Welch’s Fruit Juice Cocktails Contain more Corn than Fruit: 80% water and High Fructose Corn Syrup

If you buy fruit juices at your local grocery store, you might notice the Welch's brand juices sold in refrigerated cartons. Welch's calls them "refrigerated cocktails" and offers exotic-sounding flavors like Strawberry Peach, Dragon Fruit Mango Cocktail and Orange Pineapple Apple.

These products are aggressively marketed with pictures of splashy fruit and loud label claims like "Fruity and Refreshing!" But what Welch's doesn't reveal anywhere except in the fine print on its ingredients label is that these juice cocktails contain more high fructose corn syrup than fruit.

In fat, they contain so much high fructose corn syrup that the front label should actually show chunks of corn rather than the fruit they currently depict.

Is this corn syrup derived from GMO corn? See below for more...

Deceptively marketed and labeled

A Natural News investigation concludes that Welch's refrigerated cocktails are deceptively labeled and marketed. The Welch's website, for starters, hides the ingredients list from consumers, showing nutrition facts but not ingredients. High fructose corn syrup only shows up under ingredients, not nutrition facts.

The front label of Welch's Strawberry Peach product uses the phrase, "Fruity & Refreshing" in a prominent position on the label. But if this claim were accurate, it would actually say, "Corny & Refreshing" because it's made more from corn than fruit.

The front label (see picture below) also intentionally leaves out any mention of corn syrup even though high fructose corn syrup is the second most prominent ingredient of the product, right after water. It says:

Strawberry Peach flavored fruit juice cocktail blend made with apple, pear, strawberry and peach juices from concentrate.

No mention of corn.

The back label (see image below) begins with a giant, all-caps "LOVE" statement, jumping on the bandwagon of trying to associate LOVE with its product, even though no rational person would use the word "LOVE" to describe a highly refined liquid sugar that has been repeatedly linked to diabetes and obesity.

Welch's annual report admits it is aware that consumers seek to avoid HFCS

All this corn syrup is being pushed as fruit juice despite the fact that Welch's 2012 annual report openly admits the company is fully aware that consumers are attempting to avoid high fructose corn syrup.

"Our mid-priced essentials line continued to grow in FY '12 with its powerful message -- no high fructose corn syrup."

The context of this statement clearly implies that "no high fructose corn syrup" is a benefit of its essentials line of products. Yet, simultaneously, Welch's continues to promote other products that contain alarming proportions of HFCS while avoiding any mention of corn on the front label.

80% water and corn syrup!

Only when you get to the back label do you learn that these Welch's fruit juice cocktails -- which are heavily adorned with photos and words that describe and imply "fruit" -- are actually 80% water and corn syrup.

The first two ingredients are Filtered Water (i.e. tap water) and High Fructose Corn Syrup. An easy-to-miss bit of text admits, "Contains 20% juice," meaning 80% of the beverage is not juice.

Nowhere does the product claim to be free of GMOs. As the vast majority of high fructose corn syrup produced in North America is derived from genetically modified corn, it is very likely that the HFCS used by Welch's is actually GMO. A genetic test would not confirm this, however, as the heavy processing of HFCS destroys genetic integrity, rendering genetic ID tests useless.

Deceptive labeling pushes more high fructose corn syrup to children

Welch's fruit juice cocktails are depicted as if they were nothing but fruit juice. The photos, descriptive text and website text all imply they are made of nothing other than fruit juices. Nowhere on the product front label, website or promotional materials is corn depicted at all.

When consumers shop for fruit juices at their local grocery stores, they are easily misled by deceptive labeling practices such as those used by Welch's. Consumers use the pictures and prominent text on the front of the product as their primary cues to determine the composition of the product, and if that product label primarily depicts fruit and fruit juices, a typical consumer will incorrectly assume the product is primarily made of fruit and fruit juices. That same consumer will typically have no idea the product contains more corn derivatives than fruit juice.

Most consumers -- especially parents -- are actively trying to avoid high fructose corn syrup. This is often the reason why they choose fruit juice instead of sodas, as a matter of fact. Yet if they reach for Welch's juice cocktails, they are getting the exact same refined liquid sugar they were trying to avoid by choosing juice instead of soda!

Here at Natural News, we think Welch's should be ashamed of itself for pushing water and high fructose corn syrup as a fruit juice beverage. Its labeling practices deceive rather than inform consumers.

