8 foods legal in the USA banned in others.

[PA5COR]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ashleyperez/8-foods-we-eat-in-the-us-that-are-banned-in-other-countries

This brings a whole new meaning to the phrase “food poisoning.” Original list found in Dr. Jayson Calton and certified nutritionist Mira Calton’s new book, Rich Food, Poor Food. (http://www.caltonnutrition.com/RFPF.aspx)
Follow linky.

[KB3LAZ]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ashleyperez/8-foods-we-eat-in-the-us-that-are-banned-in-other-countries

This brings a whole new meaning to the phrase “food poisoning.” Original list found in Dr. Jayson Calton and certified nutritionist Mira Calton’s new book, Rich Food, Poor Food. (http://www.caltonnutrition.com/RFPF.aspx)
Follow linky.

Yah but that is what adds the flavor!

[wa6mhz]

Probably alotta toxins in TOP RAMEN too! Dangerous world we live in.
But it is better than eating CAT FOOD!

[n2ize]

I am not saying all these things are safe. But as the same time they all may not be dangerous. One would have to read the specific studies from reputable sources to determine how dangerous or safe these things are. It sort of reminds me of the people who say fluoride in water is extremely deadly because fluoride is also an ingredient in rat poison. Well, yeah, many atoms, radicals, and molecules that comprise poisons also comprise things that are good for us. Hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen are present in some extremely deadly poisons. But, they are also vital to support human life and our bodies are comprised of them. Fluorode has been present inb much of the worlds natural drinking water for thousands of years.

[PA5COR]

Most of th examples giiven are already tested and found to be bad for you.
I prefer safe food, no coloring or anything added to it what nature already put in it.
I certainly don't need arsenic in my food as additive or hormones etc.
Lucky me all that stuff is NoNO here in the EU in our food.

[KB3LAZ]

Most of th examples giiven are already tested and found to be bad for you.
I prefer safe food, no coloring or anything added to it what nature already put in it.
I certainly don't need arsenic in my food as additive or hormones etc.
Lucky me all that stuff is NoNO here in the EU in our food.

My stomach seems to do a lot better here in Spain. Digestive wise. Now, if only they would do some health inspection enforcement, particularly in the summer. Food sitting out all day on the counter in the open, this attracts bugs. Also, the thought of ordering any mayo based dish or seafood in the summer just makes my stomach churn.

Another issue is the serving of under cooked pork and chicken. My in-laws dont seem to understand why they have to hit up the bathroom every three minutes after eating half raw foods or eat potato salad that has been basking in the heat for 10 hours.

There will be new laws on open containers for things like oil, and other sauces in 2014. That is a start.

[AE1PT]

Most of th examples giiven are already tested and found to be bad for you.
I prefer safe food, no coloring or anything added to it what nature already put in it.
I certainly don't need arsenic in my food as additive or hormones etc.
Lucky me all that stuff is NoNO here in the EU in our food.

Seeing as a couple Netherlands companies have their hands on the handle for some of the food production here in the states, I might wonder if their EU ingredient ethics extend here. BTW, that's a rhetorical question...

It takes laws to protect food, and the ingredients in it. Shame our system here is so flawed that the primary thing of importance in not consumer health, but profits.

Note I said consumer, not citizen...

[PA5COR]

Dutch Unilever, Albert Heyn, DSM, Akzo Nobel, Nutricia, Friesland foods etc etc, producing food and lots more will stricktly adher to local laws, and will produce most products locally too, so my bet is they add the stuff there as well.
Not so here, labelling is stricktly regulated and checked by the food safety authorities, what is in the package is also as ingredients on the label, and online you can look up what ingredient is made of what stuff and what it does.

GM food is not really sold here, products that can contain traces of GM food will be labeled as such.
Most people shy away from that stuff, so most producers keep it from the shelves in the supermarkets.
http://www.shape.com/blogs/shape-your-life/13-banned-foods-still-allowed-us
Here's a larger list of banned additives still used in USA food.

The hormones allowed in beef is one of the reasons USA beef is not allowed to be imported in the E.U.
As are many other food products with the USA list of allowed additives.
http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/general/hormones_meat.htm

Most U. S. beef cattle are implanted with synthetic hormones in feedlots prior to slaughter. On January 1, 1989 the European Economic Community (EEC) placed a ban on hormone-treated U. S. meat, preventing U. S. meat products from being sold in any European nations.

The European Economic Community banned hormone-raised meat because of questions on the dangers of meat that has been treated with synthetic sex hormones. European consumers pressured the EEC to take this action to protect their health.More than a decade ago, Roy Hertz, then director of endocrinology at the National Cancer Institute and a leading authority on hormonal cancers, warned of the carcinogenic risks of estrogenic additives which can cause imbalances and increases in natural hormone levels. Hertz warned against the uncontrolled use of these potent carcinogens. No dietary levels of hormones are safe and a dime-sized piece of meat contains-billions of millions of molecules.
Breast cancer has been raised as a primary concern in light of associations between breast cancer and oral contraceptives, whose estrogen dosage is known and controlled. The risk of breast and other cancers only increases with the uncontrolled use of hormones in meat.

The same goes for anti biotics, There is an increasing amount of evidence suggesting that the sub-therapeutic use of antibiotics in food animals can pose a health risk to humans. If a group of animals is treated with a certain antibiotic over time, the bacteria living in those animals will become resistant to that drug. According to microbiologist Dr. Glenn Morris (https://forums.hamisland.net/interviews/morris.html), the problem for humans is that if a person ingests the resistant bacteria via improperly cooked meat and becomes ill, he or she may not respond to antibiotic treatment.

Concern about the growing level of drug-resistant bacteria has led to the banning of sub-therapeutic use of antibiotics in meat animals in many countries in the European Union and Canada. In the United States, however, such use is still legal. The World Health Organization is concerned enough about antibiotic resistance to suggest significantly curbing the use of antibiotics in the animals we eat. In a recent report, the WHO declared its intention to "reduce the overuse and misuse of antimicrobials in food animals for the protection of human health." Specifically, the WHO recommended that prescriptions be required for all antibiotics used to treat sick food animals, and urged efforts to "terminate or rapidly phase out antimicrobials for growth promotion if they are used for human treatment."

[KB3LAZ]

Dutch Unilever, Albert Heyn, DSM, Akzo Nobel, Nutricia, Friesland foods etc etc, producing food and lots more will stricktly adher to local laws, and will produce most products locally too, so my bet is they add the stuff there as well.
Not so here, labelling is stricktly regulated and checked by the food safety authorities, what is in the package is also as ingredients on the label, and online you can look up what ingredient is made of what stuff and what it does.

GM food is not really sold here, products that can contain traces of GM food will be labeled as such.
Most people shy away from that stuff, so most producers keep it from the shelves in the supermarkets.
http://www.shape.com/blogs/shape-your-life/13-banned-foods-still-allowed-us
Here's a larger list of banned additives still used in USA food.

The hormones allowed in beef is one of the reasons USA beef is not allowed to be imported in the E.U.
As are many other food products with the USA list of allowed additives.
http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/general/hormones_meat.htm

Most U. S. beef cattle are implanted with synthetic hormones in feedlots prior to slaughter. On January 1, 1989 the European Economic Community (EEC) placed a ban on hormone-treated U. S. meat, preventing U. S. meat products from being sold in any European nations.

The European Economic Community banned hormone-raised meat because of questions on the dangers of meat that has been treated with synthetic sex hormones. European consumers pressured the EEC to take this action to protect their health.More than a decade ago, Roy Hertz, then director of endocrinology at the National Cancer Institute and a leading authority on hormonal cancers, warned of the carcinogenic risks of estrogenic additives which can cause imbalances and increases in natural hormone levels. Hertz warned against the uncontrolled use of these potent carcinogens. No dietary levels of hormones are safe and a dime-sized piece of meat contains-billions of millions of molecules.
Breast cancer has been raised as a primary concern in light of associations between breast cancer and oral contraceptives, whose estrogen dosage is known and controlled. The risk of breast and other cancers only increases with the uncontrolled use of hormones in meat.

The same goes for anti biotics, There is an increasing amount of evidence suggesting that the sub-therapeutic use of antibiotics in food animals can pose a health risk to humans. If a group of animals is treated with a certain antibiotic over time, the bacteria living in those animals will become resistant to that drug. According to microbiologist Dr. Glenn Morris (https://forums.hamisland.net/interviews/morris.html), the problem for humans is that if a person ingests the resistant bacteria via improperly cooked meat and becomes ill, he or she may not respond to antibiotic treatment.

