Are GMOs Ethical?

corn storm

(This is a guest post from reader, Ed Allison, taking a look from a different angle at GMOs. He raises some important points we should consider going forward and does it in a sober, measured manner. Since my thoughts are well known here, I will keep my comments to a bare minimum, that all might get their say. But the same rules as always still apply to the comments section – CJ)

By Ed Allison

GMO: Genetically Modified Organism
This is one of those topics that seems to bring out an emotional response. I have participated in many such ‘discussions’, where it’s Organic vs. GMO, a fight to the death! As entertaining as that could be, I will try very hard not to stoop to that level. Regardless of which side of this debate you currently find yourself on, I am asking you to wade through all of the information and links I provide. This is not an easy topic to understand. However, an investment of your time here, may well pay dividends for your health, and the health of your family down the road. I became interested in GMOs several years ago, and began to read everything I could on both sides of the debate. I do not hold any science degrees, nor do I work in the field of agriculture. I’m just an average guy, with a wife and 3 kids that I love and want the best for. For myself and my family, I have resolved this issue to my satisfaction. How about you?
Is genetic engineering ethical? Is it safe? Are there side effects or unintended consequences?
All of these are good questions, but unfortunately, not all of them have solid answers. At the highest level, is it ethical? Are scientists who genetically alter corn, soybeans, cotton, or other crops for human consumption, playing God? (Yes, cotton seed oil is actually used for human consumption.) Their intentions may be honorable. Perhaps they want to increase yields by reducing a crop’s vulnerability to insects, being choked out by weeds, or even by making it more drought resistant. All these things are good in and of themselves. But does the end justify the means?
Gen 1:12the earth brought forth vegetation: every kind of plant that bears seed and every kind of fruit tree that bears fruit with its seed in it. God saw that it was good.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church; 1789: One may never do evil so that good may result from it;
Scientists are trying to make ‘new and improved’ what God has already declared to be good. Can we alter creation itself in order to bring about the monumental good of the elimination of scarcity so that we can feed the world? And if we succeed in that, what’s next? Do you think that science will stop at plants? Or will they move on to animals, and eventually people? Science has already attempted to mix plant and animal. They actually combined tomatoes with fish, but thank God, failed to achieve the desired result.
An early tomato was developed that contained an antifreeze gene from the winter flounder with the aim of increasing the tomato’s tolerance to frost, which became an icon in the early years of the debate over genetically modified foods, especially in relation to the perceived ethical dilemma of combining genes from different species as the tomato gained the moniker fish tomato.[18] The antifreeze protein was found to inhibit ice recrystallization in the flounder blood, but had no effect when expressed in transgenic tobacco.[19] The resulting tomato was never commercialized, possibly because the transgenic plant did not perform well in its frost-tolerance or other agronomic characteristics.[20]
A quote from the movie ‘Jurassic Park’ comes to mind. Jeff Goldblum’s character says, “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not the COULD, they didn’t stop to think if they SHOULD.”
I sometimes have breakfast at a local diner. I usually get 2 scrambled eggs, wheat toast, hash browns and coffee. I like to sit by a window and observe people as they rush to do whatever it is that they have to do. I especially like to do this when I need to think about something important. Some of the folks going by are men in suits; some women with small children; some teenagers who don’t appear to have anything to do. But they all have something in common. They, like me, have consumed genetically modified foods in the last 24 hours. It’s almost impossible to avoid them. My hash browns (shredded fried potatoes), were probably fried on the grill in oil from either GMO soy or GMO canola. (In fact, every deep fryer in nearly every restaurant in America is filled with soybean oil from GMO soybeans). The potatoes themselves are probably not GMO, although the USDA did just approve a genetically modified potato in Nov 2014, created by the J.R. Simplot Company. But I do not think that has had time to come to market yet. My coffee is even guilty. The sugar I put in it is likely from GMO sugar beets, not non-GMO cane sugar which is more expensive. The cream in my coffee may have come from cows injected with BGH (bovine growth hormone), which is a synthetic hormone created by the Monsanto Corporation, and is widely used in the Dairy industry because it increases milk production in a lactating cow by as much as 25%. More milk per cow means higher profits for the dairy farmer. This is concerning for a number of reasons, which I will get into in a minute. But let’s continue to look at my breakfast. My wheat toast was likely made from wheat flour ground from wheat treated with Roundup (glyphosate). Even though wheat is mostly NOT a GMO crop, it is still sprayed with Roundup to kill the plant and dry it before harvest. Even my eggs likely came from chickens which were fed GMO soybeans as their main food source. Isoflavones from the soy, pass into the egg yolks. These are plant derived compounds which mimic estrogen. Too much soy in the diet has vast health implications. And as a man, I don’t think I have to tell you that I don’t want to be consuming something that mimics estrogen!
Now, back to BGH (bovine growth hormone), which is banned in Canada, all 28 countries of the European Union, Japan, New Zealand and others. As far back as 1989, the press was raising the red flag with regard to BGH. Have a look at this LA Times article dated 07/27/1989:
Then in 1997, a Fox News affiliate in Florida, hired 2 new investigative reporters who chose to do their first story on Monsanto’s BGH. The story never aired. Monsanto threatened to sue and the manager of the station killed the story. Eventually, the 2 reporters were fired over it when they wouldn’t back down. You can see how that turned out here in this 10 minute video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0AL4yml3bw 
This doesn’t sound like a benevolent company who’s noble mission is to feed the world. It sounds like corruption, strong arm tactics and a cover up. I offer a second example, just in case the BGH story was an anomaly. I’m sure everyone has heard about ‘bee colony collapse disorder’. Well, Monsanto and their GMO products had been implicated as a possible cause by a leading bee research firm. So, what is their response? To buy the firm. See this story from ‘Natural News’: http://www.naturalnews.com/035688_Monsanto_honey_bees_colony_collapse.html# 
Now, Natural News is known for its right wing style of journalism. Some might even call this a hit piece. So, to balance it out, here’s a piece on the same story from the Huffington Post, a well known liberal rag. (sorry, are my politics showing?):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-schiffman/the-fox-monsanto-buys-the_b_1470878.html Here’s a quote from the Huffington Post: “Yet one has to wonder if owning a firm dedicated to shedding light on the trouble with bees might not serve Monsanto’s interest in allowing it to further cover up their own corporate complicity in the problem.”
Monsanto appears to be a well oiled machine. But how do they get all this stuff past the FDA? Well, over the years, the FDA and Monsanto have become joined at the hip. There have been many high ranking Monsanto employees that have accepted high ranking positions at the FDA. So, it certainly gives the impression, that the inmates really are running the asylum. http://ivn.us/2013/02/11/the-revolving-door-fda-and-the-monsanto-company/
There have been several referendums on ballots in Oregon, California and Colorado which would have required labeling of any food for human consumption that contained GMO ingredients. Each was defeated with mass marketing and many millions of dollars spent by Monsanto and processed food companies who use GMO ingredients. In contrast, animal feed is required to be labeled if it contains GMO ingredients. You just can’t make this stuff up!
Corn, soybeans and cotton are the 3 top GMO crops in the US.

“1. Corn: Corn is the No. 1 crop grown in the U.S. and nearly all of it — 88 percent — is genetically modified. In addition to being added to innumerable processed foods, genetically modified corn is a staple of animal feed.

2. Soy: 93 percent of soy is genetically modified. Soy is a staple of processed foods under various names including hydrogenated oils, lecithin, emulsifiers, tocopherol (a vitamin E supplement) and proteins.

3. Cottonseed: According to the USDA, 94 percent of cotton grown in the U.S. is genetically modified. Cottonseeds are culled from cotton, and then used for vegetable oil, margarine or shortening production, or frying foods, such as potato chips.”

The 3 crops above are genetically modified to resist glyphosate (Roundup). This allows the farmer to spray his entire field with Roundup to control weeds, without killing the corn, soybean or cotton plant. That doesn’t mean that the corn stalk, soybean plant or cotton plant do not absorb the herbicide, it just means that they are genetically immune to it. Wikipedia defines glyphosate as a ‘broad-spectrum systemic herbicide’. This means that is exists in every cell of the plant that absorbs it. Read that again and let it sink in. That means that the corn, soybeans and cotton seed oil that are destined for human consumption contain glyphosate. You probably don’t even know how many of the things that you eat contain corn and/or soy. Read the ingredients label on the loaf of bread that’s on your counter. I’ll bet it has lecithin on the list. That’s soy. How about all the things that have high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in them. Do you drink soda? Most maple syrup in the supermarket doesn’t contain a single drop of real maple syrup. It’s all HFCS and artificially colored and flavored to fool you into thinking it’s maple syrup. Do you use that ‘Real Mayonnaise’? It’s not real at all. It’s a soybean oil emulsion. Go read the label….. seriously, go do it. Do you eat out a lot, where you would be willing to make french fries the entrée instead of the side dish? How about at home, do you eat a lot of processed foods? Or do you cook from scratch?
What is soy lecithin?
“To solve the problem of disposing of the gummy waste residual generated from the soy oil refining process, German companies patented a process of vacuum drying the sludge to make soybean lecithin. Although lecithin originally had many uses, today soy lecithin is used as an emulsifier in foods and infant formulas and also as a health supplement.” So, the soy industry has a waste product that they don’t know what to do with. Rather than dispose of it, they feed it to us!
According to the EPA fact sheet on glyphosate, “Glyphosate is among the most widely used pesticides by volume. In 1986, an estimated 6,308,000 pounds of glyphosate was used in the United Sates. Usage in 1990 was estimated to be 11,595,000 pounds. It ranked eleventh among conventional pesticides in the US during 1990-91. In recent years, 13 to 20 million acres were treated with 18.7 million lbs. annually.” http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/pdfs/factsheets/soc/tech/glyphosa.pdf 
One of the things listed on the fact sheet under ‘Health Effects Summary’ is ‘reproductive effects’. Now, I know a goat farmer in the Pacific NW. Her name is Rose. Now Rose has a herd of goats and she produces goat’s milk, and goat milk cheeses. For a long time, Rose spent extra money on organic feed for her goats because she wanted the highest quality milk and cheese. Well, Rose fell on some hard financial times and could no longer afford the organic feed. She had to buy the standard, GMO feed. The very next breeding cycle for her goats, some of them had difficulty conceiving. Of those that did, some kids were stillborn, and others had birth defects. Rose also tells me that she knows other farmers with similar problems due to GMO feed. Now, I realize that this is far from a scientific study, and I’m not trying to pass Rose’s situation off as anything other than anecdotal evidence. But it does line up with what is listed on the fact sheet.
Due to run off, it is literally everywhere. Glyphosate has been detected in our drinking water, the air, even in rain. Glyphosate has been linked to birth defects, infertility and cancer. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/10/herbicide-poison-groundwater-supply.aspx 
The EPA has even established supposed ‘safe limits’ of how much glyphosate is allowed to be in drinking water.
Before Monsanto can bring a new version of their GMO corn to market, they are required to perform a 90 day toxicity study on lab rats. The problem is, the long term effects don’t show up until after 90 days. Monsanto published its study on maize NK603 in 2004, the same year that NK603 was approved in the EU. In 2012, there was a French study published in the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology (JFCT) by Gilles-Eric Seralini. The study fed a specific variety of Monsanto GMO corn (NK603) to rats for 2 years. The results showed that up to 50% of the males, and 70% of the females suffered premature death. Rats that drank trace amounts of Roundup (at levels legally allowed in the water supply), had a 200%-300% increase in large tumors. Rats fed GMO corn, and traces of Roundup suffered sever organ damage (Including liver and kidney damage).
Monsanto immediately went into damage control. The French government demanded an investigation. Multiple media outlets release stories attacking the study. Quoting from this article: http://www.examiner.com/article/scientific-journal-withdraws-s-ralini-paper-on-roundup-toxicity 
“Almost immediately, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a statement saying the Séralini paper did not meet scientific standards set out by the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). They accused the authors of using the wrong kind of rats, not enough rats and that the statistical analysis was inadequate. By these standards, all toxicity studies on glyphosate and GMOs should be retracted because they used the same type and approximate number of rats as those in the Séralini study.”
“Within a week, a whole host of scientists from the biotechnology sector, most of them plant biologists, wrote letters to the editor of JFCT demanding retraction of the paper. They all used the same arguments given by EFSA. Could this have been an orchestrated effort?
There have been seven studies published between 2004-2012 in the JFCT in which the same type of rats (Sprague–Dawley) were fed diets supplemented with material from GM plants. All of these papers were published by those companies who developed the GM plant used in the study. One paper was from Monsanto, and the others from DuPont/Pioneer. Furthermore they often did not report the formulations used, the studies were 90 days or less, and many did not adhere to the three dose level requirement. In point of fact, Séralini’s study was more rigorous than most. It seems that both the EFSA and the JFCT are cherry picking data and applying double standards. If the Séralini study was less than perfect, then one would think that scientists would rush to design better experiments to further test these results. Instead they viciously attack and try to discredit the scientists and suppress the results. Does anyone smell a rat, Sprague-Dawley or otherwise?”
This paper by Test Biotech, lays out in gory detail, how the EFSA applied a double standard in it’s handling of the Seralini case.
Then, the journal that originally published the paper, prostitutes itself to Monsanto. Again, quoting from the Examiner article linked above:
“May, 2013: JFCT creates a new position, Associate Editor for Biotechnology, and fills it with Richard E. Goodman, a former Monsanto employee (1997-2004). In addition to working for Monsanto, Goodman is involved with the International Life Sciences Institute which develops industry-friendly risk assessment methods for GM foods and chemical food contaminants and inserts them into government regulations.”
So, it appears, that the Monsanto imposed its will on a peer reviewed journal, which is supposed to independent and unbiased. Then, installed an overseer to make sure that no more papers get published that cast a negative light on the Monsanto machine.
See also:
November of 2013, 6 months after Goodman joins the JFCT and a year after the Seralini paper was published, the JFCT retracts the Seralini paper. Seralini never agreed to retract the paper.
The whole debacle surrounding the handling of the Seralini paper just screams corruption, conspiracy and cover up. Does the retraction invalidate the results of the study? Because of the double standard applied to the handling of the Seralini paper, I don’t believe it does. It’s like a murder conviction that gets overturned on a technicality. The defendant that walks free is no less guilty. He’s just not convicted.
Almost done…..  I’d like to introduce you to Dr. Stephanie Seneff. Dr. Seneff, is a Senior Research Scientist at MIT. She has many published papers, but in recent years has turned her attention to the relationship between nutrition and health. Very recently, a story was published about her and her research: http://www.globalresearch.ca/autism-and-the-health-impacts-of-monsanto-glyphosate-roundup-on-children-research-scientist-at-mit/5421901
This one was just published in late Dec 2014, and has generated a lot of interest on both sides of the argument. To quote the article: At a conference last Thursday, in a special panel discussion about GMOs, she took the audience by surprise when she declared, “At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.”She noted that the side effects of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity, and presented data showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the use of Roundup on crops (and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds) with rising rates of autism. Children with autism have biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder.”
Now, I can already hear Charlie saying, “Correlation does not imply causation.” And he, of course, would be right. But in the following YouTube video, Dr. Seneff explains the biology behind the claims. The camera is on Dr. Seneff and not on her charts. That is unfortunate, but if you pay close attention, it is not that hard to follow. This presentation is very long (2 hrs 8 min). But the last 15 minutes are questions and answers, and you can’t hear the questions at all. So, it’s really only 1 hr 53 min. There, I just saved you 15 minutes!
I know that I’m asking for a lot of your time. If this is a topic that interests you, that video is an excellent source of information, and worth your time. If you can’t watch the whole thing, please watch as much of it as you can. Even the first 10 minutes are worthwhile.
Here is Dr. Seneff’s home page at MIT, with links to all her papers: http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/
Here is a hit piece by James Cooper that came out attacking the globalresearch.ca article linked above:
The top comment on that article sums it up well: by a commenter named Bill Barnes – “James Cooper: Reviews of Research are Research. Take a look at any Handbook of Research to set yourself straight. You attack the credentials and statements of the authors, but you never supply research that counters their findings. Essentially this article of yours (peer reviewed?) is an ad hominem attack. Try writing ad hoc. In fact your writing seems to have come right out of a Monsanto press kit.”
I literally could keep going, but I think you are probably getting the idea. I appreciate you staying with me until the end. As I see it, there are potential health risks to the continued use of glyphosate and crops genetically engineered to be ‘Roundup Ready’. So, have you decided? Is genetic engineering ethical? Is it safe? I would certainly argue that it has unintended consequences. But, is it worth feeding the whole world, if you’re potentially feeding them poison? Let’s talk about it.