We urge you to call the Welch's comment line at 1-800-340-6870 and demand they stop selling high fructose corn syrup as fruit juice.

Corn is not a fruit. And corn syrup is not fruit juice. It is, however, often contaminated with mercury.

Demand that Welch's stop tricking consumers into thinking corn syrup is fruit juice.

Source:

www.naturalnews.com

worldtruth.tv

If you want to help these blog , like and share the facebook page :

http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

 

General Mills’ Ken Powell Maintains Opposition to Labeling GMOs

Ken Powell, chairman and CEO of General Mills Inc., restated his opposition to mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms, commonly called GMOs, at a conference in California.

The conference, called Brainstorm Green, was put on by Fortune. In an uneditedtranscript posted by the magazine, Powell said GMOs are safe and they're part of a solution to feeding the world's growing population.

Powell said he didn't have a problem with specialty retailer Whole Foods' recent announcement it would require GMO information on labels.

He said he's not opposed to Whole Foods' policy because General Mills' organic brands -- such as Muir Glenn, Cascadian Farms, Larabar and Food Should Taste Good -- that it sells to Whole Foods are GMO free.

Powell said virtually every product in the grocery store contains GMOs, and he doesn't think it's a good idea to label those as having GMOs.

 

General Mills spent about $1 million lobbying with other food manufacturers to defeat a measure in California that would have required GMOs to be disclosed on food labels, according to the story.

If such a rule was implemented on a state-by-state basis, it would cost consumers more because manufactures would have change how they manage their supply chains, Powell said.

He added that there wouldn't be room to include GMO information on product labels.

 

"Consumers tell us, and I think they're right, that they want to know about the ingredients, they want to know the nutrition information of that product, they want to know if there's a safety thing, if there's peanuts in there or something like that. They need to know these things. But we should restrict the use of that label for this important information, and limit it to that. If we broaden it to other things that could be anything, I mean it could be anything, causes that we have, things that we believe in, we'll need to add pages to the label, and we simply don't think we should do that."

Source:

www.bizjournals.com

http://worldtruth.tv

If you want to help these blog , like and share the facebook page :

http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

 

Bill Gates Dodges Questions on Why He Owns 500,000 Shares of Monsanto

Bill Gates is primarily known as the multi-billionaire who created Microsoft, the company behind the most popular computer operating system known as Windows.

With this massive wealth, he has retired from leading Microsoft and now instead focuses his money and time on furthering genetically modified technology, geoengineering, experimental vaccinations, and preaching about how Monsanto is the answer to world hunger.

 

It should come as no surprise, then, that Gates owns 500,000 shares worth 23 million US dollars (or more) of Monsanto stock. The very same company that has been caught running slave rings in Argentina in which workers were forced to work 14+ hours a day while withholding payment, has used their massive finances to fund organizations that literally fake FDA quotes to support GMOs, and of course peddling through GMOs that have been linked to numerous health concerns.

This is not even taking into account the farmer suicides that occur around every 30 minutes due to Monsanto’s failing GMO crop yield bankrupting small-time farmers in India’s notorious ‘suicide belt‘.

Bill Gates Funding Corporations Caught in Child Slave Rings

And if that’s not enough, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has even teamed up with Cargill to pump GMO soy into the third world. Cargill, of course, is the the 133 billion dollar corporation that also has been found in direct violation of human rights laws. Cargill was sued by the International Labor Rights Fund for trafficking children from Mali and forcing them to work on cocoa bean plantations for around 12 to 14 hours each day without pay, food, or sleep. The company even continues to purchase cotton from Uzbekistan, where it is well known that child slave labor is used in the cultivation.

Bill Gates himself even filmed commercials for Monsanto’s GMOs, propping them up as the ‘solution’ to world hunger despite even the United Nations admitting that GMOs cannot fight hunger as effectively as traditional farming. Headed by an entity known as the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), a team of 900 scientists and researchers studied the issue of world hunger. The results of the major study were very simple: 900 scientists agreed that GMO crops were not the answer to the world hunger, and revealed this in 2008 — long before Bill Gates began claiming that GMOs were the answer while ignoring this readily available information.

