Featured in a 300-plus photographic showcase in the annual exhibit of the Argentine Photojournalists Association (Argra) is an image of Lucas Techeira that is haunting. The child shows on his skin just how devastating the spraying of glyphosate on the world’s crops can be. I challenge you to visit this pictorial and not be concerned of pesticides on our food.
Though it is difficult to even know which of our foods contain GMOs since Monsanto and other biotech companies consistently block GMO labeling efforts, the sordid story presented in these pictures really ‘speaks’ to the issue in ways that the written word cannot.
A photography critic for the Financial Times, Jurist Francis Hodgson, says this of the showcase:
“It’s a horrific story of great importance to us all, very properly and very well told. The pictures are structured and built with harmonic proportions, an outer respect for the subject matter, and all of those old virtues about tones, and colors, and balance, absolutely nicely held.”
Aside from the artistic and technical acumen presented in these photographs, they show in the plain light of day what toxic chemicals are doing to our children.
The image of Lucas Techeira — a three-year old boy from Misiones with a skin disease reportedly caused by his mother being exposed to glyphosate during the pregnancy — won’t leave your mind after viewing it. It makes you ask yourself how we’ve allowed the corporations who spray these chemicals to get away with such clear torture of the human genome and spirit.
This photo was selected to be included in the exhibit from a total of 3000 submissions, not all of which were about a topic as controversial as the use of glyphosate on our crops.
The photograph submitted by the Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo head Estela Barnes de Carlotto hugging her grandson Guido Montoya Carlotto was chosen.
Read: Argentina Doctors Demand that Glyphosate be Banned
Techeira’s picture, included on the catalogue’s back cover, was taken by Página/12 photojournalist Pablo Piovano, who published a photo essay called The Human Cost of Agrotoxins after touring many of the provinces Argentina where these chemicals are regularly used in agriculture.
The declaration of the World Health Organization (WHO) that glyphosate is a ‘probable carcinogen’ has helped in making aware the biological warfare that biotech has unleashed on the planet, but we need more. The herbicide is currently used on more than 28 million hectares in Argentina, and similar levels can be found in other countries, including the US.
Something is seriously wrong with regulators and Congressmen and women that would allow the massive use of glyphosate to continue.
Once again Chrissy only tells half the truth. Yes this woman was exposed to glyphosate, but it wasn’t thru food or from other people spraying, it was her using it by her own admission. If one looks at the label there are precautions and safe handling instructions on there for a reason. Also if you look at the who report closely it clearly states that the only ones in danger are the farm workers not the end consumers on glyphosate. Wha they did answer was how much danger exists if all the precautions are actually followed.
so just farmers and farm workers and thats okay///// wow… they have been poisoning us since the early 1960 if not earlier and we are safe>.. NOT ON YOUR LIFE
I work with these chemicals on a daily basis and have for thirty years. I’m fine with the risks, but you need to use the proper precautions.
proper precautions, ,,,,,lol,,,,says the guy who has a tree and an arm growing out of his head,,, THANKS GMO ROBERTS BUT NOT THANKS
No need to say thanks as long as you remember that it is those of us in farming that keep food on your table.
If it’s so safe, label it.
what are you going to label? Gmo? Non gmo has even more chemicals used on it and nutritionally all of them including organic are the same.
Sitting in Monsanto’s press office writing and trolling, is not the same as “work with these chemicals on a daily basis and have for thirty years.”.
But if it makes you feel proud, go ahead.
Sorry, never been to anything Monsanto, don’t even really like them and don’t even sell any of their chemicals. Thanks for playing though.
I don’t consider GMOs “food”. Food is that which nourishes. It is absolutely false that food grown in depleted soils with lots of chemicals are as nutritious as organic food. There are many independent studies that show this. GMOs are products of the rape of the genome with all the implied toxicity that the word “rape” implies….and all the short term, self serving studies foisted on us by the biotech industry are just irresponsible efforts to distract us from the potential dangers of GMOs.
Yes and how many samples have you personally sent off for testing? You are basing your whole theories on lies told to you on websites like this one.
Even just common sense dictates that the quality of the soil and chemicals used in cultivation of an organic substance like food would have a significant effect on the quality of the end product. But i have read many articles verifying this notion. And..btw…all i have to do is compare the produce from my home, organic garden with what is offered in the large chain grocery stores/ You can see the differnece right away. much less wait for the experience of eating both. As for GMOs….we have no business mucking with the genome of a plant for edible food. The experts in this field have no comprehensive understanding of this incredibly complex level of nature. They are continually finding out new things ab out the dynamics at work there which begs the question…”what are they missing”. I trust the intelligence of nature (not the human intellect) to maintain the integrity of the plants such that they are suitable to cultivate and consume.