About charliej373

Charlie Johnston is a former newspaper editor, radio talk show host and political consultant. From Feb. 11, 2011 to Aug. 21, 2012, he walked 3,200 miles across the country, sleeping in the woods, meeting people and praying as he went. He has received prophetic visitation all his life, which he has vetted through a trio of priests over the last 20 years, and now speaks publicly about on this site. Yet he emphasizes that we find God most surely through the ordinary, doing the little things we should with faith and fidelity. Hence the name, The Next Right Step. The visitations inform his work, but are not the focus of it. He lives in the Archdiocese of Denver in the United States.
This entry was posted in Guest Columns and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

131 Responses to Are GMOs Ethical?

  1. CrewDog says:

    Thanks Ed,
    Lots of good and believable info … and probably another reason why God has unleashed The Storm … but I think it’s too late to worry about it as “EVIL THIS WAY COMES” .. NOW! … in a terrifying way …. Terrorists commit TERROR to terrorize YOU so YOU will be terrorized and surrender and submit. Surrender = Death … and, if required, our knives, guns and bombs work just as well as theirs … better with God’s help …. and if the Rescue comes as Charlie/Others believe … I suspect that all our silly human meddling will be corrected too.
    GOD SAVE ALL HERE!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Judy says:

      I try to avoid GMO foods. So I do not buy sugar made from beets. I buy cane sugar. As far as I know, pop corn is not GMO at this time. I believe olive oil is not GMO. I try to avoid canola and corn oil. Well, you get the picture. If I know about it, I stay away from it. Eating simply and preparing from scratch is the best way.

      Like

      • Judy says:

        I have read that there is a way to identify types of foods by the PLU codes. I will post it here with the idea that it may be so, and that you have to do some research:

        How To I.D. Genetically Modified Food at the Supermarket

        Not many consumers realize that the FDA does not require genetically modified food to be labeled. That’s because the FDA has decided that you, dear consumer, don’t care if the tomato you’re eating has been cross bred with frog genes to render the tomato more resistant to cold weather. Some consumers may not be concerned with eating Frankenfood, but for those who are, here’s how to determine if the fruits and vegetables you’re buying are (GM) genetically modified.
        Hat tip to Marion Owen for her valuable information. Here’s how it works:
        For conventionally grown fruit, (grown with chemicals inputs), the PLU code on the sticker consists of four numbers. Organically grown fruit has a five-numeral PLU prefaced by the number 9. Genetically engineered (GM) fruit has a five-numeral PLU prefaced by the number 8.
        For example:
        A conventionally grown banana would be: 4011
        An organic banana would be: 94011
        A genetically engineered (GE or GMO) banana would be: 84011
        These tips are specially important now that over 80% of all processed foods in the US are genetically modified. Many countries in the European Union have been banning GM products and produce (including Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary and Luxembourg). We say “Eat healthy, buy or grow organic”.

        Liked by 2 people

      • aprolifer says:

        Judy, I read just a few weeks ago (and I’m sorry, I didn’t save the link) that sugar cane, like wheat, is saturated with Roundup to “ripen” it. That is not to say it’s GMO, I’ve never heard it is; just that it can be full of glyphosate.

        Like

        • Mick says:

          Thanks, Aprolifer; I didn’t know that about sugar cane. Maybe that’s why my kids and I always get sick whenever we eat cane sugar in any form. Like Judy, we don’t do beet sugar because of the GMO issue; so we gave up sugar years ago. Sure helps us save on dentist bills. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

  2. Ed Allison says:

    Thanks CrewDog. I certainly hope God corrects all the meddling. At this stage, He is probably the only one who can!

    Like

  3. Diane says:

    God save us – I had no idea this was so imbedded in our foods. We fell asleep and look at what we have become. Lord have great mercy on us all. You are God and you alone can bring us to who you created us to be. Thank you for the wake up call. Love. I do.

    Like

    • Ed Allison says:

      They really are almost unavoidable. However, the biggest health issues may not be from the fact that the crops are genetically modified, but from the choice to marry these GMO crops to Roundup. The systemic nature of the herbicide means that we end up consuming it in the final products we eat. It seems that glyphosate (a.k.a. Roundup), also damages our gut bacteria. You can read about that here: http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416

      Supposedly, 70-80% of our immune system is in our gut. And Prevention magazine, citing the study above, says this: “Citing recent studies, review coauthor Stephanie Seneff, PhD, senior research scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, explains how glyphosate acts as a potent bacteria-killer in the gut, wiping out delicate beneficial microflora that help protect us from disease.”
      http://www.prevention.com/food/healthy-eating-tips/crazy-new-research-roundup-weed-killer

      Indeed. God save us all.

      Like

  4. Bob says:

    Yes I fear the corruption and collusion between money and those with power is so great that God will need to intervene. Not to say we shouldn’t educate ourselves and work with like minded folks but the results are not likely to succeed with human efforts alone. It seems God is always putting us in situations where we will need to rely more fully on God. As my wife says FROG means Fully Rely On God.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. NancyA says:

    Thanks, Ed, I’ve been awaiting your guest post. Does not disappoint. In time I will be sure to view the video you refer us to, of Dr. Seneff. I wonder, are you at all familiar with Dr. Judy Mikovits, and her very new book, _Plague_, coauthored by Kent Heckenlively, JD? I’d been ‘watching’ Dr. Mikovits for years and then she fell out of favor. Her book explains much. I’m convinced of her integrity, and therefore of the lack of same in other scientists and groups she writes about. Genetic predisposition, toxicity, plus viral or retroviral infection equals…?… the mechanism of vaccines in the mix are explored, also. Personally, I can’t help but wonder if the glories of modern medicine have brought about untold unforeseen negative consequences. We don’t really know if, for example, the early polio vaccines did not instill other illnesses. Since I am ‘sick,’ it matters to me… but I recognize the inability of the average citizen to get to the truth, and I appreciate anyone who ‘does the work’ to try to bring it to others. Thanks, Ed.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ed Allison says:

      Nancy, I am not familiar with Dr. Mikovits, or her book. I may have run across her work over the years, but I just don’t remember the name. I’ll have to look for it. Thank you. And I’m glad you weren’t disappointed.

      Like

  6. Ceri says:

    I deeply appreciate all of the info with links that you presented. I didn’t know that lecithin was soy. I have 5 nieces and nephews who are autistic. All 10 years old and younger. It is heartbreaking to see so many children being injured. Being the primary cook/ shopper for my large household, I take this topic very seriously. My baby can’t wait for years while we research. Her brain and body are developing with every bite she takes. I choose to err on the side of caution until God sorts it out.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ed Allison says:

      Ceri, there are other forms of lecithin besides soy, but when used as a cheap filler, like in the loaf of bread example I used, it’s soy. Autism makes we want to weep. Your nieces and nephews are victim souls, participating in the Passion of the Lord, in the crowning with thorns. They will be made whole in heaven. God bless you and your family.

      Liked by 1 person

    • SteveBC says:

      Ceri, Lekithos, Inc., makes an organic sunflower lecithin that I am using. Go to the website mysunflowerlecithin.com to read more about it.

      Like

  7. vicardwm says:

    Thanks so much for taking the time to put this together, Ed! I will use this link from now on when I want to refer people to information about GMO’s. Many blessings to you and your family!

    Like

  8. Cynthia says:

    Thanks for all your hard work on this Ed, I personally think it is as evil as it gets. Profit at any cost. Frankly it is not any different than the pharmaceutical companies and vaccine manufacturers. The evidence of harm is everywhere, but those who point it out are vilified.
    God save us, soon please!

    Like

    • Ed Allison says:

      Thank you Cynthia. I don’t necessarily think you’re wrong, but it didn’t start out that way. As I said at the end of my post, I think there are unintended consequences that are now past the point of no return. If they banned GMO crops tomorrow, there would be a world wide famine. What we need is for informed people to simply opt out in mass. Vote with your dollars. The tide may be turning…. I recently read that Monsanto had a horrible 4th quarter. 😉

      Liked by 1 person

      • vicardwm says:

        “Unintended consequences”….Ed, this is the key, and the main reason why modern science is literally killing us. Combined with the natural desire of corporations (and approving agencies) for money, the long-term studies are just not done and “science” as a whole has extreme hubris about their level of knowledge. In fact, there is no way that scientists knew enough to be confident about modifying our very food – the source of our life – but they believed otherwise.

        Spirit Daily carries some messages from an anonymous visionary. There have been only aboutt 4 messages over a 25 year time period, but they ring very true, and are seeming more and more prophetic. I have to admit, I scratched my head a bit at them when they first came out. Here are the first two:

        http://www.spiritdaily.org/New-world-order/revelation1.htm
        http://www.spiritdaily.net/2004prophecy.htm

        An excerpt from the first (1990) prophecy:
        “”My greatest nemesis is science, even more so than the media. The science that alters life, the science which creates a counterfeit heaven, the science that toils with the womb and genes, the science that has filled the air with the power of the enemy, the science which creates chemical witchcraft and fouls the earth, the science which seeks to create life but cannot in actuality even sustain it, the science which has denied God.”

        An excerpt from the second (2004) prophecy (note that this was shortly after GMO’s went into mass circulation):
        “The world is now seriously out of conformance with the Will of God and what He created and intended. There are those who would reconfigure the very creatures He has formed, and who meddle with the texture of life. For this reason, the Lord will allow a huge reorientation. If not for the action of Heaven, what God has created on earth will soon be damaged beyond recovery. A very dramatic effect already is in progress as regards the support structures of what man calls nature. Such cannot be allowed to take the final realization of total realignment when it comes to the very way elements and life forces interact. The event to come will surprise everyone who has offered a prognostication, and will show even recalcitrant scientists, though not all, that there is a fundamental alarm in Heaven over their arrogant and wayward course. Nothing that is artificial in a way that disrupts what God intended will be allowed to stand.”