Even the Union of Concerned Scientists examined the true yield of GMO crops, only to find that the GM crops do not produce increased yields over the long run — despite their excessive cost and extreme danger to health and environment. The lack of scientific support behind the GMO crops was so startling to the Union that they documented all the details in a 2009 report entitled ”Failure to Yield.”

Watchdog groups have criticized Gates’ support of these corporations after finding out about his massive funding. One such group, a part of the Community Alliance for Global Justice, stated:

“Monsanto has a history of blatant disregard for the interests and well being of small farmers around the world… [This] casts serious doubt on the foundation’s heavy funding of agricultural development in Africa…”

So why is Bill Gates, a man who is propped up by the media as an angel of philanthropy, pumping millions (if not billions) into these operations? And why is he claiming that GMOs can fight world hunger when we know this is not true due to decreased yields and other problems?

I Asked Bill Gates Why

In a unique opportunity to ask Bill Gates himself why he has purchased 500,000 shares of Monsanto behind the scenes (expelled into the news thanks to tax information) and teamed up with Cargill to expand GMOs worldwide, myself and several others asked him ourselves.

Yesterday Gates opened himself up to questions from online users via the social sharing site Reddit, in which he posted an open interview of sorts known as an ‘Ask me Anything’ post. This is essentially an invitation for questions that the subject will answer via text. While I had a large number of questions for Gates, such as if he actually eats GMOs himself, I simply asked him:

"Why did you buy 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock?

Unsurprisingly, the comment received a large degree of feedback. Users asked Gates to please respond to the question, and several others posed similar variations to Gates that all went unanswered (as to be expected). Some quotes from users in response to my question included:

User Lawfairy replied: “I wish he’d answered this one — to me, this is one of the most curious things about Mr. Gates, whom I otherwise respect as one of the foremost humanists of our generation… Mr. Gates’ relationship with Monsanto is, in my mind, simultaneously the most morally troubling thing about Mr. Gates”

Another user posted (with links intact): “Would you be willing to take some time to give us some insight with your investments in Monsanto? Despite having the headlines of “ending world hunger”, this company has done some despicable things in the past 100 years and I don’t believe they have the public’s best interest in mind. Having a single company or entity trying to “control”, “manipulate” or “own” the world’s food supply, in my opinion, is not the way to end world hunger."

Another user answered with: “Because he is supporting the Bilderberg group!”

None of these received a response nor did the many others I could not include in this article. The answer, it seems, is to bring this topic to the mainstream. The very same mainstream that seems to think Bill Gates is some sort of philanthropic super star that can do no evil. I am opposed to all wrongdoing at every level, and I find it absolutely disturbing that someone funding the GMO agenda and slave-labor-linked companies has been met with applause.

Source: 

Natural Society

http://worldtruth.tv

If you want to help these blog , like and share the facebook page :

http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

 

Biosecurity Board suspends entry of 26 GMOs to Turkey

The Biosecurity Board has decided to ban the entry of 26 genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into Turkey amid ongoing debates about whether genetically modified rice passed through customs.
The board, which is the deciding body on the issue in the country, unanimously rejected the entry authorization demands.The banned products include genetically modified sugar beet and rapeseed, which are permitted in European Union countries as feeders.Also, the demand to use 22 types of genetically modified corns as fuel was rejected unanimously on the grounds of scientific concerns about the products.With these decisions, only 19 products were allowed to enter Turkish markets.
Corns and soy in 19 genetic types have been authorized to be imported for use as animal feed.
Board calls for further research
The board also called on universities and the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) to conduct research on genetically modified products.
The Biosecurity Board’s decision came right after a debate on genetically modified rice. Recently, executives of three food companies were detained on grounds that rice about to be imported into Turkey from the Mersin port was genetically modified. The executives were later released. This incident has caused the debate on GMOs to heat up again. American officials joined the debate, saying legislation in Turkey should change and that penalties for GMOs should be moderated.
Corn and soy, in which GMOs are intensively used, are used as feed for chicken, fish and cattle. Corns generally make up about 10 to 20 percent of cattle feed, while soy constitutes less than 10 percent of this feed. Soy products are mostly used in fish feed.
The usage of GMOs as animal feed poses a threat to human health since scientific research has revealed that GMOs could pass from animals to humans when their meat is consumed.
U.S. officials demand Turkey facilitate usage of GMOs and soften the penalties on the issue.
Source:
www.organicconsumers.org
http://worldtruth.tv


If you want to help these blog , like and share the facebook page :

http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblogv

 

Trader Joe’s and Whole Foods Won’t Sell GM Salmon

If you want this blog to get up with great information: 
Share & Follow us on facebook and be 

updated! http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

 

A number of US supermarket chains pledged on Wednesday not to sell genetically modified salmon, in a sign of growing public concern about engineered foods on the dinner table.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is in the final stages of deciding whether to allow GM salmon on to the market. If approved, AquaBounty Technology's salmon would be the first genetically engineered animal to enter the food supply.