Man has been altering his food for thousands of years and now he is still doing it just in different ways. Thanks for admitting that you have never done any testing on food, for myself I have sent in thousands of silage and grain samples for my customers over the years to many different labs and they all have come back statistically similar, gmo or not.
If you compare conventional selective breeding to modern genetic engineering by direct insertion of genetic material into the genome then you have no credibility whatsoever. This myth propagated by GMO advocates is ridiculous. It’s like saying consensual sex is no different than rape. I offer this analogy because Nature would never allow the changes that GE accomplishes by forcing foreign genetic material directly into the genome. This method bypasses uncountable levels of nature’s intelligence which maintains the integrity of an organism….the delicate balance among the innumerable variables which make the organism and it’s relationship with the environment. Without the comprehensive intelligence of nature changes made at the level of the genome through modern GE create organisms that are very, very potentially dangerous to the integrity of then environment and toxic to our health. These “scientists” who have a vested interest in the economic vialbility of these monstrous creations play with these organisms like their DNA were tinker toys…..children with no respect for nature…..who ignore their own limitations. It’s madness…utter madness.
Do you ever think these things through? If roundup ready corn could never have happened in nature then how did we get roundup resistant weeds? Is there some mad scientist out there creating them? LOL, your arguments just continue to make no sense.
Round up resistant weeds are nature’s own reaction to the machinations of the use (and overuse) of Roundup and the creation of GMO crops. Their existence is irrelevant to the arguments against the viability of humanly engineered GMOs. There is no reasonable logic in your last statement. Nature will always react to changes in the environment. GMO corn is solely a product of direct insertion of foreign genetic material into a genome. The weeds created by nature in reaction to this is, if anything, evidence that the human intellect is incapable of anticipating the changes in nature that occur when you muck around with genomes. I’m surprised you even bring it up…i’ve never seen such an argument raised.
If nature can make the weeds it “could” have done the same for the corn. Nature never invented things like seedless watermelons either, but you are whining about them or how they are even able to be labeled organic.
Well…..nature never did, in thousands of years, create a corn the same as GEd corn…did it? And, i would aver, that left to it’s own devices it never would…and, it never would have created Roundup resistant weeds with out the machinations of the biotech and ag chemical industry. You don’t seem to grasp (or, perhaps, accept) the notion that conventional selective breeding of things like seedless watermelon leaves nature’s intelligence intact enough to produce safe to consume produce as opposed to bypassing many levels of this intelligence through modern GE…so, i think, we are at an impasse, as in good luck.
“conventional selective breeding of things like seedless watermelon”? once again you prove that you have no concept of what you are talking about. Why don’t you look up mutation breeding and see how man has been changing nature long before anyone heard of gmos.
Maybe this will help you understand…….
As we move into the summer fruit season and enjoy juicy grapes and luscious watermelon (seedless fruits) it’s important to understand the difference between traditional breeding and genetic modification. Just because a watermelon or grape is seedless does not make it a genetically engineered product!
Our Director of Marketing, Simcha Weinstein, who has written about GMO’s both on our blog and through the Organic College, says it well when he writes “Traditional breeding typically occurs within the natural boundaries of nature. For example, tomatoes may cross-pollinate with other tomatoes, but not with rice, or with flounder. Pigs will mate with other pigs, but not with cows. Genetic engineering crosses genes between unrelated species that would never naturally cross-breed in nature. Natural reproduction or breeding can only occur between closely related forms of life.”
This is a very important distinction. Careful breeding of plants to yield desired results, such as small seeds or bigger fruits, has been done since the dawn of agriculture. Seedless oranges and seedless grapes, for example, are the result of cultivating naturally occurring seedless plants. The navel orange is descended from a seedless orange tree found on a plantation in Brazil in the nineteenth century. This tree was a mutation, that is, something in its genetic material had spontaneously changed, resulting in this unique plant. Orange growers propagated new trees from the original navel, so that all the navel oranges available in markets today are descended from that Brazilian tree. This is how plant breeding works.
Genetic Modification, on the other hand, involves taking genes from one species and inserting them into another. For example, genes from an arctic flounder (which obviously are resistant to cold temperatures) may be spliced into a tomato to prevent frost damage, allowing yields later into the season. Organic fruits and vegetables CANNOT be raised using genetic modification! it eating of the year. Enjoy the season and eat lots of organic seedless fruit.
