Wednesday, July 9, 2014

USDA MUM Bee Killing Parasites Rampant ZOMBEE

Queen starves due to lack of workers in the hive...
ZomBee Watch is a citizen science project sponsored by the San Francisco State University Department of Biology, the San Francisco State University Center for Computing for Life Sciences and the Natural History Museum of LA County. ZomBee Watch was initiated as a follow-up to the discovery that the Zombie Fly Apocephalus borealis is parasitizing honey bees in California and possibly other areas of North America. You can read or download a copy of our original scientific paper, A New Threat to Honey Bees, the Parasitic Phorid Fly Apocephalus borealis, for free from PLoS One.

Honey bees infected by the Zombie Fly leave their hives at night and are attracted to nearby lights where they become stranded and eventually die. The presence of fly larvae in up to 18% of active foragers in some California honey bee hives makes the Zombie Fly a potential contributor to hive declines. This would be especially likely if Zombie Fly infection is widespread and higher in areas that are experiencing hive declines. We founded ZomBee Watch to find out how widespread Zombie Fly parasitism is and to learn how often unparasitized honey bees are attracted to lights at night for other reasons.

ZomBee Watch has three main goals.

To determine where in North America the Zombie Fly Apocephalus borealis is parasitizing honey bees.

To determine how often honey bees leave their hives at night, even if they are not parasitized by the Zombie Fly.

To engage citizen scientists in making a significant contribution to knowledge about honey bees and to become better observers of nature.
There are many ways you can get involved. It can be as easy as collecting honey bees that are under your porch light in the morning, under a street light or stranded on sidewalks. If you are a beekeeper, setting up a light trap near one of your hives is the most effective way to detect ZomBees. It's easy to make a simple, inexpensive light trap from materials available at your local hardware store. To test for the presence of Zombie Fly infection all you need to do is put honey bees you collect in a container and observe them periodically. Infected honey bees give rise to brown pill-like fly pupae in about a week and to adult flies a few weeks later. View the tutorial.

In California, parasitism begins to increase in early June and peaks in the fall and early winter months. Most records of the fly from other parts of North America (such as the Midwest and Northeast) are from late May to September, which is the most likely time that parasitism will be observed by citizen scientists in those areas.

Not all honey bees attracted to light produce Zombie Fly pupae. Whether or not you find parasitized bees, we are interested in your records.

https://www.zombeewatch.org/theproject#about_ZomBee_watch_






I can totally understand this in Hawai'i around 2005 we were invaded by an invasive species. A wasp from Africa that laid their eggs in the Wiliwili Tree...In less then 6 months almost every tree was dead!
Every April they used to show their orange blooms. Hawaiians said when the tree blooms it's the time to watch for sharks in the ocean.




Natural Pesticides Help | Synthetics Harm 1990 Study False Foundations

Disclaimer: When conducting and even reading scientific research, it’s important to do so removed of pre-conceived social and political biases - take the science at face value.

Research on the psychoactive drug, cannabis, or marijuana, has been ablaze for some time. An article published by Robert Melamedeon the online Harm Reduction Journal draws the distinction between tobacco smoke (that contains the highly addictive compound, nicotine), and cannabis smoke (which contains the psychoactive, THC). At this point in time, it’s medically established that marijuana, even when smoked, has less severe adverse effects on the human body than tobacco. Yet the question remains - what are the degree of the detrimental effects that cannabis does have, and are there any medically beneficial effects?

Some research points to cannabis killing a variety of cancer types, including lung, breast and prostate, leukemia, lymphoma, skin, and glioma cancers. At the same time, however, a German study found that low THC doses encouraged lung cancer in in-vitro cells. Seemingly contradicting results, no? Just keep in mind that while nicotine and THC are chemically similar, their actual receptors in the human body vary in cell type distribution, which is what ultimately determines the effects on the human body.

… cannabis typically down-regulates immunologically-generated free radical production by promoting a Th2 immune cytokine profile. Furthermore, THC inhibits the enzyme necessary to activate some of the carcinogens found in smoke. In contrast, tobacco smoke increases the likelihood of carcinogenesis by overcoming normal cellular checkpoint protective mechanisms through the activity of respiratory epithelial cell nicotine receptors. Cannabinoids receptors have not been reported in respiratory epithelial cells (in skin they prevent cancer), and hence the DNA damage checkpoint mechanism should remain intact after prolonged cannabis exposure.

I highly recommend this article, which you can read fully here. It gives great insights into cell biology within a biomedical context.

Image: Courtesy of David Scharf, via The Scientist

Article: Melamede, Robert. “Cannabis and tobacco smoke are not equally carcinogenic.”
Above is an electron micrograph of a cannabis sativa leaf.


Here’s What Marijuana Looks Like Under The Microscope [Photos]
http://www.leafscience.com/2014/04/22/heres-marijuana-looks-like-microscope/

... resinous outgrowths known as trichomes. You may have also read that the sticky coating of trichomes is home to the active ingredients in cannabis – the stuff that gets you high and has all the medical benefits – tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), and other cannabinoids. But have you ever wondered exactly what the trichomes do for the cannabis plant, or what biological purpose they serve?
Sticky resinous growths knows as trichomes are home to the active ingredients in cannabis. (Click picture to enlarge)Sticky resinous growths knows as trichomes are home to the active ingredients in cannabis. (Click picture to enlarge)Evolution of Trichomes
In nature, only the strong survive, and it is hypothesized by biologists that trichomes evolved as a defense mechanism of the cannabis plant against a range of potential enemies (1). Trichomes, from the Greek meaning ‘growth of hair,’ act as an evolutionary shield, protecting the plant and its seeds from the dangers of its environment, allowing it to reproduce. These adhesive sprouts form a protective layer against offensive insects, preventing them from reaching the surface of the plant. The chemicals in the trichomes make cannabis less palatable to hungry animals and can inhibit the growth of some types of fungus. The resin also helps to insulate the plant from high wind and low humidity, and acts as a natural ‘sun-screen’ in protecting against UV-B light rays. But since trichomes contain euphoric properties attractive to humans, it may be man who has had the most influence on the plants’ development through many years of favoring strains that consistently produce more of these gooey resin heads.
http://www.cannabisculture.com/content/inside-trichome


Dietary pesticides (99.99% all natural).
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Oct 1990; 87(19): 7777–7781.

PMCID: PMC54831

B N AmesM Profet, and L S Gold
Author information ► Copyright and License information ►

This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.

