Academic research carried out on genetically modified (GM) food is either rife with conflicts of interest (in favour of GMO corporations and their products), or when it shows negative health impacts for consumers, is ignored by corporate media.
Either way, using the public in a mass experiment to promote GMO’s only enriches the GM crop industry and their subsidiaries in academia.
Humans together with the bees and the flora and fauna are being used in a massive experiment that has in store unforeseen consequences for them all.
Despite new research indicating health concerns and conflicts of interest related to Genetically Modified foods, the corporate media has, once again, remained silent.
Activist Post reports:
In late December, a series of studies and news stories went largely unreported and ignored by the corporate, deadstream media. These reports covered blatant conflicts of interest between the biotechnology corporations promoting genetically modified or engineered products and the researchers and politicians guiding legal policy. There was also the issue of a new study that shows negative health affects with rats who ingest genetically engineered food.
This study, Effect of genetically modified corn on the jejunal mucosa of adult male albino rat, which was published in the journal Experimental and Toxicologic Pathology, showed that rats fed GM Bt corn MON810 suffered serious damage to the surface mucous membranes of the jejunum, an important part of the small intestine. The signs of damage were apparent after only 90 days, according to the researchers.
The study used Monsanto’s MON810: Ajeeb YG, a genetically modified version of Ajeeb, a local species of corn grown in Egypt. The GM version was created by Monsanto for the Egyptian market. The rats who were on the GM corn consumed MON810 corn as 30% of their diet. The control group had the same amount of non-GMO corn. The GM group experienced damage on the finger-like structures within the intestine known as villi. These villi are responsible for absorbing nutrients from food. The researchers found them to be distorted and flattened. They also found signs of inflammation, disturbed mucosal glands, and congested blood vessels.
“Consumption of GM-corn profoundly alters the jejunal histological [microscopic] structure,” the researchers concluded.
Despite this astounding study, there has been little to no mention of its conclusions in the independent or corporate media. The study alone is not hard evidence that the same results will be found in humans, or even necessarily that the genetically modified corn is the sole reason for the damage, but it does absolutely warrant further investigation. Especially in light of growing concern around conflicts of interest.
In late December, researchers with France’s National Institute for Agricultural Research announced stunning findings in their study of potential conflicts of interest within the biotechnology industry. Published in the journal PLOS One, the study found that nearly half of studies on genetically modified crops were found to have conflicts of interest. The study, Conflicts of Interest in GM Bt Crop Efficacy and Durability Studies, also concluded that GM studies with conflict of interest had an increased likelihood of drawing conclusions which favored genetically modified or engineered foods.
The researchers examined 579 published studies and found that around 40% showed at least one conflict of interest. In these cases the conflict was typically related to someone involved with the study also working as an employee of a GM company or had received funds directly from the company. Given that America is one of the world’s largest consumer of GM foods, it was not surprising to find that our of the 579 studies examined, 404 were American and 83 were Chinese.
“We thought we would find conflicts of interest, but we did not think we would find so many,” Thomas Guillemaud, director of research at France’s National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA) told AFP.
The authors also admit that the study was limited in its scope. “We used the addresses of authors to identify their affiliations, only one type of affiliation, that relating to employment, was considered,” the researcher wrote. “However, authors may have affiliations to GM crop companies of other types, such as being members of advisory boards, consultants, or co-holders of patents, and this could also have a significant impact on the outcomes of studies on GM crops.”
Again, silence from the corporate media on these conflicts. It should also be noted that other than Activist Post reporting on this, the only other link came from the Times of India, an English language website for news in India. There was one story regarding conflicts of interest that made the deadstream.
In early December 2016, the New York Times released a report that was quickly forgotten or ignored by the masses. The article details how committees associated with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) were being questioned for their own conflicts of interest. The NAS provides policy guidance to the U.S. government. They distribute this guidance via written reports from scientific committees.
Critics say that several committee members have financial ties to biotech businesses that could color the panel’s report, expected to be published soon, potentially giving short shrift to health and environmental worries.
By the academies’ own account, two of the scientists already violate the group’s extensive conflict-of-interest policy. The National Academies play an outsize role in the debate because of their stature in the academic community and connections to the federal government.