The company combined genes from two species of salmon with a pouter eel to produce a fish it says it can bring to market twice as fast as conventional salmon.

The GM salmon is the first in some 30 other species of genetically engineered fish under development, including tilapia. Researchers are also working to bring GM cows, chickens, and pigs to market.

However, those plans could be blocked by Wednesday's commitment not to sell genetically engineered seafood from national grocery chains including Trader Joe's, Aldi, and Whole Foods, as well as regional retailers.

Whole Foods, United Natural Foods and the Myth of Natural

If you want this blog to get up with great information: 
Share & Follow us on facebook and be 

updated! http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

WHY ORGANIC CONSUMER ASSOCIATION  BELIEVES THAT MOST "NATURAL" FOODS ARE A FRAUD

• There is widespread use of GMO (genetically modified organisms) ingredients in so-called "natural" foods, including the "natural" brands that make up most of WFM and UNFI's sales.
• So-called "natural" (non-organic) soy milk, including leading brands such as "Silk," are made with conventional soy lecithin, utilizing the hazardous chemical, hexane, as an extraction agent.
• 90% or more of the vitamins and supplements now on the market labeled as "Whole Foods," "natural" or "food based" are spiked with synthetic chemicals.

Why Target Whole Foods and United Natural Foods?

Corporate Takeovers & Monopolistic Practices

The $25 Billion organic marketplace has enjoyed substantial growth for over a decade, thanks to growing consumer consciousness and farmer innovation.

No longer a passing trend or simply a niche market, organic food and farming are proving to be a viable alternative to the unhealthy, unsustainable and unjust conventional food system.

Unprecedented wholesale and retail control of the organic marketplace by UNFI and Whole Foods, employing a business model of selling twice as much so-called "natural" food as certified organic food, coupled with the takeover of many organic companies by multinational food corporations such as Dean Foods, threatens the growth of the organic movement.

Perpetrating "Natural" Fraud

Consumers are confused about the difference between conventional products marketed as "natural," and those nutritionally and environmentally superior products that are "certified organic."

Retail stores like WFM and wholesale distributors like UNFI have failed to educate their customers about the qualitative difference between natural and organic.

A troubling trend in organics today is the calculated shift on the part of certain large companies from certified organic ingredients and products to so-called "natural" products. With the exception of the "natural" meat sector, where there are limited voluntary guidelines, there is no definition of "natural." In the majority of cases, "natural" products are green washed conventional products, with "natural" label claims neither policed nor monitored.

Whole Foods and UNFI are maximizing their profits by selling quasi-natural products at premium organic prices. Organic consumers are increasingly left without certified organic choices while organic farmers continue to lose market share to "natural" impostors. It's no wonder that less than 1% of American farmland is certified organic.

Excluding Small and Family Farms

Whole Foods and UNFI's business model of centralized sourcing and prioritizing natural products over organic rewards large corporate farms and processors, to the detriment of local and regional small-scale organic farmers and brands.

Organic farmers must "get big or get out" to be able to compete and have free access to markets. Many industrial organic farms and dairy operations reflect the same abuses and problems of the conventional food system: extremely energy intensive, systematic abuse of workers, reduced food quality, and damage to biodiversity.

So-called "natural" products, since they are actually in most cases conventional products in disguise, are being sold at lower prices than genuine organic products--thereby retarding the growth of the organic sector.

Organic and Local Food?

In light of the food system's significant contribution to the climate crisis and the deepening economic troubles facing local food economies, it is more important than ever to prioritize locally produced organic food.

Though Whole Foods talks a lot about supporting local food and producers, the fact is that the vast majority of their products are not local, and much of what they sell is sourced from a small number of industrial organic operations in California, often owned by the same conventional food conglomerates responsible for destroying the world's food system.