Concern about the growing level of drug-resistant bacteria has led to the banning of sub-therapeutic use of antibiotics in meat animals in many countries in the European Union and Canada. In the United States, however, such use is still legal. The World Health Organization is concerned enough about antibiotic resistance to suggest significantly curbing the use of antibiotics in the animals we eat. In a recent report, the WHO declared its intention to "reduce the overuse and misuse of antimicrobials in food animals for the protection of human health." Specifically, the WHO recommended that prescriptions be required for all antibiotics used to treat sick food animals, and urged efforts to "terminate or rapidly phase out antimicrobials for growth promotion if they are used for human treatment."

Sigh, I could go for a good steak or burger. Existence in Spain, rare. Gonna have to hop on a plane and head over your way if I want a good burger. Beef here is just dreadful. Pork, chicken, seafood, its all great but beef is just awful. For two reasons. The way it is butchered and the way that it is cooked. I can deal with one of those problems at home but not the other.

At this moment, I dont care how loaded with chemicals it is. I could go for a nice medium rare NY strip, blackened and served with a loaded baked potato as well as a side salad.

[NQ6U]

Sigh, I could go for a good stake or burger.

Funny—I wouldn't expect a vampire to think a stake could be good...

[KB3LAZ]

Funny—I wouldn't expect a vampire to think a stake could be good...

Lol, ofc I meant steak.

[PA5COR]

I buy my meat at a local butcher that still slaughters himself, pay a little bit more as the supermarket stuff, but the meat is a total different better class.
I like a good piece of meat fresh and juicy, and if that costs a bit more, so be it.
Nothing better as digging in at a good steak or burger LOL :mrgreen:

[KB3LAZ]

I buy my meat at a local butcher that still slaughters himself, pay a little bit more as the supermarket stuff, but the meat is a total different better class.
I like a good piece of meat fresh and juicy, and if that costs a bit more, so be it.
Nothing better as digging in at a good steak or burger LOL :mrgreen:

I buy at the local butcher too. However, the do not get full sides of beef in. It is quarter and such. Spanish butchery seems to be different. IE different cuts. This works out well for pork however for beef, not so much.

[PA5COR]

I feel your pain....
Top sirloin steak, some garlic butter and french fries yummy.....

[KB3LAZ]

I feel your pain....
Top sirloin steak, some garlic butter and french fries yummy.....


Its all good. I have have some ribs on the BBQ that I have been slow cooking all day.

[PA5COR]

Dang, sounds good too ;)

[AE1PT]

This is nothing against you Cor, but the fact is that Dutch food conglomerates only espouse responsibility when regulated by particular countries or the EU. They seem content to reap profit and poison the American populace due to the fact that U.S. FDA law allows them to do so. And what they are allowed to do is all in the name of profitability.

So we see just one more circumstance that social responsibility or accountability on the part of slop generators is incumbent upon the laws that a particular legislature imposes upon them. Lacking that, they have no issue on poisoning and imperiling other populaces...

[n2ize]

Most of th examples giiven are already tested and found to be bad for you.
I prefer safe food, no coloring or anything added to it what nature already put in it.
I certainly don't need arsenic in my food as additive or hormones etc.
Lucky me all that stuff is NoNO here in the EU in our food.

Many of those studies are debatable and have not garnered wide scale consensus. It reminds me of the cyclamate ban here in the USA when a flawed experiment showed the non-sugar sweeterner to cause cancer in rats. But the rats were fed far more cyclamate per body mass than a norman human would intake in a lifetime. European attempts to duplicate the results using better controls and more careful dosing of cyclamated could not reproduce the cyclamate-cancer connection. That is why when I last checked cyclamate based sweeteners are still available in Europe buit are entirely banned in the USA.

[AE1PT]

So John, are you justifying being shoveled shit in your diet?

I don't like eating shit, regardless of what one's armchair opinion of studies may be...

[n2ize]

So John, are you justifying being shoveled shit in your diet?

Of course not. I am just stating fact that there is scientific debate and consensus has not been reached in several cases.. When a study shows that say, substance X causes cancer the results and methods of the study are reviewed by other scientists. They look for possible flaws in the study, try to modify the experiments appropriately and see if they can reproduce the same, or similar, results.

I used as an example the cyclamate story, an synthesized sweetener discovered in the 1930's, and abruptly banned in the USA on pretty much the basis of a single flawed study. However, unable to reproduce similar results in Europe and thus still available there (last I checked).


I don't like eating shit

Nobody is suggesting you should.


regardless of what one's armchair opinion of studies may be...

Armchair opinion based of factual information.

[AE1PT]

Who shall determine the sanctity of research? There are myriad studies that codify the BS additives in our diets. Yet, the EU and many other nations look to other studies and choose to ban those ingredients based upon solid research that labels them harmful. The same companies shovel that shit into our diet here because it is profitable.

Why is that? I sincerely hope that our children to not get consumed by obesity and diabetes--nor we as adults suffer from long term impact whilst you are waiting for 'objective' studies. There is far too much money to be had and at play here in the US to expect that.

[W2NAP]

Another issue is the serving of under cooked pork and chicken. My in-laws dont seem to understand why they have to hit up the bathroom every three minutes after eating half raw foods or eat potato salad that has been basking in the heat for 10 hours.

I wont eat chicken at all. really wont eat pork ether. cept for bacon that I know is recently cooked.

[W2NAP]

The hormones allowed in beef is one of the reasons USA beef is not allowed to be imported in the E.U.
As are many other food products with the USA list of allowed additives.
http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/general/hormones_meat.htm"

I would believe also these hormones pumped into the food like that is the reason kids are developing so young. I have seen so many young girls that are 10-12 look more like they are 15/16. Not being perverted or anything but when I was 11/12 years old none of the girls my age had the looks of a woman yet. now many do.

[PA5COR]

Tell me why USA food producers can follow EU regulations in food safety here, but feel free to pump the same shit in food in the USA?
They know of the research done here in food safety and the results, but don't mind to poison your own country people?
Why should Dutch food conglomerates put themselves in dire straits and adher to EU regulations in the USA where that is no law? and put themselves out of business?

That is if we assume the Dutch conglomerates do this act in the USA producing food there.
Any exported food from the EU produced by them will be in strickt compliance with the EU food safety laws and banned ingredient lists.
All export food from the EU at least has the ingredient list printed on it as that is mandatory here.

Pointing fingers to Dutch food producers is slly as you know it, want to change it? change your food safety laws.
As the situation is now, they follow your food safety laws to the letter in the USA.
Assuming they follow the banned ingredient lists which has not be proven by you yet is just as silly.
Do you have proof the Dutch firms put the banned stuff here in the food in the USA produced food?
If not, you shoot with blanks.


This is nothing against you Cor, but the fact is that Dutch food conglomerates only espouse responsibility when regulated by particular countries or the EU. They seem content to reap profit and poison the American populace due to the fact that U.S. FDA law allows them to do so. And what they are allowed to do is all in the name of profitability.

So we see just one more circumstance that social responsibility or accountability on the part of slop generators is incumbent upon the laws that a particular legislature imposes upon them. Lacking that, they have no issue on poisoning and imperiling other populaces...

[PA5COR]

I have no proof found of that (yet) but it is possible.
When i was just 16 i got hormone treatment to stop growing, Í was then 1 inch shy of 7 feet tall and had 2 years to grow in front of me, i grew 5 inches a year then....
I blame that on genetics ( all tall people in my both siddes of the family) and better food as ever.
Dutch people became the tallest people on earth, I personally think our abundant intake of dairy products has something to do with it, i daily drink 1/4 gallon of milk, eat lots of Dutch cheese, and after the war ourr childcare from the government and the parents was excellent.

Personally food should stay free of any (chemical) additive reason i buy my meat at a local butcher from where i know whatt cow/pig he slaughtered and where my meat comes from he buys biologically raised cattle for the slaughter.
I grow my own veggies and potato's use no chemicals to get the weeds away doing it by hand, use household methods to fight bugs with non chemical stuff.

I accept losing some produce by bugs rather as spraying lots of harmfull chemicals over it.
I still have lots left after ou use here and share that with neighbours which form a row to get to it.
Taste is much better as supermarket stuff, which is my main drive to grow my food.

No, i'm not the biological warrior, but since i was young my parents did the same, we always had a plot of ground hired to grow our food, i just follow tradition, they taught me respect for nature and natural ways of growing food and fighting weeds and bugs.

I'm member of a Dutch consumer organisation with 2 million members, as in most EU countries consumer organisations are big and test lots of stuff ranging from food to any other consumer products, they have a lot of influence in politics as well.

Hormones and anti biotics have no place in what should be a fully natural product.


I would believe also these hormones pumped into the food like that is the reason kids are developing so young. I have seen so many young girls that are 10-12 look more like they are 15/16. Not being perverted or anything but when I was 11/12 years old none of the girls my age had the looks of a woman yet. now many do.

