The Netherlands Says NO to Glyphosate, Monsanto’s RoundUp Herbicide

New Exercise and Fitness Review

The Netherlands Says NO to Glyphosate, Monsanto’s RoundUp Herbicide
by Christina Sarich
Posted on April 22, 2014

First Russia, Tasmania, and Mexico say no to Monsanto and now, the Netherlands have passed a similar ban, determined to keep Glyphosate-laced herbicides away from the general public for good.

Starting from the end of 2015, the sale of glyphosate-based herbicides to private parties will be prohibited due to a recent decision by the Dutch Parliament. People who spray RoundUp on their gardens and lawns will have to find another form of pest control since glyphosate, the main ingredient in RoundUp, has been linked to cancer, infertility, birth defects, nervous system damage, and kidney disease.

Several years ago, the Dutch Lower House wanted to ban glyphosate aside from agricultural use (it is unclear why they wouldn’t want to ban it altogether, aside from Monsanto’s influence), but the ban is just now passing with parliamentary approval. This is due, in part, to the Dutch cabinet making all sorts of exceptions to the requested ban that was then proposed.

The Party for Animals motion has been adopted by the cabinet, making it increasingly difficult for them to ignore environmental issues, like the heavy use of glyohosate. Political parties PvdA, CU, 50+, GroenLinks, SP, and PVV support the motion by Esther Ouwehand – one of the two Members of Parliament for the Party for the Animals – which she has submitted together with Gerard Schouw (D66).

Study: Sick People Have Higher Levels of Toxic Glyphosate

Citizens of the Netherlands have been expressing their concern over glyphosate chemicals at Gifkikker.nl, a notification centre launched last April by the Party for the Animals and a foundation called Bollenboos. The Dutch Health Council praised this initiative, because until this forum was set up, communities had no formal body to express their concerns to.

Hopefully, the Dutch government is more transparent than our own. Millions have expressed their desire to ban GMOs in the US, but the FDA, USDA, and President do absolutely nothing. Michelle Obama even completely ignored the issue in a recent discussion on the new FDA food label changes. You can sign a petition here, to tell her that you want GMOs labeled.

The Netherlands are adding their name to what will soon be a long list of countries that are saying ‘NO’ to Monsanto.

World Class Bodybuilding Forum

The Netherlands Says NO to Glyphosate, Monsanto’s RoundUp Herbicide

Analysis DOES NOT Find Monsanto’s GM Corn Nutritionally Dead, Highly Toxic

New Exercise and Fitness Review

Here is another Q&A with Kevin Folta where this topic and study is addressed and debunked. It’s another example of anti-GMO’ists and activists trying to deceive the public with lies.

*********************************

Q: GMO corn is nutritionally dead compared to organic corn http://naturalsociety.com/analysis-m…ly-dead-toxic/ Why do you still sell them? If you’re selling glyphosate filled corn can’t you just label them so people know what they’re eating. It’s the constitutional right of Americans to know such things.
Question Submitted By: Soup from NYC, NY *

Expert Answer By: Kevin Folta, Professor and Chairman, Horticultural Sciences Department, University of Florida on Thursday, 8/29/2013 12:47 pm

Thanks Soup! You could not have found a better person to answer your question. I was front-and-center when this news/chart hit the prime time in March of 2012. It was posted on Moms Against Monsanto where they portrayed it as you do—proof that GM corn is nutritionally vacant and full of glyphosate and formaldehyde.

I’ll tell you up front that the “moms” site, Howard Vleiger (the guy that produced these data) and many other anti-GMO websites and promoters stand by these data as valid and representative of actual tests. They stand by them to this day. Keep that in mind.

I looked at the data and immediately saw some problems. First, the tests performed were not tests you’d use on corn, or any produce. We don’t measure “cation exchange capacity” in food. These were soil tests and probably soil data. Even if they were soil data, they were clearly altered.

We know that they were altered for faked because there is no 1% Brix (soluble solids; sugars) corn. Can’t be done. (note, they even get the definition of Brix wrong in the footnote). 1.2% organic matter? A corn kernel is pretty close to 100% organic matter outside of a pinch of minerals. There’s more iron than carbon, but carbon is the basis of just about every macromolecule in corn, or any cell. You get the picture. These data are bo-o-o-o-gus, and derived from someone not even trying to get it close.

Those that promoted the data stood by them rabidly as legitimate. They didn’t report the kind of corn, the lab that did the test, the number of samples, etc. All of the details were a mystery.

When I pointed this out to them I was blocked from their comments sections and facebook pages.

So I offered to build their case. I personally offered to pay out of pocket for an experimental replicate. You can read the whole story on the links below. In short,
Dr. Mae-Wan Ho contacted me quite kindly and wanted to take me up on my generous offer. She cc’d the original person behind the data, Howard Vleiger, and also Dr. Don Huber. She was enthusiastic about the experimental replicates.

The rules were simple. They would send us the seeds and we’d plant at several locations in Wisconsin, Florida and Indiana. They could plant anywhere they wanted to. We’d have GM and control. At the end we’d exchange coded samples and then have them tested at independent labs, one at my choosing, one their choosing. We’d then compare data.

