constipation. You should keep them in some water overnight, and then drink the water in the morning to help digestion, and use their mild laxative properties.
Dates help weight loss
The consumption of dates on an empty stomach will help you control your body weight, as they contain no cholesterol.
Even the bestselling flu vaccine is only the fifth most popular vaccine in the United States.
Prevnar, the vaccine used to prevent infection caused by pneumococcal bacteria; Gardasil, which supposedly prevents cervical cancer; PENTAct-HIB, given to tiny infants to stave off diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, poliomyelitis, and Haemophilus influenzae type b; and Infanrix/ Pediarix, a vaccine indicated for active immunization against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, infection caused by all known subtypes of hepatitis B virus, and poliomyelitis; are all far more popular than the flu vaccine.
Nonetheless, a report released in 2013 by the Department of Justice, shows that more than half of all claims settled by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, also known as the Vaccine Court, were for injuries caused by the influenza vaccine.
As reported by Health Impact News, during the period covering 16 August to 15 November 2013, 139 claims were settled by the Vaccine Court, 70 of which received compensation.
Of these settled claims, 42 – or 60 percent – were for injuries caused by the flu vaccine. The remaining 40 percent were for injuries caused by 11 other vaccines.
The greatest number of injuries by far that were reported as a result of the flu vaccine were for Guillain-Barré Syndrome, or GBS, a condition which the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke describes as follows:
Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is a disorder in which the body’s immune system attacks part of the peripheral nervous system. The first symptoms of this disorder include varying degrees of weakness or tingling sensations in the legs.
In many instances the symmetrical weakness and abnormal sensations spread to the arms and upper body. These symptoms can increase in intensity until certain muscles cannot be used at all and, when severe, the person is almost totally paralyzed.
In these cases the disorder is life threatening – potentially interfering with breathing and, at times, with blood pressure or heart rate – and is considered a medical emergency.
Such an individual is often put on a ventilator to assist with breathing and is watched closely for problems such as an abnormal heart beat, infections, blood clots, and high or low blood pressure.
Most individuals, however, have good recovery from even the most severe cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome, although some continue to have a certain degree of weakness.
The flu vaccine: a toxic recipe for disaster
The injuries caused by the flu vaccine, as listed in the Department of Justice report, are not limited to Guillain-Barré Syndrome, however.
They also include: neurological injury, peripheral neuropathy, painful myalgias, psychological sequella, opsoclonus-myoclonus syndrome, cerebellar ataxia, corneal transplant failure, transverse myelitis, encephalitis, shoulder injury, bilateral optic neuritis resulting in permanent legal blindness, leukoencephalopathy, chemically-induced multiple sclerosis, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, fibromyalgia, and death, among others.
To the uninformed it might seem shocking that a medical procedure considered safe by the mainstream medical community could cause such serious health problems. When one considers the flu vaccine’s ingredients and adjuvants, however, it becomes totally understandable.
For example, considering the severity of the reactions and conditions linked to the flu vaccine in just a three-month period, and remembering that very few adverse vaccine reactions are ever reported, why is the mainstream media not shouting this information from the rooftops?
Why is there virtually total media silence when it comes to the dangers of vaccines in general? Why are we not given this information when we choose to vaccinate ourselves and our children with these potentially deadly vaccines?
The Fourth Phase of Water – What You Don’t Know About Water, and Really Should
Your body consists of over 99 percent water molecules, but the water in your cells is not regular water, but highly structured water with special properties
There is a fourth phase of water, not H2O but H3O2, and can be called living water. It’s more viscous, dense, and alkaline than regular water; has a negative charge, and can hold energy, much like a battery, and deliver energy too
The key ingredient to create this highly structured water is light, i.e. electromagnetic energy, whether in the form of visible light, or infrared wavelengths, which we’re surrounded by all the time
One reason why infrared saunas make you feel so good is because your body’s cells are deeply penetrated by infrared energy, which builds and stores structured water. The same goes for light therapy, spending time in the sun, and laser therapy
Besides optimizing your drinking water by vortexing, you can help support your body’s negative charge by connecting to the Earth, which also has a negative charge. This is the basis of the earthing or grounding technique
Water is clearly one of the most important factors for your health—especially when you consider that your body actually consists of over 99 percent water molecules! I sincerely believe water is a really underappreciated part of the equation of optimal health.