Abstract

The toxicological significance of exposures to synthetic chemicals is examined in the context of exposures to naturally occurring chemicals. We calculate that 99.99% (by weight) of the pesticides in the American diet are chemicals that plants produce to defend themselves. Only 52 natural pesticides have been tested in high-dose animal cancer tests, and about half (27) are rodent carcinogens; these 27 are shown to be present in many common foods. We conclude that natural and synthetic chemicals are equally likely to be positive in animal cancer tests. 
We also conclude that at the low doses of most human exposures the comparative hazards of synthetic pesticide residues are insignificant.
Full text
Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.1M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.


I would stay away from synthetic chemically prepared THC pills too...



Strike 3 DNA/RNA GMO Science False

A revolutionary new study reveals that the core tenet of classical genetics is patently false, and by implication: what we do in this life -- our diet, our mindset, our chemical exposures -- can directly impact the DNA and health of future generations.

A paradigm shifting new study titled, "Soma-to-Germline Transmission of RNA in Mice Xenografted with Human Tumour Cells: Possible Transport by Exosomes," promises to overturn 
several core tenets of classical genetics
including collapsing the timescale necessary for the transfer of genetic information
through the germline of a species (e.g. sperm) 
from hundreds of thousands of years to what amounts to 'real time' changes in biological systems.

...In classical genetics, Mendelian laws specify that the inheritance of traits passed from one generation to the next can only occur through sexual reproduction as information is passed down through the chromosomes of a species' germline cells (egg and sperm), and never through somatic (bodily) cells.  Genetic change, according to this deeply entrenched view, can take hundreds, thousands and even millions of generations to manifest.
The new study, however, has uncovered a novel mechanism through which somatic-to-germline transmission of genetic information is made possible.  Mice grafted with human melanoma tumor cells genetically manipulated to express genes for a fluorescent tracer enzyme (EGFP-encoding plasmid) were found to release information-containing molecules containing the EGFP tracer into the animals' blood; since EGFP is a non-human and non-murine expressed tracer, there was little doubt that the observed phenomenon was real.
...The implications of research on exosome-mediated information transfer are wide ranging. First, if your somatic cells, which are continually affected by your nutritional, environmental, lifestyle and even mind-body processes, can transfer genetic information through exosomes to the DNA within your germline cells, then your moment-to-moment decisions, behaviors, experiences, toxin and toxicant exposures, could theoretically affect the biological 'destinies' of your offspring, and their offspring, stretching on into the distant future. 
Exosome research also opens up promising possibilities in the realm of nutrigenomics and 'food as medicine.' A recent study found common plant foods, e.g. ginger, grapefruit, grapes, produce exosomes that, following digestion, enter human blood undegraded and subsequently down-regulate inflammatory pathways in the human body in a manner confirming some of their traditional folkloric medicinal uses.  If the somatic cells within our body are capable through extrachromosomal processes of modulating fundamental genetic processes within the germline cells, or, furthermore, if foods that we eat are also capable of acting as vectors of gene-regulatory information, truly the old reductionist, mechanistic, unilinear models of genetics must be abandoned in favor of a view that accounts for the vital importance of all our decisions, nutritional factors, environmental exposures, etc., in determining the course, not only of our bodily health, but the health of countless future generations as well.
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/no-sex-required-body-cells-transfer-genetic-info-directly-sperm-cells-amazing

Photo: Agree? Disagree?
You tell us!

RNA Interference Ridiculousness Alarming Boom is Over is Bust Soon

RNA interference (RNAi) is a biological process in which RNA molecules inhibit gene expression, typically by causing the destruction of specific mRNA molecules
. . . The pathway is also used as a practical tool in biotechnology, medicine and insecticides.[1]
. . . It is becoming increasingly clear that RNA binding proteins regulate posttranscriptional gene expression and play a critical role in RNA stability and translation.
. . . micronucleus test was performed to detect chromosomal damage...from spleen of rats... rats fed GM soyabean alone revealed a significant decrease in the amount of DNA...
. . . the activator binds to DNA and enables the binding of RNA polymerase.
. . . The mechanism for the decrease in the amount of DNA was discussed by Zhou et al. [27] who reported on hepatocellular degeneration, necrosis, DNA damage and the lesions of the extracellular matrix...could cause liver toxicity due to DNA strand breaks in hepatocytes.
. . . The binding of an inhibitor...alters the shape of the enzyme, resulting in a distorted active site that does not function properly.
. . . Poisons are inhibitors that bind irreversibly.

Historically, it was known by other names, including co-suppression, post transcriptional gene silencing (PTGS), and quelling. Only after these apparently unrelated processes were fully understood did it become clear that they all described the RNAi phenomenon.

USDA: RNA-interference Pesticides Will Need Special Safety Testing
http://www.gmoevidence.com/usda-rna-interference-pesticides-will-need-special-safety-testing/

The Effect of Extra Virgin Olive Oil and Soybean on DNA, Cytogenicity and Some Antioxidant Enzymes in Rats
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4073157/

Photo: RNA interference (RNAi) is a biological process in which RNA molecules inhibit gene expression, typically by causing the destruction of specific mRNA molecules
. . . The pathway is also used as a practical tool in biotechnology, medicine and insecticides.[1] 
. . .  It is becoming increasingly clear that RNA binding proteins regulate posttranscriptional gene expression and play a critical role in RNA stability and translation. 
. . .  micronucleus test was performed to detect chromosomal damage...from spleen of rats... rats fed GM soyabean alone revealed a significant decrease in the amount of DNA...
. . . the activator binds to DNA and enables the binding of RNA polymerase.   
. . . The mechanism for the decrease in the amount of DNA was discussed by Zhou et al. [27] who reported on hepatocellular degeneration, necrosis, DNA damage and the lesions of the extracellular matrix...could cause liver toxicity due to DNA strand breaks in hepatocytes. 
. . . The binding of an inhibitor...alters the shape of the enzyme, resulting in a distorted active site that does not function properly.
. . .  Poisons are inhibitors that bind irreversibly.

Historically, it was known by other names, including co-suppression, post transcriptional gene silencing (PTGS), and quelling. Only after these apparently unrelated processes were fully understood did it become clear that they all described the RNAi phenomenon.

