Meats Declared Too Dangerous for Human Consumption!

[Woodhouse]

It's taken this long for a big organization to say something. Food industries control pretty much everything. I doubt you guys heard about the fact that the bill that would have required companies to label foods that are GENETICALLY MODIFIED in California didn't pass. Probably because the media was paying so much attention to gay marriage. It's also funny that a number of votes went missing but of course, it's not like anyone said anything.

Processed Meats Declared too Dangerous for Human Consumption | Love Your Health

[[MPGH]Austin]

quick! ban the sun! you can get skin cancer!

[Woodhouse]

quick! ban the sun! you can get skin cancer!

It's not like they have to put chemicals in our food to make them look full of color. And it's not just about cancer and meats. They're genetically modifying certain foods and keeping us from knowing which ones they are. Wouldn't you want to know what you were eating really was? What about if it if was linked to sterility? There are studies linking GMOs and sterility: https://articles.mercol*****m/sites/ar...-april-24.aspx

That shit makes rats sterile. What do you think that stuff is doing to us?

Did you know the government is trying to make it illegal to grow your own food and have your own live stock? Why are they putting fluoride and Prozac in our water supply? Oh, and for people who don't believe what I'm saying, look it up

[Tamashimasen]

Meh I'm not a health nut meat is good i don't care what they do to it as long as it tastes good.

[[MPGH]Disturbed]

These companies might not have the most ethical business practices, but there has yet to be a single case of disease or death that was proven to be caused by genetically modified food. There's no reason to give in to peoples baseless fears and needlessly hurt an entire industry.


If they food is actually dangerous, then it would be banned, not labeled.

[Woodhouse]

If they food is actually dangerous, then it would be banned, not labeled.

You're oh so wrong .Monsanto pretty much controls the government, lol. GMOs have also been recently linked to leukemia and anemia: https://www.digitaljournal.com/article/350126

Milk has been proven to draw Calcium out of your bones yet it still remains in the food pyramid. Isn't that a little bit weird?

https://www.alternet.org/story/13557/...dairy_industry
https://www.seven30runner.com/drinkin...-bones-strong/

Oh, read my newer post.

"Hey, it still tastes good!" I wouldn't expect a lot of people on here to care. Mostly because a lot of MPGH members are like 13 and under. Not saying I'm an adult or anything but I think it's a major problem the we're being fed all of these chemicals. I mean, fuck, if I had kids I wouldn't want them eating this garbage.

If one person on here can tell me the overall benefits of putting Prozac and Fluoride in the public water supply then I'll rest my case. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything. All of what I'm saying is true. Put 2 and 2 together, guys.

@Lehsyrus , I am I wrong here? Surely they don't teach you that GMOs are safe in college, do they?

[Lulz$ecurity]

Lol what's going to follow?

[Woodhouse]

Lol what's going to follow?

Well. Do you know about vaccines?

[darkajapan]

Just eat salad for the rest of your life if you don't wanna eat meat, I mean I think as long as you exercise you are okay to eat whatever the fuck you want

[s8n.]

Hehehehe.

quick! ban the sun! you can get skin cancer!

[Woodhouse]

Just eat salad for the rest of your life if you don't wanna eat meat, I mean I think as long as you exercise you are okay to eat whatever the fuck you want

This is about processed meat. And yes, running on the treadmill will keep you from developing leukemia, becoming anemic and sterile, and all of the other great things that come with GMOs

[Lehsyrus]

You're oh so wrong .Monsanto pretty much controls the government, lol. GMOs have also been recently linked to leukemia and anemia: Study: GMOs linked to leukemia and anemia

Milk has been proven to draw Calcium out of your bones yet it still remains in the food pyramid. Isn't that a little bit weird?

Not Milk: The USDA, Monsanto, and the U.S. Dairy Industry | Alternet
Does Drinking Milk Really Make Your Bones Strong?

Oh, read my newer post.

"Hey, it still tastes good!" I wouldn't expect a lot of people on here to care. Mostly because a lot of MPGH members are like 13 and under. Not saying I'm an adult or anything but I think it's a major problem the we're being fed all of these chemicals. I mean, fuck, if I had kids I wouldn't want them eating this garbage.

If one person on here can tell me the overall benefits of putting Prozac and Fluoride in the public water supply then I'll rest my case. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything. All of what I'm saying is true. Put 2 and 2 together, guys.

@Lehsyrus , I am I wrong here? Surely they don't teach you that GMOs are safe in college, do they?

Believe it or not, I am with you on the harmful effects of GMO's. Monsanto's newest bacteria for self-pesticide producing corn eats away at red blood cells. I live in a rural area and buy my meats locally. Also, large fish such as Cod and Tuna are bad for your health as they absorb more mercury through the mercury in the water.

---------- Post added at 06:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:07 PM ----------

These companies might not have the most ethical business practices, but there has yet to be a single case of disease or death that was proven to be caused by genetically modified food. There's no reason to give in to peoples baseless fears and needlessly hurt an entire industry.


If they food is actually dangerous, then it would be banned, not labeled.

Not necessarily true. The FDA is in charge of food related research and bans, however Monsanto has had several high ranking employees in high ranking positions in the FDA. Michael R. Taylor, Margaret Miller, Susan Sechen, Arthur Hayes, Michael A. Friedman, and Virginia Weldon, have all bounced between high ranking positions in both the FDA and Monsanto.