I’ve previously interviewed Dr. Gerald Pollack, who is one of the leading premier research scientists in the world when it comes to understanding the physics of water, and what it means to your health.
Besides being a professor of bioengineering at the University of Washington, he’s also the founder and editor-in-chief of a scientific journal called Water, and has published many peer-reviewed scientific papers on this topic. He’s even received prestigious awards from the National Institutes of Health.
His book, The Fourth Phase of Water: Beyond Solid, Liquid, and Vapor, is a phenomenal read that is easy to understand even for the non-professional.
It clearly explains the theory of the fourth phase of water, which is nothing short of ground-breaking. The fourth phase of water is, in a nutshell, living water. It’s referred to as EZ water—EZ standing for “exclusion zone”—which has a negative charge. This water can hold energy, much like a battery, and can deliver energy too.
For years, Dr. Pollack had researched muscles and how they contract, and it struck him as odd that the most common ideas about muscle contraction do not involve water, despite the fact that muscle tissue consists of 99 percent water molecules.
How could it be that 99 percent of the molecules were ignored? How could it be that muscle contracts without involving the water in some way? These questions help catalyze his passionate investigation into water.
So You Think You Understand Water?
Gilbert Ling, who was a pioneer in this field, discovered that water in human cells is not ordinary water (H2O), but something far more structured and organized.
“I began to think about water in the context of biology: if water inside the cell was ordered and structured and not bulk water or ordinary water as most biochemists and cell biologists think, then it is really important,” Dr. Pollack says.
Dr. Pollack’s book also touches on some of the most basic features of water, many of which are really not understood. For example, how does evaporation take place? Why does a tea kettle whistle? Also, despite the fact that conventional science tells us freezing is supposed to occur at zero degrees Celsius, experiments show that it can freeze in many different temperatures down to minus 50 degrees Celsius.
There’s actually no one single freezing point for water! Other experiments show that the boiling point of 100 degrees Celsius (or 212 degrees Fahrenheit) does not always hold true either.
“There’s a famous website1 put together by a British scientist, Martin Chaplin. Martin lists numerous anomalies associated with water,” Dr. Pollack says. “In other words, things that shouldn’t be according to what we know about water…
The more anomalies we have, the more we begin to think that maybe there’s something fundamental about water that we really don’t know. That’s the core of what I’m trying to do. In our laboratory at the University of Washington, we’ve done many experiments over the last decade. These experiments have clearly shown the existence of this additional phase of water.”
The reason this fourth phase of water is called the exclusion zone or EZ is because the first thing Dr. Pollack’s team discovered is that it profoundly excludes things. Even small molecules are excluded from EZ water. Surprisingly, EZ water appears in great abundance, including inside most of your cells. Even your extracellular tissues are filled with this kind of water.
to read more, go to: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/08/18/exclusion-zone-water.aspx
Uncovered: Monsanto campaign to get Séralini study retracted
Documents released in US cancer litigation show Monsanto’s desperate attempts to suppress a study that showed adverse effects of Roundup herbicide – and that the editor of the journal that retracted the study had a contractual relationship with the company. Claire Robinson reports
Internal Monsanto documents released by attorneys leading US cancer litigation show that the company launched a concerted campaign to force the retraction of a study that revealed toxic effects of Roundup. The documents also show that the editor of the journal that first published the study entered into a contract with Monsanto in the period shortly before the retraction campaign began.
The study, led by Prof GE Séralini, showed that very low doses of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide had toxic effects on rats over a long-term period, including serious liver and kidney damage. Additional observations of increased tumour rates in treated rats would need to be confirmed in a larger-scale carcinogenicity study.
The newly released documents show that throughout the retraction campaign, Monsanto tried to cover its tracks to hide its involvement. Instead Monsanto scientist David Saltmiras admitted to orchestrating a “third party expert” campaign in which scientists who were apparently independent of Monsanto would bombard the editor-in-chief of the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT), A. Wallace Hayes, with letters demanding that he retract the study.
Use of “third party experts” is a classic public relations tactic perfected by the tobacco industry. It consists of putting industry-friendly messages into the mouths of supposedly “independent” experts, since no one would believe industry attempts to defend its own products. Back in 2012, GMWatch founder Jonathan Matthews exposed the industry links of the supposedly independent scientists who lobbied the journal editor to retract the Séralini paper. Now we have first-hand proof of Monsanto’s direct involvement.