#MONSANTO #RNAi 

USDA: RNA-interference Pesticides Will Need Special Safety Testing
http://www.gmoevidence.com/usda-rna-interference-pesticides-will-need-special-safety-testing/

The Effect of Extra Virgin Olive Oil and Soybean on DNA, Cytogenicity and Some Antioxidant Enzymes in Rats 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4073157/

The elephant is in the room.
We will all be squished...

...by feeding as a dietary component.
Feasibility, limitation and possible solutions of RNAi-based technology for insect pest control.

"Numerous studies indicate that target gene silencing by RNA interference (RNAi) could lead to insect death. This phenomenon has been considered as a potential strategy for insect pest control, and it is termed RNAi-mediated crop protection. However, there are many limitations using RNAi-based technology for pest control, with the effectiveness target gene selection and reliable double-strand RNA (dsRNA) delivery being two of the major challenges. With respect to target gene selection, at present, the use of homologous genes and genome-scale high-throughput screening are the main strategies adopted by researchers. Once the target gene is identified, dsRNA can be delivered by micro-injection or by feeding as a dietary component."
http://www.pubfacts.com/detail/23955822/Feasibility-limitation-and-possible-solutions-of-RNAi-based-technology-for-insect-pest-control.

very specific ?
...for use in potential plant-based RNAi control strategies. Delivery of dsRNA expressed by genetically modified crops to the midgut of phytophagous insects is under investigation as a new tool for very specific protection of plants from insect pest species. The T. castaneum screening platform offers a system for discovery of candidate genes with high potential benefit.

Photo: THIS SAYS IT ALL!!

Please share!

Spray Drift and Volatilization Agent Orange with RoundUp Enlist Duo Harming Kids!

"We are pleased to see that EPA is finally taking steps to consider volatilization drift. This important source of pesticide exposure has been overlooked for too long in the agency’s assessment of pesticide risk.

Data from the Pesticide Action Network’s Drift Catcher and state agency monitoring in several states clearly show that volatilization drift is affecting communities across the country. Many of the chemicals measured in on-the-ground tests are known to harm human health, and children are especially at risk.

The fact that 68 pesticides failed the screening test underscores the importance of this evaluation. Many of these chemicals — including the insecticide chlorpyrifos and the herbicide atrazine — are in widespread use and have been clearly linked to a range of health harms.

We urge EPA to finalize the volatilization screening tool, move quickly to implement the assessments and take effective and timely action on the results. Children and families in rural areas deserve no less." 

After years of pressure, EPA is poised to take action on the "other" kind of pesticide drift: volatilization. This kind of drift happens hours or even days after spraying. Pesticides that settle on soil or plants can become vapor and “re-drift,” spreading far and wide.

EPA has finally developed a new tool that measures whether a pesticide is likely to vaporize and re-drift. The agency needs to hear that we like this idea, and want them to take meaningful action on the results — and soon.

Please sign on to the petition below by this Friday, July 11, to urge EPA to protect children and families in rural areas from all kinds of pesticide drift.
http://action.panna.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=15898

{I can understand this because when my yard was at it's worst from being pesticided I would just stick my head out the back door, and start to get dizzy from the fumes.}

5,609 schools within 200 feet of farm fields may soon be blanketed with massive amounts of a toxic defoliant linked to Parkinson’s disease, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and reproductive and immune system problems. That’s the finding of a new Environmental Working Group analysis that shows that hundreds of thousands of children across the country will be at risk of increased exposure to the harmful chemical compound 2,4-D if the U.S. EPA approves a new weed killer mixture called “Enlist Duo” created by Dow AgroSciences. When it comes to dousing crops with noxious chemicals, the EPA focused on buffer zones for plants, not people, according to the agency’s recent risk analysis of Enlist Duo, which is a combination of 2,4-D and glyphosate. WTF?

READ MORE: http://ecowatch.com/2014/07/03/schools-at-risk-toxic-pesticide-exposure/


Did you know that lichen can be a sign of good air quality?
Small areas with many types of lichen have especially good quality air.
Photo: Did you know that lichen can be a sign of good air quality? Small areas with many types of lichen have especially good quality air. 

Photo: Lichen courtesy of Jim McCulloch/Creative Commons.
Photo: Lichen courtesy of Jim McCulloch/Creative Commons.

Collapse of Shipping Industry by DNA/RNA/GMO/Pesticide Patent Greed

Falling like dominoes...
The system of capitalism and patent greed is taking it's toll; even if it seems subtle.
"...increase in the average aflatoxin in corn.
Many states in the United States reported an increase in the level of contamination of fungal infection of the corn crop in 2012, compared with what it was in 2011. For example, in Missouri for more than 50% of the corn, harvested in October, was contaminated by a fungus Aspergillus flavus (In 2011 this figure was 8%).
Last year, drought conditions contributed to the spread of the fungus Aspergillus (Aspergillus flavus) — a pathogen that leads to the accumulation of toxins that can cause the death of livestock and pets.

He makes much of the harvest in 2012 could not be used for food and feed purposes..."
http://survincity.com/2013/08/drought-in-the-u-s-has-led-to-the-growth-of-maize/


Eagle Bulk Shipping Inc. (NASDAQ:EGLE) suffered new low after a Seeking Alpha blog post was bearish on the stock, claiming Eagle is insolvent just like Genco. Verge Of Bankruptcy said “in its last quarterly filling, Genco listed assets of $2.9B. Turns out the bankruptcy court ruled their NAV was only $1.4B, well shy of the nearly $1.6B in debt it owed. Outcome: Genco shareholders are entitled to no recovery whatsoever. Now with Eagle, their balance sheet lists $1.7B in assets. Since the company has $1.2B in debt, it would appear on the surface that there’s plenty of money left over for shareholders. Well, that’s obviously not the case! Remember in the case of Genco, the judge agreed with the $1.4B valuation of the company, which is about 50 cents on the dollar. Using a similar ratio for Eagle gets you at a valuation of $0.8B or so. So shareholders are about $500M away from seeing a single penny!”

Eagle Bulk Shipping Inc. (NASDAQ:EGLE) Tumbles Amid Continued Scrutiny of SEC Filing
BY DAVID SCOUTS ON JULY 9, 2014 COMPANY
Shares in Eagle Bulk Shipping Inc. (NASDAQ:EGLE)
fell sharply on Tuesday, down some 34%,
and at their lowest since January 2013 in what looks to be a continued selloff six days after the company filed with the SEC its entry into a material definitive agreement.

egle stock name

Eagle Bulk Ships
www.eagleships.com/
Eagle Bulk Shipping Inc. is the largest US-based owner of Handymax dry bulk vessels. This modern fleet is comprised principally of Supramax class vessels, ...

