Genesis Communications Network GCN News Health News «

Archive for the ‘Health News’ Category

GM salmon rejected by Whole Foods, Trader Joe’s, Aldi and other food retailers

Thursday, March 21st, 2013

Mike Adams
Natural News
March 21, 2013

In yet another blow to GMOs, several major U.S. food retailers have signed on to the “Campaign for GE-Free Seafood” found at http://www.foe.org/gefreeseafood

These retailers include Whole Foods, Trader Joe’s, Aldi and many more. It’s the latest private sector blow to the deceptive biotech industry. Consumers overwhelming reject GMOs even if the FDA conspires with biotechnology companies to try to shove genetically engineered food down their throats. Activist organizations like Natural News, the Organic Consumers Association and the Institute for Responsible Technology have helped organize constant grassroots pressure on food retailers to either label GMOs or reject them outright.

“A coalition of consumer, health, food safety and fishing groups today launched the Campaign for Genetically Engineered (GE)-Free Seafood by announcing that several major grocery retailers representing more than 2,000 stores across the United States have already committed not to sell genetically engineered seafood if it is allowed onto the market,” reads the press release announcement. It continues:

The FDA has stated it will likely not label genetically engineered salmon, providing consumers no way of knowing if the fish they are feeding their families is genetically engineered. At least 35 other species of genetically engineered fish are currently under development, and the FDA’s decision on this genetically engineered salmon application will set a precedent for other genetically engineered fish and animals (including cows, chickens and pigs) to enter the global food market.

Mainstream media tries to downplay the power of grassroots activism against GE foods

What’s interesting about this announcement is that the mainstream media is largely refusing to link to the FOE.org website for fear of readers learning more about the “Friends of the Earth” organization and its GE-Free Seafood petition.

The mainstream media, I can tell you firsthand, has engaged in a longstanding conspiracy to attack GMO labeling, deny the presence of GMOs in food and spread quack science propaganda that favors the biotech industry. But they are losing this battle over GMOs and losing their audiences at the same time. The New York Times, in particular, is an absolute disgrace when it comes to reporting to truth about GMOs, and it’s no surprise the NYT seems constantly on the verge of bankruptcy while being known as the “toilet paper of record.”

Note, too, that the FDA seems determined to hide GMO ingredients in foods as a strategy to make sure consumers have no clue what they’re buying and eating. This campaign of intentional consumer ignorance and disinformation echoes the key underlying philosophy of the FDA and the biotech industry: LIE TO EVERYONE. Hide GMOs. Confuse, deny, obfuscate and disorient. Pollute the ecosystem, poison the fields, falsify the science and rake in the profits. That’s the mantra of the biotech industry.

Thankfully, they’re not getting away with it. This is the second significant announcement by Whole Foods on the issue of GMOs. Just two weeks ago, the retailer announced mandatory GMO labeling across all its stores by 2018.

Natural News will publicly shame retailers still selling unlabeled GMOs by 2018

Whole Foods has no doubt realized that coming down on the wrong side of history with respect to GM food is nothing short of corporate suicide. Trader Joe’s had better wise up as well, because here at Natural News, we pledge that by 2018 or possibly sooner, we will publicly expose the GMOs sold by Whole Foods, Trader Joe’s and other retailers unless they are actively and authentically moving toward labeling and / or eliminating all GMOs from their stores. We support Whole Foods’ effort to label all GMOs by 2018, but if this turns out to be some sort of PR stunt that isn’t followed through in terms of real action, the grassroots activist community will hold them accountable.

There will be transparency on this issue whether the retailers like it or not. Any retailer still selling GMOs by 2018 will be publicly shamed, ridiculed and boycotted by the informed masses of foodies and health-conscious consumers. Sure, all those who pledge GMO labeling say they have chosen to “do the right thing” because they’re all such angels, right? But those of us in the trenches of the info war on the issue of GMOs know the raw, brutal truth of the matter: unless large retailers are pressured into honoring their commitments on GMOs, they may conveniently forget them. My experience with these matters, which is considerable, says that only through the application of grassroots pressure and the constant threat of public humiliation will these retailers make good on their promises to reject or label GMOs.

That’s the ugly but authentic truth of how these things really work behind the scenes. So keep the pressure on, folks, and these retailers will sooner or later be forced to reject GMOs entirely. A victory against Monsanto (i.e. a victory for the future of life on our planet) is within reach. Keep applying pressure and be prepared to continue your activism for as many years as it takes to put Monsanto permanently out of business.

Tags: gmo
Posted in Health News

Brain Scans Show Who You’re Thinking About

Thursday, March 14th, 2013

By Charles Choi
http://www.businessinsider.com/

Scientists scanning the human brain can now tell whom a person is thinking of, the first time researchers have been able to identify what people are imagining from imaging technologies.

Work to visualize thought is starting to pile up successes. Recently, scientists have used brain scans to decode imagery directly from the brain, such as what number people have just seen and what memory a person is recalling.

They can now even reconstruct videos of what a person has watched based on their brain activity alone. Cornell University cognitive neuroscientist Nathan Spreng and his colleagues wanted to carry this research one step further by seeing if they could deduce the mental pictures of people that subjects conjure up in their heads.

“We are trying to understand the physical mechanisms that allow us to have an inner world, and a part of that is how we represent other people in our mind,” Spreng says.

