If GMO is no different than conventional, then how can it have patent protection? It can't be the same such that it doesn't have to be labeled, yet different such that it can't be cultivated. FDA can't have it both ways, so you know they're lying.
Scientists will tell you there's "a mountain of evidence" that GMOs are safe. But even according to Monsanto right on their own website, there is not one single scientific study on the effects of GMO consumption.
What they don't tell you is why. It's two reasons. One, it's actually illegal because of intellectual property laws. Two, no scientific organization would do it anyway because they consider it "bio-unethical". You won't believe why. Get this. You can't test something on people that is hypothesized to be bad for them, like you can't give someone lead and study how many brain cells it kills or something. We estimate that from rats. So instead, scientists consider it perfectly bio-ethical to feed GMOs to the entire population unknowingly in a giant uncontrolled experiment.
Here's why GMOs are likely to be bad for you. The "modification" we're talking about allows the crops to stand up to more pesticide spraying. Over the years, America has already loosened its laws on allowable limits for contamination. Now we get to have even more as a benefit of GMO. Pesticides are estrogenic. They promote obesity and other endocrine disorders. That could explain something. Thanks scientists!
reply
share