Organic Monopoly and the "Whole Paycheck" Phenomena

UNFI has undermined the growth of the organic movement by implementing an unfair tiered pricing system that gives Whole Foods deep discounts while other grocers, coops and independent retailers pay significantly higher prices, in effect subsidizing UNFI for its reduced profits at Whole Foods.

With UNFI as the largest organic (but of course their sales are mostly so-called "natural" products) food wholesaler and Whole Foods as the largest organic (like UNFI most of its sales are "natural") food retailer, organic consumers are assured higher prices, lower quality and fewer choices.

Cancer in a Bottle?

In 2008, the Organic Consumers Association exposed a problem which particularly threatens women - a large number of leading conventional as well as "natural" and "organic" brands of shampoos, lotions, cosmetics and household cleaning products which contained the carcinogen 1,4-Dioxane.

Included in the list of products were several Whole Food's 365 brand products and many products in the UNFI catalog.

While several dozen companies have committed to eliminating the 1,4-Dioxane, neither Whole Foods, nor UNFI, have endorsed OCA's Coming Clean Campaign, nor have they called on the USDA to crack down on blatant labeling fraud in the organic personal care and cosmetics sector.

Corporate Consolidation of Organics

In the last decade, the organic marketplace has experienced hyper consolidation, with numerous small to medium-sized farmers, manufacturers and retailers being taken over by larger, profit-hungry corporations.

Whole Foods has employed an expansion strategy that resembles Wal-Mart with its targeting of local and independent retailers with new store locations while steadily buying out competitors like Wild Oats.

UNFI has also grown rapidly over the last decade, in part by aggressively taking over other distributors, regional wholesalers and manufacturers.

Organics for Elites?

The organic food and farming movements were born out of the desire to provide healthy and safe food to all. Whole Foods' business model: selling overpriced conventional foods as "natural," with organics in a subordinate role, is a recipe for maximizing profits rather than maximizing the growth of organic food and farming.

Worse yet, Whole Food's high prices have not translated into larger profits for family farms or small-scale manufacturers. Likewise, UNFI's growing market share and near-monopoly of the organic and "natural" market has reduced the options for consumers and independent retailers alike, undermining the growth of consumer buying clubs and the lower-cost alternatives.

Anti-worker

UNFI and Whole Foods have a history of cutting workers' benefits. Both have gone to extreme lengths to block their employees from choosing to unionize. Whole Foods has long fought unionization of its retail locations, largely ignored the demands of farm workers organizations, like the United Farm Workers, and kept workers' wages consistently low by industry standards.

UNFI has repeatedly fought efforts by its employees to fight for better pay, benefits and working conditions. Where workers have sucessfully formed unions, UNFI has begun moving jobs to new, non-union locations.

Source:

www.organicconsumers.org

http://worldtruth.tv

If you want this blog to get up with great information: 
Share & Follow us on facebook and be 

updated! http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

High Levels of Lead Detected in Imported Rice

If you want this blog to get up with great information:
Share & Follow us on facebook and be updated! http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

The biotech industry is pushing the envelope further on the need for genetically modified rice by highlighting recent evidence that rice imported from certain countries contains high levels of lead that could pose health risks, particularly for infants and children, who are especially sensitive to lead’s effects.

Tufts University researchers in Boston recently swapped the term “genetically modified” (GM) for “nutritionally enhanced” so they could proceed with a study testing GM rice on six to eight-year olds.

Greenpeace called the move a “dangerous genetic experiment” and said it had previously exposed illegal cases of GM rice in China.

But now biotech companies are highlighting recent reports which suggest that imported rice contains high levels of lead.

The research, which found some of the highest lead levels in baby food, was among almost 12,000 reports scheduled for the 245th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society.

Tsanangurayi Tongesayi, Ph.D., who headed the analysis of rice imported from Asia, Europe and South America, pointed out that imports account for only 7 percent of the rice consumed in the United States. With vast rice fields in Louisiana, California, Texas, Arkansas and Mississippi, the U.S. is a major producer and exporter of the grain. However, imports of rice and rice flour are increasing — by more than 200 percent since 1999 — and rice is the staple food for 3 billion people worldwide, he added.

