The GMO Bandwagon is in Town!

It's been a while since I blogged about GMO's.... (Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are the result of laboratory processes which artificially insert foreign genes into the DNA of food crops or animals. Those genes may come from bacteria, viruses, insects, animals or even humans. GMOs are not safe, but have been in the food supply since 1996. Most Americans say they would not eat GMOs if labeled, but the U.S. does not require labeling.)

I got my copy of Spilling the Beans newsletter today. In it was a fantastic article on GMO's. Spilling The Beans is put out by the Institute for Responsible Technology. You can get your copy by signing up here.

You can join the 30 day challenge by clicking on the image above! We need to put our foot down. We need to shout from the roof tops. We need to pass this on to everyone we know!

GMO's ARE BAD FOR YOU!

This month's article is

Doctors Warn: Avoid Genetically Modified Food

By Jeffrey M. Smith

Excerpt:

GM corn and cotton are engineered to produce their own built-in pesticide in every cell. When bugs bite the plant, the poison splits open their stomach and kills them. Biotech companies claim that the pesticide, called Bt—produced from soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis—has a history of safe use, since organic farmers and others use Bt bacteria spray for natural insect control. Genetic engineers insert Bt genes into corn and cotton, so the plants do the killing.

The Bt-toxin produced in GM plants, however, is thousands of times more concentrated than natural Bt spray, is designed to be more toxic,[10] has properties of an allergen, and unlike the spray, cannot be washed off the plant.

Moreover, studies confirm that even the less toxic natural bacterial spray is harmful. When dispersed by plane to kill gypsy moths in the Pacific Northwest, about 500 people reported allergy or flu-like symptoms. Some had to go to the emergency room.[11]^,[12]

[10] See for example, A. Dutton, H. Klein, J. Romeis, and F. Bigler, “Uptake of Bt-toxin by herbivores feeding on transgenic maize and consequences for the predator Chrysoperia carnea,” Ecological Entomology 27 (2002): 441–7; and J. Romeis, A. Dutton, and F. Bigler, “Bacillus thuringiensis toxin (Cry1Ab) has no direct effect on larvae of the green lacewing Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae),” Journal of Insect Physiology 50, no. 2–3 (2004): 175–183.

[11] Washington State Department of Health, “Report of health surveillance activities: Asian gypsy moth control program,” (Olympia, WA: Washington State Dept. of Health, 1993).

[12] M. Green, et al., “Public health implications of the microbial pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis: An epidemiological study, Oregon, 1985-86,” Amer. J. Public Health 80, no. 7(1990): 848–852.

Another excerpt:

On May 19^th, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) called on “Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community, and the public to avoid GM (genetically modified) foods when possible and provide educational materials concerning GM foods and health risks.”[1] They called for a moratorium on GM foods, long-term independent studies, and labeling. AAEM’s position paper stated, “Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food,” including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. They conclude, “There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation,” as defined by recognized scientific criteria. “The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies.”

More and more doctors are already prescribing GM-free diets. Dr. Amy Dean, a Michigan internal medicine specialist, and board member of AAEM says, “I strongly recommend patients eat strictly non-genetically modified foods.” Ohio allergist Dr. John Boyles says “I used to test for soy allergies all the time, but now that soy is genetically engineered, it is so dangerous that I tell people never to eat it.”

Dr. Jennifer Armstrong, President of AAEM, says, “Physicians are probably seeing the effects in their patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions.” World renowned biologist Pushpa M. Bhargava goes one step further. After reviewing more than 600 scientific journals, he concludes that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are a major contributor to the sharply deteriorating health of Americans.

[1] http://www.aaemonline.org/ gmopost.html

Please go register for the newsletter, Spilling The Beans! Read it! Be appalled! Share it!
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/AbouttheInstitute/NewsletterSignup/index.cfm

Also visit the Institute for Responsible Technology here for more information.

Our future depends on the people speaking out! If we don't speak out, we may not have a future!

Join the 30 day challenge!

Stumble It!

EMERGENCY!!!!!

Urgent: Sign USDA Petition Demanding Stronger Regulations for Genetically Engineered Crops!

The petition is below. Click link above to sign petition! Monday, Nov 24, 2008 is the last day!

Why is this important???? Once again big brother is telling us what to do. You should have the right to choose NOT to feed your family and animals genetically modified foods. These crops that have been genetically modified could cause serious health problems. Do you want to do that to YOUR family? There needs to be full disclosure of products containing these genetically modified crops. I will not grow or eat or feed these crops to my family and animals. Without legislation, the big corporations will sneak this into our lives. WE MUST NOT LET THEM! Stand up and be heard now! Read the petition below and click the link above to sign the petition.

Docket No. APHIS-2008-0023
Regulatory Analysis and Development
PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8
4700 River Road Unit 118
Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

Re: Docket No. APHIS-2008-0023, Importation, Interstate Movement, and Release into the Environment of Certain
Genetically Engineered Organisms.