        Liked by 3 people

  9. MMBev says:

    I have tried to click up the very last article “Autism Explained”. I do not get the article, just no longer available. Does anyone have another link? I know that stuff just doesn’t usually disappear, and that often there is another way to access the material. I am very interested in autism. Anyone? Please? Please?

    Some of you guys (males and females; I consider myself on of the guys) are real wizards at obtaining things that I don’t know that I don’t know. And this is one thing that I know I don’t know. Help. Please?

    My thanks if a link shows up from someone, anyone, human or alien.

    Like

  10. Gary says:

    It doe not appear that Senneff is qualified in this field:

    The study that gets shared and starts misconceptions about glyphosate in farming stem from Stephanie Seneff, a very well known anti-GMO proponent, whom I’ve read about a lot in the last year. One of the reasons why my red flag goes up when Senneff’s name is behind research is that she’s a senior research scientist at the computer science and artificial intelligence lab at MIT with biophysics and electrical engineering degrees also from MIT. So why the research on pesticides from an electrical engineer/computer scientist? Truth be told, she and her colleague didn’t conduct any research at all.
    Read more at http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/roundupwheat.asp#r27YYeQ7Hm5w5Uwj.99

    Herbicides have been used for a very long time, with no apparent side effects. I also remember the big fluoride scare.

    Like

    • Ed Allison says:

      This is something I included in article Gary, not from snopes, but it’s there. While it’s true that Dr. Seneff does not hold a degree in biology, she is a trained reserch scientist, and……. reviews of research are considered research. Please fell free to dismiss me, my article, and Dr. Seneff if you wish. But you don’t bring anything new to the discussion.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Gary says:

        My first impression was that Seneff was a biologist.
        An auto mechanic is not qualified to work on a NASA rocket ship. And unless he had spent years of work he will not have credibility. In like manner a computer scientist does not make a biologist or vice versa. Unless she switched careers and has done her own research rather than complying others “research” she is spreading disinformation that may well be biased or of a predisposed opinion. I have talked to scientists at Abbots and Monsanto
        and it take years of qualifying tests to determine what they are developing is safe for the public.I do not believe that Monsanto is looking at a short term profit above the public’s safety and none as of yet of their scientists have blown the whistle on their company.
        Is there a statistical increase of autism? I don’t know because statistics can be misleading and not altogether reliable, There were those who though the rise if there is one in autism was because of vaccines. It took years to prove that that theory was unfounded yet know because of unfounded assertions there is public doubt. But there is a rise in measles and other diseases because people did not get their children vaccinated. Whatever moral qualms one might legitimately have vaccinations have saved lives.Of course they do not need to use aborted fetal tissue to make vaccines, but that is not the issue. The propagation of fear is my concern. At some point we have to trust that these developers are not deceiving them selves or the public good. Anecdotal evidence is not science.If I tell you that there are millions more cars on the road and that there is as increase in autism cases does that mean cars are the problem? As our population increases one might see more cases previously in the past of some disease but that does not necessarily mean that the rise is due to some outside forces if it is statistically within what was there before the population increase. It just means that the increased population as a whole has an increased amount of children predisposed to certain diseases.If there were 1000 cases say of autism in 1960 but now the are are 2000 cases of autism is that a real problem or just what would happen when the population has doubled?
        As is said: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.”

        Like

        • Ed Allison says:

          Gary, first, I apologize for my terse response to you last night, It was 1:30 AM, and I really needed to go to bed.

          I may have given the impression that Dr. Seneff was a biologist when I was describing the video. I said, “Dr. Seneff explains the biology behind the claims.”. That was unintentional. I linked to her homepage at MIT, which lists her credentials; and I linked to another hit piece similar to the snopes article that attacked her work as ‘bogus’. Both are attack pieces designed to discredit her, to plant the seed of doubt about her work. It is a particularly reprehensible example of how politics works. And make no mistake about it. This is politics. The fact that Dr. Seneff is a Senior Researcher at MIT speaks volumes about her abilities. I assume she’s on the payroll, and not working for free, which means that MIT thinks she’s qualified. After all, their good name is behind her. That’s good enough for me. If you actually watch some of the video (or others out there on youtube), you’ll see that she knows her stuff. She’s quite impressive.

          I don’t think Monsanto is looking for short term profit either. I think they’re fighting for their very existence. IF glyphosate is proven beyond any doubt to be the poison I believe it is, the lawsuits would bankrupt them. Not that I expect that to really happen. Heck, last year Obama signed into law the Monsanto protection Act. Now, if their products are safe, why do they need protection from litigation? And possibly more important, why would the govt WANT to protect them?

          Yes, I’m sure that there’s plenty of good people in the trenches who believe in what they’re doing. But the requirement to be approved for human consumption is only a 90 day toxicity test, not years.

          I do not understand how any intellectually honest person could say with a straight face, that they’re not sure if there is an increase in autism rates. Really? You do yourself a disservice. I guess you think it’s fear mongering. No, I don’t have to, at any point, just trust those at the top to do what is best for me and the sheeple. There are too many examples of the people getting screwed for profit. Ronald Reagan may have said it best when talking arms reduction with Gorbechev, “Trust, but verify.”

          You may be right not to trust statistics though….. even your own. The population of the US in 1960 was 179 million. In 2000 it was 281 million. Hardly a double.

          Liked by 3 people

      • Kris says:

        When working on my MSW one of the main ways a researcher begins to prepare a new research project is to do literature review. This gives a person a baseline of what has been done, what designs have been used, etc to prepare to check out the validity of research results. Peer review and literature research is definitely research.

        Liked by 2 people

    • vicardwm says:

      Snopes itself is discredited in my eyes. They’re essentially posing as a neutral party while advancing the big government/big corporate agenda as far as I can tell. I don’t even pay any attention to them any more. Truth be told, as Charlie says, any reasonably intelligent person can bring themselves up to speed on any subject if they are thorough in their efforts. Charlie did so on the stem cell issue. It appears that Dr. Seneff has done so in this area, and she is obviously a very intelligent person.

      Liked by 3 people

    • KW says:

      I haven’t looked at much of Dr Seneff’s work/background yet, so that you for that information. I want to make a note about degrees. Blended topic degrees- such as biophysics- can cover a lot of material in a wide variety of areas. Depending on the course work and lab work, biophysics can have a whole lot of biology, making Dr Seneff’s interest in what many would consider to be more biology topics more understandable. You would really have to look at her transcript to see what a degree in biophysics really means in her case.

      I have a friend who could call himself a bio-materials scientist if he was trying to put most of his degree work in one title. He has a degree in biology and a degree in material science (a blend of mechanical engineering and chemistry) and I don’t even remember all the things he took because it was interesting and applied to his research. Most of his official job titles have had “engineering” in them. Blended degrees make for some pretty interesting resume’s/CV’s.

      I did see the graph from Dr. Seneff’s presentation a couple days ago. My initial concern with the graph is that with two different y axis labels (one set for the autism cases and one for the glyphosate use), it can be easier to find a “trend” that isn’t really there. At the same time, you can’t use that to say it’s definitely a false trend. To me, this is at the point of “oh, those are interesting findings. How do we take it to the next step to either give this a higher confidence and potentially start showing the mechanisms that could cause it, or show that it was a fluke.” I’m guessing someone out there is already double checking her data points (or should be)- that’s the first, easy thing to check.

      Like

  11. MMBev says:

    Oh. Oh.. Oh. I can’t believe it! Kyle must be in the mix somewhere!

    I tried once more and clicked and was taken all the way back to my inbox. I headed down to the comments to click (on my computer, when the comments come up, the original article is darker print, along with the comments making it much easier for me to read). This time as I scrolled down, I guess I went a bit further, and clicked. (Be honest, I can’t remember if it’s before or after, whatever) and below the article and the “click” instructions were two videos Guess what! There it is! Could a guardian angel be classed as an “alien”? If I get absolutely no help for the next day, I will know that the answer is no. And don’t EVER call an angel “dude”. That’s a real no go.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. MMBev says:

    Darn it. Gary! Well, I’m going to listen anyway. I’ve been around a number of autistic adolescents and two with Aspergers and took a couple of courses out of interest although I didn’t work with them.

    I became more interested after my brain surgery. I had to relearn to swallow. I still can’t swallow a number of food items even 13 years later. When I was first going crazy trying, the mouthful would get to about just past the vocal chords and sit there. Dinner required three eight ounce glasses of water and I still have to drink quite a bit to eat. Back then, though, I discovered myself “stimming” very rapidly with my hands to try and get my brain to perform a swallowing motion. Often, I couldn’t swallow with doing it and let me tell you, it does not go over well in a restaurant with the other patrons. I desperately wanted to go back to university and study to see if I could learn why. Why do autistic children do that and why did I have to do that to get my brain to perform a completely unrelated task? The odd occasion (few, thank God) I still have to.

    Will keep your comment in mind, Gary. Thanks. (And for what it’s worth, Kinsey’s degree was in Gaul Wasps, as he became the leading (perverted) expert on Human Sexuality. People must have read the book. How in God’s name could they use any of that material for educational materials–and still do. I can’t ever examine the research and charts on infants again. See Dr Judith Reisman.com or not because you will be horrified.)

    Liked by 1 person

  13. SteveBC says:

    Ed, like you, I consider myself an informed layman. I’m not an expert or trained in the field, but sometimes common sense is more important. Your article is filled with useful information, all of which agrees with what I have learned.

    I would off-hand add three items;

    1) I gather that glyphosate is a chelator. You hint at this with comments about low iron, etc., but it doesn’t simply affect humans who consume it. Our soils have been slowly denuded of minerals by our commercial farming methods, which unlike organic forms of farming, do not replenish the soil after harvest with all the minerals removed by the plants. Glyphosate chelates minerals in the soil, which makes this problem even worse. Of course, plants grown in depleted soils have depleted nutritional profiles in the parts we eat and are more prone to disease while living and to decay after harvest. There are also indications that glyphosate creates novel disease and pest profiles in that soil. Scientist Don Huber is the guy on this set of issues: http://farmwars.info/?p=7718

    2) One company is attempting to get permission to release a salmon that has been genetically modified. This species of salmon when unmodified generates growth hormone only 6 months out of the year, so it takes a few years to get to proper weight. Of course, this means that its impact on its ocean food sources is lowered during half the year, allowing some regeneration of that food source. The GM salmon has been engineered to contain a gene that causes the salmon to produce growth hormone for all twelve months of the year. This means it grows about twice as fast and has a substantially larger impact on annual food sources. Proper management of salmon fisheries should enable the sea to be bountiful enough without doing this, and I find this to be an egregious alteration to the salmon’s normal life. It’s like taking a stolid regional bank and turning it into a high-frequency trading pit. What happens if this fish becomes the most common portion of the salmon population? Who knows? As far as I can tell, the likelihood that this fish will be certified soon seems relatively high. This seems a reasonable article, from 2004: http://www.rense.com/general50/gm.htm

    3) GM alfalfa has recently been approved. That means that many field-fed animals will be eating it, at unknown impact, especially since it is known that GM genes migrate from their original field into neighboring, possibly organic fields. There was a big foofaraw about it up to 2011. Whole Foods Market fought against its adoption, saying that allowing GM alfalfa into the food chain would make it much harder to know whether an animal’s meat was truly organic or not. They had to knuckle under and arrange a settlement on the issue because they simply couldn’t win that battle. I note that WFM’s recent program to voluntarily label as many of their products as possible as either GMO or NonGMO began soon after that decision was forced down everyone’s throat (literally). I strongly applaud that program. Here is an anti-GM alfalfa article that has useful facts in it, but you can Google “GM Alfalfa” to find more:
    http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/february2011/gmalfalfawillbeeverywhere.php

    Ed, thank you again.

    Like

    • Judy says:

      I have recently read about making a GMO alfalfa. This is one of the world’s oldest, hardy and prolific plants. It is used to feed animals. Why in the world would anyone need to make a GMO variety?

      Like

    • Ed Allison says:

      Steve, on #1: Yes it is a chelator. Your comments on soil depletion and reduced nutrition are accurate. It also depletes beneficial microbes in the soil, leaving behind pathogens. Someone, maybe you, mentioned in another thread something about Roundup creating new diseases for crops. That is true for corn especially, where in the absence of good microbes in the soil, the bad ones not killed by the glyphosate actually create a fungal root disease. Look here: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/12/us-glyphosate-idUSTRE77B58A20110812 You have to love the last line of that article.
      “Neither the USDA nor the Environmental Protection Agency, which is reviewing the registration of glyphosate for its safety and effectiveness, have shown interest in further exploring this area of research, Kremer said Friday.” Nothing to see here folks, move along……

      #2: The GMO salmon. This is insanity. This is supposed to be for ‘farmed’ salmon. It’s not like salmon farms are in the middle of Iowa. Of course not! They’re on the coast. How long before a few of these beauties escape into open water and start breeding with the wild salmon, destroying the natural salmon stocks forever. Not to mention, if it grows 12 months a year instead of 6, it’ll be a forocious predator, impacting other species and ecosystems.

      #3: GMO alfalfa. This one has been on my radar, but I don’t know a lot about it, other than it scares the crap out of me. I have not read the article you posted yet, but I will. Thank you.

      Liked by 1 person

      • SteveBC says:

        Of the three, the alfalfa is the most subtle act and therefore perhaps the most insidiously corrupting. It will get into almost everything we eat in some way or another, and it will probably become a super-weed.