[n6hcm]

and then there's this rebuttal to the eight toxic foods (http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/06/21/eight_toxic_foods_a_little_chemical_education.php)

[PA5COR]

When i read in your "rebuttal" : Olestra was a major flop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olestra) for P&G; the only things (as far as I can tell) that still contain it are some fat-free potato chips. It does indeed interfere with the absorption of fat-soluble vitamins, but potato chips are not a very good source of vitamins to start with.
My hairs immediately start to rise.
So yes, it is hampering with the vitamine intake, NOT OLY from the chips it is used in, but all food ingested.

His conclusion: But I can agree with the plan of not eating the stuff, does not sound like much of a rebuttal to me...

Next Bromine:
His words: Bromine isn't just used to keep carpets from catching on fire - bromine is a hideously toxic substance that will scar you with permanent chemical burns and whose vapors will destroy your lungs. Drinking bromine is not just a bad idea; drinking bromine is guaranteed agonizing death.
Again, not much of a rebuttal here is it?

Next:
Now, back to potassium bromate. The article says, "Only problem is, it’s linked to kidney damage, cancer, and nervous system damage". And you'll probably fall over when I say this, but that statement is largely correct.
Then he jumbles the figures a bit to "show" it really isnn't all that bad, but here again, not much of a rebuttal.

How about the asthma, though? If you look at the toxicology of azodicarbonamide (http://www.inchem.org/documents/cicads/cicads/cicad16.htm), you find that "Azodicarbonamide is of low acute toxicity, but repeated or prolonged contact may cause asthma and skin sensitization." That, one should note, is for the pure chemical, not 45 parts per million in uncooked flour (much less zero parts per million in the final product). If you're handling drums of the stuff at the plastics plant, you should be wearing protective gear. If you're eating a roll, no.
No real rebuttal here as well, downplaying much yes.

Fact is these substances have no place in the food we eat, the feeble excuses of someone bent on protecting the food industry use is noted and discarded for wht it is.

He also stated:
Your claim below surprised me because I had read that cancer incident rates were rising:
*The age-adjusted incidence rates of almost all forms of cancer are falling, by the way, not that you'd know that from most of the coverage on the subject.
Reality:

http://progressreport.cancer.gov/highlights.asp
Which says that while cancer incidence rates for some cancers are declining, rates of others are rising:
"including melanoma of the skin, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, childhood cancer, cancers of the kidney and renal pelvis, leukemia, thyroid, pancreas, liver and intrahepatic bile duct, testis, myeloma, and esophagus."

Well well, all the cancers as described from the food additives ;)


Do we need to put xenobiotic stuff into our food? Why? Why put artificial dyies in your food (are there not naturally occuring dyes found in our regular diet)? Why add BVO at all (is it that hard to shake your drink before use)?

So this post tells that "any food additives are NOT toxic to you unless 100/100 studies show that they are". It is also hilarious to see the author's self-righteous stubbornness. The whole part of BGH additive defending paragraph sounds like "although there are many studies show elevated IGF-1 is linked to cancer, because there are a few of others failed to find that link I choose not to believe all the ones that say there is a link". Come on, are you a real scientist?

Obviously what we have here is another paid shill for Big Chemistry.





and then there's this rebuttal to the eight toxic foods (http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/06/21/eight_toxic_foods_a_little_chemical_education.php)

[KC2UGV]

Dihydrogen monoxide is a byproduct of fossil fuel combustion. We put it in pretty much all of our foods here. It's also highly corrosive to steel and aluminum.

Potassium Bicarbonate is an industrial waste product of potash manufacture and reclamation. In the US, we eat about 2 g of this a day.

Hell, around the entire world, they put C35H49O29 in foods, and it's a toxin produced by the Xanthomonas campestri bacteria.

Sulfur dioxide is a known contributor to acid rain, and air quality pollutant that causes many respiratory diseases. It's in every bottle of wine, and countless other foods.

Trans-butenedioic acid has been found in every piece of produce that has left the EU, and is used to make polyester resins.

[PA5COR]

I don't see clean water as a problem.

Potassium bicarbonate is used to treat hypokalemia, most of us don't hav that condition, too much causes hyperkalemia.

E 415 or Xantham gum is safe as the Eu number E 415 already shows.

Sulfur dioxide, i do't drink wine nor dried fruits.
E 220 Acceptable intake: Up to 0.7 mg/kg body weight daily.
Due to its oxidising effect, it may reduce the vitamin content in products. It is reduced in the liver to harmless sulphate and excreted in the urine. It can, however, cause breathing problems in asthmatic patients. In high concentrations (above those normally used in foods) it can cause gastrointestinal disturbances in some people.
Hence the limited intake for daily use.

Trans-butenedioic acid or E 297 .
All these have been tested for human use and limited in daily intake to be safe, used in medicines or other multiple uses.

Nice try, but your point is?
The original post was about Forbidden additives here in the EU, not the allowed ones.




Dihydrogen monoxide is a byproduct of fossil fuel combustion. We put it in pretty much all of our foods here. It's also highly corrosive to steel and aluminum.

Potassium Bicarbonate is an industrial waste product of potash manufacture and reclamation. In the US, we eat about 2 g of this a day.

Hell, around the entire world, they put C35H49O29 in foods, and it's a toxin produced by the Xanthomonas campestri bacteria.

Sulfur dioxide is a known contributor to acid rain, and air quality pollutant that causes many respiratory diseases. It's in every bottle of wine, and countless other foods.

Trans-butenedioic acid has been found in every piece of produce that has left the EU, and is used to make polyester resins.

[KC2UGV]

Nice try, but your point is?

You can make anything scary sounding...

[PA5COR]

Scary sounding or proven to be not healthy is a totally different ballgame.
Arsenic is healthy too then? good luck with that...
I expected better.



You can make anything scary sounding...

[KC2UGV]

Scary sounding or proven to be not healthy is a totally different ballgame.
Arsenic is healthy too then? good luck with that...
I expected better.

Sigh...

I was going to seriously comment on the arsenic bit earlier, but then figured it would be pearls before swine.

Do you understand the difference between organic and inorganic arsenic? And, are you aware that most tests for arsenic aren't able to tell the difference? And, are you also aware, that organic arsenic is non-toxic?

[n2ize]

I don't see clean water as a problem.

Yet pure clean water will kill you if you drink too much of it too fast. A woman died from drinking water right after a water drinking contest done as part of a radio promo. She collapsed in the parking lot. Yep, even clean, pure water is a "toxic poison".



Potassium bicarbonate is used to treat hypokalemia, most of us don't hav that condition, too much causes hyperkalemia.


Yet most people don;t intake enough to get hyperalkemia.



E 415 or Xantham gum is safe as the Eu number E 415 already shows.


OK fine, but I'll bet enough of it will still be toxic.



Sulfur dioxide, i do't drink wine nor dried fruits.
E 220 Acceptable intake: Up to 0.7 mg/kg body weight daily.
Due to its oxidising effect, it may reduce the vitamin content in products.



Simple solution. don't drink too much wine and / or take a supplement to reduce the chances of vitamin deficiency.



It is reduced in the liver to harmless sulphate and excreted in the urine. It can, however, cause breathing problems in asthmatic patients.


Yes it can. used to have asthma and we were given a list of products, foods and medications to be wary of. I never had trouble with SO2 in dried fruits or wine. But some do and they should avoid it. When you have certain medical issues you avoid things that can aggravate it.



In high concentrations (above those normally used in foods) it can cause gastrointestinal disturbances in some people.
Hence the limited intake for daily use.


And in really high concentrations, like breathing the gas itself it will inflame the mucous lining of the lungs and induce suffocation. Thats why we use common sense and avoidn exposure to high levels of SO2 and/or wear special apparatus if we need to work with it in concentrated forms.

Flourine gas will suffocate you and eating large amounts of fluoride compounds are quite toxic. Yet it is present in much of the worlds clean, pure drinking water.

[W2NAP]

I accept losing some produce by bugs rather as spraying lots of harmfull chemicals over it.
I still have lots left after ou use here and share that with neighbours which form a row to get to it.
Taste is much better as supermarket stuff, which is my main drive to grow my food.


I have bees. and one thing I can say people spraying chems on plants can and will cause bees to die. no bees no polination. no polination no food. I do believe without a doubt the pesticides are what is causing the bee die offs/ Colony Collapse Disorder.

