Prediction: New Monsanto-Backed Study to Find GMOs ‘Perfectly Safe’
Will people fall for it?
Latest News
As the public awakens to the true reality of GMOs and the disease-breeding practices of biotech juggernaut Monsanto, billions stand to be lost with the culmination of GMO labeling initiatives across the United States and abroad. And with such a large amount of money at risk, some investors and executives will resort to any measures necessary in order to secure their stake.
That’s why I’m predicting that we are not too far off from corporations like Monsanto and agricultural lobby groups coming together and funding a massive ‘study’ that ‘scientifically proves’ GMOs to be ‘completely safe.’ A ‘scientific study’ that is backed by millions in PR, hitting the mainstream media like a tidal wave of bought and paid for false conclusions.
And trust me, it’s not hard to release a study that is completely false.
Its been well known for years that even many well-intentioned scientific studies turn out to be completely wrong, oftentimes for a number of different reasons. That’s why it’s always important to think for yourself and use basic reason when it comes to so many different health topics, using studies as a guide, but never your ultimate resource.
But let’s go beyond the basic possibility of mistake, and enter the realm of direct scientific manipulation.
How Phony Study Will Claim GMOs Are ‘Completely Safe’
I believe that this coming ‘mega GMO study’ will be fashioned in a very similar way to the latest attack ‘study’ on organic food — which was torn apart so hard by experts that it led to retractions from media organizations. This study, which boasted ‘Little evidence of health benefits from organic foods, study finds’ on the Stanford website, was a perfect example of warping statistics in order to favor a pre-determined outcome.
As we found out back in 2012 when the anti-organic study came out, top researchers are very good at this statistical manipulation practice. In fact, the anti-organic study actually utilized the ‘father of statistical lies’ in order to reach the conclusion that organics were the ‘same’ as conventional products when it comes to nutrition.
The study’s author, Ingram Olkin, actually worked closely with Stanford University to develop a “multivariate” statistical algorithm in order to ‘lie with statistics.’
As one page describes it: “Obviously, if one chooses convenient mathematical functions, the result may not conform to reality.”
Because, after all, studies sometimes aren’t about conforming to reality. Instead, they’re quite often about conforming to the goals of those who fund them — whether for the right or wrong reasons. And in the case of the coming pro-GMO study that will surely invoke a similar media hype to the anti-organics story, the motive is clear.
While I certainly hope that this prediction is incorrect, or at the very least that the public and even media outlets disregard the coming study as Monsanto-backed falsification, I do believe that it is coming. And I do believe that Monsanto and pals will ensure that their names are not directly tied to the support of the study — pushing the research as an ‘independent look’ at the safety of GMOs.
This looks like the only possible way to salvage Monsanto’s foothold on the food supply and make us all look like ‘anti-science’ lunatics for ever rejecting GMO-laden products. And with the World Health Organization agreeing that Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide is probably causing cancer, it will be that much harder for the company to dig itself out of the public backlash.
Do you think people will fall for the coming Monsanto-backed GMO ‘safety’ study?
 | Natural Society staff contribution |
That’s why I’m predicting that we are not too far off from corporations like Monsanto and agricultural lobby groups coming together and funding a massive ‘study’ that ‘scientifically proves’ GMOs to be ‘completely safe.
What a completely pointless thing to say. I doubt such a study will happen because STUDIES HAVE ALREADY BEEN DONE. But you wouldn’t know anything about that, would you Anthony? No, it’s difficult to maintain your lack of comprehension while simultaneously actually reading scientific papers. This prophecy of yours just allows you to keep on your message.
…it’s always important to think for yourself and use basic reason when it comes to so many different health topics…
Right. And by telling people to “think for yourself”, what you actually mean is read my blog and blindly accept what I say.