        Something else to consider are reports that eating GMO foods can introduce the new genes (for example, the gene that gives plants the ability to make Bt toxin) into our gut, where normal gene transfer processes common among bacteria and other intestinal flora may enable our gut flora to incorporate the gene. This would cause our gut flora to produce Bt toxin as an example. I emphasize here that I am not a scientist looking into this particular issue, but the mechanisms of transfer are well-known. Whether it is actually happening or not remains to be proven. However, there are stories…

        Like

      • Jacquie says:

        I have honeybees. You have no idea how strange it is to watch a hive full of bees, sitting next to a roundup ready bean field and ignor it! They used to forage in an alfalfa field close by but when the farmer went to roundup ready alfalfa I gave up the bees. They were so hard to keep alive. It made me heartsick to watch them dying. It’s dumb but I came to have an affection for the girls…
        Thanks for your post. When I learned that Roundup is registered as an antibiotic I knew it was very serious. How I miss the bullfrogs.

        Like

        • Mick says:

          Wow, Jacquie. We had bees for 3 years. We got them in the spring, we did everything we were supposed to, and they all died during the winter. The next spring, we bought new bees. Again, all dead during the winter. The third spring, bees; by winter’s end, dead. Behind our farm, there is a huge field this is alternately planted in corn and beans (both almost certainly GMO). Across the street from our farm, the same thing. To the right and to the left of our farm, there are corn/bean fields within a half mile. All of them are almost certainly planted in GMOs. We bought our bees from a very reputable source (an organic farmer about an hour from our farm), so the bees weren’t the problem. The only explanations I can come up with are that either the GMO crops’ pollen killed my bees, or that the Roundup sprayed on the crops did.

          Like

          • Jacquie says:

            Mick,
            Isn’t that just a sick feeling to go out in Spring and find them either gone or a soppy mess in a corner? There could be a couple other causes. Did you treat them for Varroa each fall? That mite will cripple the hive within a short period of time. If you treat for Varroa then in Indiana we would lose an overwintering hive to starvation. Did you check the weight of the hive in Feb and feed if it is light?
            All that being said, I believe the antibiotic properties of Roundup affects the whole hive. There is research. But, I ask you, how many of us who raise honeybees can avoid the effects of Roundup or Roundup Ready crops? Maybe if you live the middle of the mountains out west.
            After RRcrops and Roundup my hives were never the robust group of girls as I was accostomed to having. That and Varroa….it is a sad thing for me….
            I have one other thought. What if the honey foraged and which I ate or sold was contaminated by Roundup or RRcrops? 😖. I become somehow complicit…..😔
            God Bless
            J

            Like

  14. MMBev says:

    Thank you Ed so very much. You really go above and beyond. You should realize, though, that I will now be listening to both, (which I won’t mind). being driven by compulsions. (I say that to cover myself so I don’t seem really weird.)

    And my thanks to you, Steve …… again. You have helped me so many times as you have others. (When you’re done doing yours and your family, could you work on my purgatory too? Hee, Hee, Ho, Ho.) “Love covers a multitude of sins”.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Mary says:

    And you didn’t even mention bio magnification, which is accepted now as the cause of Eagle extinction from DDT and also shown with mercury and in the works BMAA (potential cause of ALS) in which the higher in the food chain the more ‘toxins/chemicals’ bio accumulate.

    Like

  16. MMBev says:

    Ed, although I realize that the beginning of this endeavor had a specific “Charlie” purpose, I got the purpose but I’ve gotten so very much more. Once a person has surgery (at least brain in my case), and you leave the hospital, that’s it. Any information has to be hunted, researched, pondered, substantiated, calibrated and it together by the “patient”. The only continuing interest is has the tumor spread or is it dead.

    I am on the fourth time to try to regain a good portion of what I have had deteriorate because of circumstances I had no control over. It becomes a struggle because one knows what is going to be required, the amount of effort necessary, along with the time involved and the frustration. (Bet that would resonate with Kim, although the difference is that she faces a different outcome, which is why I feel so close to her and why I carry her in my heart.)

    In the struggle to learn what to do beyond eating “well”, exercising, focusing on emotions and behavior, one often hits a brick wall. One see pieces of a puzzle, never the whole puzzle, and sometimes the picture on a piece isn’t even complete. Then comes the almost impossible task of trying to see if some of the pieces one has, will somehow fit together. The elation at even joining two pieces together is incredible. I know that I speak for many of the commentators who have special needs children who are doing exactly what I am doing.

    Since along with everything else, I am NOT computer savy, finding each new puzzle piece is only more difficult – and that is true for many others as well. And they have the additional frustration of not having the time to focus on the task because of the demands of raising a family, as I very well remember.

    Your column Ed, is such a gift. I doubt if you could ever fathom what you have given to many of us. There is solid “food” here we could not have located on our own. It leads far beyond the initial topic, with side bonuses that for you are unimaginable, but are like locating a gold mine for some of us. It’s a feast that will last a long, long time.

    An example. My neurotransmitters need help. (Stupid things.) When there is a change in medication, it’s a bit of shock to the brain. It’s been happy being supplied with what it has managed to be given, and WHAP, now it’s gone. Believe me, the whole body feels the whap. A few times in desperation, I have sought wildly to locate what the symptoms of withdrawal are and discovered that my experience is anecdotally presented to me by a whole host of other people from around the world. So one looks at the severest symptoms, the moderate symptoms, and the least symptoms. When you find out that you have 2/3 rds of the most severe, your spit dries. (well, at least mine does,) Then you start reading about what foods contain the elements required to supply what nutrients you have just taken away from the brain so it can make what you stopped giving it.

    What you have provided in various links gives pieces of the puzzle (I believe that we are just one huge one that God made with parts that all work together), and while, at least for me, I am going to have to listen to the videos two or three times (slightly slower processing but WAY better than it was) to glean information that will help me, I already have about five pieces I must write down and I’ve only spent one hour on the first video. Some I have already learned the hardest way – Vitamin D. When you have almost none, you don’t function well at all. BUT, you can bet I intend to get sunlight in my eyes for a portion of time whenever the sun is out. See, a whole piece I didn’t have a clue about.

    And I haven’t even started on the “reading” ones. Thank you is such a pathetic thing to say to such a gift. I have felt that way about all Charlie has given to us. Guess I will have to put you right with him. Different area of learning, but it will make a change in my physical life, just as he has made a change in my spiritual life. (Only don’t tell him. The commentators here are ALWAYS praising him ad nauseum, whereas I just want to keep him on his toes.)

    Like

    • Ed Allison says:

      Bev, if any of this can help you, then the time spent was well worth it. I’m humbled by your comments. Thank you and God bless you.

      Like

  17. http://news.discovery.com/tech/biotechnology/human-animal-hybrid-chimera-splice-slide-show.htm
    If this is not stopped these “scientists” are going to contaminate the earth’s life systems beyond repair. God is in control and He will not only stop them but fix our home but that does not make all of these experiments less scary.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. I’m starting to feel like a broken record ;-), but I am afraid reiterating this is yet again called for:

    Your scientific analysis is thorough and I commend that; as I’ve already said, GMOs might not be good or safe (I don’t know), and we should carefully consider this.

    But we should *not* be claiming they are intrinsically morally or ethically flawed. You implied in this article that creating GMOs is “playing God.” In reality, that assertion is itself one layman “playing Magisterium,” because the Magisterium has already spoken on this:

    Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, paragraph 458:

    “The Magisterium’s considerations regarding science and technology in general can also be applied to the environment and agriculture. The Church appreciates “the advantages that result — and can still result — from the study and applications of molecular biology, supplemented by other disciplines such as genetics and its technological application in agriculture and industry”. In fact, technology “could be a priceless tool in solving many serious problems, in the first place those of hunger and disease, through the production of more advanced and vigorous strains of plants, and through the production of valuable medicines”

    Like

    • If I may, I’d just like to include here an excerpt of a couple paragraphs from a post I have been working on for my blog on an unrelated topic, but which does happen to overlap on this one point. (This post probably won’t be on my blog for a couple months, so this may change.) I think it will help people understand why I am so insistent upon this point:’

      “”
      We may find ourselves drawn to this or that opinion on a matter, but if the Church has something to say on this matter, then it is her teaching that must be deferred to; and we should not be whining “but… do I really HAVE to believe that? Is it really Ex Cathedra? Is it really within her competence to rule on this or that?” That approach is no way to be what we are called to be: submissive children to Holy Mother Church.

      For example, we may feel a burning zeal against pesticides, pasteurization, GMOs, refining processes, or anything of the sort with food. Perhaps we have become quite the naturalists in this regard, and we have enough money to afford buying food three times as expensive to feed this preference. Go for it; that’s your choice!
      But we mustn’t feel we can in all freedom condemn these things as intrinsically immoral using Faith based arguments, if the Church has something to say on the matter! For she certainly does. For just one example, CSDC (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church) paragraph 458: “***SEE QUOTE ABOVE***.”

      Therefore assertions like “GMOs are evil,” or “to make a GMO food is to play God,” are phrases that should not find a home in any Catholic’s speech. Feel free to oppose GMOs if, on scientific grounds, you believe they are unsafe. Do not feel free to oppose them because you deem them intrinsically immoral. You have succumbed to a very cunning trap set by the devil if you say that, for he very much wants to divide God’s Church; one of his best ways of doing that is by convincing certain Catholics that something that the Church explicitly allows is actually an intrinsic evil and must be condemned as such. Goodbye unity.

      To use a personal example, I do not believe in evolution. But I recognize that the Church explicitly permits belief in it (though she does NOT teach that it did happen; she simply allows Catholics to believe or disbelieve in it), so I do not use Faith-based arguments against it. Who am I to argue that the Faith insists that we not believe in something that the Magisterium clearly says we are allowed to believe in? Consider how much demonic and destructive division is currently wreaking havoc upon the Church thanks to Catholics who insist upon condemning as evil that which the Church teaches is permissible? (for example, the Novus Ordo Mass, making personal pilgrimages to Medjugorje, using NFP, ecumenical efforts, etc.) There are entire organs of the Body of Christ that practically never interact because one of them accuses the other of following an intrinsic evil simply because the latter follows something that the Church clearly teaches is allowable. This is lethal to the Church.
      “”

      Like

      • Rita Warfel says:

        Read The Garden Of God, by Pope Benedict XVI. In this book Pope Benedict correctly points out that our world is ecologically fragile. I think the church is very clear that our duty is to be protectors of the environment so we leave to those that come after us an unblemished planet.

        Like

    • vicardwm says:

      You may think that the paragraph above gives approval to GMO’s. I do not think this necessarily follows. Anyway, a Pontifical Council is not necessarily an expression of the Magisterium. The Pope has authority over the Universal Church. A bishop has authority over a local diocese. I’m not exactly sure where a Pontifical Council or the USCCB, for example, fit in.

      Anyway, as a general statement, I don’t think that it’s controversial that science and technology can result in benefits to society. It’s just that they need to be much more careful than they are being right now!!!

      Liked by 2 people

    • E. Allison says:

      Daniel, I appreciate your reminder that when our will or beliefs are in direct conflict with the doctrines of the Church, we must conform our will and beliefs to the Church. You get no argument from me. Since the Magisterium has apparently spoken on genetically modified plants, I willingly submit. However, you may recall a comment I made above, that the biggest health concerns do not seem to be because the crop is genetically modified, but because the industry chose to marry these GMO crops to a herbicide called Roundup. I believe it can be demonstrated that Roundup is causing untold human suffering. I also believe that the industry has become aware of it, and is attempting to deny it, and cover it up. That my friend, is evil. Science has also not restricted its genetic manipulation to plants. They have both mixed plant and animal, and as SteveBC also points out, now have a GMO salmon which grows faster and bigger than it’s natural counterparts. Bigger, faster growth may mean more food, but let’s be honest. We’re not distributing salmon to the poor. Bigger, faster growth means more profit. I also recently read about GMO mosquitoes being released in the Florida everglades. And, I believe, that the mixing of plant and animal, and GMO salmon and mosquitoes, are outside the scope of the Magesterium’s statement. These things, constitute the corruption of creation itself, and the term, ‘playing God’, applies IMO.

      Liked by 2 people

      • malachi99 says:

        The difficulty in implementing Catholic social teaching in the socio-political, economic, cultural spheres is simply the fact that the principles appealed to in the documents of various councils and conferences can be applied in an infinite number of ways. There is no one way to love your neighbour etc etc. We don’t need to get hung up about “intrinsically evil” moral objects that are clearly ‘defined’ by the Church. There are a number of ways in which that which of itself is licit can be an immoral object of choice. Circumstances and intentions are essential elements of the moral evaluation of any human act.

        The question to be asked is “what is the limit to power”? Are we content to carry on subduing reality to our wishes no matter what effects it may have? Are we willing to continue to buy power and knowledge at the cost of life itself? As Lewis pointed out in ‘Abolition of Man’, we today are willing to do things that hitherto would have been regarded as disgusting and impious. Indeed, we wouldn’t dream of doing to animals what we do do and threaten to do to human beings today. But hey it’s all progress… 🙂

        Liked by 2 people

      • SteveBC says:

        I would add that there are reports of human/animal hybrids or chimera. If true, and the reports are persistent, then I suspect the Magisterium would think that unacceptable and even intrinsically evil. However, I note I am not a member of the Magisterium. This is just my take on their possible reaction.