In one document, Saltmiras reviews his own achievements within the company, boasting that he “Successfully facilitated numerous third party expert letters to the editor which were subsequently published, reflecting the numerous significant deficiencies, poor study design, biased reporting and selective statistics employed by Séralini. In addition, coauthored the Monsanto letter to the editor with [Monsanto employees] Dan Goldstein and Bruce Hammond.”
Saltmiras further writes of how “Throughout the late 2012 Séralini rat cancer publication and media campaign, I leveraged my relationship [with] the Editor i[n] Chief of the publishing journal… and was the single point of contact between Monsanto and the Journal.”
Another Monsanto employee, Eric Sachs, writes in an email about his efforts to galvanize scientists in the letter-writing campaign. Sachs refers to Bruce Chassy, a scientist who runs the pro-GMO Academics Review website. Sachs writes: “I talked to Bruce Chassy and he will send his letter to Wally Hayes directly and notify other scientists that have sent letters to do the same. He understands the urgency… I remain adamant that Monsanto must not be put in the position of providing the critical analysis that leads the editors to retract the paper.”
In response to Monsanto’s request, Chassy urged Hayes to retract the Séralini paper: “My intent was to urge you to roll back the clock, retract the paper, and restart the review process.”
Chassy was also the first signatory of a petition demanding the retraction of the Séralini study and the co-author of a Forbes article accusing Séralini of fraud. In neither document does Chassy declare any link with Monsanto. But in 2016 he was exposed as having taken over $57,000 over less than two years from Monsanto to travel, write and speak about GMOs.
Sachs is keen to ensure that Monsanto is not publicly seen as attempting to get the paper retracted, even though that is precisely what it is doing. Sachs writes to Monsanto scientist William Heydens: “There is a difference between defending science and participating in a formal process to retract a publication that challenges the safety of our products. We should not provide ammunition for Séralini, GM critics and the media to charge that Monsanto used its might to get this paper retracted. The information that we provided clearly establishes the deficiencies in the study as reported and makes a strong case that the paper should not have passed peer review.”
Another example of Monsanto trying to cover up its involvement in the retraction campaign emerges from email correspondence between Monsanto employees Daniel Goldstein and Eric Sachs. Goldstein states: “I was uncomfortable even letting shareholders know we are aware of this LTE [GMW: probably “Letter to the Editor”]…. It implies we had something to do with it – otherwise how do we have knowledge of it? I could add ‘Aware of multiple letters to editor including one signed by 25 scientists from 14 countries’ if you both think this is OK.” Sachs responds: “We are ‘connected’ but did not write the letter or encourage anyone to sign it.”
A. Wallace Hayes was paid by Monsanto
The most shocking revelation of the disclosed documents is that the editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology, A. Wallace Hayes, entered into a consulting agreement with Monsanto in the period just before Hayes’s involvement in the retraction of the Séralini study. Clearly Hayes had a conflict of interest between his role as a consultant for Monsanto and his role as editor for a journal that retracted a study determining that glyphosate has toxic effects. The study was published on 19 September 2012; the consulting agreement between Hayes and Monsanto was dated 21 August 2012 and Hayes is contracted to provide his services beginning 7 September 2012.
The documents also reveal that Monsanto paid Hayes $400 per hour for his services and that in return Hayes was expected to “Assist in establishment of an expert network of toxicologists, epidemiologists, and other scientists in South America and participate on the initial meeting held within the region. Preparation and delivery of a seminar addressing relevant regional issues pertaining to glyphosate toxicology is a key deliverable for the inaugural meeting in 2013.”
Hayes should have recused himself from any involvement with the Séralini study from the time he signed this agreement. But he kept quiet. He went on to oversee a second “review” of the study by unnamed persons whose conflicts of interest, if any, were not declared – resulting in his decision to retract the study for the unprecedented reason that some of the results were “inconclusive”.
Hayes told the New York Times’s Danny Hakim in an interview that he had not been under contract with Monsanto at the time of the retraction and was paid only after he left the journal. He added that “Monsanto played no role whatsoever in the decision that was made to retract.” But since it took the journal over a year to retract the study after the months-long second review, which Hayes oversaw, it’s clear that he had an undisclosed conflict of interest from the time he entered into the contract with Monsanto and during the review process. He appears to be misleading the New York Times.
The timing of the contract also begs the question as to whether Monsanto knew the publication of the study was coming. If so, they may have been happy to initiate such a relationship with Hayes at just that time.
