Dr. Michael Antoniou of King’s College London School of Medicine in the UK is one author of a recent paper presented by Responsible Technology. Dr. Antoniou uses genetic engineering for medical applications, but he warns against its use in developing crops for human food and animal feed. Why exactly does Antoniou believe GM crops are unsafe?
Biotech shills with lesser integrity than Antoniou tell us that genetic engineering is the same as the natural breeding process in plants. This is precisely untrue. Genetic engineering differs from the natural process of plant breeding in that tissue culture processes are imprecise and highly mutagenic, leading to unpredictable changes in the plants DNA, proteins, and biochemical composition.
This results in many GMO crops that have unexpected toxic or allergenic effects (such as being chelators for major minerals in the soil and plants that our bodies really need). But nutritional disturbances in GM plants are the smallest of the problems they create.
Moreover, as Antoniou explains, any plant developed with transgenic or cisgenic methods are highly dangerous. As is, radiation induced mutation breeding (another method of biotech) which also allows for mutagenic changes that are unexpected, and often unwanted.
When a geneticist tries to create a GM food, they start with a tissue culture from a plant that contains hundreds of thousands of plant cells. Some pick up the GM genes and carry them to their progeny, and others do not. The culture is then treated with chemicals to make the plant eliminate all the cells except those with the GM traits.
You might surmise how this could be extremely dangerous as it causes GM plants to be self-destroying. In the final genetic engineering process, the plants final cells are treated with hormones to stimulate the GM plant cells and cause them to proliferate, thus changing the plant from its original form to one that can be patented by biotech companies.
If you continue this process into the food chain – all the way into human anatomy – then you have a real problem. You are what you eat, after all. Is it any wonder we see GM foods and their pesticide-counterparts causing cancer – which is basically a process of the body attacking itself?
How then, can ‘scientists’ who promote GE food (biotech puppets) claim that gene transfer is neither unnatural or dangerous?
Michael Eisen states, for example:
“The most striking thing about the GMO debate is the extent to which it contrasts ‘unnatural’ GMOs against “natural” traditional agriculture, and the way that anti-GMO campaigners equate ‘natural’ with ‘safe and good’ . . .
The problem with the unnatural/natural contrast is not that it’s a mischaracterization of GMOs – they are unnatural in the strict sense of not occurring in Nature – rather that it is a frighteningly naïve view of traditional agriculture.
Far from being natural, the transformation of wild plants and animals into the foods we eat today is – by far – the single most dramatic experiment in genetic engineering the human species has undertaken. Few of the species we eat today look anything like their wild counterparts, the result of thousands of years of largely willful selective breeding to optimize these organisms for agriculture and human consumption. And, in the past few years, as we have begun to characterize the genetic makeup of crops and farm animals, we are getting a clear picture of the extent to which traditional agricultural practices have transformed their DNA.”
What this and other writers in support of GM foods fail to mention is what geneticist Dr. Antoniou explains fully. In an open letter to Dr. Megan Clark, Chief Executive of CSIRO, he opposed human trials to test the efficacy of genetically engineered wheat to give a lower glycemic index (wheat is known for spiking blood sugar levels and therefore induces sugar cravings).
“There is a large body of evidence that shows that GM crop / food production is highly prone to inadvertent and unpredictable pleiotropic [producing more than one] effects, which can result in health damaging effects when GM food products are fed to animals.” He cited research by multiple scientists to support this claim. “How long has science been aware of the concept of pleiotropic effects and how is an assessment of potential pleiotropic effects incorporated into the regulatory approval process?”
Additionally, he explains:
“Research studies show that genetically modified crops have harmful effects on laboratory animals in feeding trials and on the environment during cultivation. They have increased the use of pesticides and have failed to increase yields. Our report concludes that there are safer and more effective alternatives to meeting the world’s food needs.”
Dr. Antoniou’s opinions are supported by another author of the report who is a former genetic engineer.
Dr. John Fagan, a former genetic engineer, returned $614,000 in grant money to the National Institutes of Health in 1994 due to concerns about the safety and ethics of the technology. He later founded a GMO testing company in order to test the outrageous claims that many biotech companies were making.
If a geneticist and molecular biologist have serious issues with GMOs – shouldn’t we at least be questioning whether or not these altered foods should be in the global food supply?
One of the most often used disinformation tactics of Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta, etc is to say that non-GMO activists have no science to back up their claims. They also like to attack people who are highly educated but don’t hold degrees in the field of genetic engineering.
Nevermind that any person with a fourth grade education can read about the links between GM crops and cancer, reproductive issues, bowel disorders, organ failure, and more. Monsanto and its supporters also like to misinform by discounting personal accounts of health issues from eating GMOs or being exposed to GM pesticides and herbicides, along with the accounts of improved health once exposure to GM foods was eliminated.
To these propagandists I ask – what of the remarks of Dr. Antoniou, Dr. Fagan, or of millions of health professionals who recently urged for GMOs to at least be labeled? Arguments that there is no science, and no professional opinion behind the ideas of banning or labeling GMOs are wearing thin.
28 thoughts on “Leading Geneticist: ‘Health Damaging Effects’ of GMOs Unpredictable”
After twenty years with zero issues they are unpredictable? Please can’t you come up with a better lie than that?
Lol! Internet troll detected.
“Biotech shills with lesser integrity “
Ah, there’s GMO Roberts! You realize you never did cite a scientific study in which bt-toxin was proven to be safe for human consumption. All you did was link to a website that had plenty of studies EXCEPT those for bt-toxin. Once again, I urge you to provide a direct link to the study that proves bt-toxin is safe for human consumption.