I am very concerned about the risks genetically engineered crops--especially those engineered to produce drugs and industrial chemicals--pose to human health, family farmers, wildlife, and the environment. I urge USDA to close the gaping loopholes in its proposed rules, and put stronger--not weaker--regulations in place. In particular:

1)Please follow the advice of the National Academy of Sciences and make genetic engineering the trigger for USDA oversight so that ALL experimental GE crops are properly regulated. This approach is scientifically sound, administratively efficient, and more protective of public health, the environment, and the interests of farmers. Eliminate loopholes that exempt any GE crop that has not undergone a determination of non-regulated status from USDA regulatory oversight.

2)Please do NOT incorporate the "Low Level Presence"
policy in the final rule. Instead, make zero presence of
experimental GE crops in food and feed your management goal, and gear your implementing regulations to achieve it as fully as possible. In particular, make all field trials of experimental GE crops subject to strict gene containment standards at least as stringent as those now applied to pharmaceutical-producing GE crops.

3)Please reconsider your "business as usual" pharma crop policy, and instead adopt one of two alternatives you proposed in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement - a simple ban on outdoor cultivation of all pharmaceutical-producing crops, or at least pharmaceutical-producing food crops - to best protect public health and the environment.

4)Please regulate as necessary pesticide-promoting,
herbicide-tolerant GE crops in order to address the rise in pesticide use these crops have fostered, and to mitigate the growing threat posed by herbicide-resistant weeds to farmers and the interests of American agriculture.

5)Remove any preemption clause that bars state and local authorities from enacting laws or regulations to control GE crops as they best see fit.

Stumble It!

To Know or not To Know????

BRCA1 A gene on chromosome 17 that normally helps to suppress cell growth. A person who inherits an altered version of the BRCA1 gene has a higher risk of getting breast, ovarian, or prostate cancer.

Why be concerned?
A mutation in the BRCA1 gene confers an 85% chance of developing breast cancer during a woman’s lifetime, and a 44% risk of developing ovarian cancer. Women without these mutations have a 10% (breast) and 1% (ovarian) risk. ...

How do you know if you have the mutated gene?
Family history plays a role in the development of breast cancer. You are more likely to have breast cancer if your mother, father, or sister has breast cancer. Also, women who carry certain genes called BRCA1 and BRCA2 are more likely to have breast cancer. If you have a strong family history of breast or ovarian cancer, you may want to be tested for these genes. People who inherit specific changes, or mutations, in one or both of these genes have a greater risk of developing breast cancer.

Testing
Genetic testing for BRCA1 mutations is commercially available through Myriad Genetics, a private company that holds at least 17 patents worldwide on BRCA mutation testing. The cost starts at $325 for an analysis of a single mutation site in relatives of an individual with an identified mutation. Although many health insurance plans will pay all or part of the cost of genetic testing for BRCA mutations, some individuals choose to self-pay because they are afraid of insurance and employment discrimination. Others apply for assistance from the Myriad Financial Assistance (Hardship) Program or charitable organizations, such as local and state breast cancer support programs. Individuals and families involved in research concerning BRCA mutations may be able to get BRCA testing done at little or no cost.

Resources
www.revolutionhealth.com
ovariancancer.gog199.cancer.gov/glossary.html
www.uihealthcare.com/topics/medicaldepartments/cancercenter/prevention/preventionterms.html
www.medscape.com


Why am I concerned about this?
I have always been interested in women's health issues. There have always been "cancers" in my family. Now, my mother has had the genetic testing and it was revealed that she has the mutated BRCA1 gene. Now the question is.... To Test or Not... To Know or Not. Well, the mom in me says, yes you must for your children. It is a hereditary trait. My daughter deserves to know. If I am a carrier of this mutated gene, then she needs to start doing yearly mamograms NOW. She is only 27. She has 2 daughters. My sons deserve to know. If I am a carrier of this mutated gene, then they also need to be more dilegent in looking for signs. Men do get breast cancer. Also the likelyhood of prostrate cancer is more prevelant in BRCA1 carriers.

My Mom recently had the tumor removed from her breast. It was discovered through her yearly mamogram. The surgery itself was not a real big deal. Same day, home by evening. The thing that bothers me is that during all of this, a lymph node was supposed to be located. The day before the surgery she was injected with a nuclear medicine. This material is radioactive and shows up on xray and ultrasound. The medical professionals that did the injection led us to believe that the solution had done and gone where it was supposed to. The next day before the actual surgery, there were additional ultrasounds to mark for the surgeon the location of the lymph node. The markings and the wire supposed leading to this node were done. The surgeon did the pre op check and all looked good to go. Then she went to surgery and the doctor tried to follow the path to the node and was unable. 2 different sets of medical professionals did not do their job. The solution did not travel and mark the node. They made a guess and left the surgeon unable to locate it. This is upsetting because the lymph nodes are the bodies garbage collector. Analyzing the node would tell us if the cancer from the tumor was spreading. If the node was clean, the radiation could most probably iradicate the cancer cells in the area the tumor was removed. She still would have to do the Chemo, but prognosis would have been better. Now she may have to undergo another surgical procedure to try to find that lymph node. Meanwhile time slips by....

On another note.... I bet you all did not know I could be so wordy!!!!! ha ha.... thanks for your thoughts and prayers!