Case in point, studies sometimes aren’t about conforming to reality. Instead, they’re quite often about conforming to the goals of those who fund them. You just told people to think for themselves, but then do a 180 and tell them that studies can’t be trusted. Opps, my mistake, all the studies that disagree with Anthony’s point of view can’t be trusted. Any study showing organic farming, for example, is the solution to all our agricultural problems is to be accepted without question. Obviously.
While I certainly hope that this prediction is incorrect…
BS. No you don’t. You hope that industry does produce just such a study so that you can proclaim yourself a prophet.
I do believe that Monsanto and pals will ensure that their names are not directly tied to the support of the study — pushing the research as an ‘independent look’ at the safety of GMOs.
That’s a nice little qualifier to add at the end. This will allow you to reject any studies not critical of GMOs as being surreptitiously funded by “Monsanto and pals”, even if you can’t directly tie them to the study.
make us all look like ‘anti-science’ lunatics for ever rejecting GMO-laden products
I don’t think you’re a lunatic Anthony. I think you know exactly what you’re doing, which is peddling pseudoscience and basic quackery to make a living because you have failed to build a respectable career in any other field.
Yes. Alot of people will fall for it as they still think that they should believe alot of top people. However a larger and larger proportion are finding out about the false truths relating to GMO. The taking over of Africa by the Corporate agri business is something that the African countries are finding it hard to fight because money is scarce , it does not take much to bribe politicians and others to back their wishes. Hugh Halliday.
Non-GMO corn offers far more nutrition without the poison, study shows
An eye-opening investigation conducted by Canada’s only supplier of
non-GMO corn seed has revealed that genetically modified “Frankencorn”
is severely lacking in a number of vital nutrients. Compared to non-GMO
corn varieties, Monsanto’s Roundup Ready corn contains only a small
fraction of the amount of calcium, iron, magnesium, zinc, copper,
manganese and carbon normally found in natural corn.
Shattering the myth that there’s no substantial difference between GMO
and non-GMO crops, the report by De Dell Seed Company of London,
Ontario, shows that GMO corn is nutritionally deficient and wholly unfit for human consumption.
In nearly every vitamin and mineral category tested, GMO corn was found
to contain only trace amounts of many key nutrients necessary for life.
According to the report, corn ears were selected from two adjacent corn
fields in Iowa — one growing Roundup Ready corn and the other growing
non-GMO corn. The corn ears were selected from multiple locations in
each field two weeks prior to harvest to get a proper sampling, and they
were then shelled from the cob and sent to a laboratory for testing.
When the results came back, researchers found that the Roundup Ready corn contained 13 parts per million (ppm) of glyphosate, the primary active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide that the WHO recently recognized[PDF]
as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” which is the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) established legal limit for this pesticide. The
non-GMO corn, on the other hand, contained no glyphosate.
“The EPA standards for glyphosate in water in America is .7ppm,”
explains Moms Across America. “European tests showed organ damage to
animals at .1ppb (.0001ppm) of glyphosate in water. Our water levels
allow glyphosate 7,000X higher than what has been shown to be toxic in
animals. This corn has 13 ppm! 130,000 times higher than what is toxic in water!” (emphasis added)
Similarly, the GMO corn samples were found to have higher pH levels, higher sodium content and significantly less natural phosphate, potassium, calcium and magnesium compared to the non-GMO corn. The “Brix” quality measurement of the GMO corn, which gauges sucrose content, was also found to be only one-twentieth of the Brix score for non-GMO corn.