“Such findings present a situation that is particularly worrisome given that infants and children are especially vulnerable to the effects of lead poisoning,” Tongesayi said. “For infants and children, the daily exposure levels from eating the rice products analyzed in this study would be 30-60 times higher than the FDA’s provisional total tolerable intake (PTTI) levels. Asians consume more rice, and for these infants and children, exposures would be 60-120 times higher. For adults, the daily exposure levels were 20-40 times higher than the PTTI levels.”

The research was part of a symposium titled “Food and Its Environment: What Is In What We Eat?”

Tongesayi’s team, which is with Monmouth University in N.J., found that levels of lead in rice imported into the United States ranged from 6 to 12 milligrams/kilogram. From those numbers, they calculated the daily exposure levels for various populations and then made comparisons with the FDA’s PTTI levels for lead. They detected the highest amounts of lead in rice from Taiwan and China. Samples from the Czech Republic, Bhutan, Italy, India and Thailand had significantly high levels of lead as well. Analysis of rice samples from Pakistan, Brazil and other countries were still underway.

Because of the increase in rice imports into the United States, Tongesayi said that rice from other nations has made its way into a wide variety of grocery stores, large supermarket chains and restaurants, as well as ethnic specialty markets and restaurants.

China, a Major Player in GM Rice 

China leads the pack in rice breeding research, where hopes are high for new, insect resistant cultivars. China has approved its first strain of genetically modified rice for commercial production, potentially easing the way for other major producers to adopt the controversial technology.

The approval of the locally-developed rice, as well as China’s first GMO corn, shifts the global balance of power in food trade and could prompt other countries to follow suit, experts said.

It will also enable China, the world’s top producer and consumer of rice, to grow more GMO rice amid shrinking land and water resources.

The Chinese Ministry of Agriculture’s Biosafety Committee issued biosafety certificates to pest-resistant Bt rice with large-scale production to start in 2-3 years.

But Greenpeace called the move a “dangerous genetic experiment” and said it had previously exposed illegal cases of genetically engineered (GE) rice in China.

“If the Ministry of Agriculture cannot even control the illegal cultivation of GE rice, how can they manage the risks of large scale cultivation?” Lorena Luo, Greenpeace’s food and agriculture campaigner in China, asked in an emailed statement.

Everything from developing allergen-free rice to preventing vitamin deficiencies is being touted as the primary objective for genetic engineering projects which focus their efforts on altering rice’s nutritional value.

Rice with Human Genes

The first GM food crop containing human genes is also set to be approved for commercial production.

The laboratory-created rice produces some of the human proteins found in breast milk and saliva.

The rice is a major step in so-called Frankenstein Foods, the first mingling of human-origin genes and those from plants. But the U.S. Department of Agriculture has already signaled it plans to allow commercial cultivation.

The rice’s producers, California-based Ventria Bioscience, have been given preliminary approval to grow it on more than 3,000 acres in Kansas. The company plans to harvest the proteins and use them in drinks, desserts, yogurts and muesli bars and many other processed foods which will not be labelled as containing genetically modified foods once they reach the markets.

The news provoked horror among GM critics and consumer groups on both sides of the Atlantic.

GeneWatch UK, which monitors new GM foods, described it as “very disturbing”. Researcher Becky Price warned: “There are huge, huge health risks and people should rightly be concerned about this.”

Friends of the Earth campaigner Clare Oxborrow said: “Using food crops and fields as glorified drug factories is a very worrying development.

“If these pharmaceutical crops end up on consumers’ plates, the consequences for our health could be devastating.

“The biotech industry has already failed to prevent experimental GM rice contaminating the food chain.

“The Government must urge the U.S. to ban the production of drugs in food crops. It must also introduce tough measures to prevent illegal GM crops contaminating our food and ensure that biotech companies are liable for any damage their products cause.”

In the U.S., the Union of Concerned Scientists, a policy advocacy group, warned: “It is unwise to produce drugs in plants outdoors.

“There would be little control over the doses people might get exposed to, and some might be allergic to the proteins.”

The American Consumers Union and the Washington based Center for Food Safety also oppose Ventria’s plans.

As well as the contamination fears there are serious ethical concerns about such a fundamental interference with the building blocks of life.

Yet there is no legal means for Britain and Europe to ban such products on ethical grounds.

Imports would have to be accepted once they had gone through a scientific safety assessment.