Eagle Bulk Ships | Eagle Bulk Ships
Eagle Bulk Shipping Inc. is the largest US-based owner of Handymax dry bulk vessels. This modern fleet is comprised principally of Supramax class vessels, a larger and more efficient Handymax design that enjoys strong demand from customers around the world.


Genco, which owns or operates vessels that transport iron ore, coal, grain, steel and other products worldwide, listed assets of $2.4 billion and debt of $1.5 billion in its Chapter 11 petition, saying weakness in charter rates made it difficult for the company to pay creditors.
Default Waived
Before the filing, Genco hired Blackstone to explore a debt restructuring. Lenders agreed to waive default after Genco missed a $3.1 million interest payment on its convertible bond, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Genco made the payment on March 20.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-02/genco-wins-ruling-on-valuation-at-core-of-reorganization.html

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Restricted Use Pesticide Texas 20,000 to 50,000 lbs. in 2010 and 2011 to 280,000 pounds per year

TEXAS Stop the Super Weed/Monsanto Attack Last Day to Comment...
What’s Happening Right Now in Texas is Utterly Destroying Monsanto’s “Sustainable” Farming Claims
While the agrochemical and GMO giant Monsanto claims to be a “sustainable” company on its web page, the ongoing, persistent and potentially devastating problem of superweeds is just one of many reasons why its claims do not appear to hold water, as many grassroots activists have noted in light of recent events. In Texas, for example, millions of acres of genetically modified cotton are now at risk of being lost, with the use of heavy, harsh chemicals the only proposed solution yet again.
A petition was filed by the Texas Department of Agriculture with the EPA recently to allow the emergency use of the toxic herbicide propazine in order to save one of its major crops: genetically modified cotton, from the emerging growth of the farm chemical-resistant weeds, making life difficult for the state’s many farmers.
The request, which was filed on June 18, is now open for public comments until July 3, which the EPA says it will consider before making the decision of whether to grant the request.
According to the Center for Food Safety, Texas’ GMO cotton is under attack by a familiar foe that has been ravaging genetically modified crops in various spots across the country: a glyphosate-resistant type of Palmer amaranth, aka the pigweed, which is popping up across GMO fields en masse and forcing many to hire workers to chop them down by hand.
Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s ubiquitous Roundup herbicide; thus far, 14 different glyphosate resistant “superweeds” have been documented in GMO fields.
Ironically, the hearty, persistent “weed” is actually more nutritious than the GMO crops it has been infesting, including in the Midwest where a potentially “devastating” infestation is threatening genetically modified corn and soy.
Three Million Acres of Poison” in Texas?
The Texas Department of Agriculture is requesting what would amount to a 10-fold increase in the use of the banned chemical (since 2010) according to the Center for Food Safety, “from just 20,000 to 50,000 lbs. in 2010 and 2011  to 280,000 pounds per year.”
“Herbicide-resistant crops lead to increased herbicide use and this is just the beginning,” said Bill Freese, Science Policy Analyst at Center for Food Safety.
“Monsanto, Dow Chemical, and the other pesticide-seed giants have developed a host of genetically engineered crops that will trigger a huge spike in the use of toxic weed-killers. This is hazardous to farmers, to consumers and to the environment.”
Texas hopes to use the toxic chemical on up to three million acres of cotton, the vast majority of which is GMO, which amounts to “hundreds of thousands of pounds of the pesticide, a chemical solution that has been banned due to its toxicity by the European Union.
In the U.S., propazine is considered a “possible human carcinogen,” a category the EPA uses for particularly hazardous farming chemicals. It’s considered an endocrine disruptor that disrupts the hormonal system, much like the infamous chemical atrazine, and one that causes birth defects when fed to pregnant rats according to the Center for Food Safety.
Propazine also takes years to break down, and has been found in both ground and surface water samples.
The proposed amount of three million acres to be sprayed with the banned chemical represents about ¼ of the U.S.’ annual production of cotton, and about 90 percent of all U.S. cotton is GMO, although the number has been dropping.
Freese continued, calling on major governmental organizations to curb the use of agricultural poisons.
“USDA and EPA need to do their job of protecting American citizens and agriculture by rejecting this request. They should also stop these companies’ from introducing more pesticide-promoting, genetically engineered crops,” he said.
“This request clearly demonstrates that herbicide-resistant crops – by generating an epidemic of resistant weeds – lead directly to increased use of hazardous chemicals,” “EPA should reject this request.” ?

Roundup in Texas: Spray Drift Showdown in the GM Cotton Fields

Eric Herm and his father farm over 6000 organic acres in Texas. He is the fourth generation of his family to run his farm. And now he is conflict with the neighbours he has known all his life because they are all GM farmers and their spraying is killing his crops. This is his story:

"I can't tackle Monsanto in court. But I will not hesitate to sue my neighbours if roundup spraying continues to damage our farming."
As an organic and non-GMO cotton farmer, I wake up each and every morning to an uneasy notion: We are surrounded and heavily outnumbered.
 Over 100,000 acres of cotton is planted in my home county (Howard) here in West Texas. More than 90 percent of that is genetically modified cotton these days.
 Every field on our farm either borders or is within one mile of fields where Roundup Ready cotton is planted year after year. On a 20-mile stretch of road between my house and our farthest field, we're the only family farm remaining that is not planting GMO crops.
 Still, it's not about the odds. It's about what is right. It's about creating more life, not vanquishing it.
 Poisoned and invaded
 Each spring, neighbours begin firing up their 100-foot, $200,000 spray rigs, pumping out gallon after gallon of Roundup, filling our environment with hundreds of millions of gallons of the nation's highest-selling herbicide.
 Some spray in 20 mph+ winds, which happen almost daily here from February to July. It's as if climbing on board one of these menacing spray rigs convinces some people the laws of physics do not apply. Not only can technology make us apathetic and arrogant, it can also make us ignorant.
 Some neighbours assure me, "I'd never intentionally drift on you." Or my personal favourite, "I'm only putting out ten pounds of pressure. It won't drift."  Really? Ever heard of parts per million?
 One neighbour sprayed in 30mph winds blowing straight toward my 250 acres of organic cotton. My plants had just reached the surface, knowing sunlight for almost 48 hours before he blasted away like a machine-gun sniper, picking off millions of baby plants in a matter of minutes. The front 50 acres looks like a bomb went off on the surface.
 Often, Roundup will not kill the plants. They merely suffocate, struggling to survive until they process the poison out of their system. This often takes up to three weeks, stunting the crops. They're unable to grow or mature during this time-frame. All of their energy goes into surviving. This impacts the yield and overall vitality of the crop.
 The real "tattle-tales" in nature are the Roundup Ready cotton plants I find sporadically in my field. They represent one to two percent of the total population, but when a completely healthy plant stands six inches taller than the rest, you know what it is and how real the seed contamination risks are in our business.
 To date this season, we've had more than 300 acres damaged by Roundup drift. I've turned in four cases to the TDA (Texas Department of Agriculture). The crops won't recover this season. Neither will my blood pressure.
 Taking a stand and fighting back
 We're not the only farmers experiencing this. Every organic cotton farmer I know goes through this every spring. And it's getting worse. Each season, some GMO farmers get more and more careless in the conditions in which they spray, affecting all those around them.
 Some non-GMO farmers are giving up and planting GM seeds rather than cause problems with neighbours or standing up in this fight. This worries me. Why are not more farmers willing to make a stand? What are we afraid of? If we don't make the stand, who will?
 Of the 12 million plus acres of cotton planted each year in the U.S., more than 90 percent are GMOs. Less than 14,000 acres are organic. Farmers as a whole are an endangered species since we represent about one percent of the U.S. population, but organic and non-GMO farmers are becoming as scarce as a Mexican spotted owl in the wild.
 If we stay silent in these times; then shame on us. If we continue to take the beatings of chemical drift, and GMO contamination from cross-pollination, without fighting back, then how do expect to ever survive this invasion of our rights to farm in a healthier manner?
 How do we expect organic and non-GMO agriculture to survive for future generations?  We need more education and awareness spread in our farming communities on herbicide drift problems, but that won't happen if we remain silent. It won't happen unless we are willing to stand up and fight.
 Neighbours becoming enemies
 Out of 25 potential neighbours, we only have one who calls us to let us know he is spraying. Just one. Being a "neighbourly" farmer has taken on a new look in the 21st century for most.
Speaking with one neighbour (who farms close to 10,000 acres of GM cotton) I've known my entire life on the phone, he stated, "I just hate to see you make enemies." My response was, "Making enemies is not my intention. Getting their attention is."
 And with Monsanto's future line of 2-4,D resistant GM seeds. I've made a decision. No more neighbourly discounts. I don't care if it is my cousin, best friend, or anyone else, but any and every time I suspect Roundup drift, I'm dealing with the TDA.
 At least they provide free testing on tissue analysis for glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup.) Plus, my neighbours have to provide spraying data sheet information, as well as uncomfortable interviews and investigations from the TDA. Fines and fees may be assessed. This summer alone, more than a dozen different neighbours have had to submit spray logs and conduct interviews with a TDA agent. They can count on more of the same in the future.
 Fighting for our future and for agriculture and healthy food
 I stay vigilant, monitoring every section of our fields. I'm constantly reminding our neighbors to please not spray in high winds. There is very little education and awareness when it comes to herbicide drift. Most farmers don't believe these chemicals will drift more than 100 yards. I've seen them drift up to one mile. Most farmers think simply because winds are below 10mph, these chemicals won't drift. Many biological factors come into play such as humidity, inversion, soil and moisture conditions.
 Most likely, I can't tackle Monsanto in the court of law. But I will not hesitate to sue my own neighbours if this recklessness continues to damage our farming operation and abilities to grow non-GMO plants each and every season. That's a fair fight. It is an unfortunate one. But at least it is fair. I don't know any billionaire farmers.
 Am I popular right now in my farming community? Not at all. But at least my neighbours now know what I'm willing to do to protect our crops. Is this the end-all of my predicament? Hardly. But I am able and willing to fire back.
 As organic and non-GMO farmers, we're expected to always be defensive because we're in the minority these days. Playing offense is the only way we can expect to protect the health of our own crops and land, as well as agriculture's future. We must be determined to stand up against the invasion of destructive chemicals even if that means standing up against our own neighbours.
 Visit Eric Herm’s website at www.sonofafarmer.com for more information.

LOOK OUT!!!

GMO Antibiotic Resistance Elephant in the Room

GMOs are made using antibiotic resistant bacteria... At about 8 minutes he explains how Horizontal DNA manipulation of bacteria is done to create new types that spread the anti-biotic resistance to other bacteria in the body.This is what is used to make GMOs an anti-biotic resistant mutation is added to the corn, soy or whatever to create the capacity for growth and mark the gene to be patentable.

Turns out that the process; which is always doubtful, because bacteria can make their own changes Vertically in their own DNA...has now a viral DNA not intended. And has changed their patent to an other type of product totally beyond their control.
It has been found in our bodies...floating around looking for a place to take hold... Somewhere comfortable to replicate...

This article is 2 years old...Where are all those "scientists"? To explain themselves...
...Pretending this is not happening will not work.

"How should a regulatory agency announce they have discovered something potentially very important about the safety of products they have been approving for over twenty years?

In the course of analysis to identify potential allergens in GMO crops, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has belatedly discovered that the most common genetic regulatory sequence in commercial GMOs also encodes a significant fragment of a viral gene (Podevin and du Jardin 2012). This finding has serious ramifications for crop biotechnology and its regulation, but possibly even greater ones for consumers and farmers. This is because there are clear indications that this viral gene (called Gene VI) might not be safe for human consumption. It also may disturb the normal functioning of crops, including their natural pest resistance."

The researchers themselves concluded that the presence of segments of Gene VI “might result in unintended phenotypic changes”. They reached this conclusion because similar fragments of Gene VI have already been shown to be active on their own (e.g. De Tapia et al. 1993). In other words, the EFSA researchers were unable to rule out a hazard to public health or the environment.

In general, viral genes expressed in plants raise both agronomic and human health concerns (reviewed in Latham and Wilson 2008). This is because many viral genes function to disable their host in order to facilitate pathogen invasion. Often, this is achieved by incapacitating specific anti-pathogen defenses. Incorporating such genes could clearly lead to undesirable and unexpected outcomes in agriculture. Furthermore, viruses that infect plants are often not that different from viruses that infect humans. For example, sometimes
the genes of human and plant viruses are interchangeable, while on other occasions inserting plant viral fragments as transgenes has caused the genetically altered plant to become susceptible to an animal virus (Dasgupta et al. 2001). Thus, in various ways, inserting viral genes accidentally into crop plants and the food supply confers a significant potential for harm.