        Liked by 1 person

          • SteveBC says:

            Wow, that’s a little disturbing, Ed. I’m a science fiction nut, so my immediate reaction was to think about a dystopian world where the mice get so smart they become serious trouble. I can see the storyboard for a movie already. 🙂 😦

            In checking out the salmon story, I found that the company is very reassuring about possible escape of the salmon into the wild. They declare it impossible, because the rate of escape is 100%-98.8%=1.2%. Or something like that. Last I checked, 1.2% does not equate to 0%, but I was not taught the New Math and may be behind the times.

            Like

          • Ed Allison says:

            Not to make light of a very serious topic, but what first came to my mind was the ‘Pinky and the Brain’ cartoon.
            What are we gonna do tonight, Brain?
            The same thing we do every night, Pinky, try to take over the world!

            Sometimes, you have to laugh at things, to keep from crying.

            Liked by 1 person

    • NancyA says:

      I’m glad to see others responding to this, better than I have time to do. May I only say to Daniel that this paragraph (I have not gone to read the primary source) only says that advantages that… *can* result “*could be* a priceless tool”…. and goes on to be vague in describing the applications. It does not give carte blanche to the use (and abuse) of genetic engineering.

      Also, it appears to be an application of “the Magesterium’s considerations…in general…” to an area other than what the Magesterium had pronounced upon.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Kris says:

      Hi Daniel, I appreciate your quote from Magisterial documents. I would like to point out that the quote is taken out of a larger statement. It is also read within the larger context of human study and fields of knowledge one of them being ethical considerations. Technology and science (human knowledge and study of the physical world) are not only valid studies but are the gift from a loving God to man who has the job from the garden to be stewards of creation. No argument there. Yet we must always ask ourselves if our scientific prowess is in line with the proper function of science and has not become subject to man’s temptation to sin. The question of whether gmo’s are ethical probably needs to be read from this second part of the question. .

      Like

  19. Just though I would add my 2c worth to this discussion.

    As a scientist, I am certainly one for exercising extreme caution when it comes to “just because we can, doesn’t mean we should”.

    One issue that could make the debate on GMO’s and any other potentially toxic substance much more complicated is the use of the Sprague Dawley rat strain. My background is with inbred mice strains. Inbred meaning that each individual is as genetically similar as possible to the next individual animal. These are used in groups so as to add statistical weight to any of the observations/data collected when comparing a test group to a control group. This is good for studies where the outcome relies on having a stable genetic influence. e.g. studying immune function following challenge with a microbial pathogen. Ideally, every time the same experiment is performed with the same strain, the same biological pathways are being triggered. By repetition and continued dissection of these pathways a picture of the processes in that strain can be constructed. Of course when the same experiment is performed in a different inbred strain the results and the biological pathways could be very different. In all cases, the information is not necessarily easily transferred to humans because, for example, mice have different populations of white blood cells (WBC) to humans. In humans, neutrophils are the most prominent WBC, in mice it is lymphocytes. The purpose then (using study of the immune system as an example) is to use the animals to identify the key biological pathways that are associated with either the animals’ susceptibility or immunity against the test infective agent and then attempt to identify the relevant and corresponding process in humans (analysis of human blood/serum from susceptible individuals). The animal studies help to identify where to start looking in humans. Here is an analogy. Study a street directory on how to navigate to a brand new and unfamiliar destination. Try and remember key intersections, the number with traffic lights along the route, the approximate location of key features like overpasses, tunnels, bridges, railway lines, landmarks etc. (That is the equivalent of the animal study). The next day, hop in your car and try and drive the planned route without using a GPS or referring to the street directory. If you get lost or uncertain the only help available is to ask for directions (the equivalent of translating very well defined laboratory results into something real).

    The Sprague Dawley (SD) rats are outbred rats which in basic terms means they are more genetically diverse. I suspect that these are recommended for toxicology studies because the human race is obviously genetically diverse. i.e. if these rats exhibit a toxic response to a given test substance, then there is a high likelihood that humans would also react in a similar way. Unfortunately, SD rats also have a propensity to develop spontaneous tumours (Cancer Research, 1973 http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/33/11/2768.full.pdf). So depending on the experimental design (dose of test agent, choice of control agent, frequency, time frame of the experiment), it could be possible to get all manner of results between test and control groups. On face value, if I wanted to test something like aspartame, and I was the manufacturer of aspartame, these rats would be a good choice because if I were to make the dose and frequency of aspartame low enough, in all likelihood, the control and test groups would generate the same incidence of spontaneous tumours. That is, no difference between the control group and test group in terms of tumours, aspartame is safe. Conversely, if I wanted to ensure that aspartame exhibited a toxic outcome compared to the controls I could simply ensure that the test group had aspartame in their food and water, not necessarily at a high concentration, but ad libitum. This same result could also be achieved by using male SD rats in the test group and female SD rats in the control group since male rats have a higher propensity to develop spontaneous tumours compared to female rats (http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/33/11/2768.full.pdf). One hopes that the experimental details and results being published by all parties is honest. Even with all of this potential skullduggery, the problem remains that a study in rats, mice, monkeys, rabbits, sheep etc does not necessarily and easily, translate to a ‘like’ problem in humans. It is only a guide not a GPS.

    To be honest, I haven’t digested all of the published material on GMO’s and nor am I likely to given my other commitments. However, I am very sceptical about Sprague Dawley rats being used as the international standard for toxicology testing. This is a quote taken directly from conference proceedings by author, Nomura T. and an article entitled “Concept for Establishment of Rat Outbred Global Standard Strains.” (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK100297/) “Rats are the most common animals used in drug safety testing at this time. Reproducibility of animal experimental results obtained using outbred rats can be expected only if the genetic quality of the rats is guaranteed. However, a genetic testing system to verify the genetic quality of outbred rats has not been established.”

    There in lies the problem. SD rats do not have a guaranteed genetic quality and they spontaneously develop tumours independently of exposure to any test agent. That should immediately disqualify them from studies that use tumour formation as a basis for correlating carcinogenicity.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Gary says:

      Thank you Paul for showing me the complexity of this issue. I would think that rats that have a propensity to develop spontaneous tumors would not be a good test rat. One would not really know if the test was due to the drug or product or the propensity of the rat.
      Looks like Charlie threw a ringer here right Paul?

      Like

    • SteveBC says:

      Paul, one of the concerns I see discussed is that long-term feeding studies don’t have tumors as their primary outcome but instead show loss of fertility and eventually complete failure to breed over the course of 2-4 generations. I have been unable to verify these studies, but they are common enough to instigate my concern.

      One aspect of the Culture of Death is its desire, expressed often, to reduce the population of the world to a far lower number. Infertility for many reasons is on the rise. I don’t think it wise to add engineered food if that food increases the likelihood of infertility for the human race. Nonetheless, as I said, I have been unable to verify the truth of these claims.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Ed Allison says:

      Paul, thank you for taking the time to share your expertise. The fact that the Sprague-Dawley rats are prone to tumors was one of the complaints about the study from the EFSA. In case you didn’t get a chance to read the TestBiotech paper I linked to, I think this is a significant quote:
      “The other issue concerns the strain of rats used in the experiment. In brief, we consider EFSA´s statement on this issue to be misleading, particularly the assertion that the spontaneous occurrence of tumours in these rats was “neither taken into account nor discussed in the Séralini et al. (2012) publication.” Seralini et al demonstrate two different findings, both an increase in the number of tumours and an earlier onset of tumours in rats fed on the GE plant or the herbicide. Thus the researchers did not just measure the number of tumours over the lifetime of the rats. Further to support their conclusions, Séralini et al. (2012) compared their results to tumour rates in other published studies using this strain of rat. So they do appear to have been aware of the issue, and to have taken it into account. ”

      The Seralini study was the first of its kind. That is, it was the first long term study (lifetime). It used the same type of rats (SD) that Monsanto had used in its 90 day study, which is required for approval for human consumption. If in your opinion, the use of SD rats in the Seralini study, invalidates the study, wouldn’t it also invalidate the original 90 day study done by Monsanto? That would mean that there is basically no valid safety testing done on Monsanto’s GMO corn (NK603). Now, that’s frightening.

      Like

  20. Jim M. says:

    I have thought quite a bit about this issue. I am concerned with the lack of any long term studies like we do before we introduce a new drug. A genetically modified organism is not of the environment, but its introduction will change the environment.

    When X ray machines were first developed, there were no controls on their use. Department and shoe stores back in the 1930’s and early 40’s used to have X ray machines people could stand on to see how their feet fit into a shoe. Radium was not considered to be dangerous. There was a plant South of Pittsburgh PA back in the 40’s and 50’s that painted radium on watch faces and gauges. The employees sometimes painted each others faces for the glow in the dark effect. Cancer raged, and the area is still to this day of limits due to radioactive concentrations.

    There are two ways to approach the issue of crop yield and health: change the crop via its genetic genetic structure, or adapt the crop to the environment. The latter approach is not sexy, and does not result in protection of a new method by way of a patent. Nor does it boost a company’s balance sheet. But it does work.

    I found this article last year, and it is a testament to adapting the crop to the environment rather than changing the environment: http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/10/the-amish-farmer-replacing-pesticides-with-nutrition/380825/

    I would like to add one more thought. Throughout the millennia, as documented in the Bible, feast or famine cycles are closely tied to a people’s closeness to God, or their distance from Him. Prayer, when combined with obedience and a path to holiness, as with all other things in this life, works.

    With our introduction of new man made organisms into this world, it may well be that God will need to destroy the present world in order to save it.

    Liked by 4 people

    • MMBev says:

      Along with your well put comment, Jim, are concerns that I have had ever since GMO; were first entertained. A lab is not the same as the environment where the product will be used. Native plants have adapted over centuries to the environment in which they grow. There are many different choices for the local farmer. When one type of seed won’t grow in a particular season, the local farmer is often knowledgeable enough to select a type that will.

      Using GMO’s eliminates these different local seeds until they have disappeared and the farmer must purchase what the company offers, along with the pesticides and fertilizer required. Suddenly, he is also faced with purchasing at the price the company has set as well. Meanwhile, the “lost” local seeds are not available to him and he is forced into a situation that may have very long reaching consequences for him, his family and his community.

      Right now there is a debate about GMO apples being used in our apple growing area. Talk about mixed reactions! Owners are faced with the exact situation that corn growers faced. What happens if your neighbour uses GMO trees in his orchard. You don’t. Bless those bees, they just refuse to behave properly. They just wander at will and take pollen from here and there and cross boundary lines, and before you know it your non GMO crop of apples has been tainted, much to you dismay and horror.

      Wind also does not obey man’s dictates either. So it carries pollen across from the GMO crops and pollinates the non GMO crops. It isn’t something man has control over. It isn’t a lab.

      Our best efforts to help man can end up inadvertently destroying God’s plan for man’s survival.

      This isn’t limited to GMO products and does not even begin to entertain the idea of corruption of a company, greed, desire for increased profits, all of which lurk in the heart of man. And today, there is no moral compass for a lot of people. Look at the Amazon.

      Currently it is almost impossible to find fresh water on the earth that does not contain the products of birth control pills (you were concerned about the affect on men? – ask the scientist who took sheep up to the northern most part of Scotland believing that they could control the variables. I forget how long it took then to figure out that it was the water!, that was creating an effect they could not control, and had a profound affect on the sheep.) Those little suckers are like water soluble vitamins. I makes me shudder to think of all the women excreting hormones with each needed urine elimination.

      Canada insists on labeling of ingredients on their products. BUT, if a GMO product is added to another ingredient, it is not listed, only the ingredient it is added to, so forget being able to determine what you are consuming.

      So those who produce food have no control, and those who consume have no control and we all end up being “potential” rats in an experiment being played out with no one really knowing the long range consequences, or being able to return the environment to it’s original state.

      Liked by 2 people

  21. caren otis says:

    thank you very much for this info also..God bless you. caren

    Like

    • Mick says:

      Caren, I just wanted to say that my husband’s mother’s name was Caren. It’s a spelling I’d never seen on anyone else until you. 🙂

      Like

  22. Luis says:

    Just a reminder… We’re heading to the center of the Storm (Maelstrom included) and we’re worried about GMOs?

    Please lets go back to Lent, God is in charge, not our scientist, nor us.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Sue says:

      Although I did appreciate the post, and agree with Ed, I find myself a little irritated at the host of issues one must be informed on in this day and age. Who has the time to horse around trying to find credible sources and research every aspect of our existence?! And then what?! Gaahhh! The fact that for the most part, these things are legitimate concerns only increases my frustration. Meanwhile, laundry is piling up, my tabs are expired, and the garbage is not going to take itself out. Sigh. Deep breath. Acknowledge God, take the next right step, and be a sign of hope to everyone. And ask, any tips on what to do about the cynicism that threatens to overwhelm me at every turn?! I’m convinced that I am one of those “not fit for combat” who must “pray in secret”, because when I do speak out on an issue, my tone and tenor are not becoming of a Christian. Being opinionated, I have managed to do this enough times to destroy any credibility among those who know me. Ha, the foot who wants to be a hand…or in some way a sign of hope.