LOL, I understand now. I ask you about seedless watermelons and you reply with grapes and oranges. You can’t stay on a simple subject so let’s see if this sinks in. Seedless watermelons are created using colchicine. Colchicine changes the chromosome number in the seeds from 2 to 4. After which, the seeds are pollinated with the natural 2 chromosome watermelon. The product – a genetically modified watermelon with 3 chromosomes. Not hardly what nature would have come up with now is it?
But let’s play your game and switch fruits. The rio ruby grapefruit was selectively created in a LAB thanks to radiation. Strange how both of these “unnatural” products can be called organic.
The facts are out there you just have to want to find them instead of trying to mislead people.
In general, i agree that the hybrids created by conventional methods would not likely occur without human intervention. However, the main point which you “can’t stay on” as you say…is that modern GE methods bypass innumerable levels of nature’s intelligence by directly …AGAIN DIRECTLY modifying genetic material in the genome. Your example above regarding chochcine use in breeding seedless watermelons, while it does introduce a step that nature, left to it’s own devices, would not accomplish….leaves the genetic material intact. Yes, the number of chromosomes may change but their integrity is left intact. Whether the product is “organic” or not…well perhaps not. But, i can live with that. I can’t live with direct manipulation of genomes in food. The larger picture is this…..Humans alter their environment in many different ways, for reasons that go beyond the scope of this discussion. The point is that these manipulations have effects on the environment and ultimately our well being in a number and scope of ways that have proven to be unpredictable and surprisingly harmful (assuming the initiators of these changes had no vision of their polluting innovations). To my mind, we can, to some degree, for a certain amount of time tolerate these effects and then we need to take remedial measures to try and bring things back in balance….a difficult, if not impossible task…but, hopefully, with many of these issues we can live with this futile balancing act. I…and the millions of people who share my perspective (which includes many, many experts in the field of genetics, microbiology, etc.) consider the methods of modern GE directly altering the DNA in genomes in foods (and many other applications, ESPECIALLY when it effects the reproductive cells) as a very, very (i can’t type enough “verys”) dangerous activity that will, ultimately have disastrous, and perhaps, irreversible toxic influences. If you want to split hairs relative to this issue…go ahead, but you miss the point.
LOL, I didn’t miss your point. Your scared and are living in a fantasy world to think it is causing the problems you describe. Your many many many experts are about ten percent or less of the scientists, while 88% have concluded that there is no harm in the current gmos. If you don’t like them then buy organic, that is why it is there.
This, recently, from the most prestigious U.S. medical journal…..about a related matter regarding the cultivation of GMOs.
(i guess they’re unreasonably paranoid also…)
A recent article published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) calls on lawmakers to label genetically modified foods.
The authors begin by pointing out the well-established fact that genetic modifications to make plants resistant to herbicides and pesticides have tremendously increased the amount of toxic chemicals dumped on crops. Between 1974 and 2014, glyphosate use alone has increased by a factor of more than 250.
This stands to become much worse. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decided in 2014 to approve Enlist Duo, a new herbicide made by Dow Chemical that combines glyphosate and 2,4-D. This will lead to substantially more chemicals in our food: according to the EPA’s own projections, 2,4-D use will increase by as much as seven times as a result. (You can read our coverage of the new generation of combination herbicides here.)
The authors point out what many of us have realized for a long time: these are very nasty chemicals.2,4-D is an ingredient in what used to be called Agent Orange when used in the Vietnam War. The World Health Organization’s ultra-cautious International Agency for Research on Cancer recently classified 2,4-D as a “possible human carcinogen” and glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen.” Both herbicides were linked to increases in malignant tumors at multiple sites in animals. Glyphosate was also linked to an increased incidence of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in humans.
These new developments cause the authors to conclude, “The time has therefore come to thoroughly reconsider all aspects of the safety of plant biotechnology….We believe the time has come to revisit the United States’ reluctance to label GM foods.”
This is not only a bold statement coming from an article in the NEJM. It is also a brave one. NEJM, like other medical journals, is highly dependent on industry for financial support. This shows that the editors still have a measure of independence.
Again you are off target. You claim gmos are bad, then you quote an article about the danger of ag chemicals. Some gmos REPLACE chemicals. Thanks to Bt corn insecticide usage has plummeted. Some gmos like the gmo papaya makes the plant resistant to certain diseases, which can help to reduce fungicide applications. Some gmos affect the plant’s nutritional value such as golden rice. Others can alter the product such as the new gmo apple that won’t turn brown when sliced. As for your chemical analysis you forgot to mention all the chemicals that glyphosate has replaced, and how much more dangerous those others were. As for 2, 4 – D you were correct that it was part of agent orange, but as usual you left out the fact that the other component (2, 4, 5 – T) was found to be the deadly one. This is evident as even the who classified 2,4-D as less of a threat than glyphosate. Even for glyphosate the who said the danger was for the people that handled the actual product daily, not the end consumer.
