Find Articles using keywords

6108+ evidence-based Articles & Reports

Blog Teaser Image Post date
51
[+]

The Dangers of GMO Insulin for Type 2 Diabetics No One Talks About

A growing body of concerning research indicates that conventional medicine's standard of care for type 2 diabetes, including synthetic insulin and oral anti-diabetic drugs, may actually increase morbidity and mortality. On the other hand, recently validated traditional approaches relying on plant-based medicines may greatly mitigate the global diabetes epidemic.
A growing body of concerning research indicates that conventional medicine's standard of care for type 2 diabetes, including synthetic insulin and oral anti-diabetic drugs, may actually increase morbidity and mortality. On the other hand, recently validated traditional approaches relying on plant-based medicines may greatly mitigate the global diabetes epidemic.  A highly concerning study published in the journal Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism titled, "Glucose-lowering with exogenous insulin monotherapy in type 2 diabetes: dose association with all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, and incident cancer," adds to a growing body of research indicating that administering genetically engineered insulin to type 2 diabetics greatly increases their risk of all-cause mortality.  Contrary to popular notions about the 'life saving' value of synthetic, genetically engineered insulin for type 2 diabetics -- a belief inculcated by pharmaceutical interests -- bioidentical-sounding insulin brands such as Humulin (1978) and Humolog (1996) are less like human insulin in form and function than pig pancreas-derived forms, which they displaced from the market soon after being introduced (you can no longer buy pig-derive insulin in the U.S.). Originally produced from genetically modified yeast, synthetic insulin's structure, and subsequent folding pattern (conformation) and function, radically diverge from the type of insulin our bodies produce naturally. For instance, one of...
01-28 2018
52
[+]

Schools Let Chick-fil-A Propagandize GMO/Chemical Food Directly To Kids

Unfortuantely schools throughout the country consider Chick-fil-A food "better fast food,"even allowing their mascot direct marketing access to children within schools. But a quick perusal of their famous Waffle Fries reveals that their food is as junky, GMO, and toxic as any other fast food brand.
Is Chick-fil-A food "better fast food?" Do the GMOs, trans fats, additives and preservatives in virtually all the products say otherwise? And how is it that this corporation is allowed to place its mascot squarely in the middle of our children's place of education?  First, a note from our founder:  "I was picking my daughter up at her public charter school this year (Florida), and I was disturbed to find a Chick-fil-A mascot waving to all the kids being picked up after school, clearly standing in a strategic and highly symbolic spot between us and our children. What in the world was going on in my school's administration's mind when they allowed such a grotesque display of pro-junk food propagandizing directly to our children?  I asked my colleague Dani to do an article on the inherently toxic ingredients in one of Chick-fil-A's products in the hopes that schools like mine will think twice before allowing the corrupting influence of corporations direct access to our children in this manner." ~  Sayer Ji, founder of GreenMedInfo.com  Chick-Fil-A Waffle Fries: Food or Toxic Junk?  On my Facebook page, I recently asked people if they ever ate at Chick-fil-A. Personally, I haven't and I wasn't sure what all the hype was about. It's fast food, after all. The responses shocked me. Majority of people commented saying that it was healthier fast food, food they could feel good about feeding their kids, food that is above par...
11-09 2015
53
[+]

Monsanto's Losing Battle Against GMO Labeling

Whoa! Did you see that? No one seems to notice yet that we're winning the battle against genetically modified foods!
Whoa! Did you see that?  No one seems to notice yet that we're winning the battle against genetically modified foods! Over the last few years voters in Colorado, Washington State, Oregon and California created unsuccessful ballot initiatives to mandate labeling of GMOs. The Big Grocery and Big Chemical lobbies outspent the grassroots by tens of millions of dollars, were unconstrained by either the truth or ethics, and showed up on the winning side of each election.  That left us on the losing side.  We mistakenly thought we'd lost the battle and the GMO lobby mistakenly thought they'd won.  But we didn't, and they didn't.  It's a sure bet that the Monsanto knows it, too, although they fight on.    Two things happened during the elections.  One, the referendums, the endless pro-GMO commercials, and the enormous sums spent to defeat something that seemed like a very reasonable idea, made the national news and seemed to raise consciousness and concern across the country and among many who might not have otherwise been paying attention. Two, some grassroots businesses decided that giving their customers the non-GMO they demanded could be a profitable and winning proposition.  How right they were.  There is currently such a demand for organic foods, which are non-GMO by definition, that American farms can't keep up.  At least not yet.  We are now importing organics from abroad to fill the demand.  Organic...
05-06 2015
54
[+]