The Many Functions of Gene VI
Gene VI, like most plant viral genes, produces a protein that is multifunctional. It has four (so far) known roles in the viral infection cycle.
The first is to participate in the assembly of virus particles. There is no current data to suggest this function has any implications for biosafety. The second known function is to suppress anti-pathogen defenses by inhibiting a general cellular system called RNA silencing (Haas et al. 2008). Thirdly, Gene VI has the highly unusual function of transactivating (described below) the long RNA (the 35S RNA) produced by CaMV (Park et al. 2001). Fourthly, unconnected to these other mechanisms, Gene VI has very recently been shown to make plants highly susceptible to a bacterial pathogen (Love et al. 2012). Gene VI does this by interfering with a common anti-pathogen defense mechanism possessed by plants. These latter three functions of Gene VI (and their risk implications) are explained further below:

This sense of a generic failure is reinforced by the fact that this is not an isolated event. There exist other examples of commercially approved viral sequences having overlapping genes that were never subjected to risk assessment. These include numerous commercial GMOs containing promoter regions of the closely related virus figwort mosaic virus (FMV) which were not considered by Podevin and du Jardin. Inspection of commercial sequence data shows that the commonly used FMV promoter overlaps its own Gene VI (Richins et al 1987). A third example is the virus-resistant potato NewLeaf Plus (RBMT-22-82). This transgene contains approximately 90% of the P0 gene of potato leaf roll virus. The known function of this gene, whose existence was discovered only after US approval, is to inhibit the anti-pathogen defenses of its host (Pfeffer et al 2002). Fortunately, this potato variety was never actively marketed.

There are two aspects to this question. One is the length of Gene VI accidentally introduced by developers. This appears to vary but most of the 54 approved transgenes contain the same 528 base pairs of the CaMV 35S promoter sequence. This corresponds to approximately the final third of Gene VI. Deleted fragments of Gene VI are active when expressed in plant cells and functions of Gene VI are believed to reside in this final third. Therefore, there is clear potential for unintended effects if this fragment is expressed (e.g. De Tapia et al. 1993; Ryabova et al. 2002; Kobayashi and Hohn 2003).

The second aspect of this question is what quantity of Gene VI could be produced in GMO crops? Once again, this can ultimately only be resolved by direct quantitative experiments. Nevertheless, we can theorize that the amount of Gene VI produced will be specific to each independent insertion event. This is because significant Gene VI expression probably would require specific sequences (such as the presence of a gene promoter and an ATG [a protein start codon]) to precede it and so is likely to be heavily dependent on variables such as the details of the inserted transgenic DNA and where in the plant genome the transgene inserted.

Commercial transgenic crop varieties can also contain superfluous copies of the transgene, including those that are incomplete or rearranged (Wilson et al 2006). These could be important additional sources of Gene VI protein. The decision of regulators to allow such multiple and complex insertion events was always highly questionable, but the realization that the CaMV 35S promoter contains Gene VI sequences provides yet another reason to believe that complex insertion events increase the likelihood of a biosafety problem.

Even direct quantitative measurements of Gene VI protein in individual crop authorizations would not fully resolve the scientific questions, however. No-one knows, for example, what quantity, location or timing of protein production would be of significance for risk assessment, and so answers necessary to perform science-based risk assessment are unlikely to emerge soon.



GM Potato & Bananas... Famine Lies... A Right of Decision Makers to Decide For "OUR OWN GOOD?" ?

Two-Gene vs. Multi-Gene Approach
The two gene approach taken by the UK scientists has a high chance of resulting in late blight resistance. The real question however, is how long this resistance will last.
The argument of course, is when the resistance of this variety is no longer adequate, they will look for more genes in wild potato relatives and create a new GM variety. If necessary, they can use more than two genes. This approach however looks an awful lot like the fungicides now being used. As these scientists move from one gene to the next, work their way through all the combinations they think of, eventually they will reach the end when it no longer works.
In a case like this, the interactions between all the genes are not likely to ever be fully understood. The UK scientists will only be working with genes or combinations of genes they can single out as being important in existing varieties, and they won’t see everything.
Tom’s multi gene approach on the other hand is much more likely to be sustainable, and is more likely to show functional resistance on farms.
By using Tom’s approach an unknown number of genes will be involved in the resistance. By taking existing resistant varieties, using the combinations of their genes in their entirety, all genes involved in that resistance can be used, not just the ones that can be specifically identified. In addition, by creating crosses with several different resistant varieties, all the genes from all the varieties can be used in their totality and in different combinations.
By creating a number of resistant varieties in this way, then growing them in different places and continuing the process of crossing new resistant varieties as they appear, new resistant genes will be discovered. This is in part because there will be natural mutations in the plants themselves creating new genes, but also previously unknown ones will be found. This ongoing process is much more likely to produce late blight resistance in the long run, and the chance of ‘running out of genes’ like what will happen eventually with the GM approach is significantly reduced.
In addition by working with a number of different varieties resistant to late blight in different ways, all at the same time, the chance of losing the entire season’s potato harvest like what happened during the Irish Potato Famine is significantly reduced.
Other Benefits of Biodiversity

http://www.bifurcatedcarrots.eu/2010/06/tom-wagner-blight-resistant-potato-trials/
Kimberly Usher's photo.

The genetically engineered (or GMO) potato: it's virtually indistinguishable from normal potatoes, except that it bruises less easily... and that its long-term health effects are completely unknown.
The potato was created by biotech company J.R. Simplot, who intends to use it in a variety of fried foods like french fries, and may even market the crop as a "healthier alternative". But the real story is that this crop has yet to be thoroughly tested for human health risks. Plus, altering enzymes in crops like the potato can unintentionally affect other characteristics of the crop, meaning it could have negative side effects that we haven't discovered yet.

These GMO potatoes would be sold unlabeled in supermarkets and restaurants, which means consumers won't even be able to decide for themselves whether to puchase them.

This is our final chance to weigh in — submit your public comment below to tell the USDA to stop the approval of the GMO potato.
As a result, they recommended that all developers and marketers manage the varieties to avoid market disruptions.