The NAS is also the organization responsible for a May 2016 study which claimed to have completely debunked any environmental or health dangers related to genetically engineered foods. However, once again, conflict of interest was an issue. Following the NAS study, the environmental watchdog organization Food and Water Watch released their own report pointing to possible influence from the same organizations that stand to benefit from the growth of GM foods. The report, Under the Influence: The National Research Council and GMOs, looks at “far-reaching ties” between the National Research Council, its parent organization the NAS, and biotechnology companies and agricultural corporations.
- Food and Water Watch claims that the NRC and NAS:
- takes millions of dollars in funding from biotechnology companies
- invites sponsors like Monsanto to sit on high-level boards overseeing the NRC’s work
- invites industry-aligned, pro-GMO scientists to author NRC reports
- draws scientific conclusions based on industry science
- operates at times as a private contractor for corporate research
Food and Water Watch also points to the fact that Monsanto, DuPont and other agribusinesses that produce or support GMOs have donated millions of dollars into the NRC’s parent organization, the National Academy of Sciences. The report also alleges that corporate representatives participate in “high-level decision-making processes at the NRC, including sitting on the board that oversees the NRC’s work on GMOs.”
How are Americans supposed to trust the corporate media, the scientists promoting genetic engineering, and the political bodies if they are completely corrupt and wrapped in conflicts of interest? We can’t. Grow your own food and vacate the unsustainable food systems that promote genetic engineering, factory farming, and pesticide use.
Russia has vowed to veto a draft U.N. resolution calling for sanctions against Syria over its alleged use of chemical weapons on civilians.
The UN Security Council resolution was drafted by the US, Britain and France.
Following a closed-door council session, Russian Deputy U.N. Envoy Vladimir Safronkov told reporters: “I just explained our position very clearly to our partners. If it is tabled we will veto it” adding that “The resolution prejudges the results of the investigation, it is one-sided [and] based on insufficient evidence”
Press TV reports:
The US, France and Britain are pressing to put their proposed resolution to a vote early next week in order impose sanctions on Syrian authorities accused of using chemical weapons.
The Syrian government, however, has repeatedly and fiercely denied using chemical weapons in the foreign-imposed conflict that has so far killed 310,000 people since March 2011.
The draft resolution follows a UN-led probe that accused the Syrian military in October of carrying out at least three chlorine gas attacks on the villages of Qmenas, Talmenes and Sarmin in 2014 and 2015.
The joint panel of the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) further concluded that Daesh terrorists had used mustard gas in an attack in 2015.
The proposed measure would slap a global travel ban and assets freeze on 11 Syrians, mostly military officials, as well as 10 entities allegedly linked to chemical weapons development.
It would further prohibit the sale, supply or transfer of helicopters and related materiel, including spare parts, to the Syrian government and its armed forces.
The US and its allies have repeatedly used chemical weapons as a pretext to pressure the Syrian government. Damascus volunteered to destroy its chemical stockpile in 2014 following a poisonous attack outside the capital.
The allegations of chemical arms use are still made against Syria even as the dismantling of the country’s entire stockpile of chemical weapons as well as relevant production facilities was supervised by the UN.
Foreign-backed militants have repeatedly used chemical weapons against Syrian troops, some of which have been verified by UN officials, but the attacks have often been ignored by Western governments.
In December 2015, a cousin of former Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi said that chemical weapons used in Ghouta which were blamed on the Syrian government were in fact stolen from Libya and later smuggled into Syria via Turkey.
Pope Francis has begun reducing penalties for pedophile priests, unveiling a “prayers not prison” punishment scheme for child abusers within the Catholic church.
The liberal pope claims to be applying his vision of a “merciful church” to pedophile priests by reducing punishments to lighter sentences, in some cases “a lifetime of prayer“.
However sex abuse victims are appalled, saying Pope Francis is normalizing pedophilia within the Catholic church again, undoing the work done by his predecessor Pope Benedict.
Marie Collins, an abuse survivor and founding member of Francis’ sex-abuse advisory commission, expressed dismay that the penalties were being weakened, arguing that pedophiles should be sentenced to jail, not told to pray.
She said: “All who abuse have made a conscious decision to do so. Even those who are paedophiles, experts will tell you, are still responsible for their actions. They can resist their inclinations.”