Until now, plants with human-origin genes have been restricted to small test plots.

Ventria originally planned to grow the rice in southern Missouri but the brewer Anheuser-Busch, a huge buyer of rice, threatened to boycott the state amid concern over contamination and consumer reaction.

Now the USDA, saying the rice poses “virtually no risk”. has given preliminary approval for it to be grown in Kansas, which has no commercial rice farms.

Ventria will also use dedicated equipment, storage and processing facilities supposed to prevent seeds from mixing with other crops.

The rice could also be a huge money-spinner in the Western world, with parents being told it will help their children get over unpleasant stomach bugs more quickly.

“It’s the same tune over and over from the GM folks. They say it helps when in actuality it only destroys the natural balance of nature, the environment and human health, period!” said GM critic Gustavo Miller about Ventria’s initiatives.

Source:

preventdisease.com

http://worldtruth.tv

If you want this blog to get up with great information:
Share & Follow us on facebook and be updated! http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

STUDY REVEALS GMO CORN TO BE HIGHLY TOXIC

If you want this blog to get up with great information:
Share & Follow us on facebook and be updated! http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

A leaked study examining genetically-modified corn reveals that the lab-made alternative to organic crops contains a startling level of toxic chemicals.

An anti-GMO website has posted the results of an education-based consulting company’s comparison of corn types, and the results reveal that genetically modified foods may be more hazardous than once thought.

The study, the 2012 Corn Comparison Report by Profit Pro, was published recently on the website for Moms Across America March to Label GMOs, a group that says they wish to “raise awareness and support Moms with solutions to eat GMO Free as we demand GMO labeling locally and nationally simultaneously.” They are plotting nationwide protests scheduled for later this year.

The report, writes the website’s Zen Honeycutt, was provided by a representative for De Dell Seed Company, an Ontario-based farm that’s touted as being Canadian only non-GMO corn seed company.

~

“The claims that ‘There is no difference between GMO corn and NON Gmo corn’ are false,” says Honeycutt, who adds she was “floored” after reading the study.

According to the analysis, GMO corn tested by Profit Pro contains a number of elements absent from traditional cord, including chlorides, formaldehyde and glyphosate. While those elements don’t appear naturally in corn, they were present in GMO samples to the tune of 60 ppm, 200pm and 13 ppm, respectively.

Honecutt says that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (FDA) mandates that the level of glyphosate in American drinking water not exceed 0.7 ppm and adds that organ damage in some animals has been linked to glyphosate exposure exceeding 0.1 ppm.

“Glyphosate is a strong organic phosphate chelator that immobilizes positively charged minerals such as manganese, cobalt, iron, zinc [and] copper,” Dr. Don Huber attested during a separate GMO study recently released, adding that those elements “are essential for normal physiological functions in soils, plants and animals.”

“Glyphosate draws out the vital nutrients of living things and GMO corn is covered with it,” adds Honeycutt, who notes that the nutritional benefits rampant in natural corn are almost entirely removed from lab-made seeds: in the samples used during the study, non-GMO corn is alleged to have 437-times the amount of calcium in genetically modified versions, and 56- and 7-times the level of magnesium and manganese, respectively.

These studies come on the heels of a recent decision on Capitol Hill to approve an annual agriculture appropriations bill, even though a provision within the act contained a rider that frees GMO corporations such as the multi-billion-dollar Monsanto Company from liability. The so-called “Monsanto Protection Act,” written by a lawmaker that has lobbied for the agra-giant, says biotech companies won’t need federal approval to test and plant GMO-crops, even if health risks are unknown.

“The provision would strip federal courts of the authority to halt the sale and planting of an illegal, potentially hazardous GE crop while the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) assesses those potential hazards,” reads a letter to the House of Representatives that was delivered to Congress last month with the signatures of dozens of food businesses and retailers, as well as interest groups and agencies representing family farmers. “Further, it would compel USDA to allow continued planting of that same crop upon request, even if in the course of its assessment the Department finds that it poses previously unrecognized risks.”