The delegates also recommended that developers and marketers adopt identify preservation systems. But they didn’t go so far as to recommend the potatoes be labeled at the consumer level.

John Keeling, executive vice president of the Washington, D.C.-based NPC, said the Food and Drug Administration continues to study the acrylamide issue. But based on current scientific knowledge, he said consumers shouldn’t change their potato consumption patterns.

“It’s under study, and it’s something that people want to figure out whether there are impacts on human health,” he said. “It’s a possible carcinogen in lab rats, but we don’t know what happens in the human gut and what impacts it has on humans.”

Innate Technology involves inserting genes from potatoes that quiet specific functions, such as bruising or asparagine production.

Asparagine is a naturally occurring amino acid found in potatoes. When mixed with sugars ― such as those also found naturally in potatoes ― and then subjected to high temperatures, asparagine forms acrylamide.

Those high temperatures may occur during frying, baking or roasting.

Acrylamide also is found in other foods, such as roasted coffee, cereals, breads and many baked goods.

During the past decade, the compound has come under scrutiny as a possible carcinogen.

Acrylamide production can be reduced to some extent by potato variety selection, cultural practices in the field, storage practices and cooking temperatures, Baker said.

By adding the Innate technology, he said acrylamide levels could be reduced an additional 50%-80%, which would bring them under the target.

The first three varieties scheduled for release are russet burbank, a baking potato; ranger russet, a french fry variety; and atlantic, a chipping variety.


J.R. Simplot hopes to have USDA approval by 2014, which would allow it to have a limited amount of Innate potatoes on the market by 2015, Baker said.

In years to come, the company plans to release snowden, yukon, pike and russet norkotah varieties with the reduced black spot/acrylamide traits.

http://www.thepacker.com/fruit-vegetable-news/USDA-seeks-comments-on-GMO-potato-status-206793911.html


Actually the "potato famine" in Ireland was caused by the British taking all their food in Ireland and putting it on ships away from the people there...so they could starve!

What became known as the great famine occurred between 1845 and 52 and was one of the greatest catastrophies of the nineteenth century. It resulted in the deaths of millions of people from starvation and disease and a decline in Irelands population through emigration. It was thought by many to be an English induced famine used by a greedy government to solve the Irish question. The potato failed from blight but the country was full of food, which was taken away from those who grew it, to be consumed by the expanding workforce of the industrial boom in England or by its army overseas. The English hid behind the fact that they were the constitutional government for the Irish people pretending to be concerned by begging food for her people abroad while at the same time by constitutional policies taking the food from the people. They were ruthless in putting down all attempts by the Irish for self-government and all attempts of resistance. They passed laws that made it a crime for a father to protect his children or his home from destruction. They passed coercion laws that made it a crime for the Irish to leave their homes between sunrise and sunset or to hold arms. They had a well-fed armed guard of military and police watch over them while they starved. Never in the history of mankind was there a government who acted so cruelly to its people. Ireland never needed the begging bowl it had its own food grown in its own land and only needed its own concerned legislatures to pass laws to save her people. The constitutional Government of England was then the most powerful in the world and had the ear of the world through its influence and press. They manipulated the facts to cover up the real truth of what was happening in Ireland the mass murder of its people and the destruction of Ireland. An English induced constitutional famine.
http://www.wolfetonesofficialsite.com/famine.htm


I am not sure why it is but so many people, myself included, have an incredibly strong emotional attachment to bananas.
This love for bananas extends to all parts of the world, and I saw this first-hand when I visited a banana plantation in Costa Rica. In fact, people who dedicate their life’s work to bananas are affectionately called bananeros.
So, when I heard the news that the world’s richest man and noted GMO-advocate, Bill Gates, is funding a human trial of genetically-modified bananas, I got absolutely sick to my stomach.
James Dale, Director of the Centre for Tropical Crops and Biocommodities at Queensland University of Technology in Australia, announced that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had donated close to $10M to finance this project and that human trials would take place over a six-week period in the U.S.
The results are expected to be revealed by the end of 2014, and the bananas used for the trials have been grown in Australia and are now being shipped to America. The bananas have already been tested on Mongolian gerbils.
While these FrankenBananas may look like ordinary bananas on the outside, on the inside it is a completely different story. The flesh has a strong orange color to it, instead of a pale one.

The ultimate goal is to have these bananas growing in Uganda and other African countries sometime within the next decade. It has been reported the approval for full-scale commercialization of genetically-modified crops in Uganda is expected by 2020.


BIOFORTIFICATION IS A HORRIBLE IDEA
While saving kids from malnutrition in Africa makes for great headlines and is a very noble cause, the attempt to alleviate this problem through increased nutrition via the genetic-modification of one food, also known as biofortification, is just a horrible idea.


Here’s why:
- As we have seen, there are SERIOUS health risks associated with all genetically-modified foods.

- If adopted, these GM-bananas will be grown as one large monoculture, which will kill all biodiversity.

- This is just one more way for Dale and other holders of the patents of these GM-bananas to control the food supply in and extract royalties from very poor countries in Africa.

- The GM-bananas could cross-contaminate other native plant species in Uganda and other African countries. A perfect example of this is what has happened with GM-maize in Mexico.

Bob Phelps, Director and Founder of Gene Ethics, believes that biofortification is an obstacle to food justice and is not the solution.

He says that “most malnutrition and starvation are really the food access disasters of poverty, inequity and social injustice. Thus, the challenge to feed everyone well is much more than adding one or two key nutrients to an impoverished diet dominated by a staple food or two. Yet biofortification enthusiasts such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation do not intend to redress the lack of access to diverse healthy foods for all. They merely propose to add one or two micronutrients to fortify the same few staple foods that most poor people now have to rely on.”

These same groups, Bill Gates et al, are also trying to introduce GM-bananas into India where iron deficiency is a problem. Famed environmentalist and food activist Vandana Shiva has started a campaign called No to GMO Bananas to fight against this plan.


MY TAKE
Poverty and malnutrition throughout the world are very serious issues but are largely political ones. We have enough food to feed everyone but the resources are not being directed in the correct manner.
As we have seen so far in history, GMOs have been nothing but empty promises.

In its study Failure to Yield, the Union of Concerned Scientists reported that the biotech industry has been carrying out gene field trials to increase yields for 20 years, all without significant results.

GMOs have caused a massive, massive problem of superweeds and have resulted in ahuge increase of pesticide use.