Yah, yah…I know…. Those weren’t human studies. I’ll save you some time. You don’t do toxicity studies on humans. You do them on animals.
I provided 4 seperate links, one to a meta-analisys of many feeding studies. But it appears that the moderators have pulled it.
Suffice to say…you’re a little late to the game here. The safety of Bt crops has been a dead issue for quite a while now. You’re going to have to find another boogie man.
You yourself is a psychopath, aren’t you little worm.
What better lie? Have you heard of GMOs produce Bt toxins, can do harms on health of human’s and animal’s gut/intestines?
so what is a long time? The first roundup corn was released in 1996. They went to market immediately, especially through livestock production. If you believe your bt statement then you really don’t know much about bt or the digestive systems of mammals then do you.
Oh really, prove that to me. Bt is stand for Bacillus Thuringiensis. GMOs are BT crops, it produce toxins that kills insects, larvae, and worms.., GMO corn have been designed to produce its own insecticides, a same chemical, to wipe out/kill off the essential bacteria (Flora) in intestines, and it disable the body’s immune system. GMO corn is not a real corn, it is MIR162 that kills insects, worms, larvae, and ect…. MIR162 sold as corn, but not a natural corn. You are wrong about GMOs introduce in the markets in 1996, because it was an experimental but it has not got approval by the government yet, until just recently, it has reported on the news that these GMO corns is finally brought in the food market about five years ago or more, then came GMO sugar beets, papaya, and oranges….., That is why cattle having problem with GMOs feeds. Look for and search: Bacillus Thuringiensis, Mr. GMO Roberts
Natural corn!? You’re priceless. There is no such thing!
That’s right, there is no such thing as GMO corn is safe and natural corn!
Do you actually read anything you type? Gmos can be bt but they do not have to be. You can buy roundup ready corn without any insect protection. Second, bt is not a chemical that the plant produces as you falsely claim. It is a simple protein that already occurs in nature. The insects are unable to digest this protein with their simple digestive systems. It has zero effect on the more complex systems of mammals. As far as when gmo corn came to be, that is a simple matter of record that you obviously can’t locate. I know, because I happen to be a seed dealer. It wasn’t very popular at first, we sold much more clear field corn instead, but that system soon ran its course and the roundup corn won out. From the very beginning though it went to livestock and has done so without a single issue. If there was issues it would be easily found because with 90+ percent of the feed being gmos the problems would be massive instead there are NONE. The only problem is with people like you spreading lies. My only question is why? Is it because you listen to lies and pass them on? Or is it to make you feel better about over paying for organic?
It’s you are spreading lies, Mr. Robert, that is why you are disinfo agent for Monsanto. I have a friend who happen to have gastrointestinal disorder from eating GMO foods, like corns that he’s been consuming it. So I haven’t bought any of those GMOs foods and non-organic foods, and that is why I am feel fine and very healthy. I haven’t gone to the doctors for many years, and I have been using natural foods and remedies as part of my longevity. The reason the organic foods is cost a little more, because these certified organic labels is cost in fees, and Kosher tax were added, too. It’s not the organic foods itself is cost higher. The USDA charge a fee for a certified organic labels. When I bought some certified organic cereals, I notice they even charge kosher tax on them, too. That’s makes it cost little higher.
Except of course there is no reliable evidence to support any of these concerns. None. And there’s this thing called back crossing that can be done to easily remove any unwanted mutations that may have been introduced during the introduction of transgenes. Believe an article by Christina Sarich is an exercise in wilful ignorance.
Oh really? Have you heard of GMOs produce Bt and what it does to the human’s and animal’s intestines and/or gut? You are the one is willful ignorant. Cristina is the truth Journalist and reporting on what the experts are saying about the danger of GMOs. You are the one who is bashing the truther, because you don’t have any MANNER.
First, not all GMOs produce Bt endotoxin. Second, show me evidence that Bt endotoxin is harmful to humans or animals in the concentrations found in the GM plants that produce it. You want to take about ignorance, why don’t you start by showing me some evidence to prove that you are not ignorant?
Are you that stupid to see these young people are problem with gastrointestinal disorder from eating GMOs foods? It kills these good bacterias and leaves bad ones to cause infections or inflammation in their guts, intestines, and it lead to cancers, enough said. Bt = Bacillus Thuringiensis, look at it up, if you care enough to see the what is can do to these human’s and animal’s guts/intestines, because it kills of these insects, worms, larvae,…ects. It sure can kills good bacterias, too. Search: Bacillus thuringiensis. It is a common sense.
Yes it has to be the gmos, it can’t be lack of exercise and junk food can it.
Not exactly, junk is not a healthy food, that is why it’s called a junk food.
Junk food is the same no matter what it is made of. If gmos go away, junk food won’t and it will still be just as unhealthy. As far as exercise? You can have a bad diet and great exercise and survive much better than a great diet and no exercise. The key to life is to stay active. There is no magic diet.
it is way bigger JUNK when it has toxic gmo/round up in it.
So yeah, as usual no evidence. Just a bunch of angry words.
You’re a retard to see the evidence.
“Are you aware of GMOs produce Bt toxins…..”
That was priceless.
Bill Gates Connection with Chemtrails & Monsanto
we are the lab rats. thanks to the free pass the fda mon satan connection.
Well, from reading these studies I posted, it appears as if the lab rats were the lab rats.