[joshZ]

sorry, but i love my bacon so ill keep eating it anyway, but they shouldn't use chemicals and stuff that could harm your health even more

[noob555]

---------- Post added at 07:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:19 PM ----------

You're oh so wrong .Monsanto pretty much controls the government, lol. GMOs have also been recently linked to leukemia and anemia: Study: GMOs linked to leukemia and anemia

LMK when you have a legit study
They used spore / crystals from modified Bt strains, rather than isolated protein. As per Schnepf, 2012a, such sporulating cultures are about ~20% Bt crystal proteins by dry weight. In other words, 80% of what the mice were fed is God knows what.
The results seen are not due to use of too high a level of protein (270 mg/kg) , as there are reports of up to 5280 mg/kg of purified proteins fed to mice without any adverse effects (Schnepf, 2012b)
So,

The real negative control should have been wild type Bt strains, not water, as water lacks the other stuff floating around the culture medium
The amounts fed the mice do not reflect human dietary levels– they were some ~ 106 to 108 time higher than exposure from GM or organic crops ( as per Hammond, 2012)
The use of 3 mice/sex/group, as compared to OECD standards that call for 5 mice per sex per group.
The historical incidence for these pathologies in the mice used was not reported. Thus, it is not clear if they are looking at treatment effects or natural biological variability for the mice
The results did not all show the expected dose-response, with the lower dose resulting in the highest symptoms, as opposed to the other way around (eg, the 136 Cry1Ab had reduced MCH, but not the 270 mg/kg group)
The reduction in MCV and RDW in all groups suggests a contaminant is involved rather than different Bt proteins
For dose response, they get U shaped or inverse U shaped curves, a la Seralini. These could be a result of small animal numbers, not of hormesis.
In the lit review, they say that Thomas and Ellar (1983) previously showed that cry proteins were hemolytic. However, Thomas and Ellar (1983) tested cyt proteins, not cry proteins. Even then, the cyt results were in vitro– there were no results when mice were fed the cyt proteins, presumably because they are digested.
They also cite Aris and LeBlanc (Bt in mother and fetal blood) to support their work. (a rubbish paper)
Their results are at odds with all the other studies whereby Bt (the bacterium) and cry (the bt protein) have not had adverse results in feeding studies.

Btw you know who else uses the same Bt bacteria as opposed to an isolated protein implementation? The shit organic farmers spray on their crops.
https://organicconsumers.org/Organic/ov3.cfm

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/...-organic-food/

[Lehsyrus]

---------- Post added at 07:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:19 PM ----------



LMK when you have a legit study
They used spore / crystals from modified Bt strains, rather than isolated protein. As per Schnepf, 2012a, such sporulating cultures are about ~20% Bt crystal proteins by dry weight. In other words, 80% of what the mice were fed is God knows what.
The results seen are not due to use of too high a level of protein (270 mg/kg) , as there are reports of up to 5280 mg/kg of purified proteins fed to mice without any adverse effects (Schnepf, 2012b)
So,

The real negative control should have been wild type Bt strains, not water, as water lacks the other stuff floating around the culture medium
The amounts fed the mice do not reflect human dietary levels– they were some ~ 106 to 108 time higher than exposure from GM or organic crops ( as per Hammond, 2012)
The use of 3 mice/sex/group, as compared to OECD standards that call for 5 mice per sex per group.
The historical incidence for these pathologies in the mice used was not reported. Thus, it is not clear if they are looking at treatment effects or natural biological variability for the mice
The results did not all show the expected dose-response, with the lower dose resulting in the highest symptoms, as opposed to the other way around (eg, the 136 Cry1Ab had reduced MCH, but not the 270 mg/kg group)
The reduction in MCV and RDW in all groups suggests a contaminant is involved rather than different Bt proteins
For dose response, they get U shaped or inverse U shaped curves, a la Seralini. These could be a result of small animal numbers, not of hormesis.
In the lit review, they say that Thomas and Ellar (1983) previously showed that cry proteins were hemolytic. However, Thomas and Ellar (1983) tested cyt proteins, not cry proteins. Even then, the cyt results were in vitro– there were no results when mice were fed the cyt proteins, presumably because they are digested.
They also cite Aris and LeBlanc (Bt in mother and fetal blood) to support their work. (a rubbish paper)
Their results are at odds with all the other studies whereby Bt (the bacterium) and cry (the bt protein) have not had adverse results in feeding studies.

Btw you know who else uses the same Bt bacteria as opposed to an isolated protein implementation? The shit organic farmers spray on their crops.
Organic Farmers Threatened by GE Crops

Science-Based Medicine » No Health Benefits from Organic Food

I have to disagree. Some GMO's are fine, but not all. As well, long term studies have never been subjugated for human clinical trials.

As for proof of harmful effects, here is a study with sources and references within: ScienceDirec*****m - Food and Chemical Toxicology - Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize

I don't agree with the way OP is presenting his evidence, though I do agree that GMO's are in no way completely healthy and fool proof. Monsanto's newest strain of BT products has been shown highly toxic. There's a resin some countries have banned GMO's.