New generation more toxic crops has been approved

New generation more toxic crops has been approved

By Dr. Mercola

Two major categories of GM seeds currently account for 99 percent of all acreage dedicated to GM crops in the United States:

• Those designed to withstand large amounts of herbicides, such as Monsanto's Roundup Ready varieties,

• Those designed to produce their own internal insecticide (so-called Bt crops)

The widespread use of these transgenic crops has led to chemical resistance among weeds and insects alike, despite initial assurances from the chemical technology industry that such an outcome was highly unlikely.

Well, the results are now too obvious to ignore — resistance has been documented on 60 million acres on farms across the United States, and the Bt-resistant rootworm has been reported in the United States and Brazil.

As transgenic seeds became the norm, chemical resistance quickly emerged. As a result, farmers have been applying ever increasing amounts of pesticides in an effort to keep up with the increased resistance.

The United States now uses about 1.1 million pounds of pesticides each year, 1, 2 and growing research has linked pesticides to a number of serious health problems. What we need is not a new generation of chemical resistant crops, but that is exactly what we are getting ...

More GM Toxic and Herbicide Crops Receive Approval

Rather than taking a proactive approach to saving the environment and human life, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently decided to approve the next generation of GM crops from Dow Chemical.

These crops are not only resistant to glyphosate, but also possess resistance to toxins such as 2,4-D, a component of Agent Orange, and Dicamba, which has been linked to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. 2,4-D chemicals and other herbicides in this class have also been linked to:

• Cancers of the immune system

• Parkinson's disease

• Alteration of the endocrine system

• Reproductive problems

Then, on October 15, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced3 its final decision to register Enlist Duo - a new herbicide manufactured by Dow Chemical - to be used on GM corn and soybeans to tolerate both 2,4- D like glyphosate.

This was the last obstacle that stood between this new generation of transgenic crops and their widespread commercialization. According to the EPA: 4

"The agency's decision reflects a large body of science and understanding of the risks of pesticides to human health and the environment ... EPA scientists use very conservative and protective assumptions to assess human health and risks. environmentally friendly for new uses of 2.4 D in Enlist Duo.

Assessments confirm that these uses meet safety standards for pesticide registration and, as approved, will be protected from the public, agricultural workers, and non-target species, including endangered species.

The agency assesses risks in all age groups, from children to the elderly, and took into account exposures through food, water, pesticide stacking, and as a result of their use around homes. The decision meets the stringent Food Quality Protection Act standard of "reasonable certainty of no harm" for human health. "

EPA Thinks Some Restrictions Will Protect Against Resistance ...

To "ensure that weeds do not create resistance to 2,4-D," the Enlist Duo approval comes with certain restrictions. For example, Dow is required to look for resistant weeds and report any occurrences of resistance to the EPA.

Education and remediation plans for farmers are also part of these additional requirements that must be met. To avoid stacking, farmers will not be allowed to spray Enlist Duo from the air, or apply it when the wind speed exceeds 15 kilometers per hour.

Farmers also have to leave a 30-foot spray-free zone around treated crops. Enrollment expires in six years, at which point EPA will assess the emergence of resistance.

I don't believe in those security guarantees. I also don't think adding a different set of toxins to the growers mix improves stamina. Instead, we will simply end up with an increasingly toxic food supply and more environmental destruction. As noted by the Pesticide Action Network: 5

"The USDA forecasts that 2,4-D use in corn and soybean production will increase between 500 and 1,400 percent over the course of nine years, depending on farmers' practices and changes in the US stock market. corn and soybean seeds.

In making this decision, EPA officials did not take into account several important health and safety factors.

By ignoring the potential synergistic effects of 2,4-D and glyphosate, not addressing the cumulative impacts of the expected increase in 2,4-D use, and failing to apply an appropriate 10-fold safety factor to limit exposure - as required by the Protect Food Quality Act — EPA has given the Enlist Duo unwarranted approval, based on a poor and inadequate review of the chemical's harm.

Additionally, neither the USDA nor the EPA have analyzed the economic impact that stacking Enlist Duo will have on surrounding farms and nearby communities. ” [Emphasis mine]

The Center for Food Safety also cites a 2012 study published in the journal Bioscience, which concluded that this new generation of GM crops "will trigger incurable weeds resistant to both glyphosate and 2,4-D."

We need a new approach, no more toxins

A great deal of damage can come in six years, and we just don't have the time to sit back and wait to see what it can turn into. How much damage would it have to do before our government begins to take these problems seriously?

What we need is a new approach to our agricultural system. We need a system that is not dependent on chemicals, one that is not only sustainable, but also regenerative.

Toxic chemicals are the foundation of GM agriculture. Chemicals are added to the soil, to seeds, to plants, and in some crops, herbicides are also added directly to the crop, to increase seed release. This technique is called desiccation.