Daily Mail reports:
One of the priests was the Reverend Mauro Inzoli, who was found guilty of abusing young boys by the Vatican in 2012 and was ordered to be defrocked.
However, he appealed, and in 2014 Francis reduced the penalty to a lifetime of prayer, prohibiting him from celebrating Mass in public or being near children, barring him from his diocese and ordering five years of psychotherapy.
Rev Inzoli was then convicted by an Italian criminal court for his sex crimes against five children as young as 12. He is now facing a second church trial after new evidence emerged against him.
A church official has said some paedophile priests and their high-ranking friends appealed to Pope Francis by citing the pope’s own words about mercy in their petitions.
They said: ‘With all this emphasis on mercy … he is creating the environment for such initiatives.’
Marie Collins, an abuse survivor and founding member of Francis’ sex-abuse advisory commission, expressed dismay that the congregation’s recommended penalties were being weakened.
She said: ‘All who abuse have made a conscious decision to do so. Even those who are paedophiles, experts will tell you, are still responsible for their actions. They can resist their inclinations.’
Many canon lawyers and church authorities argue that defrocking paedophiles can put society at greater risk because the church no longer exerts control over them.
They argue that keeping the men in restricted ministry, away from children, enables superiors to exert some degree of supervision.
But Ms Collins said the church must also take into account the message that reduced canonical sentences sends to both survivors and abusers.
‘While mercy is important, justice for all parties is equally important,’ she said.
‘If there is seen to be any weakness about proper penalties, then it might well send the wrong message to those who would abuse.’
Comparatively, his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, rarely granted clemency petitions and defrocked 800 priests, who had raped and molested children, during his eight-year papacy.
According to the church official, Pope Francis also ordered three staffers to be dismissed – two of whom worked for the discipline section that handles sex abuse cases.
It’s well-known that strange UFO phenomena have been going on for some time. People have reported these objects for decades. There’s even reason to believe that UFOs were spotted centuries ago. However, what’s more surprising than the UFO reports themselves, is how often they’re occurring in the modern world. Apparently the number of UFO sightings has been escalating in recent years.
According to Sam Monfort, a US PhD student who collected data provided by the National UFO Reporting Center, UFO sightings are at an all-time high. For instance, there were 10,000 claimed sightings in 1990, but by 2010 there were roughly 45,000 sightings every year.
He also noted that the type of UFOs that people claim to see have changed over time. For most of the twentieth century, UFO sightings mainly consisted of flying saucers and cigar shapes, but these days most people describe them as strange lights.
What’s also interesting about his report, is that it shows just how many UFO sightings occur in the US. Monfort described Americans as “hilariously more likely to report a UFO sighting than anyone else.” Americans report these objects at a rate that is 300 times the global average. He also found that UFO sightings in the US tend to spike on the 4th of July (for obvious reasons), but that trend has escalated significantly since 2008.
According to the maps that he’s published, UFO sightings tend to occur most often in developed Western nations and their neighbors. That would lend credence to the idea that UFOs are either nothing more than a Western cultural phenomena, or perhaps that these objects are top-secret military aircraft built by the world’s most advanced nations.
Unless of course aliens just find our high-tech societies more interesting. You decide.
DARPA is creating a GPS-like technology that works in the deep ocean called Positioning System for Deep Ocean Navigation, or POSYDON.
The Global Positioning System (GPS) is the predominant means of obtaining positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) information for both military and civilian systems and applications. However, the radio frequency basis for GPS also means that its signals cannot penetrate seawater, and thus undersea GPS is effectively denied. The Positioning System for Deep Ocean Navigation (POSYDON) program aims to develop an undersea system that provides omnipresent, robust positioning across ocean basins. By ranging to a small number of long-range acoustic sources, an undersea platform would be able to obtain continuous, accurate positioning without surfacing for a GPS fix. Phase I of the program focuses on accurately modeling the signal propagation channel, and Phase II focuses on developing the signal waveform. A complete positioning system is scheduled to be demonstrated in Phase III.
DARPA envisions that the POSYDON program will distribute a small number of acoustic sources, analogous to GPS satellites, around an ocean basin.
