About Us
Write for Us
Media Info
Advertising Info

NY Times asks: Why aren't GMO foods labeled?

Monday, February 21, 2011 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
Tags: GMOs, food labeling, health news

Most Viewed Articles

(NaturalNews) It is a question that more people should be asking, and one that even some in the mainstream media have begun to entertain: why are genetically-modified (GM) foods, which are patently (no pun intended) different from conventional and organic foods, not required to be properly labeled on food packaging? The answer, dictated directly from the public relations departments of Monsanto and friends via the U.S. government, is that GMOs are safe and identical to natural varieties, and do not require differentiation. But this notion is a flat out lie.

No matter what those in the ivory towers of conventional academia and science often say in defense of GMOs, the simple fact remains that GMOs, also known as imitation food, has never been proven to be safe for consumption, either by animals or by humans, and the technology neither increases crops yields nor reduces the use of toxic pesticides and herbicides. In fact, it does all of the opposite, all while giving complete control of agriculture to a few multinational biotechnology companies that are rapidly eliminating all competition.

And you surely do not have to take our word for it. A simple look into the history of GMOs and how they even gained a foothold in agriculture in the first place clearly illustrates the heavy hand of the likes of Monsanto in weaseling its way into the limelight through lobbying, lies, and deceit (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=M...).

One would think that the proposition of, at the very least, simply requiring GMOs to be labeled -- just as they are in Europe -- is more than reasonable, as it allows the public to rightfully know what they are buying and feeding their children. But the pro-GM stacked Obama administration, in the spirit of carrying on the pro-GM legacy of previous administrations, has repeatedly said NO to this common-sense approach to food transparency.

According to Obama's U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA), labeling GMOs is "false, misleading, [and] deceptive." In other words, being honest is lying, and lying is being honest, according to the administration of transparency (http://www.theatlantic.com/food/archive/2010...).

Or course, the simple explanation for this rhetorical nonsense is the fact that the vast majority of those who now hold positions of power in federal agencies that deal with food, agriculture, and drugs, are former higher-ups at Monsanto (http://www.organicconsumers.org/usda_watch.c...). So anything that opposes the Monsanto agenda automatically gets shut down, even if it makes perfect sense.

But it goes beyond just labeling, as numerous studies showing the detrimental effects of GMOs prove they are poisons. So in reality, the bare minimum of a reasonable approach is to label GMO poisons as being present in food, even though they truly do not even belong in food, or deserve to be even be called food.

A 2009 study published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences found that three varieties of GM corn that have been approved for human consumption in the U.S. cause "adverse impacts on kidneys and liver, the dietary detoxifying organs, as well as different levels of damages to heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system." And this conclusion was arrived upon based on the same data Monsanto used to somehow get these GMOs approved (https://www.naturalnews.com/027931_GMO_crops_...).

Various other studies have also found that GMOs lead to infertility, allergic reactions, autoimmune disorders, intestinal problems, liver dysfunction, enlarged bile ducts, stomach ulcers, premature delivery during pregnancy, and death (https://www.naturalnews.com/026426_GMO_food_G...).

Numerous biologists and others have come forth insisting that, upon review of all available scientific literature on the subject, GMOs are wholly unfit for human consumption. Even the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) has stated that an indefinite moratorium is needed on GMOs until proper safety studies have been conducted, rather than industry-funded ones, proving the safety of GMOs. The organization has warned the public to stop consuming GMOs until that time. And the list of documented safety concerns goes on and on.

Jest and jeer as they might, GMO apologists simply do not have science or even reasonable speculation on their side. The evidence is highly stacked against the safety of GMOs, and it is time for their proper labeling on food packaging. Let the public decide whether or not to consume "Frankenfoods" and see how long they last on the market. And in doing so, it will become clear exactly why Monsanto is fighting tooth and nail to make sure that never happens: because the "most evil corporation in the world" would be put out of business in no time.

To learn more about the dangers of GMOs, visit:

Sources for this story include:


Receive Our Free Email Newsletter

Get independent news alerts on natural cures, food lab tests, cannabis medicine, science, robotics, drones, privacy and more.

comments powered by Disqus

Natural News Wire (Sponsored Content)

Science News & Studies
Medicine News and Information
Food News & Studies
Health News & Studies
Herbs News & Information
Pollution News & Studies
Cancer News & Studies
Climate News & Studies
Survival News & Information
Gear News & Information
News covering technology, stocks, hackers, and more