For example, desiccation of conventional wheat crops with glyphosate just before harvest came into vogue some 15 years ago, and Dr. Stephanie Seneff suspects that this practice may be the reason we have seen such a dramatic increase in celiac disease ever since ... It is important to understand that agriculture today is not driven by real agricultural enterprises. Patented seeds are actually the brainchild of the pesticide industry. While they try to present themselves as "biotech companies," they are actually chemical technology companies, and they have no financial incentive to discontinue or even reduce the use of chemicals.

Biased Research is a Direct Threat to Human Health

As for "bodies of science," the EPA claims to base its reckless decision on it, it is worth noting that the vast majority of this research has significant conflicts of interest as it is conducted by companies that sell chemicals. This fact was directly addressed in a report6 ​​in January 2014 on 2,4-D, jointly published by Testbiotech, GeneWatch UK, and the European Pesticide Action Network:

"Many of the publications are written by the scientists of the manufacturers or are sponsored by the manufacturers of 2,4-D. This causes a lot of confusion, because, on the one hand, these documents are scientific, peer-reviewed documents, but, on the other hand, it can be assumed that financial interest drives the bias towards studies that show no negative effects. A recent study by Diels et al. (2011) has shown that in studies with transgenic crops, there is a strong relationship between funding And the result.

Some industry-funded publications omit important information, for example, Ross et al. (2005), which does not mention the results showing high dermal absorption of 2,4-D ... Basically, industry funded / written studies create rash information - a tactic also applied by the tobacco industry. The parallels between the tobacco industry and the pesticide industry are multiple, not only in their rationale and strategy, but also in the bottom line - despite the evidence - cancer-causing agents are not banned. "

All Legal Options Will Be Made To Stop These Dangerous Crops

Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, PhD, lead scientist for the Pesticide Action Network, has called the lack of protection from the EPA and USDA "surprising," stating that: 7 "Now is the time for real reform in these agencies. We need a new government oversight system that is powerful enough to say “No” to Dow and Monsanto when their products show signs of harm to the health and livelihoods of our farmers and rural communities. "

In response to the complete failure of the USDA and EPA to protect the American public from the growing threat of a toxic food supply and resistance to devastating pests that could decimate natural resources, the Center for Food Safety has announced8 that it will "deplete all legal options available in order to stop the commercialization of these dangerous crops. " Sixty members of Congress have signed a letter opposing the approval and release of corn- and soy-tolerant 2,4-D. On June 30, 35 prominent physicians, scientists, and researchers also sent a letter of opposition to the EPA.9 From according to representative Peter DeFazio (D-OR): 10

"For years, the scientific community has been the alarm bell about the rise in herbicide use and the link to a multitude of health problems. It is surprising that the EPA believes that it is a good idea to allow widespread use of a chemical. toxic, which is already present in Agent Orange in this nation's farm fields. EPA should be working to reverse the trend of chemicals that poison our food, water and soil supplies. It will only be a matter of time before for weeds to develop resistance to 2,4-D, and for the chemical industry to develop an even more dangerous and potent product. "

In fact, there are already new GM crops with built-in resistance to a variety of toxic chemicals awaiting federal approval (below). In addition to 2,4-D and dicamba, each and every one of them will eventually cause resistance. And more likely, we will end up seeing resistance to multiple chemicals, just as we now have antibiotic resistant bacteria with multi-drug resistance:

• ALS (Pioneer Hi-Bred) tolerant crops

• Bromoxynil tolerant crops (Calgene)

• Imidazolinone tolerant cultures (BASF)

• Isoxaflutole tolerant crops (Bayer)

• Sulfonylurea tolerant crops (DuPont)

The Way to Get Rid of This Nightmare Starts at Home

Escaping this maze of toxic chemicals will decrease the profits of the chemical technology industry, which is why they don't want you to know which foods contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). If people in America started to make dramatic changes to their diet, that could quickly revolutionize America's farming system, because farmers would grow what they sell. If people want organic, uncontaminated food, that's what farmers would grow — and there is already evidence that biodynamic agriculture can be done even on a large scale. In fact, by using biodynamic principles, you can grow much more food in less land area.

The real solutions are available. What is lacking is the political will to confront the chemical technology industry and sever its relationship with the food supply. But we can still make that happen by making conscious choices each and every time we buy our food. Remember that your money will support either the chemical-based system that threatens the survival of the Earth and its descendants, or a system that can regenerate and revitalize the soil and the environment so that healthy food and people can thrive. To make conscious decisions, we need information, which is why the labeling of GM products is so important.

I recently named the GMA "the most evil corporation on the planet," considering the fact that it consists mainly of pesticide producers and junk food manufacturers who violate some of the most basic rights - just to ensure that subsidized, genetically modified foods, chemically dependent and highly processed maintain the status quo.

The madness has gone far enough. It is time to unite and fight, which is why I ask you to boycott every product that is from GMA members, including natural and organic brands. To learn more about this boycott and the treacherous brands included, please visit I also ask that you donate to the Organic Consumer Fund. Your donation will help fight the demand for GMA in Vermont, and will also help win the citizens' initiative for GMO labeling in Oregon in November.

Dr. Mercola Blog

Video: Gen Z is more red pilled than you realize (August 2021).