      Liked by 1 person

    • vicardwm says:

      “we’re worried about GMO’s?” Please read my comment above, under Cynthia’s comment…

      Like

    • Kati says:

      Luis,

      I truly understand your sentiment here but I think that Charlie has taught us some important lessons by bringing these things up. We are, indeed, finding ourselves in the midst of a steadily increasing storm of events. We also know that our God is allowing this storm to bring about a change for our good. We need to know how to discern far better than we have previously known. Our decisions about many things need to be grounded in the Father’s WILL. God has been so neglected that our world has become a dangerous cesspool that affects all of us. As we REBUILD, we need to have learned how to seek HIM for guidance in everything we do. We are learning the importance of this more and more. We can even take this expanding understanding into our Lenten prayer agenda. Perhaps we could begin to ask the Father now for good and holy scientists, farmers, engineers, etc, etc. We will need such people, who will follow God’s plan to build and plan and study …in line with Church Teaching about serving the Kingdom. The Scripture says that “we have not because we ask not.” Thus, we should use this Lent to ask HIM for all of our needs for the rebuilding time after the storm. This is just one of my little thoughts about this, my dear brother in Christ.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Kati says:

      One more thing, Luis,
      I should have mentioned the liturgical readings, etc. from today’s Mass because they fit so well with the notion that God is preparing us for the future rebuilding. However, it’s better to read them all and in the context of Mark Mallet’s offering here:

      http://www.markmallett.com/blog/going-against-the-current/#more-17895

      God is GOOD! Alleluia!

      Like

  23. Bob says:

    As I see it the major problem is the power and collusion which exists between the multinationals, food producers, media outlets and even the pressure on scientific journals to publish biased info. I hope after the storm is over there will be less power and greed to influence honest research into what is good and what isn’t and even if people disagree those who don’t like GMO foods could more openly choose otherwise. I do believe the toxic chemicals which go along with the roundup ready crops would be seen as evil over time but as for others like the golden rice Charlie referred to they may have some place. And after the storm I would hope farmers could use their own seeds without persecution.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ann says:

      “. . . but as for others like the golden rice Charlie referred to they may have some place.”
      I have been following and collecting data on the gmo issue for years and there is so much under-reported research out there proving deceit, blackmail, and genuine corruption surrounding the issue that I just don’t have time to comment on. But these claims about golden rice keep coming up.

      Dr. Vandana Shiva is a highly regarded scientist, author, pioneer, and activist who has studied in depth and probably knows more than anyone the plight of farmers in India and other developing countries, and its relation to Monsanto. Before buying into the corporate claims for golden rice, I would suggest you read her article, “THE “GOLDEN RICE” HOAX -When Public Relations replaces Science,” where she explains in detail and supports her conclusion that “While the complicated technology transfer package of “Golden Rice” will not solve vitamin A problems in India, it is a very effective strategy for corporate take over of rice production, using the public sector as a Trojan horse.” http://online.sfsu.edu/rone/GEessays/goldenricehoax.html
      She has been a victim of slander and character assassination and many attempts to undermine and denigrate her work, but I find her arguments compelling.

      Like

  24. Alphonsus says:

    If I wanted to know what the chemical composition of feldspar is, it might take me a half hour on the web to find the most hard-core, credible, empirical data generated and reported in credible journals by authentic experts in the field. I would have my answer. Why so easy and straightforward? Well, because the chemical composition of feldspar is sitting still and laying right out there, accessible to capture in the open. It is not on the move through a shifting, dense undergrowth of political, sociological, philosophical, and emotional foliage. In other words, it does not have the attention of yahoos.

    I sympathize with you, Ed, and all sincere folks who are not scientists, much less scientific experts on GMOs, as you try to find answers to your legitimate questions. Sans being able to design and carry out your own experiments, you really have only two options after narrowing each question as much as possible.

    1) Identify authentic, credible experts and look to see if they have done the legitimate work to answer the question – this is not easy and may result in no answer, but it is the most promising way to find an answer if it exists. Don’t mistake a person who talks and writes a lot about your question – but who does no original, peer-reviewed scientific work in the field themself – as a credible expert. In all likelihood, they are a yahoo.

    2) Go with your gut intuition. Sometimes that is the most satisfying option for a person who finds themself in a bewildering mess of competing opinions and agendas – like with GMOs. But beware. This is precisely where the yahoos want you to go, because it is there they have the best chance of bypassing your reason to recruit your feelings.

    There have been folks in medicine who were considered yahoos by their peers at the time, but who turned out to be correct. Ignaz Semmelweis was correct about hand washing as a method for reducing maternal deaths from childbed fever, but his colleagues dismissed his idea for his entire life. Now, who doesn’t wash their hands to prevent infection? Barry Marshall’s idea that a specific bacterium causes peptic ulcers and has a role in stomach cancer also was dismissed for a long time, but eventually he was awarded a Nobel Prize for being correct. Being considered a yahoo is not the same as being a yahoo. What those men above have in common is that they actually were doing work rather than bloviating about the work of others. A key difference.

    Liked by 1 person

    • MMBev says:

      Well, two points, Alphonsus.

      First, I think the actual idea is so that we will all be mummified by the time we die, thus reducing the costs of funerals.

      Second, spend three months in a hospital, and you will be UNBELIEVABLY HORRIFIED at how many staff don’t even wash their hands, and of those that do, most do an inadequate job. Now I don’t care if it says the soap is antibacterial. When a person washes their hands they should be scrubbing with a good lather of soap for the time it takes to sing happy birthday twice. If you don’t believe me, ask at a school if you can observe when they are teaching special needs students how to wash their hands. A special light is used to demonstrate the absolute necessity of what I have said. UUUUUUUUUUUUUgh. You should see what’s left on the hands between fingers, on knuckles, fingernails etc, when these directions are not followed. Not using my hands to eat with out doing that.

      A woman was brought into our four bed room. She was there one morning. She was then removed. Then we were all swabbed in every orifice, yes, even there, of our bodies.

      I waited an appropriate amount of time, and then questioned a nurse to know if I had picked up a mycobacteria that was antibiotic resistant. I didn’t need to be a scientist to figure out why what had happened had happened. Luckily, no one else in the room was infected. At least I knew that no staff had touched me in the half day, so I was not hyper nervous.

      Like

  25. Mary N says:

    Ed, thank you so much for this post – it’s an area of great interest to me. My daughter is 11 and has Asperger’s Syndrome. Many people think of Asperger’s as a sort of “mild” autism but I can tell you that it affects all areas of a child’s life. Dealing with it overwhelms us at times because there are so many issues to deal with when you have a child with Asperger’s – sleep issues, sensitivity to clothes, sound, and light, excessive stimming (she “flaps” her hands and also runs on her tiptoes for hours a day). She considers school a form of torture because she can’t look people in the eyes and her social skills are very poor. On the brighter side, she is a genius and very sweet and loving with people she trusts. I try to help her focus on her gifts but she says she would trade them any day if she could be like other kids.

    I’ve read a few of the links you have in your post but can’t wait to read the others! I will come back and comment once I have read them 🙂 Thank you – I am so glad you wrote this article. I know some people feel that worrying about GMO’s, vaccines, herbicides, and pesticides is a small thing compared to some of the things we have to cope with in the storm we are in but I’m of the mind that helping even one person is a great thing indeed. You have done this today. Mother Teresa always said that she never looked at her life as “helping the masses” but rather as helping the the individual person right in front of her. “One by one by one” she’d say. I’ve always been struck by her words. While I understand that some people may be a bit irritated by Charlie’s decision to write about and allow Ed to write about what seems to be inconsequential when you look at the problems in our world today, I have to disagree: I don’t think this is a small thing at all – it affects all of us. And even if it just affected the person right in front of us it would be a very big thing because every person matters.

    I mean, can you imagine if no one spoke up for Joe Cronin because it was just one small person? So, this here Mom is very grateful for what you have written here today 🙂 Thank you as well, Charlie!

    Liked by 5 people

    • NancyA says:

      Hear, hear! (in other words, a second “like.” ) Mary, I so agree with you and am glad you found the way to express it. These topics might not be for everyone, but if I’ve found that none of the columns/articles/comments have been so. We each take what is appropriate to our state and circumstances, and leave the rest, in charity.

      Like

  26. diane says:

    Do not let anything afflict you, and do not be afraid of any illness, or accident, or pain. Am I not here who am your Mother? Are you not under my shadow and protection? Do you need anything else. Am 1 not the source of your joy? Are you not in the hollow of my mantle, in the crossing of my arms? Do you need something more? Let nothing else worry you or disturb you. –

    The sourceof all Good is God.
    Love. I do.

    Like

  27. Donette says:

    Ezekiel 4:9 “Take also unto thee WHEAT and BARLEY, and BEANS, and Lentils, AND millet, AND SPELT and put them in one vessel, and make bread of it….” Thus saith the Lord.

    This is printed on the wrapping of Sprouted Grain Bread known as Ezekiel 4:9.

    I never paid much attention to GMO’s and all of the information that was ‘out there’ in regard to food. I was told constantly that it was just “quack” information. When my daughter came down with breast cancer and went through chemotherapy and major surgery,I became involved in “food awareness”.

    You are what you put in your mouth or so the saying goes. I would never interfere with an individual’s human will in deciding on what he eats and what he does not eat. I, personally, have gone organic, and I am almost to the stage of ‘vegan” as they call it today. I am content with my decision. My meat and potato’s husband is not. I constantly am ribbed by him about how I keep our refrigerator filled with “grass.” But that’s O.K. We’ve been married for 53 years and I have learned how to accommodate him over that length of time. My daughter, under the care of an alternative medical regimen to maintain her health post op, is doing just great. And I, (I’m told a woman who tells her age will tell you anything.)am doing terrific.

    But I thank Charlie and you, Mr. Allison for keeping us informed.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. narnialion54 says:

    Thank you, Ed, Thank you for your thorough presentation.
    Just some musings… I have studied Human Nutrition for many years. We have always eaten organically and skipped vacations in order to do so. However when my purse was stolen by a poor woman and the first thing she used my credit card for was to buy groceries, it gave me pause.
    If agribusiness is making it possible to feed the world, but is poisoning them while feeding them, is
    not that evil? yes, there may be many good people working at Monsanto doing wonderful studies, but what is the overall effect? I know that comment probably belongs on another post.
    I find myself agreeing with Sue and Luis above. I am overwhelmed by just my daily existence right now and must do the laundry and go pick up some milk and eggs, make dinner (my two college sons have returned home from college after persecution for disabilities (ok we had the name of a hotshot lawyer, but financially and emotionally and spiritually, we did not have the strength to pursue) and severe depression.(terrible mental illness in the family…as my son was out by the compost pile trying to overdose (autistic), my mother and brother (both involved in the occult/New Age) were on the phone telling me about the darkness in me.) Throw in a sister who practices shamanism, an exorcism, after which all hell broke loose), between crying and praying, and preparing our home as a refuge…I am feeling the hour is late for any discussions, and only the most essential things (including trying to have a sense of humor about all this 😉 Crew Dog a shout out to you for making me laugh out loud! are necessary.
    And I think the link that Carlos provides about human/animal hybrids is frightening.
    And Charlie says we are on the cusp of Armageddon.
    And the prophecies that vicard refer to are spot on, as far as I can tell.
    There is a comment on another post about the terrible spiritual battle we are involved in by Marino Restrepo whose testimony I highly recommend.
    I am so looking forward to our rescue by Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception in late 2017.
    Hail Holy Queen, Mother of Mercy, our life, our sweetness and our HOPE! I really don’t care whether I make it through or not. If I have to die, just let it be quick. Lord!
    And I am trying to find a place to learn to shoot my new 22 rifle (all the gun clubs here are full)
    .I feel totally inadequate about everything, including praying, fasting and posting on this wonderful blog. I pray for all of you at Mass. We all fasted yesterday and then late night sat down to the most wonder takeout dinner of cold fish and french fries (yes, probably GMO and mercury included!) but it was FUN!!
    All to say….I have followed Charlie’s blog since last Spring. I have copied off almost everything and many of the comments to have available, since Charlie said many people will die from panic.
    The two dogs and cat are madly chasing each other around the house and it is going to go down to minus 20 tonight (with wind chill). Ok enough of my ranting…but I can only cope with the most essential things right now and have to keep my life simple. Thanks for being there, all of you in this magnificent rag-tag .0002 % army of the Lord. You are all dear to me.

    Liked by 4 people

    • diane says:

      Narnialion – I love that – says so much

      Liked by 1 person

    • NancyA says:

      “Narn'”, I will pray for you. Many of us have a laundry list of “storm related troubles.” Your list is formidable! God bless you.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Mary N says:

      Narnialion, just read your comment and my first thought was, “That sounds like my house!” Lol. Including the two dogs, a cat, and the cold temps! (It’s snowmageddon here in N.E. and soooo cold that our snowman has been knocking at the door asking to come in 😉 )

      We can be “inadequate” together 🙂 I always ask the Lord, “Are you sure you placed me in the right century?” I just put one foot in front of the other and take things day by day. You know, like that song in that children’s Christmas show – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OORsz2d1H7s. I actually sing this to myself whenever I feel overwhelmed! (Yep, and I can’t believe I just admitted this on a public blog! Ha! Ha!)

      I will pray for your family. I am very familiar with the word “overwhelmed”.