As such, there is no reason to believe that GM-bananas in Africa will deliver any different of an outcome.

This is just one big disaster waiting to happen.

http://livingmaxwell.com/gmo-bananas-human-trials-bill-gates
Bunch Of Organic Ripe Bananas

THE "GOLDEN RICE" HOAX -

When Public Relations replaces Science


by Dr. Vandana Shiva

It appears as if the world’s top scientists suffer a more severe form of blindness than children in poor countries. The statement that "traditional breeding has been unsuccessful in producing crops high in vitamin A" is not true given the diversity of plants and crops that Third World farmers, especially women have bred and used which are rich sources of vitamin A such as coriander, amaranth, carrot, pumpkin, mango, jackfruit.

It is also untrue that vitamin A rice will lead to increased production of betacarotene. Even if the target of 33.3 microgram of vitamin A in 100g of rice is achieved, it will be only 2.8% of betacarotene we can obtain from amaranth leaves 2.4% of betacarotene obtained from coriander leaves, curry leaves and drumstick leaves.

Even the World Bank has admitted that rediscovering and use of local plants and conservation of vitamin A rich green leafy vegetables and fruits have dramatically reduced VAD threatened children over the past 20 years in very cheap and efficient ways. Women in Bengal use more than 200 varieties of field greens. Over a 3 million people have benefited greatly from a food based project for removing VAD by increasing vitamin A availability through home gardens. The higher the diversity crops the better the uptake of pro-vitamin A.
http://online.sfsu.edu/rone/GEessays/goldenricehoax.html

Golden rice falls at first hurdle
on 13 May 2014.

GM golden rice has failed in field tests, giving lower yields than comparable local non-GM varieties and causing yet another "delay in the timeline" for release.

Golden rice falls at first hurdle

Jonathan Matthews and Claire Robinson, 13 May 2014

Yet again GMO promoters have been caught lying about GM golden rice.

A new report has just been published by authors at the University of California which is being hyped in the media as exposing the "injustice" of denying GM golden rice to the poor, causing "the death of millions of children".
http://www.appeal-democrat.com/opinion/ag-at-large-prohibition-on-golden-rice-kills-millions/article_9ceececc-d8c5-11e3-8c29-001a4bcf6878.html


The article says the University of California researchers blame "powerful forces that hide behind environmentalism" for an "international prohibition" on "producing golden rice". The implication is that golden rice has long been available for use and that it is only GM opponents who stand in the way of its use.

But this "prohibition" is entirely imaginary. GM golden rice has not been submitted to regulators anywhere in the world, as it isn't ready yet!

GMWatch has long pointed out that it isn't anti-GM activists in the West, but basic research and development problems that mean GM golden rice still isn't ready, even after swallowing millions in development funds and two decades' worth of work.
And now it seems there is going to be a further delay in releasing GM golden rice.

The most recent news from the IRRI, which is overseeing the golden rice project, shows that golden rice doesn't even pass muster in terms of the yields and agronomic performance necessary for farmers to adopt it. IRRI noted (see article below), "average yield [of GM golden rice] was unfortunately lower than that from comparable local varieties already preferred by farmers."
http://irri.org/golden-rice/faqs/what-is-the-status-of-the-golden-rice-project-coordinated-by-irri

It is more than reprehensible that a product that doesn't yet work in the field, hasn't been proven safe, and may not even help people with malnutrition, is being promoted as a miracle cure that could already be saving millions. All this false promotion does is distract attention from the proven alternatives that are already effectively combating vitamin A deficiency in a country like the Philippines - the main target of the golden rice promoters
http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/articles/gm-reports/15024-golden-rice-resources
More here...
http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15431-golden-rice-falls-at-first-hurdle


Golden Lies: No credibility for Golden Rice campaign
After many years of development, Golden Rice is still not on the market. Initially it was thought that the commercial cultivation of Golden Rice would start in 2012. However, in 2013 this plan was once again postponed for several years, the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) coordinating the project admitted for the first time in public that crucial data for risk assessment were still missing.

The current delay might have been triggered by a scandal involving Chinese school children: Chinese scientists were sacked and families received financial compensation after neither the children nor the parents were informed about a trial in which the school children were fed with the genetically engineered rice.

Nevertheless, some well-known advocates of the Golden Rice project such as Ingo Potrykus, one of the inventors of the rice, are still pushing for immediate market authorisation. In the meantime, the advocates of this product appear to have divided opinions. Some have gone as far as to say that government agencies and critics will be complicit in instigating a “Holocaust” (Chassy, 2010) or a crime against humanity if they prevent the introduction of Golden Rice. To speed up market approval and limit expenses, they are campaigning for a general lowering of standards for the risk assessment of genetically engineered plants.

A Testbiotech background shows that those involved in the Golden Rice project have demonstrated a complete lack of regard for necessary scientific accuracy and precision. Over many years they have used propaganda which was unacceptable from an ethical point of view. In doing so, they have sought to use the project to increase the pressure on regulatory authorities and accelerate the introduction of agricultural biotechnology.
http://www.testbiotech.org/en/node/1006

Potato Famine Story Fails To Boost Support For GMOs
June 12, 2014

“If you think genetically modified crops are dangerous ‘frankenfoods’ and/or that crop disease is best controlled with chemicals – if you suspect federal regulators care more about Big Ag’s interests than your family’s, thus the whole game is rigged – plaintive tales of historical famines won’t change your mind about genetic modification for disease resistance,” said study author Katherine A. McComas, a science communications professor at Cornell University.

In the study, which included almost 860 shoppers, researchers began by assessing their subjects’ knowledge of GMOs. Then participants were asked to self-assess their own knowledge.


Half of the participants were told to read about the potato famine and how the fungus Phytophthora infestans could devastate crops today. The other half were asked to think about plant disease in a general sense.


“Stories of the Irish Potato Famine were no more likely to boost support for disease-resistant GM crops than were our generic crop-disease descriptions,” McComas said. “Preconceived views about risks and benefits of agricultural genetic engineering – and perceptions about the fairness and legitimacy of the decision-making process – these things matter most.”

Researchers assessed the influence of perceptions of fairness and legitimacy by asking participants to agree or disagree with statements like, “Decision-makers try hard to understand the views of people like me” and “Decision-makers have a right to increase the use of biotechnology in agriculture.”
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1113168701/gmo-support-not-swayed-by-potato-famine-tale-061214/#muqxcQHXqQ27OLWR.99