Good for you Bobo, you found another pigeon. ROTFLMFAO Now I don’t feel alone!
BTW tell me more about uncle Herman!!
Don’t worry no one could ever replace you.
Uh oh…two whole countries exhibiting paranoid behavior…..mmmmm
Germany joins Scotland in seeking ban on gene-modified seeds
by Stefan Nicola
Bloomberg, 25 Aug 2015
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-25/germany-joins-scotland-in-seeking-ban-on-gene-modified-seeds
* German opposition to GMO “comes from all sides”, ministry says
* Gene-modified seeds are already mostly banned in the EU
Germany is taking steps to outlaw the cultivation of genetically modified crops in Europe’s biggest economy.
The Agriculture Ministry plans to officially request that producers of GMOs exclude Germany when applying to sell seeds in European Union, Christian Fronczak, a spokesman for the ministry, said Tuesday. Scotland took similar measures earlier this month.
“The German government is clear in that it seeks a nationwide cultivation ban,” Fronczak said by phone from Berlin. “There’s resistance from all sides, from the public to the farmers.”
Germany is taking advantage of new measures allowing countries to opt out of growing gene-modified crops. Switzerland’s Syngenta AG and U.S. rival Monsanto Co. have been among the strongest proponents of the seeds, which are mostly banned in the EU because of what some say are uncertain environmental and health effects. Monsanto maintains the products are safe.
The Agriculture Ministry has asked for the backing of state ministries in a letter sent in the past few days, Fronczak said. Germany gave state governments a deadline until Sept. 11 to reply. If it doesn’t hear any objections from the states, it will ask that companies exclude Germany from their applications to sell GMO seeds, Fronczak said.
There is one genetically modified crop, a variety of corn designed to be pest-resistant, already grown in the EU and eight pending applications for GMO seeds, according to an April statement from the European Commission.
Colchicine is a pharmaceutical used in treating gout, pseudo-gout arthritis, etc. There are definite side effects in the use of colchicine as a pharmaceutical–I should know as I have been treated using colchicine for pseudo-gout arthritis. So, now I learn that colchicine, which caused horrific side effects for me, is an ingredient used in genetic modification. Gawd, we are screwed!
You’re not keeping what you call food and I call by science and fact toxins on my table! Thanks? Thank GOD for judgement.
No one ever said you had to have it on your table.
Bottom line is this, science has always failed when it attempts to play Mother Nature, research it, their failings are guaranteed.
Mother Nature cannot be replaced by a laboratory.
LOL, man has been replacing it for over 10,000 years and putting it on their tables.
man not nature.
Nature never infused rat dung into a plants genes for the good of all and just to see what would happen, lol.
Scientists also warned all of genetic manipulation and introduction into nature, again the profiteers ignored their counterparts warning.
Face it, the scientific community is forced to comply with their master wishes, or else.
Question, question and question more, demand answers!!
Nature didn’t create almost everything we have today, man did. Questions are fine, but they become useless when they have already been answered and a consensus among the experts have been reached. Then you are just childishly trying to delay progress.
BS and dribble.
there are no experts, because their history is filled with failure. Your experts are bulls in china cabinets.
Your experts created success from theory’s, most only conducted the experiments to prove their theory’s. It is a well known fact the experts within the scientific community will ruin any who oppose them. They are guided by the all mighty dollar, because of recognition and funding. The true experts are the concerned voices within the communities. All you can do is attempt to turn any conversation around to make the folks asking questions appear as the fools.
The children are dying and they are our future,
.What is the experts take on that?
The sad part is there are a lot of children dying — of hunger and people like you continue to waste time, money, and resources on stupid things like this. Just imagine if you would actually put all those wasted resources into a real cause. That would be a good thing.
Why are there people starving?
You stated “people like me”
Please explain people like me, your wisdom is needed.
Why is the future and health of the people stupid?
My cause is the People and their communities, to inform them and ensure they are able to exist within the rights they have. They communities and the land belongs to them, therefore then need knowledge to manage them as they see fit.
GMO’s should be researched and a time evaluated study should be conducted, to ensure the safety when introduced into the environment.
The People have a right to demand that, don’t they?
Turn it around on me again, I’m just a concerned citizen exercising my rights.
All of your studies have been done time and again all around the world, and with the same results, they are safe. They have been in the food chain now for twenty years without problems, again they are safe. You just choose not to believe.