"Non-GMO" Cheerios Oats Still Sprayed With Roundup, Supplier Announces

Cheerios may be "non-GMO" but it is virtually guaranteed to contain Roundup herbicide residues, based on an oat supplier's recent admission.
General Mills Cheerios may now be "non-GMO" but it is virtually guaranteed to contain Roundup herbicide residues, as disclosed by North America's largest oat supplier.  While there are no genetically modified oats on the marketplace today, non-organic oats might as well be labeled Roundup Ready (RR). This is because it is common practice to spray them with Roundup's active ingredient glyphosate, putting them in the same category of glyphosate contaminated crops which includes RR GM soy, corn and canola. Why must oats be sprayed? Known as pre-harvest desiccation, glyphosate is sprayed on oat crops right before their harvest, ostensibly to increase product uniformity and yield, and to save time in harvesting. A report on Washingtonsblog.com explains how Monsanto funded research, which is notoriously biased, is behind this practice: "Specifically, Monsanto International published a paper in 2010 touting the application of Roundup to kill crops right before harvest, in order to dry out the crops in advance and produce a more uniform and earlier harvest (starting on page 28): "Uneven maturity and green tissue delays harvest. Spraying glyphosate desiccates green foliage & stems. The photograph (below left) shows the uniform dessication of sunflower by the use of glyphosate(Roundup Bioaktiv) applied by helicopter in Hungary (Czepó, 2009a). The photograph (below right) shows complete foliar desiccation of grain maize on the right side 14...
05-30 2015
55
[+]

Game-Changing Study: GMO Soy Accumulates Carcinogenic Formaldehyde

A groundbreaking new study reveals that GMO soy accumulates the carcinogenic chemical formaldehyde, calling into question its safety and the notion that GMOs are substantially equivalent to their conventional counterparts.
A groundbreaking new study reveals that GMO soy accumulates the carcinogenic chemical formaldehyde, calling into question its safety and the notion that GMOs are substantially equivalent to their conventional counterparts.  WASHINGTON, July 14, 2015 /PRNewswire/ Systems Biology Group, International Center for Integrative Systems: GMO Soy Accumulates Formaldehyde & Disrupts Plant Metabolism, Suggests Peer-Reviewed Study, Calling For 21st Century Safety Standards A new study published today in the peer-reviewed journal AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES reveals genetic engineering of soy disrupts the plant's natural ability to control stress, and invalidates the FDA's current regulatory framework of "substantial equivalence" used for approval of genetically engineered food (GMOs). The study, led by Dr. V.A. Shiva Ayyadurai, Ph.D., an MIT-trained systems biologist, utilizes his latest invention, CytoSolve, a 21st century systems biology method to integrate 6,497 in vitro and in vivo laboratory experiments, from 184 scientific institutions, across 23 countries, to discover the accumulation of formaldehyde, a known carcinogen, and a dramatic depletion of glutathione, an anti-oxidant necessary for cellular detoxification, in GMO soy, indicating that formaldehyde and glutathione are likely critical criteria for distinguishing the GMO from its non-GMO counterpart. Dr. Ayyadurai stated, "The results demand immediate...
07-15 2015
56
[+]

Anti-GMO But Pro-Vaccine?

The truth is that the GMO and vaccine agendas are the same; only, activists appear to think there is a difference.
The truth is that the GMO and vaccine agendas are the same; only, activists appear to think there is a difference. Few things are as disturbing to me as the divide that exists between the GMO and vaccine awareness movements. If you look closely you'll see the exact same concerns: the violation of informed consent, the neglect of the precautionary principle, predominance of industry propaganda over actual science, the revolving door between government regulators and legislators and industry, and the undermining of the fundamental right of bodily self-possession, the keystone of health freedom. And yet, these two groups behave as if they are fighting their own separate battles, with the end result that they usually are.   Non-GMO Blindspot There are numerous examples of how these movements are lost without one another. For instance, the non-GMOs movement adamantly supports organic production methods, correct? But if you look at big players, such as Organic Valley and Horizon Organic, both openly utilize vaccines in their veterinary care practices, some of which either contain genetically modified components, adventitious retroviruses that alter host DNA sequences and/or expression, or utilize pathogens which have been genetically altered in a way that may result in altered genetic expression in the vaccinated animal and/or those who consume these animal products. These obviously non-organic practices and/or consequences...
07-19 2015
57
[+]

Growing Doubt: a Scientist’s Experience of GMOs

The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming. They exist to gain patent rights over seeds and plant breeding and to drive agriculture in directions that benefit agribusiness at the expense of farmers, consumers and the natural world.
Originally published on Independent Science News. The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming. They exist to gain patent rights over seeds and plant breeding and to drive agriculture in directions that benefit agribusiness at the expense of farmers, consumers and the natural world. By training, I am a plant biologist. In the early 1990s I was busy making genetically modified plants (often called GMOs for Genetically Modified Organisms) as part of the research that led to my PhD. Into these plants we were putting DNA from various foreign organisms, such as viruses and bacteria. I was not, at the outset, concerned about the possible effects of GM plants on human health or the environment. One reason for this lack of concern was that I was still a very young scientist, feeling my way in the complex world of biology and of scientific research. Another reason was that we hardly imagined that GMOs like ours would be grown or eaten. So far as I was concerned, all GMOs were for research purposes only. Gradually, however, it became clear that certain companies thought differently. Some of my older colleagues shared their skepticism with me that commercial interests were running far ahead of scientific knowledge. I listened carefully and I didn't disagree. Today, over twenty years later, GMO crops, especially soybeans, corn, papaya, canola and cotton, are commercially grown in numerous parts of the world. Depending on which country you live in...
08-31 2015
58
[+]

