Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

GM: A tool for population control?

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

14.13 GM FOOD http://www.policestateplanning.com/chapter_14_.htm

 

 

According to the UK Soil Association: ' All non-GM farmers in North America are finding it very hard or impossible to grow GM-free crops. Seeds have become almost completely contaminated with GM organisms (GMOs), good non-GM varieties have become hard to buy, and there is a high risk of crop contamination.' The U.K. Government's official adviser on GM, the Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission (AEBC), has said it would `be difficult and in some places impossible to guarantee' that any British food was GM-free if commercial growing of GM crops went ahead. In North America, farmers can no longer be certain the seed they plant does not contain GM genes. (161)

GM food scientists can increase the vitamin content of food, so there is no reason why they cannot reduce it in order to increase malnutrition, disease, and death on a large scale. For example, more than $100 million has been spent over 10 years to produce transgenic rice at the Institute of Plant Sciences in Zurich. The Zurich team introduced three genes taken from daffodils and bacteria into a rice strain to produce a yellow rice with high levels of beta-carotene, which is converted to Vitamin A within the body. As well as altering vitamin content, over 300 open-field trials of `pharma' crops have taken place around the world since 1991. In California, for example, GM rice containing human genes has been grown for drug production. Pharmaceutical wheat, corn, and barley are also being developed in the U.S., France and Canada. A biotech

company called Prodigene has been working on growing edible vaccines in corn and in November 2000 began trials on an edible AIDS vaccine.(162)

By introducing drugs into food, GM technology has huge population control potential.

“There is an unpleasant whiff of arrogance in the whole (vaccine-autism) debate,†Horton says. “Can the public not be trusted with a controversial hypothesis? The view that the public cannot interpret uncertainty indicates an old-fashioned paternalism at work. The public is entitled to know as much as possible.â€

Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...