Lucky for me most people dont spray around here (course most dont put out gardens.) but all it takes is 1 and a hive of bees could be gone

[PA5COR]

Sigh....
See how non toxic food arsenic is please and keep your pearls for swines to yourself please...
Arsenic is used as a feed additive in poultry (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Poultry_farming) and swine production (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Pig_farming), in particular in the U.S. to increase weight gain, improve feed efficiency (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Feed_conversion_ratio), and to prevent disease.[40] (https://forums.hamisland.net/#cite_note-40)[41] (https://forums.hamisland.net/#cite_note-41) An example is roxarsone (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Roxarsone), which had been used as a broiler (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Broiler) starter by about 70% of U.S. broiler growers.[42] (https://forums.hamisland.net/#cite_note-42) The Poison-Free Poultry Act of 2009 proposes to ban the use of roxarsone in industrial swine and poultry production.[43] (https://forums.hamisland.net/#cite_note-43) Alpharma, a subsidiary of Pfizer Inc., which produces Roxarsone, voluntarily suspended sales of the drug in response to studies showing elevated levels of inorganic arsenic, a carcinogen, in treated chickens.[44] (https://forums.hamisland.net/#cite_note-FDAQ.26A-44) A successor to Alpharma, Zoetis (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Zoetis), continues to sell nitarsone (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Nitarsone), primarily for use in turkeys.[44] (https://forums.hamisland.net/#cite_note-FDAQ.26A-44)

Arsenic (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2011/06/arsenic-chicken-fda-roxarsone-pfizer) is beloved of industrial-scale livestock producers because it makes animals grow faster and turns their meat a rosy pink. It enters feed in organic form, which isn't harmful to humans. Trouble is, in animals guts, it quickly goes inorganic (http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es051981o), and thus becomes poisonous. Several studies, including one by the FDA (http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/ProductSafetyInformation/ucm257540.htm), have found heightened levels of inorganic arsenic in supermarket chicken, and it also ends up in manure, where it can move into tap water (http://pubs.acs.org/email/cen/html/050107180254.html). Fertilizing rice fields with arsenic-laced manure may be partially responsible for heightened arsenic levels in US rice. (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/09/waiter-theres-arsenic-my-rice)


Inorganic check, arsenic, check, carcinogen, check.
Inorganic arsenic is used in food.....that should have been your clou you so really sorrily missed.

Elemental arsenic and arsenic compounds are classified as "toxic (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Toxicity)" and "dangerous for the environment" in the European Union (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/European_Union) under directive 67/548/EEC (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Directive_67/548/EEC). The International Agency for Research on Cancer (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/International_Agency_for_Research_on_Cancer) (IARC) recognizes arsenic and arsenic compounds as group 1 carcinogens (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinogens), and the EU lists arsenic trioxide, arsenic pentoxide (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Arsenic_pentoxide) and arsenate (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Arsenate) salts as category 1 carcinogens (https://forums.hamisland.net/wiki/Carcinogen).

You know how arsenic goes inorganic—and thus poisonous—in chickens' guts? Consider that their arsenic-laced manure isthen commonly used as a feed for cows (http://extension.missouri.edu/p/G2077). According to Consumers Union, the stuff "consists primarily of manure, feathers, spilled feed, and bedding material that accumulate on the floors of the buildings that house chickens and turkeys." The "spilled feed" part is of special concern, because chickens are often fed "meat and bone meal from dead cattle," CU reported, and that stuff can spill into the litter and be fed back to cows, raising mad cow disease concerns (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/04/mad-cow-california).
What Europe did: Banned (http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biosafety/tse_bse/feed_ban_en.htm) all forms of animal protein, including chicken litter, in cow feed in 2001.
US status:The practice remains unrestricted. US cattle consume about 2 billion pounds of it annually.
Double sigh, double whammy...

Getting better all the time:
Ractopomine and other pharmaceutical growth enhancers in animal feed
Why it's a problem:Fed to an estimated 60 to 80 percent of US hogs, ractopomine (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/01/supermarket-meat-comes-sick-animals) makes animals grow fast while also staying lean. Unfortunately, it does so by mimicking stress hormones, making animals miserable. The excellent food safety reporter Helena Bottemiller looked at FDA documents and found (http://thefern.org/2012/01/dispute-over-drug-in-feed-limiting-u-s-meat-exports/) that between its introduction in 1999 and 2011, the drug had killed 210,000 pigs—"more than any other animal drug on the market." Pigs treated with it, she found, suffer from ailments ranging from hyperactivity and trembling to broken limbs and the inability to walk. (Beef cows are fed similar drugs (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/04/bum-steer-how-big-pharma-makes-dominates-animal-science), as are turkeys (http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2013/02/escalating-trade-dispute-russia-bans-turkey-over-ractopamine-residues/#.UYgI8oKGtrU).) Traces of these pharmaceuticals routinely end up in our meat (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2013/01/what-s-in-that-pork/index.htm)—and according to Bottemiller, their effects on humans are little-studied.
What Europe did: Europe (http://www.globalmeatnews.com/Industry-Markets/European-ministers-uphold-EU-ractopamine-ban) not only bars its own producers from using ractopamine, it also refuses to allow imports of meat from animals treated with it (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2013/01/what-s-in-that-pork/index.htm)—as do China and Russia (http://www.porknetwork.com/pork-news/192558781.html).
US status: Rather than trying to rein in ractopamine use, the Obama administration is actively seeking to force Europe and other nations to accept our ractopamine-treated pork (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/02/obama-ractopamine-meat-taiwan).

Good luck with that, won't happen here no imports of your crappy meat.



Sigh...

I was going to seriously comment on the arsenic bit earlier, but then figured it would be pearls before swine.

Do you understand the difference between organic and inorganic arsenic? And, are you aware that most tests for arsenic aren't able to tell the difference? And, are you also aware, that organic arsenic is non-toxic?

[PA5COR]

Yet pure clean water will kill you if you drink too much of it too fast. A woman died from drinking water right after a water drinking contest done as part of a radio promo. She collapsed in the parking lot. Yep, even clean, pure water is a "toxic poison".

most people refrain from drinking themselves to dath with water, alcohol is another subject.


Yet most people don;t intake enough to get hyperalkemia.
Most is the keyword, it does happen

OK fine, but I'll bet enough of it will still be toxic.

Less as the 8 that were named in the article that was the subject of the post.


Simple solution. don't drink too much wine and / or take a supplement to reduce the chances of vitamin deficiency.

I don't drink alcoholic beverages at all, i prefer to eat food that i don't have to use additional vitamines by to hide the default in the food additives.

Yes it can. used to have asthma and we were given a list of products, foods and medications to be wary of. I never had trouble with SO2 in dried fruits or wine. But some do and they should avoid it. When you have certain medical issues you avoid things that can aggravate it.



And in really high concentrations, like breathing the gas itself it will inflame the mucous lining of the lungs and induce suffocation. Thats why we use common sense and avoidn exposure to high levels of SO2 and/or wear special apparatus if we need to work with it in concentrated forms.

Flourine gas will suffocate you and eating large amounts of fluoride compounds are quite toxic. Yet it is present in much of the worlds clean, pure drinking water.
As is arsenic in drinking water in large parts of the world like the USA.

[PA5COR]

Last week, the European Commission voted to place a two-year moratorium (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/05/eu-ban-bee-harming-pesticides-puts-pressure-us-epa) on most uses of neonicotinoid pesticides, on the suspicion that they're contributing to the global crisis in honeybee health (a topic I've touched on here (http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/04/epa-honeybees-drop-dead), here (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/03/bayer-pesticide-bees-studies), here (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/01/purdue-study-implicates-bayer-pesticide-bee-die-offs), and here (http://grist.org/article/food-2010-12-10-leaked-documents-show-epa-allowed-bee-toxic-pesticide/)). Since then, several people have asked me whether Europe's move might inspire the US Environmental Protection Agency to make a similar move—currently, neonics are widely used in several of our most prevalent crops (http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/04/epa-honeybees-drop-dead), including corn, soy, cotton, and wheat.

The answer is no. As I reported (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/05/eu-ban-bee-harming-pesticides-puts-pressure-us-epa) recently, an agency press officer told me the EU move will have no bearing on the EPA's own reviews of the pesticides, which aren't scheduled for release until 2016 at the earliest.



I have bees. and one thing I can say people spraying chems on plants can and will cause bees to die. no bees no polination. no polination no food. I do believe without a doubt the pesticides are what is causing the bee die offs/ Colony Collapse Disorder.

Lucky for me most people dont spray around here (course most dont put out gardens.) but all it takes is 1 and a hive of bees could be gone

[KC2UGV]

...wall o'text which demonstrates you don't know much about the subject...

See? Pearls before swine.

Thank you for refusing to even answer the questions I posed, and instead replied with a copypasta job from a Wikipedia page, thereby demonstrating the futility of even trying to discuss this with you.

[W2NAP]

EPA dont care. when dealing with anything tied to the US Fed Government money means everything.