At that point I’m looking at about $ 13,000 out of pocket to do this (Eeek!). Still, I was excited by their participation. I started to think that maybe their data were an honest mistake from a soil lab and not the contrived fabrication I thought them to be. I was feeling really good about this and giving them the benefit of the doubt.

We started to talk about replicates, locations and independent tests. I also mentioned that all of us would agree to publish the work in a peer-reviewed journal and that all of us would be authors—no matter what the outcome was.

Then it turned sour. Dr. Mae-Wan Ho and others decided to pull out. They claim that it was because I was “pro-GMO” etc, but these results were being done by a lab of their choice and materials in their control… maybe they just didn’t have something to replicate…

You can read the emails on the links below.

—-

So the table you see on the URL you cited contains fabricated data that make zero sense when you sit and think about them. They are doctored soil data.
To this day those responsible for these data stand by them as legitimate. They are not only impossible, not only NOT corn, but any other living thing. Moreover, those that stand by the chart refused a paid-for test to establish the truth. That should say a lot.

LINKS: (This was fun to read again)
http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2013/04/f…kes-alarm.html
http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2013/05/p…-mouth-is.html
http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2013/05/y…plication.html

Another quick note. Glyphosate is applied when the corn / soybeans are young and competing with the weeds. It is not sprayed onto the corn ears in any case I’ve ever heard. It’s long gone by ear set and does not accumulate in kernels. Maybe you can find a tiny bit here and there, but it is because we have phenomenal detection—not because the herbicide is appreciably present.

Labeling is a whole ‘nutter issue. Read about that somewhere (hear: http://gmoanswers.com/ask/why-do-you…roducts-please) at GMOAnswers. Constitutional issue? Not so much. The Constitution protects us from an over-reaching government. What we need are real scientists to protect us from an over-reaching activism and fear mongering. That’s what I’m trying to do here.

To conclude, even though this table and these data are clearly false, they continue to be touted by those that think GM foods are dangerous. Ask them tough questions about corn with 1.2% organic matter and less carbon than iron. Biologically impossible. See if they’ll keep deceiving you.
I hope you take the time to critically assess these data and then maybe question those that provide them and stand behind them. And of course, always reach out to me anytime you have questions.

World Class Bodybuilding Forum

Analysis DOES NOT Find Monsanto’s GM Corn Nutritionally Dead, Highly Toxic

Monsanto’s Bt-Toxins Found to Kill Human Embryo Cells

New Exercise and Fitness Review

Monsanto’s Bt-Toxins Found to Kill Human Embryo Cells
by Christina Sarich
Posted on January 24, 2014

Many individuals have heard it a million times, but for the uninformed, or those just looking to fuel their 2014 fire to finally defeat Monsanto and their cronies, you’ll be interested to know that Monsanto’s Bt-toxin is far from ‘safe’ as the chemical company claimed it would be when filing their papers with the FDA. New research from Canada show that BT toxins are showing up in pregnant women, and low and behold – they are killing human embryo cells. 2014 is the year of the horse, but we’re not through beating this one to death.

It’s called reproductive toxicology, and just like their suicide seeds, these Bt toxins are starting to kill our own unborn children. This is no exaggeration. Hopefully reading further will compel you to take action. It is time to put Monsanto to rest, bankrupt them, and let the world know their ‘secrets’ near and far.

Bt toxins are prominent in genetically altered crops such as corn, soy, wheat, and others, called Cry1Ab – and they can be lethal. Not only do these cry-toxins target the kidney cells of developing human fetuses, but when Cry1Ab and Cry1Ac are combined with RoundUp, they can delay apoptosis of human cancer cells. What’s worse, glyphosate, the main ingredient in RoundUp, also causes necrosis – i.e. the death of human tissue, and this happens even when the substance is found in much smaller amounts than what is currently being used on our agricultural crops. The stuff is still carcinogenic in the parts per trillion range.

In its rush to remain the ‘agricultural leader’ of the world, the US government erected defunct regulatory bodies that have no means to truly examine the ramifications of biotechnology on our food. The National Institute of Health (NIH) is a joke and the FDA gave Monsanto an indefinite hall pass to cause mayhem on the food supply.

More people need to file lawsuits against this company until they are without one red cent to continue poisoning the planet and killing our unborn babies. The Organic Seed Grower’s Association sued Monsanto in 2011, and Idaho wheat growers are suing Monsanto for cross-contamination, but what about parental groups? Mother’s Against Drunk Driving was formed when a mom lost her baby to a drunk driver. Perhaps the mothers who face reproductive failure due to Monsanto’s hand can sue them collectively.

The FDA’s internal memos about their concerns surrounding GMO seed crops recently surfaced in one lawsuit, though the public was never meant to see them. GMO foods are not the foods we have always eaten. This is an outright lie.

Any lawyers out there willing to go against the monopoly? I’d sign a class action suit today. Would you? In the meantime, utilize these 5 tips for avoiding GMOs while you write your local senator, state representatives, congressman, and president.

World Class Bodybuilding Forum

Monsanto’s Bt-Toxins Found to Kill Human Embryo Cells