A Monsanto internal email confirms the company’s intimate relationship with Hayes. Saltmiras writes about the recently published Séralini study: “Wally Hayes, now FCT Editor in Chief for Vision and Strategy, sent me a courtesy email early this morning. Hopefully the two of us will have a follow up discussion soon to touch on whether FCT Vision and Strategy were front and center for this one passing through the peer review process.”
In other email correspondence between various Monsanto personnel, Daniel Goldstein writes the following with respect to the Séralini study: “Retraction – Both Dan Jenkins (US Government affairs) and Harvey Glick made a strong case for withdrawal of the paper if at all possible, both on the same basis – that publication will elevate the status of the paper, bring other papers in the journal into question, and allow Séralini much more freedom to operate. All of us are aware that the ultimate decision is up to the editor and the journal management, and that we may not have an opportunity for withdrawal in any event, but I felt it was worth reinforcing this request.”
Monsanto got its way, though the paper was subsequently republished by another journal with higher principles – and, presumably, with an editorial board that wasn’t under contract with Monsanto.
Why Monsanto had to kill the Séralini study
It’s obvious that it was in Monsanto’s interests to kill the Séralini study. The immediate reason was that it reported harmful effects from low doses of Roundup and a GM maize engineered to tolerate it. But the wider reason that emerges from the documents is that to admit that the study had any validity whatsoever would be to open the doors for regulators and others to demand other long-term studies on GM crops and their associated pesticides.
A related danger for Monsanto, pointed out by Goldstein, is that “a third party may procure funding to verify Séralini’s claims, either through a government agency or the anti-GMO/antl-pesticide financiers”.
The documents show that Monsanto held a number of international teleconferences to discuss how to pre-empt such hugely threatening developments.
Summing up the points from the teleconferences, Daniel Goldstein writes that “unfortunately”, three “potential issues regarding long term studies have now come up and will need some consideration and probably a white paper of some type (either internal or external)”. These are potential demands for
• 2 year rat/long-term cancer (and possibly reproductive toxicity) on GM crops
• 2 year/chronic studies on pesticide formulations, in addition to the studies on the active ingredient alone that are currently demanded by regulators, and
• 2 year rat/chronic studies of pesticide formulations on the GM crop.
In reply to the first point, Goldstein writes that the Séralini study “found nothing other than the usual variation in SD [Sprague-Dawley] rats, and as such there is no reason to question the recent EFSA guidance that such studies were not needed for substantially equivalent crops”. GMWatch readers will not be surprised to see Monsanto gaining support from EFSA in its opposition to carrying out long-term studies on GMOs.
In answer to the second point, Goldstein reiterates that the Séralini study “actually finds nothing – so there is no need to draw any conclusions from it – but the theoretical issue has been placed on the table. We need to be prepared with a well considered response.”
In answer to the third point, Goldstein ignores the radical nature of genetic engineering and argues pragmatically, if not scientifically, “This approach would suggest that the same issue arises for conventional crops and that every individual formulation would need a chronic study over every crop (at a minimum) and probably every variety of crop (since we know they have more genetic variation than GM vs conventional congener) and raises the possibility of an almost limitless number of tests.” But he adds, “We also need a coherent argument for this issue.”
EU regulators side with Monsanto
To the public’s detriment, some regulatory bodies have backed Monsanto rather than the public interest and have backed off the notion that long-term studies should be required for GM crops. In fact, the EU is considering doing awaywith even the short 90-day animal feeding studies currently required under European GMO legislation. This will be based in part on the results of the EU-funded GRACE animal feeding project, which has come under fire for the industry links of some of the scientists involved and for its alleged manipulation of findings of adverse effects on rats fed Monsanto’s GM MON810 maize.
A. Wallace Hayes is no longer the editor-in-chief of FCT but is named as an “emeritus editor”. Likewise, Richard E. Goodman, a former Monsanto employee who was parachuted onto the journal’s editorial board shortly after the publication of the Séralini study, is no longer at the journal.
But although they are sidelined or gone, their legacy lives on in the form of a gap in the history of the journal where Séralini’s paper belongs.
Now that Monsanto’s involvement in the retraction of the Séralini paper is out in the open, FCT and Hayes should do the decent thing and issue a formal apology to Prof Séralini and his team. FCT cannot and should not reinstate the paper, because it is now published by another journal. But it needs to draw a line under this shameful episode, admit that it handled it badly, and declare its support for scientific independence and objectivity.