Underwater acoustic signal propagation channels present a number of challenges:
• Time-varying multipath propagation and multipath delay
• Doppler spread due to platform motion relative to the acoustic source(s) and ocean environment
• Bandwidth-limited signals
• Convergence zones
• Tomographic calibration of a region as a function of time/environmental variability
There are some GPS radio systems that can work in shallow waters, but DARPA wants to go into the deep ocean with submarine drones. Submarine navigation is one of the most complex and dangerous ventures in the military because, to get a precise location on one, the vessel has to eventually emerge from the water to catch a radio signal. Even access to a GPS can be blocked by enemy jamming.
Currently, submarines are outfitted with a “very large and very expensive inertial measurement unit,”Niedzwiecki. says. It basically remembers the submarines last known location and keeps track of its diving depth and forward movement. This, of course, is not the nearly as precise as a GPS system.
Drone subs operating under POSYDON could locate underwater mines, track enemy subs and perform other critical tasks larger manned submarines cannot, according to The National Interest:
* Number of small drones could send out an acoustic ping and then analyze
* Drone swarms update ships and submarines
The current controversy over the immigration policies of President Donald Trump prompted me to engage in some rather deep thinking and introspection vis-à-vis the issue of immigration. In context, of course, this means illegal immigration and border control and the effects thereof in recent decades, which obviously played a significant part in Mr. Trump’s election.
When I was a young man, I actually thought I might be something of a racist, and quite honestly, I didn’t have a problem with that. Leaving aside certain popular fallacious definitions of racism (such as the notion that nonwhites can’t effectively be racists since they have no power to actualize their racism), my outlook at that time had largely to do with the immigrants with whom I was acquainted. Since I’d grown up in the metropolitan New York City area, of course I had been exposed to innumerable immigrants since my birth. I’ve even had immigrants among my relatives, both legal and illegal.
As a young adult, I found that I didn’t particularly care for most of the foreigners with whom I interacted on a regular basis, most of whom were from Third World nations and had come to America fairly recently. Whether scientists or taxicab drivers, I observed that their attitudes were vastly different from those of the immigrant children I’d encountered years earlier.
While the latter and their parents were industrious, gracious and generally positive regardless of socioeconomic standing, those immigrants I encountered in young adulthood had a markedly different deportment. They felt entitled; many were disrespectful of America and Americans in general; and many subscribed to the “America Sucks” culture that was being fostered by the political left with great vigor.
In my ignorance, I wondered why these people were even present, why they were being imported in such vast numbers if all they were interested in doing was enriching themselves or subsisting off of the teat of our entitlement programs. It was only with the wisdom of age that I was able to objectively qualify their worldview, the dynamic behind their presence, and determine that my view of them wasn’t really racist at all.
I don’t have to tell regular readers of this column that neither their viewpoints nor the immigration initiatives of our president are based in racist or racialist doctrine. This is common sense, plain logic that is nevertheless lost on rank-and-file liberals. The astroturf protests against Trump’s policies (those concerning immigration being just one among these) are wholly calculated and defy logical analysis, their premises originating in erroneous and flawed notions of compassion (or more accurately, emotional blackmail). Manipulating people and these ideas is something at which progressive leaders are so adept that even conservative pundits and politicos find themselves stymied; often, they don’t even consider advancing the simplest and most effective arguments against their opponents’ fallacies. Thus, liberals find themselves free to characterize anyone’s desire to maintain our borders and a sane immigration policy as racist.
Obviously this hits home for me as a person of color; in context, it is impossible for me to see millions of people subscribing to this sort of political dogma as anything less than mentally retarded in the literal sense. Granted that there is a whole lot being proffered at present relative to our president’s policies that is similarly inane, but obviously the issue of immigration and border control was key among voter concerns, and so was central to Trump’s campaign. Had this not been the case, Trump as a candidate wouldn’t have bothered with it, since his campaign was almost entirely driven by issues voters – not think tanks nor survey companies – prioritized. In theory, Trump could have remained as unconcerned with the ramifications of illegal immigration as any Washington insider; he’s a fabulously wealthy man and could insulate himself from the effects other Americans experience as a result of illegal immigration.