[PA5COR]

What part of this: You know how arsenic goes inorganic—and thus poisonous—in chickens' guts? Consider that their arsenic-laced manure isthen commonly used as a feed for cows (http://extension.missouri.edu/p/G2077). According to Consumers Union, the stuff "consists primarily of manure, feathers, spilled feed, and bedding material that accumulate on the floors of the buildings that house chickens and turkeys." The "spilled feed" part is of special concern, because chickens are often fed "meat and bone meal from dead cattle," CU reported, and that stuff can spill into the litter and be fed back to cows, raising mad cow disease concerns (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/04/mad-cow-california).
What Europe did: Banned (http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biosafety/tse_bse/feed_ban_en.htm) all forms of animal protein, including chicken litter, in cow feed in 2001.
US status:The practice remains unrestricted. US cattle consume about 2 billion pounds of it annually.
Double sigh, double whammy...
Don't you understand?

Your ignorance is showing Again...



See? Pearls before swine.

Thank you for refusing to even answer the questions I posed, and instead replied with a copypasta job from a Wikipedia page, thereby demonstrating the futility of even trying to discuss this with you.

[KC2UGV]

What part of this: You know how arsenic goes inorganic—and thus poisonous—in chickens' guts? Consider that their arsenic-laced manure isthen commonly used as a feed for cows (http://extension.missouri.edu/p/G2077). According to Consumers Union, the stuff "consists primarily of manure, feathers, spilled feed, and bedding material that accumulate on the floors of the buildings that house chickens and turkeys." The "spilled feed" part is of special concern, because chickens are often fed "meat and bone meal from dead cattle," CU reported, and that stuff can spill into the litter and be fed back to cows, raising mad cow disease concerns (http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/04/mad-cow-california).
What Europe did: Banned (http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biosafety/tse_bse/feed_ban_en.htm) all forms of animal protein, including chicken litter, in cow feed in 2001.
US status:The practice remains unrestricted. US cattle consume about 2 billion pounds of it annually.
Double sigh, double whammy...
Don't you understand?

Your ignorance is showing Again...

Arsenic doesn't "go inorganic"... Cor, you really need to read ALL the available information on a topic prior to forming an opinion. Free arsenic exists every where, in all soil. It's just a fact. It's an element in lots of rocks, which are ground down into soil.

When taken up into plants, it is converted into organic arsenic, which is by and large harmless. When free arsenic (Or, inorganic) is taken up into animals, some of it is stored in the liver, and some of the fatty tissues, most of it is excreted. When organic arsenic is consumed by animals (Us included), we excrete it.

This is a principal used in brown site cleanups: Plant foliage that sucks up as much inorganic arsenic as possible, for conversion into the harmless organic arsenic.

Now, are you up for actually answering the questions I posed to you, or are you going to just resort to more word vomit?

[PA5COR]

Kiddo, till now you just state some crap.
I came with the proof you did so, debunking your statement that Arsenic can't go from organic to inorganic.
Just because you say so that arsenic doesn't go inorganic makes it the truth.

As tests here in the E.U. proved so, and was the reason to ban the stuff from the food line.
Sticking desperately to your faulty statements doesn't make them true.
As i told before, arsenic can be found in drinking water in the USA as well it is used in metallurgic processes.
That does not mean i want it ( extra) in my meat or other food, like rice.
You might rethink your position because of all the research doen here in the E.U. your FDA is just goodsestepping inline with big corporations, not so here, we rather keep our food safe.
Read back the thread your Q's were answered.





Arsenic doesn't "go inorganic"... Cor, you really need to read ALL the available information on a topic prior to forming an opinion. Free arsenic exists every where, in all soil. It's just a fact. It's an element in lots of rocks, which are ground down into soil.

When taken up into plants, it is converted into organic arsenic, which is by and large harmless. When free arsenic (Or, inorganic) is taken up into animals, some of it is stored in the liver, and some of the fatty tissues, most of it is excreted. When organic arsenic is consumed by animals (Us included), we excrete it.

This is a principal used in brown site cleanups: Plant foliage that sucks up as much inorganic arsenic as possible, for conversion into the harmless organic arsenic.

Now, are you up for actually answering the questions I posed to you, or are you going to just resort to more word vomit?

[KC2UGV]

Kiddo, till now you just state some crap.
I came with the proof you did so, debunking your statement that Arsenic can't go from organic to inorganic.


You showed no proof.

You posted a link purporting that arsenic laced feed has been fed to cows, and then some diatribe about mad cow disease (Which has nothing to do with arsenic, and everything to do with a misfolded protein called a prion).

The only organism that is capable of converting between the various forms of arsenic are plants. No animal known to man today is able to do it.



As tests here in the E.U. proved and was the reason to ban the stuff frommthe food line.


Really? Banned an element that occurs in all soil from the food line? I take it no vegetables are produced in the EU then?



Sticking desperately to your faulty statements doesn't make them true.

Pot. Kettle. You're black!



As i told before, arsenic can be found in drinking water in the USA as well it is used in metallurgic processes.
That does not mean i want it ( extra) in my meat or other food.

Which one? Inorganic, or organic arsenic?



You might rethinkk your position because of all the research doen here in the E.U. your FDA is just goodsestepping inline with big corporations, not so here, we rather keep our food safe.


I'm not even referring to the FDA, I'm talking about basic biology here. You should go and audit a biology class in your local uni.


Read back the thread your Q's were answered.

Again, you answered none of them.

Do you understand the differences between organic and inorganic arsenic?
Are you aware organic arsenic is by and large, harmless?
Are you aware that most tests for arsenic are unable to differentiate between organic and inorganic arsenic?

Can you answer these three questions for me Cor, before skipping off onto more word vomit? The answers are very simple: Yes or no.

[KC2KFC]

We can thank Clark Griswold for this mess.

[n2ize]

I'm not even referring to the FDA, I'm talking about basic biology here. You should go and audit a biology class in your local uni.


Here is a good starting point. You can audit the courses here for free and many of them include video lectures, video recitations, problem sets, lab experiments, and even exams. You can basically take the courses on your own in your spare time taking as much time as you need to study them, whether it be a month, a year, or several years. They also offer about 100 or more other Bio courses including biochemistry, cellular biology, etc. Some of the courses require the purchase of a textbooks but many of the courses the text is optional and you can do well enough just from the video lectures and/or the lecture notes.

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/biology/7-012-introduction-to-biology-fall-2004/

I have reviewed several of their courses to refresh my knowledge of various topics in my own field.

To see the full selection of available courses just go to the home page

http://ocw.mit.edu

and select the subject, subtopic or department It's the closest thing to a free undergraduate/graduate college online.

[N2RJ]

It would kind of help if a Monsanto ex exec wasn't running the FDA. But I digress.

[n2ize]

It would kind of help if a Monsanto ex exec wasn't running the FDA. But I digress.


The good part is that despite this new genetically modified crops must undergo rigorous testing before they can even think of putting them on the market. genetic engineering is basically a modern name for evolution. Been a part of farming since the beginning.

[PA5COR]

Selecting seeds from a crop and change the product on natural selection over a long time is different as forcing totally different DNA into the seed in one go.
We already saw people killed by that "rigorous"testing failing.
It is not banned without reason here in Europe.

[kb2vxa]

Got that right Cor, there's a reason why GE corn is immune to Roundup defoliant, both are Monsanto patented products. There's also good reason GE corn can't produce seed corn, it's called profit. If you can't see the devil's finger in the pie you're blind to GREED.

"It is not banned without reason here in Europe."
Unfortunately for us on this side of the pond Monsanto is an American corporation. Australia should wise up, stop grumbling and start ROARING. Unfortunately sheeple live there too.

[KC2UGV]

Selecting seeds from a crop and change the product on natural selection over a long time is different as forcing totally different DNA into the seed in one go.

How is a person injecting part of a new gene into a cell different than a virus doing so?

Did you know your DNA is about 10% virus DNA?



We already saw people killed by that "rigorous"testing failing.
It is not banned without reason here in Europe.

Wait, I thought you said there hasn't been any safety testing of GMO?

[PA5COR]

Farmers selected seeds that they wanted from the crop to improve the crops i.e. natural selection.
Injecting brute force DNA from total different species or chemicals does not happen in nature.

Tou missed a part: that "rigorous"testing failing, watch the way i wrote "rigorous"....


How is a person injecting part of a new gene into a cell different than a virus doing so?

Did you know your DNA is about 10% virus DNA?



Wait, I thought you said there hasn't been any safety testing of GMO?

[KC2UGV]

Farmers selected seeds that they wanted from the crop to improve the crops i.e. natural selection.
Injecting brute force DNA from total different species or chemicals does not happen in nature.


Yes it does. Daily, actually. You may have missed my point that about 10-15% of your DNA belongs to various viruses, due to the exact same thing happening in nature.