Source:

RT

http://worldtruth.tv

If you want this blog to get up with great information:
Share & Follow us on facebook and be updated! http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog

SCIENTISTS FINALLY PRESENT EVIDENCE ON EXPANDING DNA STRANDS

The human genome is packed with millions of gene switches that reside in bits of DNA that once were dismissed as “junk” but it turns out that so-called junk DNA plays critical roles in controlling how cells, organs and other tissues behave. Cambridge researchers have published a paper proving that four-stranded ‘quadruple helix’ DNA structures — known as G-quadruplexes — also exist within the human genome. The question is, how many DNA strands are human beings capable of possessing? Some geneticists are claiming humans will one day have 12 strands.

Just a few years ago, modern medicine officially acknowledged the first case of a child with 3 DNA strands. A two-year-old boy, Alfie Clamp became the only person in the world to be diagnosed with an extra strand in his DNA. He was born blind and with severe disabilities, which led doctors to carry out various tests. They revealed his seventh chromosome had an extra strand of material which had never been documented anywhere in the world before. Doctors were baffled at his condition, which is so rare it does not have a name.

Dr. Berrenda Fox said “we are finding that there are other helixes that are being formed. In the double helix there are two strands of DNA coiled into a spiral.” Dr. Fox says there are major changes and mutations occuring in our DNA. We are evolving. “We will be developing twelve helixes. During this time, which seems to have started maybe 5 to 20 years ago, we have been mutating. This is the scientific explanation. It is a mutation of our species into something for which the end result is not yet known,” she stated.

The findings of the G-quadruplexes mark the culmination of over 10 years investigation by scientists to show these complex structures in vivo — in living human cells — working from the hypothetical, through computational modelling to synthetic lab experiments and finally the identification in human cancer cells using fluorescent biomarkers.

The research, published in Nature Chemistry and funded by Cancer Research UK, goes on to show clear links between concentrations of four-stranded quadruplexes and the process of DNA replication, which is pivotal to cell division and production.

Physical studies over the last couple of decades had shown that quadruplex DNA can form in vitro — in the ‘test tube’, but the structure was considered to be a curiosity rather than a feature found in nature. The researchers now know for the first time that they actually form in the DNA of human cells. Quadruplex DNA is actually found fairly consistently throughout the genome of human cells and their division cycles

The study showed that if an inhibitor is used to block DNA replication, quadruplex levels go down — proving the idea that DNA is dynamic, with structures constantly being formed and unformed.

The researchers also previously found that an overactive gene with higher levels of Quadruplex DNA is more vulnerable to external interference.

Scientific research has now proven our DNA holds the genetic codes for our physical and emotional evolution through frequency held in the languages we speak.

There is evidence for a whole new type of medicine in which DNA can be influenced and reprogrammed by words and frequencies WITHOUT cutting out and replacing single genes.

Russian researchers’ findings and conclusions are simply revolutionary! According to them, our DNA is not only responsible for the construction of our body but also serves as data storage and in communication. The Russian linguists found that the genetic code, especially in the apparently useless junk DNA follows the same rules as all our human languages. To this end they compared the rules of syntax (the way in which words are put together to form phrases and sentences), semantics (the study of meaning in language forms) and the basic rules of grammar. They found that the alkalines of our DNA follow a regular grammar and do have set rules just like our languages. So human languages did not appear coincidentally but are a reflection of our inherent DNA.

The Russian biophysicist and molecular biologist Pjotr Garjajev and his colleagues also explored the vibrational behavior of the DNA. The bottom line was: “Living chromosomes function just like solitonic/holographic computers using the endogenous DNA laser radiation.” This means that they managed for example to modulate certain frequency patterns onto a laser ray and with it influenced the DNA frequency and thus the genetic information itself. Since the basic structure of DNA-alkaline pairs and of language (as explained earlier) are of the same structure, no DNA decoding is necessary.

This finally and scientifically explains why affirmations, autogenous training, hypnosis and the like can have such strong effects on humans and their bodies. It is entirely normal and natural for our DNA to react to language. While western researchers cut single genes from the DNA strands and insert them elsewhere, the Russians enthusiastically worked on devices that can influence the cellular metabolism through suitable modulated radio and light frequencies and thus repair genetic defects.

Through scientific inquiry, research has exposed that only 3% of our DNA is wrapped up in the spiraling double helix strand. During the time of the 75,000 year cycle when we are exposed to the most torsion energy waves and it affects our DNA by reorganizing the 97% “junk” DNA from a 2-strand double helix to a 12-strand helix advancing man in a leap of evolution.

Source:

Prevent Disease 

http://worldtruth.tv