So what am I getting at? Well, a couple of things. One is that I am obviously no more or less a racist than I was when I was 20. I don’t care what my immigrant coworker or taxicab driver looks like, or talks like, or smells like – I just don’t appreciate those of them who choose to crap on my country.
Another is that we all have choices here. If one holds to the idea that America is wretched, they can get the hell out. There is nothing preventing anyone, citizen or immigrant, from pursuing greener pastures elsewhere. Case in point: Some of the illustrious, brain-dead celebrities whom Americans so ardently worship – like Madonna and Johnny Depp – have done just that. So have a few people of far less means whom I grew up with in New York. Buh-bye. Good luck. Hope that works out for ya …
While I certainly don’t respect the shallow, uninformed worldview of such people, I can certainly respect their choice to act according to their values more than those who choose to do nothing more than chant from the sidelines how much you and I and Donald Trump suck.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/is-being-pro-america-really-racism/#xgcsiHgBzA0u8bKR.99
Scandal after scandal haunts Westminster as investigations reveal more systematic abuse against children between the 1970s and 1990s, this time from former British PM, the late Sir Edward Heath.
British parliament is in the paedophile spotlight again with resurfaced allegations against former British Prime Minister – now deceased – Sir Edward Heath.
The cover up within a cover up of UK elites and the systematic abuse against children from the 1970s through to the 1990s is now seeing over 30 of Heath’s victims come forward in a new investigation, claiming some of the viler crimes committed against them.
Over the years, the paedophile ring “covered up by the establishment” has highlighted well known names such as Jimmy Savile and retired bishop Peter Ball. In this last week, the Daily Mail reported on the allegations now under serious investigation, with Jimmy Savile’s nephew, Guy Marsden admitting that one of his friends was sexually abused by the former Prime Minister during the 1970s.
The police chief investigating the paedophilia claims against Heath stated they are “120 percent” genuine. What’s more, according to Wiltshire Chief Constable Mike Veale, the allegations are “totally convincing” with “strikingly similar” accounts from the alleged abused victims who don’t know each other.
“There are very close similarities in the accounts given by those who have come forward. The same names used for him, the same places and same type of incidents keep coming up.
“What stands out is that the people giving these accounts are not connected but the stories and the details dovetail.
“It contains disturbing stuff. Investigators have been shocked by what they have learned.’
Chief Constable Veale also believes that the alleged crimes of Sir Edward Heath were covered up by the Establishment years ago after reports were made to police.
In what appears to be operation and investigation hand over foot, the latest Operation Conifer – the investigation into Heath – occurred in the wake of the Jimmy Savile case.
Furthermore, as reported by the Daily Mail, Chief Constable Veale received pressure to drop an inquiry into a paedophile ring in Westminster last year, which involved the late Lord Brittan, the former Home Secretary, and Lord Bramall, the former Defence chief, both of which claims were found to be unsubstantiated.
The cover up and the failure to disclose information in the past is also under investigation, contrary to senior politicians dismissing the Heath allegations. Former Cabinet Secretary Lord Armstrong is also among those discrediting Veale’s investigation, giving one key counter claim that Heath never drove a car and nor could he.
However, many a photo have documented the Prime Minister Heath driving a car in 1975, during the years under current investigation.
The “VIP paedophile network” allegedly existing in the “heart of British government” suggests decades of brutal assault and even murder against young children, conducted by the United Kingdom’s most elite and powerful men.
Don Hale, a newspaper editor in 1984, was handed explosive evidence supporting the network, but only 24 hours into inquiring received a personal visit by a senior Labour Party politician, Sir Cyril Smith, threatening and demanding the documents be handed over.
The documents, however, remained in Hale’s possession and suggested a full-scale cover up that involved British politicians and that the Margaret Thatcher administration of the time was aware of its existence.
The report that Hale held, however, was seized shortly after by counter-terror and intelligence officers, with the warning to Hale to never publish a report on the findings or otherwise face arrest.
The widespread abuse occurring in the British echelons of parliament are surfacing. Although Heath is now dead, investigating and acknowledging the abuse occurred is a positive step for the victims who are very much alive.
With each individual investigation, however, more appears to be uncovered; taking a road map of each inquiry to simply keep track of them all.