Tou missed a part: that "rigorous"testing failing, watch the way i wrote "rigorous"....

Again, I thought you said it's never been tested for safety? Which is is: Testing for safety killed people, or it's never been tested for safety?

[PA5COR]

Lack of testing, and natural virussses changing my DNA is natural, so what is your point?

Moare: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/17666-millions-against-monsanto-on-the-road-to-victory
Plagued by a growing army of Roundup-resistant superweeds and Bt-resistant superpests spreading across the country, a full 49 percent of American farmers are now frantically trying to kill these superweeds and pests with ever-larger quantities of toxic pesticides, herbicides and fungicides including glyphosate (Roundup), glufosinate, 2,4D (“Agent Orange’), dicamba, and neonicotinoids (insecticides linked to massive deaths of honey bees).
Reacting to this dangerous escalation of chemical farming, toxic residues on foods and environmental pollution, over a million consumers and organic farmers have pressed the Obama administration to reject a new generation of GE “Agent Orange” and dicamba-resistant crops, forcing the USDA to postpone commercialization of these crops, at least temporarily.
According to the trade press, thousands of U.S. farmers - as well as farmers worldwide - are moving away from biotech crops and searching for non-GMO (genetically modified organism) alternatives. At the same time U.S. and global market demand for non-GMO organic foods and crops is steadily increasing.
Compounding Monsanto’s superweed and superpest problems, scientific evidence continues to mount (http://www.earthopensource.org/) that GMO feed and foods, laced with Bt toxins and contaminated with ever-increasing residues of Monsanto’s deadly weedkiller, Roundup, are severely damaging animal and human health.
As the June 24, 2013 issue of Green Medical News puts it (http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27918.cfm):

“ . . . within the scientific community and educated public alike, there is a growing awareness that Roundup herbicide (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/roundup-herbicide) , and its primary ingredient glyphosate, is actually a broad spectrum biocide , in the etymological sense of the word: "bio" (life) and "cide" (kill) – that is, it broadly, without discrimination kills living things, not just plants. Moreover, it does not rapidly biodegrade as widely claimed, and exceedingly small amounts of this chemical – in concentration ranges found in recently sampled rain, air, groundwater, and human urine samples – have DNA-damaging (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/topic/78151/focus/35399/page) and cancer cell proliferation stimulating effects.”
You were saying?

[KC2UGV]

Lack of testing, and natural virussses changing my DNA is natural, so what is your point?


Ok, so GMO products have not been tested. So, can you stop claiming they have been, and are unsafe now?

Also, what exactly is the difference between viruses adding/changing DNA in a target cell, and a human with an electrostatic needle?



Moare: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/17666-millions-against-monsanto-on-the-road-to-victory
Plagued by a growing army of Roundup-resistant superweeds and Bt-resistant superpests spreading across the country, a full 49 percent of American farmers are now frantically trying to kill these superweeds and pests with ever-larger quantities of toxic pesticides, herbicides and fungicides including glyphosate (Roundup), glufosinate, 2,4D (“Agent Orange’), dicamba, and neonicotinoids (insecticides linked to massive deaths of honey bees).
Reacting to this dangerous escalation of chemical farming, toxic residues on foods and environmental pollution, over a million consumers and organic farmers have pressed the Obama administration to reject a new generation of GE “Agent Orange” and dicamba-resistant crops, forcing the USDA to postpone commercialization of these crops, at least temporarily.
According to the trade press, thousands of U.S. farmers - as well as farmers worldwide - are moving away from biotech crops and searching for non-GMO (genetically modified organism) alternatives. At the same time U.S. and global market demand for non-GMO organic foods and crops is steadily increasing.
Compounding Monsanto’s superweed and superpest problems, scientific evidence continues to mount (http://www.earthopensource.org/) that GMO feed and foods, laced with Bt toxins and contaminated with ever-increasing residues of Monsanto’s deadly weedkiller, Roundup, are severely damaging animal and human health.
As the June 24, 2013 issue of Green Medical News puts it (http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27918.cfm):
“ . . . within the scientific community and educated public alike, there is a growing awareness that Roundup herbicide (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/roundup-herbicide) , and its primary ingredient glyphosate, is actually a broad spectrum biocide , in the etymological sense of the word: "bio" (life) and "cide" (kill) – that is, it broadly, without discrimination kills living things, not just plants. Moreover, it does not rapidly biodegrade as widely claimed, and exceedingly small amounts of this chemical – in concentration ranges found in recently sampled rain, air, groundwater, and human urine samples – have DNA-damaging (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/topic/78151/focus/35399/page) and cancer cell proliferation stimulating effects.”

You were saying?

I'll agree, we use far too many pesticides, and in far to great of amounts. However, this is a different subject than GMO, which you are trying to combine into a single issue (Which they are not).

[PA5COR]

Do a re read of the article GMO and the use of too much pesticides etc are directly connected.

Just a partly quote:
49 percent of American farmers are now frantically trying to kill these superweeds and pests with ever-larger quantities of toxic pesticides, herbicides and fungicides including glyphosate (Roundup), glufosinate, 2,4D (“Agent Orange’), dicamba, and neonicotinoids (insecticides linked to massive deaths of honey bees).

The difference in a virus? adding DNA or just natural changes or human induced DNA that would never enter the DNA chain of the product naturally is the difference, mostly chemical to make the product resistant against a certain herbicide.
We here don't need that chemical in our food, mandatory labelling took care of Monsanto pulling out of Europe peddling their poison.
I have the choice to read the label here and ditch any product that has a trace of GMO ingredient in it.


Why do you think the superweeds come from? and need massive amounts of weedkiller to get rid of?

[KC2UGV]

Do a re read of the article GMO and the use of too much pesticides etc are directly connected.


No, they are not. One particular modification might be directly connected, but GMO as a whole is not.



Just a partly quote:
49 percent of American farmers are now frantically trying to kill these superweeds and pests with ever-larger quantities of toxic pesticides, herbicides and fungicides including glyphosate (Roundup), glufosinate, 2,4D (“Agent Orange’), dicamba, and neonicotinoids (insecticides linked to massive deaths of honey bees).

The difference in a virus? adding DNA or just natural changes or human induced DNA that would never enter the DNA chain of the product naturally is the difference, mostly chemical to make the product resistant against a certain herbicide.

So, I presume you refuse any and all vaccines then, correct?



We here don't need that chemical in our food, mandatory labelling took care of Monsanto pulling out of Europe peddling their poison.
I have the choice to read the label here and ditch any product that has a trace of GMO ingredient in it.


Do you have mandatory labeling for any produce you make? It's never been tested, so it must be dangerous.



Why do you think the superweeds come from? and need massive amounts of weedkiller to get rid of?

Superweeds come from excessive, and constant use of the same pesticides over time. If you are against this sort of thing, you should stop taking and and all antibiotics, stop using bleach and alcohol as a cleaner too. Those all create super microbes, such as MRSA.

[kb2vxa]

Oh foo, UGV speak with two mouths. Mouth #1:
"Superweeds come from excessive, and constant use of the same pesticides over time."
Mouth #2:
"If you are against this sort of thing, you should stop taking and and all antibiotics, stop using bleach and alcohol as a cleaner too."

If super weeds come from excessive and constant use of the same pesticide does it not stand to reason that super microbes come from excessive and constant use of the same antibiotic? Does it not stand to reason that limiting the time one antibiotic is used and switching between them limits the microbes' ability to mutate and adapt? It's a phrase you've heard I'm sure; survival of the fittest. Those that survive multiply and produce a new, resistant strain so follow doctor's orders and kill them all.

I never heard of a microbe that could survive a sodium hypochlorite (bleach) or an alcohol environment so if you have please show me that I may become a believer. Speaking of sodium hypochlorite, large swimming pools and municipal water supplies are chlorinated with compressed chlorine gas while those "chlorine" tabs you toss in your backyard pool are compressed sodium hypochlorite powder, mixed with a little water it's chlorine bleach for your washing machine. Chlorine is an effective disinfectant because it literally dissolves organic tissue which is why when concentrated it's a strong irritant that can kill YOU. Same with ozone which BTW is replacing chlorine at the water company, it breaks down into harmless oxygen a lot quicker than chlorine so your water won't stink. In this hot weather pay attention to air quality alerts, ozone wreaks havoc with the respiratory system as it too is a strong irritant dissolving >your< organic tissue. Now if you think that's not enough or it will produce super microbes that will grow to enormous size and take over the Earth do what hospitals and other health care facilities do, carbolize the rooms. Another word is phenolate, disinfect with carbolic acid C6H5OH. If all else fails NOTHING survives nuclear fire.