In each of the following categories, non-GMO corn was found to have significantly higher nutrient levels:
Phosphate: more than 14 times higher in non-GMO corn
Potassium: more than 16 times higher
Calcium: more than 437 times higher
Magnesium: more than 56 times higher
The soils of the non-GMO corn were also found to be superior in terms of
their mineral content, presumably because they weren’t sprayed with
nutrient-robbing glyphosate, which draws out the vital nutrients of
living things:
The base saturation rates, which represent a measure of soil nutrient density, were also determined as follows:
Sulfur: 14 times higher in non-GMO corn
Manganese: 7 times higher
Iron: more than 7 times higher
Zinc: more than 6 times higher
Copper: more than 6 times higher
Cobalt: more than 7 times higher
Molybdenum: more than 7 times higher
Boron: more than 7 times higher
Carbon: 30 times higher
GMO corn also contains dangerously high levels of toxic formaldehyde
Meanwhile, the GMO corn was found to contain extremely high levels of
various chemicals, chlorides, glyphosate and even formaldehyde, which is
normally metabolized into carbon dioxide through a process that is
blocked by the spraying of glyphosate. Because glyphosate is a vital nutrient chelator,
meaning it pulls out nutrients from the plants on which it is sprayed,
experts believe the herbicide disrupts the normal enzymatic processes in
plants that would otherwise break down formaldehyde.
For discussion sake, let’s say we finally win the gmo battle? Who is going to rule over its implementation? The FDA…the USDA…WHO? I for one, don’t trust any federal, state agency. Nor any higher learning think tanks (colleges) to govern or say that any and all foods from that point would be safe or GMO free or pesticide free! Even if tomorrow every seed and toxic chemical being used to destroy are food was banished from the market, it would be years before the ground and water would be purified enough to go back to good proven large farming practices! The Real answer to future farming is returning to millions of local small farms growing food with better newer methods with old traditional methods. That is….if we are to survive.
But unfortunately, we have created a society that is so busy surviving, so tired and so ignorant about how to do anything, I am wary of even this taking place…..and even if it did, between Fukashima and our own ailing nuclear plants, the Gulf poisoning of our seafood, ( along with the west coast disaster that’s taking place, I hold no real hope out for a long future for this country unfortunately. And all this is just the tip of the iceberg….many real and worse things looking in the deep will eventually, ( probably sooner than later) come to fruition! Can you say, mega earthquakes, super tsunami’ s, the economic crash, the destruction of the power grid, the potential for large asteroids, to name a few.
When your focus remains on the faceted problems that surround the ” CORE” problem, you end up fighting a losing battle!
I agree! Every one in the gov. are bought and paid for whores!
END THE FED!!
I’m not disagreeing with you that it would be nice to return to the good old days with many small family farms, but how can this happen? The only way is to have food prices skyrocket. You must also find your millions of pele willing to work those long hours instead of a nice high paying forty hour factory job.
Lol, food prices are skyrocketing, and will continue to do so. ” Everyone is capable of growing their own food without quitting their jobs,it’s a matter of free time priorities! Local farmers can expand their growing areas along with cattle, pigs, chickens and other protein products, especially if the needs arise (which they will!) Any increase in prices would still be lower than trucked in (expensive) transportation/packaging/ advertising, stocking, big store overhead foods would be! And go/ synthetic chemical free foods. Just like neighbors who now share such with family and friends. This is not a pipe dream.. it is do-able!!!!
Even too the point of your “well paid jobs”….. those who do such as I say, stand to make more fiat money than they make now, and when, (not if) the economy collapses due to any number of man-made or natural scenarios that play out, food of any kind will be worth more than any type of money! Can you say “barter?”
When things go south, there will be no jobs for the average people, how will they then buy food? This is not something to just think about, it’s something that must be done.
It’s not the good old days, it’s the “future days” that you should concern yourself with! It’s not a “returning to” something, it’s preparing for the inevitable! It’s not “old knowledge” it’s “now” knowledge! That needs to be put to use so as to not find your self unable to survive and starving come the time!
To snuff off the idea people won’t do so by the millions, is nieve at least and ignorant or stupid at the most. Millions are already doing so we just need millions more to join in if we are to survive.
you are really missing the real problems. Its not GM food – its bacterial contamination of food that is actually killing people. Focus on GM misplaces the attention.
Not missing the point, would the bacterial contamination be as bad if natural pesticide methods had been used all along? Is not the pesticides/ poisons, that go hand in hand with GMO’ s that have now created super weeds, insects, etc., killed off good bacteria etc., yes….this problem is bigger than but not apart from genetic engineering.