      Like

      • narnialion54 says:

        Mary,
        love the song…just put one foot in front of the other..it had me laughing! .I think I will make that my theme song through the Storm. Ha ha hee haw thank you!!

        Like

        • Mary N says:

          Narnialion,

          Yeah, it fit’s in perfectly with the theme of Charlie’s blog 🙂
          It seems to be my life theme as well, putting one foot in front of the other. I wrote a poem about it years ago (well, I don’t know if Charlie allows lame poetry on his blog but here goes) :

          A Foot for Sorrow

          On the endless road – Redemption way
          I thought I heard my Savior say
          “For love alone, one step more.
          You can do it, I love you. One step more.”
          A foot for sorrow, a measure of pain
          I lifted my feet, again and again
          And the Lamb’s voice echoed as before:
          “You can do it. I love you. One step more.”
          “Though you may stumble, when you fall down,
          I’ll lift you up; my graces abound.”
          In my heart arose a love so sweet
          Grace set me once more upon my feet
          His beloved voice shook me right to the core:
          “You can do it . I love you….
          …one step more.”

          Really, the more I think about it the more I see that life is a crucifixion of a sort. The crosses vary in size and strength but we all have them.

          I think this is why I was so taken with Charlie’s “The Next Right Step” – I have been living this way for years and my guess is that many others are as well. When I was young I never truly understood the consequences of our fallen natures but the past twenty years have taught me a lot. We truly cannot exist without grace and that grace which we so rely on comes at the right time – with every step if need be. I joked about being inadequate for the times we live in but truthfully this is no obstacle to God at all. If we focus on what is right in front of us and do each thing for love alone there can be no inadequacy because the measure of a person’s life is love.

          Bad poetry and weird motivational songs just go with the territory (wink, wink)!

          Liked by 3 people

          • narnialion54 says:

            “For love alone, one step more.
            You can do it. I love you..
            one step more…”

            Thank you, Mary. Beautiful.

            Liked by 1 person

          • connie says:

            Thank You, Mary so much for sharing your poem. I read it yesterday and read it gain this morning!. I have been beset withone illness after another since Christmas and my head is so foggy most of the time, it takes all I have just to try to keep up with the posts and comments here but I got much consolation by hearing Jesus say “one step more” through you. There is so much my mind wants to accomplish but my body has not been able so I just offer all up to Mother Mary and all of you here are in my prayers and what I offer up. In my weakness Jesus is strong, I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. Well, I am mostly praying now until the Lord sees fit for me to do something else. One next right step at a time.

            Charlie, I watched a program on CNN the other day(which I NEVER do) but it caught my eye because the author of a book called “The Hundred Year Marathon” by Mike Pillsbury of the Hudson Institute who basically said that China is working towards replacing America as a superpower and wants to avenge what they feel has been past humiliations by the West towards them. Also that China is using deception in dealing with the US. playing “nice” when it reality China is”circling the enemy”(my quotations) It made me think about what you have said in the past that China will be our main problem. I wish that he would have talked about Russia’s attitude towards China and viceversa but I guess that was not his expertise. Have you heard of Pisllsbury?

            Liked by 1 person

          • charliej373 says:

            I’m not familiar with that name, Connie. (Oops, I was just looking at your last line in response…I think you might have been speaking of Mike Pillsbury, an Asst. Sec. of Defense under Reagan and a serious, sober thinker).

            Like

          • Mary N says:

            Hi Connie,
            I’m sorry you have been so sick and I will pray for you. It’s hard to feel ill for months on end. The poem was written during a time when I was suffering terribly with a neuromuscular condition called Myasthenia Gravis. Like many with autoimmune disorders I would also catch every virus and nasty bug under the sun. In other words – I was always sick. My brother and a friend dragged me to a healing service and much to my surprise I was healed of it. (I thought I had faith but was so shocked by the healing that I realize now that my faith was seriously lacking…lol. Sad that I had to be dragged there. The priest’s name was Fr. Ralph Di Orio and he is well known for his healing gift.) One of the best side effects of the healing is that I’ve only had a couple of colds in the past (almost) 5 years whereas before I’d catch every cold, flu, and stomach bug that was going around.

            I share this because I can very much relate to how it feels to walk around ill for a long period of time. What seems like small tasks become monumental when a person is sick. I tackled this by approaching each task one step at a time, uniting it with the Lord’s suffering and offering it up for conversions. I would picture Jesus taking one step after the other on the road to Calvary and I would take those steps with Him. It helped me immensely because I knew we were walking together and it gave me the courage and strength to face each day.

            Illness is like a living “way of the cross”.

            Looking back, I can see what great blessings lay hidden beneath things like diseases, illnesses, and pain and suffering. We grow so much more during those tough times than during the easy times. We grow closer to God and grow in virtue as well. Those physical sufferings seem to heal us spiritually in ways we cannot understand.

            I hope this consoles you a bit, knowing that there are wonderful things going on spiritually when you are feeling bad physically. Things aren’t always as they seem. I loved your beautiful comment about offering it up and Jesus being strong in your weakness – yes, He certainly is!

            Praying that you will feel better soon.

            Liked by 1 person

          • connie says:

            Your prayers are very much appreciated, Mary N. You have hit the nail on the head about the dreariness of an affliction dragging on! Though I told the Lord I willingly suffer for souls, I am so relieved when the time of suffering passes! And thanks be to God, He has healed me in a way that I have asked even if it pleases Him to allow other chronic illnesses to stay for now. I love your attitude and Narnia’s also – gotta laugh or we will only cry and that gets old fast! You Know, when I get exhausted and sleep deprived I get very dingy and nothing really bothers me (like I am on a Xanax or something) and everything is hilarious- that is one I have the most fun! We are the overwhelmed .0002%
            Club but we can laugh at ourselves and have a good time anyways and though we don’t look it, we are keeping our sanity this way!

            Liked by 1 person

        • MMBev says:

          Told you guys. Rag Tag, inept, clumsy, a bunch of losers, and we’re walking with Ellenchris, Steve and Carlos and a bunch of others with Charlie, for goodness sake, in the lead. Look, we didn’t pick who was going to be part of the army. We were “conscripted”, and I’m not sure but in my case I think it was by stealth. You guys are in it just as much as I am. Seems He needs a true mix. (Could He be giving a picture of the Church, do you think?)

          Anyway, not to worry, we didn’t volunteer, so I guess He knows what He’s doing. Welcome to the motley part of the crew you guys. I just hope we don’t form the largest group!

          Liked by 2 people

          • Mary N says:

            Funny, Bev! A certain “ragtag” bunch comes to mind when I think of the early church as well 🙂

            Liked by 1 person

          • SteveBC says:

            MMBev, motley is good. The most robust ecosystems and communities generally contain many elements with many different aspects and characteristics. The whole here is far greater than any single part. 🙂

            Liked by 1 person

          • MMBev says:

            Well, to tell true Steve, I’ve been called quite a few things but that has to be just about the nicest…. “an element with many different aspects and characteristics”. Love it, love it. It actually sounds sort of suave. But I know you’re just saying that because you are up at the front of the group and don’t want us to have hurt feelings. However, the next time someone dares to refer to me in a slightly derogatory manner, I am going to inform them they are wrong, and quote your phrase. It should leave them speechless.

            In my last comment, did I mention what happens to the first few lines leading an army? Keep the Banner being passed from man to man so it doesn’t fall on the ground. And I think that all things considered, maybe a couple of you should walk in from of Charlie at all times. Just so he can keep sending info back to those of us bringing up the rear.

            OK. Entire Army. PRAY FOR NO LOSSES. If we are the size Charlie says we are, God has to be covering all of us with His Wings.

            Like

          • MMBev says:

            Is this the same as saying we have found our own “niche”?

            Like

          • SteveBC says:

            MMBev, you do so make me laugh! I agree we are all finding our niche in this ecology of the Next Right Step, and at the same time we here as an ecology are part of a larger ecology-of-ecologies of groups like/unlike ours who will also do their parts so we all help each of us through the Storm.

            As the Age of Empires dies, I think we will replace it with an interlinked ecology of ecologies organized mostly in terms of partnerships of equals. We are used to thinking in terms of a few leading the many, but I think the lead will shift among the many, as events and needs dictate. For example, when it comes to liquid-golding people into the ground, you reign supreme! 🙂

            That means you might very well find yourself in the forefront at some point, holding our 0.0002% banner high for the rest of us! Heh-heh!! (And I will be falling-over laughing in the background.)

            Like

          • Ed Allison says:

            For most of my adult life, whenever someone would tell me that I’m a pain in the @@@, my response is that everyone has to find their niche in life. That’s mine! 😉

            Like

          • SteveBC says:

            Ed, it is a wonder and a great thing when someone finds their niche in life. I am so glad you have found yours!

            Now pardon me while I go into the next room and laugh myself silly. 😀

            Liked by 1 person

  29. Mary N says:

    These are excellent resources for me, Ed. Funny how God answers prayers sometimes – my daughter has been having a really rough time coping lately and I (and others) have been praying so much for her and asking the Lord for help. A few weeks back I felt so overwhelmed by everything concerning my daughter that I prayed the The Prayer of Miraculous Trust and placed it all in Our Lady of Tepeyac’s hands and now I see these links to articles that would have taken me forever to find on my own (if I ever found them at all). I am especially interested in the glyphosate/autism correlation. High fructose corn syrup has an immediate effect on my daughter – it’s very strange really. We have always been aware of what it does to her because it’s so obvious. I thought it was more a “sugar effect” type of thing but I’m wondering if it’s a reaction to the glyphosate instead. I try to keep her “toxic load” to a minimum but this is very difficult because there are so many toxins our bodies have to deal with today, including PCB’s, BPA, phthalates, and numerous herbicides and pesticides. We give her organic milk because of the BGH and I have an organic garden during the warm months but the truth is that we can’t afford to eat strictly organic foods because they are so expensive (but I do buy certain foods organic). Unfortunately, GM foods do not have to be marked as such so it’s impossible to avoid them. Still, the info you have here will be a great help in understanding what foods would be best kept out of my daughter’s diet. She also has terrible stomach issues and was tested for Celiac Disease last year but the results came out negative. I’m going to try eliminating possible GM foods from her diet to see if it makes a difference – definitely worth it if it helps her. Thanks again!

    (Still have to watch the video!)

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mick says:

      Mary, I can relate to how high-fructose corn syrup immediately affects your daughter. Within hours of eating soy, I start to feel ill and get brain fog. Within hours of eating anything with non-organic corn, I have an allergic reaction. Within hours of eating wheat, I start to get headaches. My children have similar reactions to soy, non-organic corn, and wheat.

      True story regarding soy: For over a decade, my kids and I have been limited to one brand of tuna (Polar brand) because every single other brand carried at any of the groceries we could find all contained “vegetable broth,” which is a euphemism for soy. At first, my dear husband used to complain about the extra cost–Polar is much more expensive than, say, Chicken of the Sea or the store brands. He continued to eat the cheaper stuff. Then our farmdog got lost in a massive snowstorm. She was gone for three days before she found her way home. We let her into the house and grabbed the first food we could find because she was clearly literally starving. The first thing I found was a can of my husband’s cheap tuna. I opened it and put it down in front of her. She put her nose down into it, but after three days of starving in the blizzardy cold, she refused to eat! So the next thing I found was a can of the Polar soy-free tuna. I opened the can and set it down. She sniffed it and then devoured it in about 20 seconds. My husband watched in awe. We puzzled over why she hadn’t eaten the first can; and the only thing we could come up with is that her doggy instincts made her shun the soy content, because soy was the only difference between the two cans of tuna. My husband said, “Wow… if a starving dog won’t eat soy, then maybe I shouldn’t, either.”

      Liked by 4 people

      • Mary N says:

        Hi Mick,
        The foods you mention are very common allergens these days but oh so hard to avoid! I know a lot of people who feel better when they remove these foods from their diets.

        I’m so glad your dog was okay! I’ve never heard of the Polar brand – is it available in regular grocery stores? We have a Whole Foods near us too and I wonder if they carry it.
        I buy organic milk, organic ground beef and I try to buy organic for the “dirty dozen” (the foods that have been found to have the most pesticides in them http://www.ewg.org/foodnews/:). In the summer it’s easier to eat organic foods because of my garden but the rest of the year it’s a lot tougher.

        Like

        • Ed Allison says:

          Mary, with regard to beef, organic could still be grain fed. God didn’t build cows to eat corn. They’re ruminants. They’re meant to eat grass. Grain fed beef has a much different lipid profile (omega-3 to omega-6 ratio) than grass fed. Grain fed has much higher omega-6 (bad fat), and grass fed has a much higher omega-3 (good fat) content. Grass fed also has much higher levels of CLA (conjugated lineolic acid) which is a cancer fighter, among other things. As you might expect, grass fed is unfortunately, much more expensive.

          Like

          • Mary N says:

            Hi Ed,
            I buy grass fed ground beef most of the time and I buy free range eggs as well. I wish I could buy all my beef grass fed but it’s soooo expensive. When I see it on sale I grab it and freeze it but it doesn’t go on sale very often. Chicken is a bit more reasonable thankfully – I only buy it in small quantities.

            Liked by 1 person

  30. radiclaudio says:

    Wow, very thorough and well done. It confirms my general thinking so I don’t have anything to add other than: 1- I agree with Crew Dog’s initial comment, and 2 – Thank you Gary. May God bless you always.