[KC2UGV]

Oh foo, UGV speak with two mouths. Mouth #1:
"Superweeds come from excessive, and constant use of the same pesticides over time."
Mouth #2:
"If you are against this sort of thing, you should stop taking and and all antibiotics, stop using bleach and alcohol as a cleaner too."


Speaking with two mouths? I do not think it means what you think it means.



If super weeds come from excessive and constant use of the same pesticide does it not stand to reason that super microbes come from excessive and constant use of the same antibiotic? Does it not stand to reason that limiting the time one antibiotic is used and switching between them limits the microbes' ability to mutate and adapt? It's a phrase you've heard I'm sure; survival of the fittest. Those that survive multiply and produce a new, resistant strain so follow doctor's orders and kill them all.

I never heard of a microbe that could survive a sodium hypochlorite (bleach) or an alcohol environment so if you have please show me that I may become a believer. Speaking of sodium hypochlorite, large swimming pools and municipal water supplies are chlorinated with compressed chlorine gas while those "chlorine" tabs you toss in your backyard pool are compressed sodium hypochlorite powder, mixed with a little water it's chlorine bleach for your washing machine. Chlorine is an effective disinfectant because it literally dissolves organic tissue which is why when concentrated it's a strong irritant that can kill YOU. Same with ozone which BTW is replacing chlorine at the water company, it breaks down into harmless oxygen a lot quicker than chlorine so your water won't stink. In this hot weather pay attention to air quality alerts, ozone wreaks havoc with the respiratory system as it too is a strong irritant dissolving >your< organic tissue. Now if you think that's not enough or it will produce super microbes that will grow to enormous size and take over the Earth do what hospitals and other health care facilities do, carbolize the rooms. Another word is phenolate, disinfect with carbolic acid C6H5OH. If all else fails NOTHING survives nuclear fire.

Oh, an example? MRSA.

Nuclear fire, well, true, however fruit flies will survive the fallout :)

[n2ize]

Do a re read of the article GMO and the use of too much pesticides etc are directly connected.


You are aware that via GMO we can produce plants that require LESS pesticide.

I hope you don't eat any plant material, i.e. salads, vegetables, or don't use any form of product made from plants as they are all GMO'd and have been for millions of years. GMO = evolution.

[n2ize]

Lack of testing, and natural virussses changing my DNA is natural, so what is your point?

Moare: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/17666-millions-against-monsanto-on-the-road-to-victory




Truthout is not a valid source. It is a propaganda site. They have been known to fabricate "truth" to fit their agenda,



As the June 24, 2013 issue of Green Medical News puts it (http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27918.cfm):
“ . . . within the scientific community and educated public alike, there is a growing awareness that Roundup herbicide (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/toxic-ingredient/roundup-herbicide) , and its primary ingredient glyphosate, is actually a broad spectrum biocide , in the etymological sense of the word: "bio" (life) and "cide" (kill) – that is, it broadly, without discrimination kills living things, not just plants. Moreover, it does not rapidly biodegrade as widely claimed, and exceedingly small amounts of this chemical – in concentration ranges found in recently sampled rain, air, groundwater, and human urine samples – have DNA-damaging (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/topic/78151/focus/35399/page) and cancer cell proliferation stimulating effects.”

You were saying?

All pesticides are potentially dangerous. However, for many farmers it's either use pesticides or suffer huge crop losses and massive famines due to crop failures. At the same time GMO and pesticides are 2 separate issues. It's a well known fact that via GMO crops can be produced that are heartier and require less pesticides and are better immune to a variety of crop destroying plant diseases. It is also a well known fact that humans have already directly benefited from genetically modified crops.

[PA5COR]

Natural selection or adding chemicals not found in nature into the DNA of plants is a totally different ballgame, if you cannot see the difference butt out of the discussion.

Nature selects and changes the DNA of plants over 1000's of years, failing species will die out the strong species are left, we put chemicals into the DNA like pesticided and herbicides so we need less to spray on them or make them resistant againt say Roundup.
Fact is that the farmers now need to use lots more of the roundup to keep the weeds from th crop, a big Fail.
Roundup didn't prove to be easily removed from the produce and people get it into their diet, it is not as promissed easily breaking down but stays into the environment, and in people.

All your harping about the benefits of the GMO food is proven unvalid by the research done here and consequent banning in Europe Russia etc for the GMO crops.
Same as in India etc.
The GMO practice created superweeds that are rsistant against the Roundup and other weedkillers made specially to protect GMO produce, so it worked counter productive.

Mandatory labelling here gives consumers the choice to know what is in the product and people here chose to leave the GMO products on the shelves.
One reason Monsanto puts lots of money and effort to prevent that from hapening in the USA ( mandatory labelling), keeping consumers in the dark what is in the products they buy and consume.

We as consumers rather stay informed to make healthy choices.
Attacking the source? attack with valid arguments and proof please....

[KC2UGV]

Natural selection or adding chemicals not found in nature into the DNA of plants is a totally different ballgame, if you cannot see the difference butt out of the discussion.

Nature selects and changes the DNA of plants over 1000's of years, failing species will die out the strong species are left, we put chemicals into the DNA like pesticided and herbicides so we need less to spray on them or make them resistant againt say Roundup.
Fact is that the farmers now need to use lots more of the roundup to keep the weeds from th crop, a big Fail.
Roundup didn't prove to be easily removed from the produce and people get it into their diet, it is not as promissed easily breaking down but stays into the environment, and in people.


SO, you are opposed to all bioengineering, where were insert foreign DNA into cells? In which case, I hope you never need insulin injections (Product of GMO), vaccines (Product of GMO), algae that produces methane (Product of GMO), etc etc.

Natural selection would make weeds resistant to ANYTHING we throw at it, eventually. Pesticides, predators, etc etc. It's all natural selection, and not a fault of GMO.



All your harping about the benefits of the GMO food is proven unvalid by the research done here and consequent banning in Europe Russia etc for the GMO crops.
Same as in India etc.
The GMO practice created superweeds that are rsistant against the Roundup and other weedkillers made specially to protect GMO produce, so it worked counter productive.


GMO didn't create superweeds. Nature created superweeds. Just like nature created MRSA.



Mandatory labelling here gives consumers the choice to know what is in the product and people here chose to leave the GMO products on the shelves.
One reason Monsanto puts lots of money and effort to prevent that from hapening in the USA ( mandatory labelling), keeping consumers in the dark what is in the products they buy and consume.


Then, I propose mandatory food labeling for your crops, since they've never been tested for safety.



We as consumers rather stay informed to make healthy choices.
Attacking the source? attack with valid arguments and proof please....

Attack what? You can't confront a lack of factual basis.

[PA5COR]

Natural selection was not the reason for the superweeds, it was the GMO changed produce and Roundup.
Try to twist it anyway you like but that was the fact here.
Yep, just attack the soure as being tainted but not deliver proof of your thesis.
Fact is Europe, India Russia and more countries banned GMO based on their findings, Food labelling is mandatory and people chose with their purse.
And that is not for GMO products.
I don't like to get roundup in my food.


SO, you are opposed to all bioengineering, where were insert foreign DNA into cells? In which case, I hope you never need insulin injections (Product of GMO), vaccines (Product of GMO), algae that produces methane (Product of GMO), etc etc.

Natural selection would make weeds resistant to ANYTHING we throw at it, eventually. Pesticides, predators, etc etc. It's all natural selection, and not a fault of GMO.



GMO didn't create superweeds. Nature created superweeds. Just like nature created MRSA.



Then, I propose mandatory food labeling for your crops, since they've never been tested for safety.



Attack what? You can't confront a lack of factual basis.

[KC2UGV]

Natural selection was not the reason for the superweeds, it was the GMO changed produce and Roundup.
Try to twist it anyway you like but that was the fact here.
Yep, just attack the soure as being tainted but not deliver proof of your thesis.
Fact is Europe, India Russia and more countries banned GMO based on their findings, Food labelling is mandatory and people chose with their purse.
And that is not for GMO products.
I don't like to get roundup in my food.

Europe, India, and Russia banned GMO based on fear, not findings. You said so yourself: They've never been tested for safety.

Since you claim GMO caused the superweeds, which weeds were modified by a company doing bioengineering? I thought we modified only food crops?

[PA5COR]

I presented the reports earlier in the thread not going to repeat it.
Super weeds developped resistance against Roundup by the GMO produce.
http://earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/GMO_Myths_and_Truths/GMO_Myths_and_Truths_1.3b.pdf



Europe, India, and Russia banned GMO based on fear, not findings. You said so yourself: They've never been tested for safety.

Since you claim GMO caused the superweeds, which weeds were modified by a company doing bioengineering? I thought we modified only food crops?

[KC2UGV]

I presented the reports earlier in the thread not going to repeat it.

And, none of those are from any journal.