It (GME) was founded on finding ways to use toxic/ poisons, that had formerly been used as direct killing agents. The plan is to continue to do the same now only in a much more slowly lethal way under the guise of improving things. Honestly, the “CORE” problem is neither GMO’ s or pesticides or there resulted damages to life and planet. It is that they exist and are allowed to do any of these things. When corporate greed rules, things die!
And “WE” have become the real culprits in this whole thing! We have allowed things to get to where they are! Where was everyone when laws were being submitted to allow corporations to become a “person”? That could be a front for a bunch of greed driven owners to hide and be safe from ” personal” accountability of what they did or manufactured?
Where were we when the nuclear plants were brought into being and allowed to be built? Where were we when all the things that now seal our doom were being implemented by those in government rallied on by mega-corp money?
We lost our way, we turned or heads and closed our ears. And as usual, we now are paying the price!
You so correct that it isn’t hard to get a fake study published, just look at Seralini.
So all those industry backed studies you assert with almost unquestioning religious zeal that your divine GMO’s are completely safe are real, but those studies that disagree with your bologna employer paid posts are completely not legitimate?
Not because of who backed them, but because they have been replicated in real life billions of times over the past twenty years with zero problems. This versus your one rat study that no one has been able to duplicate, but plenty have been able to tear it apart.
Hey genius, they keep changing the modifications. You even said they have more coming on board soon (nice team logo, Mr Monsanto Roberts). So you cant say they have replicated in real life billions of times over the past twenty years with zero problems, because first of all you cant prove that point, and secondly if there is any changes, you cant say billions of times since it keeps changing. C’mon genius, come up with something better than that. What about the goat producing ABNORMAL milk there genius?
Why ignore the facts? Roundup beans have been out since the mid nineties, they just recently changed, and even that change was minor. They kept the same gene just the insertion of that gene changed to give us roundup ready 2 beans. So again you are wrong. Not surprising Mikey.
A change is still a change. You cant replicate, by definition, if you change anything. So you are wrong by definition. Unless you dont know what the word ‘replicate’ means. Although you should because it is a biochemistry term and you post for a biotech company. Did they not give you a better crash course ‘go get em meeting’ training? So you are wrong. Any change is a change. In pharmaceuticals, simply using an enantiomer, or replacing, inserting, deleting an atom, or altering a side chain will change the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of a drug entity. But your biotech company can change things all they want without true disclosure and you simpleton with no real background can say they have been replicating this in vivo experiment billions of times with no oversight, no regulation, no objective parameters (not that the regulation protected the population to begin with) without any possible adverse effects. Please stop embarassing yourself Mr. Monsanto Roberts.
Mikey, you just don’t seem to get it do you. Of course when you don’t actually do any research it is hard to understand isn’t it.
Do you even know how to interpret words, Mr. Monsanto Roberts?
Better than you Mikey Jon, but that isn’t really setting the bar too high now is it.
Actually we have to set the bar far below us to let you keep up with us. Its like no child left behind, but its no Mr Monsanto roberts left behind. I can start using smaller easier to use words if you need to be able to understand. I know its difficult for you, but I will take my time and make it easy for your brain to get things. It cant be easy being for you , being all GMO’d in the brain. Problem is, you probably were a smarter guy before you loaded your brain full of that toxic GMO garbage. But I can go slow for you since your neural connections are dimmer than the rest of us.
Well Bobo, I’ll think for myself, instead of listening to a babbling boob with a vested interest.
I’m expecting a good harvest this year in the garden.
Fake like Seralini. That’s funny! I’m sure you know but he was republished, and his findings were highly scrutinized by peers. But I’m sure that wont stop you from babbling the same BS Lies!
So when are you? Going to start thinking that is.
Please look in the mirror Mr. Monsanto Roberts when it comes to thinking. You have yet to start thinking. Please inform us when you start to think instead of your corporate paid posting.