    Like

  31. radiclaudio says:

    sorry. I meant Thank you “Ed” not ” Gary”. 🙂

    Like

  32. Ed Allison says:

    There are several folks that I owe a reply too. I am still at work and can only pop in here from time to time. I will do my best to give thoughtful replies in a couple of hours. But I do not intend to stay up until 2:00 AM like I did last night! I am really dragging today.:)

    Like

  33. Hereford says:

    Just wanted to put a short comment in here. In the article Ed wrote, he stated that although there isn’t really R.R. wheat yet it is sprayed with RoundUp to kill it and thus dry it down for harvest. Well I don’t know where he got that info, but I can tell you as a fact, here in our rural farming area NONE of our neighbors or ourselves spray RoundUp on our wheat crop to get it ready to harvest! With our harvest in late June/early July, we have plenty of hot weather and drying winds that all the wheat in this area of the country is dried down naturally. The only time I have ever seen a wheat field sprayed with RoundUP to kill it is if there was an extremely poor stand of wheat and it wasn’t going to make it as a crop and they sprayed it to kill it so they could plant another crop in that field. And just for the record, I myself am not a fan of RoundUp either. I think there are too many unanswered questions on it’s safety. But it is used almost exclusively in no-till and minimum till farming practices.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ed Allison says:

      Hereford, I’m glad to hear that there are still wheat farmers who do not do it, but it is a common practice. I do not have a source at the moment, but I could dig one up if you insist.

      Liked by 1 person

  34. Judy says:

    Hurrah, Hereford! You are doing a good job for the nation.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Hereford says:

    No I don’t need you to look up a source, I just did not want everyone to think that this is a common practice, at least it isn’t through a lot of the midwest anyway. Unfortunately with the introduction of R.R. crops, it hasn’t all been good as far as I can see. It has only encouraged the big to get bigger as it cuts down on the time spent tilling the fields and therefore there are now huge farms with several thousand acres and that has left small farmers out of the picture. They can’t begin to compete with the “big boys” to buy land, etc. So we are losing a lot of our young people off the farms because they can’t afford to get into farming and they are working somewhere else. I firmly believe that God never intended for farming to end up being done the way it is these days. Too many people have left the rural lifestyle and are no longer in touch with nature or growing their own food.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Judy says:

      I think you are right, Hereford. My father and mother use to grow a lot of vegetables and can or freeze them for the winter. We kids used to pick and cut them up. This gives a great appreciation for farmers and their labor. Of course, we did not have cows or chickens. But once we did raise some pigs. May father had such a terrible time slaughtering them that he said he would never do it again. I think that if one learns to care for animals at a young age, then he will have more respect for life in general, and there will be less abuse of both animals and children.

      Like

    • Ed Allison says:

      Hereford, I am actually looking to go the other way….. from the rat race into farming. I currently work as a systems analyst for a major healthcare company. But I also own a 85 acre farm in KY. Well, I’m still paying on it, but I own a good piece of it! The plan was to pay off the land, then sell the house and move there to begin a farmstead, complete with livestock. From a secular viewpoint, I’ve seen what’s coming for years. Now, I see that I don’t have enough time to get to the farm and get set up before the ‘stuff’ hits the fan. So, plan B….. God willing, if we survive the storm, we’ll be farmers after.

      Like

      • Ed Allison says:

        Of course, our farm will be ‘organic’! 🙂

        Like

      • vicardwm says:

        Nice, Ed! That’s a dream of mine. A bigger dream would be to start a Catholic community, no major rules or cultish aspects like that other than faithfulness to the Magisterium – somewhat rural and with each family having 5-10 acres of their own as well as some common areas set aside for recreation/farming/nature etc.

        But I have no idea how to go about such an endeavor short of a large amount of money coming into my possession, so it will remain a dream for now.

        Liked by 1 person

        • NancyA says:

          Quite a few years ago, I was very interested in a planned Catholic community that was being developed…I think it was in Arkansas. I went as far as to get the plots offerings map… but I wasn’t ready to quite commit. Later, a similar idea; I went up and visited at a place that afterwards was exposed to be running rampant with the wrong type of behavior. It sounds ‘idea’ in some ways, doesn’t it, vicardwm? Who knows? Your dream may one day become reality of some sort!

          Like

        • Rosalie says:

          vicardwm, there is a community like that in the Shenandoah mountains of VA; we bought a plot there (they’re only 3 acres; you’d have to buy 2 or 3) but our home (our primary source of wealth; what we were going to build in the mountains with the proceeds of) lost 2/3 of its value in the crash of 2008 and our health went down the tubes and we ended up not building there. It’s the kind of Catholic community you’re talking about; has an HOA with rules, but otherwise it’s just a collection of like-minded faithful Catholics which began when an opthalmologist from FL, Cuban emigre, with a wife who hears from the Holy Spirit and told him to buy 640 acres. They had everything you could ask for, herd of beef on the hoof, and a slaughterhouse to deal with it; resident priests (vacation homes), and best of all a retreat center, but the crash of 2008 was not kind to them either. He had to sell a lot of it.

          Like

  36. Ed Allison says:

    One of the things I expected to come up, that didn’t, was confusion over genetic manipulation vs. hybridization. Just in case anyone needs an explanation of the difference, this one is pretty good:
    http://www.trevorcaswell.com/ramblings/differences_between_hybridization_and_genetic_modification/

    Like

  37. Ed Allison says:

    Based on this discussion, there may be some of you who might like an alternative to Roundup for use around the house. I have seen on Facebook, posts about a mixture of vinegar, dish soap and (I think) Epsom salts. Save yourself some trouble….. it doesn’t work. It may kill a few weeds, but it’s a far cry from the absolute death to everything that Roundup is. The problem is, that most white vinegar is only about 5% acetic acid. It’s not strong enough to do the job. But I have found a source for 20% acetic acid. I now have some, but have not had the chance to try it yet. I’ve read it only takes about 12% purity to give you acid burns on your skin, I’m going to dilute it further down to about 10% and try it. I’m going to take precautions, such as rubber gloves just in case. I think I’ll also need to lime any area I use it in to correct the soil ph after the weeds are dead. That will let me replant the affected area.

    I just thought I’d put this out, in case anyone is pondering this issue. I’m not going to post the source without Charlie’s permission. He may not want specific products promoted on his site. I will tell you that it’s not Amazon (way too expensive). You need to buy direct. Use google, you’ll find it.

    Like

  38. SharonAnn says:

    I really appreciate the information Ed has provided here. I have felt for quite a long time that with all the supposed knowledge and scientific studies, etc., at our disposal, that we should be going forward in the area of health, but alas, we seem to be going backward. How many people do you know who are very ill with long term debilitating illnesses, which are ‘incurable’? How many new ‘diseases’ are there which were never heard of before? Some people that I know, including myself, have actively begun to seek out sources of natural food that was originally created by God, and we have regained good health — which is not necessarily for the purpose of trying to live longer, but to respect the human body which is ‘the temple of the Holy Spirit’, and provide it with what God has given us so that we can do the work He has given us to do. The many people I know who are so very ill with autoimmune ‘diseases’ will not change their eating habits and have chosen the path of chemical medications, which is not helping them at all, but indeed seem to be worsening their conditions.

    Also, one small example of the wrong next step we have all taken, exchanging artificial for real food products, ie, artificial sweeteners replacing natural sweeteners has been a nightmare. Cane sugar in large quantities, is not good for anyone, but aspartame, and other unnatural ingredients in the various pink, blue and yellow packets, is especially toxic and actually increases weight gain. The addition of high fructose corn syrup (from GMO corn) to most all processed foods even more increases levels of sugar consumed, and has been proven to be detrimental – ie, diabetes upsurge. I use only Stevia or Xylitol as sweeteners. Telling us natural butter is unhealthy and replacing it with ‘margarine’ and other artificial chemical brews are a drop in the bucket of the things which should be avoided. And don’t get me started on fluoride in all our water! Each and every food label must be examined very closely, even with organic products, and educating oneself in what the strange ingredient names represent, is a good idea because then you realize that these ingredients are likely dangerous chemicals that our bodies do not require. The example of the starving dog and the tuna, given by Mick, was excellent – we have also been feeding unnatural or inappropriate ingredients to pets so that they too are exhibiting more illnesses and require more frequent veterinary services.

    I look at all of this as a pro-life issue. Planned Parenthood kills babies for profit, and it seems that many large corporations are using chemicals which are harming and bringing on unnecessary early deaths, for profit. It most likely was not their original plan to kill people, and many working for any of these entities are naive or uninformed, but long-term illness and untimely death is the indisputable result, and even with all the evidence, the corporations will not veer from their path of delivering unnatural products, but throw their substantial wealth into the mix to keep it going by influencing decision makers who are not taking the next right step, but caving to the temptations offered them, whatever they may be, to make decisions beneficial to the corporations’ desires, ie, the Monsanto protection act, and is harmful to the people who are supposed to be protected by the government agencies.

    Monetary Profit is at the base of the sales of most things which are detrimental to people. For example, doctors are trained by sales reps from Pharmaceutical companies as to what is to be given to patients with certain symptoms, rather than getting to the root of a problem for a more healthy, long-lasting recovery. It’s easier to dispense pills, and there are many ‘perks’ available to promote the ‘push’ of the latest product. Most drugs have so many warnings, which you are not told about by said physicians. Just listen closely to the many drug ads on TV (with the many dangerous possible side effects listed) spoken so quickly it is hard to understand what they are even saying, (likened to an auctioneer) not advising that you inevitably will need more drugs to deal with the side effects, etc. There are natural plants which provide antibiotic, healing properties – I have used them and know that they work – along with pesticide / chemical fertilizer free food, with much improved health and no prescriptions in my cabinet, and no visit to the doctor in several years, no colds or flu, etc, at age 68. Hippocrates said “Food is medicine.” In these times, I would add, “real” food is medicine. Processed food is toxic.

    Our bodies were created by God to heal themselves when properly fed and watered. Some chemical cures can have their place, in the case of accidents/ emergencies, but we have become a society depending entirely too much upon drugs/chemicals, greatly overused, with many people addicted to them. The number of immune deficiency disorders are directly attributed to the toxic air, water, food and medicines introduced into the world by those who have a monetary stake in all this. With the terrible condition of the world, as regards the evil surrounding us in this “Storm”, why can’t we believe that there is/has been a major plan afoot by ‘the satan’ for centuries, who has had no shortage of volunteers throughout that time to help ensure the evil agenda of killing God’s people, even if they don’t understand what is behind it all and are merely cooperating for income? The promise of money and power is much too alluring to not find some folks who will cooperate in each segment of the satan’s hateful plan. I believe that many people are too afraid to see the reality of deception on many fronts in our world right now, and are in denial, so they are unwilling to make any real changes to help themselves. Easier to bury ones head in the sand, and we all know that change is very difficult…..very sad!

    The following is a quote from a book I am currently reading and I believe sums up what is driving all of this…

    “Our great error is that we have turned economic activity into an end in itself. We have separated economics from the influence of those human sciences and norms that should orient all human actions. Economics, which should be a faithful servant to help man reach his end in life, thus becomes a domineering master. ….ever since economic thought broke free from its moorings in moral philosophy and ethics, there have been those who have sought to keep such considerations out of this debate. The time has come for such reflections to return. The need for this great return is made evident by the fact that we are suddenly faced with the terrifying specter that material progress and money alone will not resolve our crisis, calling to mind the words of Scriptures: “What doth it avail a fool to have riches, seeing he cannot buy wisdom?” (Prv 17:16). What we must now seek is a return to this wisdom.” (Horvat, John (2013-01-23). Return to Order: From a Frenzied Economy to an Organic Christian Society–Where We’ve Been, How We Got Here, and Where We Need to Go (Kindle Locations 2078-2080, 2083-2088). York Press. Kindle Edition.)

    Like

  39. Rosalie Dancause (please use first name only) says:

    For about 10 years I have been trying to eat healthy, learning as I go. Especially I was trying, by diet and supplements primarily, to avoid cancer. But until I learned about GMOs, I ate a lot of soy. In mid-2013 I was diagnosed with a rare cancer in the abdomen (not colon cancer; it’s called gastrointestinal stromal tumor — GIST — and its incidence is like 1% of 1% of all cancers.) But when diagnosed I had already seen those pictures of the rats with tumors and I had then a pretty good idea of where my cancer came from. I can’t prove it — for one thing, nobody biopsied those rats’ tumors, that I heard of, so we don’t know if they were GIST — and even if they were, it would just get hushed up like all the other research. But within two months of my diagnosis, there turned up in a friend of a friend the same kind of cancer — and she had nine children at home, I got a hint from the friend that she wasn’t very nutritiously fed, which meant she probably ate a lot of cheap GMO food — and since then another case has turned up in my circle of acquaintance — and I don’t have a huge circle of acquaintance. And this is a rare cancer? Ed, I think you are on the right track.

    Like

  40. Ed Allison says:

    Here’s 2 more very interesting videos with Dr Seneff, about 7 min each.

    http://tv.greenmedinfo.com/root-cause-of-inflammation/

    http://tv.greenmedinfo.com/vaccine-causes-autism/

    Like

  41. Spikenard says:

    FWIW all of Trader Joe’s foods are non-GMO. They import many of their products from Europe, where they’ve not allowed GMOs.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s