Super weeds developped resistance against Roundup by the GMO produce.
http://earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/GMO_Myths_and_Truths/GMO_Myths_and_Truths_1.3b.pdf

Right, super weeds developed resistance against roundup, due to plain ole natural selection.

[kb2vxa]

OK guys, top THIS!

[K7SGJ]

OK guys, top THIS!

Let me see if I can find the picture of the guy that took that same photo, from under the elephant.

[PA5COR]

You still didn't debunk the scientists reports.

No natural selection since Roundup is a chemical introduced by man, not found in nature normally, so the superweeds would not exist without human interference.

http://www.earthopensource.org/index.php/news/145-vital-link-article-on-health-hazards-of-genetically-modified-foods

A new peer-reviewed article has been published on the health hazards of genetically modified foods in Vital Link, the journal of the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors (www.cand.ca (http://www.cand.ca/)). The article was written by Claire Robinson, research director of Earth Open Source.The article:


leads with the Seralini et al (2012) study, which remains the most thorough and detailed study ever to be carried out on a GM food
reviews additional evidence from animal feeding studies with GM foods
supports the American Academy of Environmental Medicine’s (AAEM) conclusion that GM foods have not been properly tested for human consumption but that animal studies offer
ample evidence of probable harm”
notes that some people in the US have reported improvements in their health and the disappearance of sometimes serious symptoms just by eliminating GMOs from their diets
recommends choosing organic and Non-GMO Project Verified foods, and foods derived from crops that are not subject to genetic modification.

Here is the citation:
Robinson, C (2103) Don't look, don't find: Health hazards of genetically modified food (https://forums.hamisland.net/files/pdfs/Dont-look-dont-find-health-hazards-of-genetically-modified-food.pdf). CAND Vital Link, Volume 20(1):17-24.
Download the PDF here (https://forums.hamisland.net/files/pdfs/Dont-look-dont-find-health-hazards-of-genetically-modified-food.pdf).

The pesticide industry and EU regulators knew as long ago as the 1980s-1990s that Roundup, the world's best selling herbicide, causes birth defects – but they failed to inform the public.This report, co-authored by international scientists and researchers, reveals that industry’s own studies (including one commissioned by Monsanto) showed as long ago as the 1980s that Roundup’s active ingredient glyphosate causes birth defects in laboratory animals.


The facts are these:


Industry has known from its own studies since the 1980s that glyphosate causes malformations in experimental animals at high doses
Industry has known since 1993 that these effects also occur at lower and mid doses
The German government has known since at least 1998 that glyphosate causes malformations
The EU Commission’s expert scientific review panel knew in 1999 that glyphosate causes malformations
The EU Commission has known since 2002 that glyphosate causes malformations. This was the year it signed off on the current approval of glyphosate.

But this information was not made public. On the contrary, the pesticide industry and Europe’s regulators have jointly misled the public with claims that glyphosate is safe. As a result, Roundup is used by home gardeners and local authorities on roadsides, in school grounds, and in other public areas, as well as in farmers’ fields.
As recently as 2010, the German Federal Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety, BVL, told the Commission there was "no evidence of teratogenicity" (ability to cause birth defects) for glyphosate.
BVL made this comment in its rebuttal (https://forums.hamisland.net/files/pdfs/Roundup-and-birth-defects/BVL2010-comments-Paganelli.pdf) of an independent scientific study by Argentine scientists which showed that Roundup and glyphosate cause birth defects in experimental animals at concentrations much lower than those used in agricultural spraying. The study was prompted by reports of high rates of birth defects and cancers in areas of South America growing genetically modified (GM) Roundup Ready soy, which is engineered to tolerate being sprayed liberally with glyphosate herbicide.
In its rebuttal of the Argentine study, BVL cited as proof of glyphosate's safety the industry studies submitted for the Commission's 2002 approval of glyphosate (the approval that is currently in force in Europe).
But the authors of the new report obtained the approval documents and found that contrary to BVL's claim, industry's own studies, conducted in the 1980s and 1990s, showed that glyphosate/Roundup causes birth defects in experimental animals.
Download the report - Roundup and birth defects: Is the public being kept in the dark? (https://forums.hamisland.net/files/pdfs/Roundup-and-birth-defects/RoundupandBirthDefectsv5.pdf)

[KC2UGV]

Cor, GMO =/= Pesticides. Two different subjects you are conflating.

[NQ6U]

No natural selection since Roundup is a chemical introduced by man, not found in nature normally

This statement demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the mechanics of natural selection. Cor, it does not matter where the selection pressure comes from, whether it's nature or man-made, the "superweeds" are still a product of natural selection in the same way as drug-resistant bacteria due to the misuse of antibiotics are a product of natural selection.

[KC2UGV]

No natural selection since Roundup is a chemical introduced by man, not found in nature normally, so the superweeds would not exist without human interference.


Then cows, dogs, cats, rats, pigs, corn, bananas, tomatoes, and a host of other things we all know (And love) were not produced via natural selection, but by GMO; since they were all produced due to pressures exerted by man not present naturally in the environment.

[n2ize]

Natural selection was not the reason for the superweeds, it was the GMO changed produce and Roundup.


No, as others pointed ou, natural selection is indeed the cause. How do you think bacteria can become resistant to antibiotics and insects can become resitant to certain kinds of insecticides. It's not the insectiicide or the antibiotic. It is nature and the process of natural selection.

Do we stop using and ban antibiotics because bacteria can become resitant to them ? No, not unless you can find a better way of curing animals and people who are sick from infectious diseases. Right now antibiotics are our best line of defense in saving lives threatened by infections.

Do we stop using pesticides because certain insects and weebs become resistant to them over time ? No, not unless you want to see a lot of farmers go bankrupt and a lot of people dying from famine induced malnutirition. Pesticides are unfortunately a nessesary part of food production.

As for GMO it's a whole nother ballgame. As others have pointed out, man has benefited from GM already, i.e., production of insulin, medications, heartier crops. In fact, one thing many anti-GMO'ers neglect to consider is that GMO can even be the solution to pesticides. Via GMO we can produce crops that are better resistant to plant diseases, pests, and climate/weather disturbances. In short, as the world changes GMO could be the very thing that saves the human species and possibly eliminates or reduces the need for pesticides

[n2ize]

Then cows, dogs, cats, rats, pigs, corn, bananas, tomatoes, and a host of other things we all know (And love) were not produced via natural selection, but by GMO; since they were all produced due to pressures exerted by man not present naturally in the environment.

+100000000000000000000000000000 ^^^ Right on target ^^^^^^^^^^

[PA5COR]

If we hadn't brought Roundup into the environment the weeds would not develop their resistance so it is man made nad not natural.
Playing words is nice but basically we let the superweed come into existence.

The rest is in the links above.
Concentrating on one aspect not related with food and it's dangers is fine but only a distraction.
Have a look again on the thread title...

[KC2UGV]

If we hadn't brought Roundup into the environment the weeds would not develop their resistance so it is man made nad not natural.
Playing words is nice but basically we let the superweed come into existence.


No, they would have developed resistance to whatever else it was we threw at it. Via natural selection.

[WØTKX]

Working with genetics due to our new knowledge and skills can and will solve problems without pesticides or antibiotics. Antibiotics are really just another form of pesticides.

The real problem is willy nilly short term development of solutions that are skewed too far for the motivation of financial profit than a long term solution. The same as throwing waste out of the window into the street gutter below. Or a cigarette butt out of the car. Short term gains at the expense of others is not a win=win. It's cheating!

Careful and thoughtful regulation is required, as always. Manipulative marketing and similar influences make us pee in the pool.

[VE7MGF]

just watched a documentary on rdtv http://rt.com/shows/documentary/genetic-chili-pepper-gmo-637/
might be hard to watch lousy site good info on gmo seeds and the safety of them
worth a look

[kb2vxa]

Interesting "discussion" but the trouble is I'm getting dizzy (but I'll spare you Tommy Roe). You keep saying the same things over and over ad nauseum, the words change but The Song Remains The Same. Yeah, take a picture from under the elephant and it's still a pissing match and another undying monster... like the .313 thread?

"Manipulative marketing and similar influences make us pee in the pool."

And I thought it was absorbing water through the skin. Gee, I learn something new every day, thanks.

[KC2UGV]

Working with genetics due to our new knowledge and skills can and will solve problems without pesticides or antibiotics. Antibiotics are really just another form of pesticides.

The real problem is willy nilly short term development of solutions that are skewed too far for the motivation of financial profit than a long term solution. The same as throwing waste out of the window into the street gutter below. Or a cigarette butt out of the car. Short term gains at the expense of others is not a win=win. It's cheating!

Careful and thoughtful regulation is required, as always. Manipulative marketing and similar influences make us pee in the pool.

+1000000 internets to you sir.