You just choose not to believe.
You mean blind faith?
I’m sure you would call twenty years of use with thousands of safety tests all with zero issues blind faith. At least I have faith in something, while you are just an empty container believing in nothing.
Yes twenty years of blind faith.
Remember the 70’s scientists warning the People about GMO’s and the possible dire consequences of releasing them into nature with out extensive research and controlled studies, their faithful community ignored them and silenced their concerns, Why?
The land comes first and foremost, environmental stewardship.
The communities are the key in maintaining their land. They need to be rallied and educated, Which will allow them to provide for themselves far into the future.
I have done thousands of safety tests and always found new and relevant issues as we progress with technology and unproven methods.
These things need to be constantly studied and researched.
One of the major failings in research and environmental stewardship that has been determined is the human error factor.
Yes, land and environment. Thanks to gmos we have reduced those harmful chemicals that damage both. Thanks for agreeing that gmos are good there lumpy.
You said GMO’s are good, I didn’t, don’t put words into my mouth seed seller. Proper farming doesn’t use chemicals, that is just attributed to the ongoing attempts to make farming easier for greater profit. Real farming is and always has been labor intensive.
There was a time before chemicals, They need to be seriously retrained and adhered to, pandora’s box need not be opened, GMO’s aren’t needed or necessary, working with nature is the key.
Your referring to experts is annoying, without providing any documentation of these unknown experts. I know as monsanto, you all aren’t responsible for research, only stating that it’s there.
Can farming be done your way? Sure it use to be, but now instead of wanting to work, people would rather be like you and run their mouths. You also seem to make it clear that food should only be for the rich since under your system prices would skyrocket. It is a shame you claim to fight for people, but only the elite? Are you a liar or just ignorant?
Can farming be done your way?
Yes the Amish are doing it everyday.
people would rather be like you and run their mouths.
People have the right to run their mouths, your doing it. You have the right, but I don’t? Couldn’t that be considered a form of tyranny and oppression, elitist?
Your better than everyone else?
You also seem to make it clear that food should only be for the rich since under your system prices would skyrocket.
From a legal stand point, the burden of proof is on the accuser, which means you need to prove this statement.
It is a shame you claim to fight for people, but only the elite? Are you a liar or just ignorant?
This statement is just beyond any form of reasonable logic, I haven’t a clue where you got this thought. I’m baffled here beyond response.
I can easily see your baffled on most things. As I told you I have many Amish customers and they readily use gmos, in both feeding and planting. The also seem to like to buy chemicals and apply them as well so yes you are correct t they are already doing this, farming by today’s methods that is.
Next, you run your mouth to spread lies and hurt people, all the while not being at all productive. You may have that right, but one day God will ask why you didn’t do anything constructive.
As far as skyrocketing prices if could could only use a little common sense it wouldn’t be that hard to figure out, but alas that is beyond you.
It’s ok, I understand now.
Thanks GMO Roberts.
Never forget that to an expert in a
completely different field, you are the public.
I’ll just keep my seeds and grow my own!! BTW when did ewe start farming??? I thought you were just a salesman?
I think you should grow your own food if that is your desire. I didn’t say I was a farmer. Farmers could produce a crop without local suppliers like myself and I wouldn’t have a job without them, same as with my suppliers. All of us are in agriculture (farming), but only some are actually farmers.
It’s not worth the risk to me. Unexpected hings happen. Things go wrong. Things break. Some things are defective. Too many variables. It’s just not worth the risk when there are more effective ways to cultivate truly natural and organic crops.
A few questions if I may! Did you know we can fit the world population comfortably into an area the size of Texas? Did you know the world population can be sustained primarily by hemp as an energy, food, and raw material source? Did you know the hemp prohibition creates the false doctrines of scarcity and resource shortages?
If it isn’t worth the risk to you then fine don’t do it, but leave the rest of us alone that have known this way of life and accept it. There are risks to everything.
You didn’t answer my questions!
And, the smart person minimizes all unnecessary risks.
And, NO! You to not have the right to experiment upon me or humanity with known toxins and substances of unknown outcome. That thinking is utterly…self-aggrandizing greed and genocidal mania. No. NO! You don’t have the right to risk my life with your experiments for profit.
Gmos are not toxic so you are wrong again. No one is forcing it on you if you don’t want them, then buy organic, that’s why it exists.
Hey Bobo, you here about the blue and black sun coming Sept. or is it Oct. 15???? BTW I check out the comments Mary!!
GMOs, Herbicides, and Public Health
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1505660#t=comments
It’s impossible to get a man to understand something when his livelihood depends on his not understanding.