44 Reasons to Ban or Label GMOs

Think GMOs are safe for human consumption? Think again. There are plenty of reasons GMOs should be banned, or, at the very least, labeled.
Originally published on www.garynull.com Think GMOs are safe for human consumption? Think again. There are plenty of reasons GMOs should be banned, or, at the very least, labeled. For twenty years the federal government, through the USDA and FDA, has stated unequivocally that genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) are safe and can help feed the world and save lives. However, over the last two decades independent scientists have brought forth challenges to the prevailing dogma on this important issue. The response of the GMO industry to any critic-irrespective of their credentials or the scientific evidence they provide-is that they are wrong. To determine where the truth lies, we have set about reviewing all available scientific literature on the safety and efficacy of GMOs. The results of our independent investigation are stated in the following 44 reasons to ban or label GMOs. All of the information is footnoted and fully referenced. 1.Because 91% of Americans want GMO labeling.[1] 2.Because 64 countries around the world including Japan, Australia, China and the entire European Union require GMO labeling. 3.Because in September 2015, Russia completely banned the production of food using GMOs. This came after the country undertook independent scientific research of the GMO issue.[2] 4.Because GMO giant Monsanto has a history of producing highly dangerous chemical compounds including DDT, Agent Orange, saccharin, and recombinant bovine growth hormone, all of which are...
11-06 2015
59
[+]

The GMO Agenda Takes a Blundering Leap Forward with EPA’s Silent Approval of Monsanto/Dow’s RNAi Corn

  Without much more than a whisper from the mainstream media, Monsanto’s newest Frankenfood has received full EPA approval and will be arriving on people’s dinner plates by the end of the decade.   How Non-Coding, Small RNAs Link Together The Entire Biosphere One of the most important discoveries of our time is that all plants, including those we use for food and animal feed, contain a wide range of RNA molecules capable of inhibiting gene expression or translation. These non-coding RNA molecules neutralize targeted messenger RNA molecules (mRNAs), which prevents their translation into a protein, i.e. they “silence genes.”   Compelling research has surfaced that not only do these genome-regulating small RNA molecules exist in our foods, but they are capable of surviving digestion, and being absorbed into our bodies fully intact where they suppress or silence genes, post-transcriptionally. Moreover, some of these small RNAs -- primarily microRNAs (miRNAs) and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) -- are believed to be cross-kingdom mediators of genetic information, making it possible for RNAs in one species impacting many others through both their active and passive exposure to them.     Food therefore is essentially an epigenetic modifier of gene expression, making it a form of information as well as a source of bodily building blocks and caloric energy. As such, any significant changes to food or feed staples within our food chain could have powerful...
07-09 2017
60
[+]

The GMO Agenda Takes a Menacing Leap Forward with EPA’s Silent Approval of Monsanto/Dow’s RNAi Corn

  Without much more than a whisper from the mainstream media, Monsanto’s newest Frankenfood has received full EPA approval and will be arriving on people’s dinner plates by the end of the decade.   I write this report with a certain degree of solemnity, if not also a tinge of regret, because I knew this was coming three years ago when I first stumbled upon a paper authored by Monsanto's resereachers on RNA interference, and when, perhaps, there was still much more time to do something about it.  It was actually the late Heidi Stevenson, my friend, colleague, and founder of the platform Gaia Health, who first alerted me to the dangers of RNA interference-based tinkering with our food supply when she reported on the near disasterous approval of GMO wheat using RNA interference technology in Australia. Thankfully a few brave scientists and informed public stood up and, together, averted the disaster. But since then, both the dangers and the breakneck speed of development of this technology have gone largely ignored, even among activists deep in the non-GMO movement. In order to truly appreciate the gravity of the situation, and why the EPA's approval of RNAi corn intended for human consumption, is so concerning, it will first require a little background information on the fascinating topic of non-coding small RNAs, and their formidable relevance to our health.    How Non-Coding, Small RNAs Link Together The Entire Biosphere One of the most important...
07-09 2017

This website is for information purposes only. By providing the information contained herein we are not diagnosing, treating, curing, mitigating, or preventing any type of disease or medical condition. Before beginning any type of natural, integrative or conventional treatment regimen, it is advisable to seek the advice of a licensed healthcare professional.

© Copyright 2008-2024 GreenMedInfo.com, Journal Articles copyright of original owners, MeSH copyright NLM.