Imagining others

His team first gave 19 volunteers descriptions of four imaginary people they were told were real. Each of these characters had different personalities. Half the personalities were agreeable, described as liking to cooperate with others; the other half were less agreeable, depicted as cold and aloof or having similar traits. In addition, half these characters were described as outgoing and sociable extroverts, while the others were less so, depicted as sometimes shy and inhibited. The scientists matched the genders of these characters to each volunteer and gave them popular names like Mike, Chris, Dave or Nick, or Ashley, Sarah, Nicole or Jenny.

The researchers then scanned volunteers’ brains using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which measures brain activity by detecting changes in blood flow. During the scans, the investigators asked participants to predict how each of the four fictitious people might behave in a variety of scenarios — for instance, if they were at a bar and someone else spilled a drink, or if they saw a homeless veteran asking for change.

“Humans are social creatures, and the social world is a complex place,” Spreng says. “A key aspect to navigating the social world is how we represent others.”

The scientists discovered that each of the four personalities were linked to unique patterns of brain activity in a part of the organ known as the medial prefrontal cortex. In other words, researchers could tell whom their volunteers were thinking about.

“This is the first study to show that we can decode what people are imagining,” Spreng says.

Unlocking brain’s personality models

The medial prefrontal cortex helps people deduce traits about others. These findings suggest this region is also where personality models are encoded, assembled and updated, helping people understand and predict the likely behavior of others and prepare for the future.

“The scope of this is incredible when you think of all the people you meet over the course of your life and are able to remember. Each one probably has its own unique representation in the brain,” Spreng says. “This representation can be modified as we share experiences and learn more about each other, and plays into how we imagine future events with others unfolding.”

The anterior medial prefrontal cortex is also linked to autism and other disorders in which people have problems with social interactions. These findings suggest people with such disorders may suffer from an inability to build accurate personality models of others. Further research could not only help diagnose these diseases, but also help treat such disorders, researchers say.

Like GCN Live on Facebook and follow on Twitter for more great news, opinions, and announcements from GCN Live’s hosts and staff.

Tags: Brain scans, people, thinking
Posted in Health News

Planned Parenthood Suing to Perform Webcam Abortions

Wednesday, March 13th, 2013

Melissa Melton
GCN Live.com
March 13, 2013

After Wisconsin amended a law last year to ban the practice of “webcam abortions,” Planned Parenthood sued the state in federal court and lost. Now the organization has refiled that suit in another bid to overturn the law.

Wisconsin has joined Arizona, Nebraska, Kansas and South Dakota in banning the practice. Five other states are in the process of passing similar laws requiring a doctor to be physically present to examine a woman before she can terminate her pregnancy.

So what exactly takes place during a webcam abortion?

During this process, which Planned Parenthood refers to as “telemedicine” or “telehealth”, a woman merely chats with a doctor over the Internet. If the physician is satisfied by this conversation and a glance at her medical records, he presses a button at his location, and a drawer pops open in the patient’s room, giving her access to abortion-inducing drugs including RU-486.

Below is my full report:

Not only does this process further dehumanize an already dehumanizing act, but the distance between doctor and patient can sometimes be hundreds of miles, potentially leaving these women without direct access to the abortionist should she have complications.

Although pill-induced abortions have been touted as a natural alternative and “like a miscarriage,” they have been shown to be incredibly painful and dangerous. In fact, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a report in 2011 regarding the thousands of adverse reactions, blood transfusions and even deaths that have been linked to RU-486.

Beyond that, more and more in our postmodern society we see humans being removed from the act of killing. Just like our nation’s unconstitutional drone wars that remotely slay thousands of innocent women and children halfway around the world at the push of a button, webcam abortions require even less human contact to kill an unborn child.

Webcam abortions are a big revenue generator for Planned Parenthood, as they require little upgrade in equipment and even less staff to perform them at more locations. The organization averaged one abortion every 94 seconds last year, ending the lives of 333,964 babies. Having received $542.4 million dollars in federal funding, Planned Parenthood’s assets now sit at over a billion dollars.

That figure will surely rise unless more states outlaw the dangerous, dehumanizing practice of webcam abortions.

For more on Planned Parenthood’s eugenics history and genocide agenda, check out the documentary Maafa 21: Black Genocide in 21st Century America, on sale in our store.

Tags: eugenics
Posted in Health News

Is a Secret Plan by Big Food Behind Whole Foods Decision to Label GMO?

Wednesday, March 13th, 2013

Being first to move to mandatory GMO labeling would preserve Whole Foods’ ‘organic’ image, as industry seeks federal GMO labeling laws.

Aaron Dykes
GCN Live.com
March 12, 2013

Whole Foods relies on its natural image, as seen in their slogan “Nothing Artificial Ever.”

There’s more to Whole Foods’ decision to label all their GMO products by 2018 than appears at first glance.

Their five year plan to label genetically-modified ingredients is a victory — albeit a cautious victory — that is only one step in taking dangerous and untested genetically-modified foods off American plates and stopping biotech’s takeover of the world’s food supply.

While grassroots pressure and consumer activism — including investigative reports by Infowars and Organic Spies — has indeed played an important role in pressuring the grocer to change its course, further research shows that the company is reacting to pressure from above as well as from below.

Biotech and Big Food interests teamed up to spend more than $45 million to defeat California’s Prop 37, which would have mandated the labeling of GMO ingredients.

Watch my report on this important issue:

But now, many of the biggest conglomerates are trying to avoid the cost of funding future fights against GMO labeling, which could spread to 20 states or the local level and beyond.

BIG FOOD LOBBIES FOR LABELING?

What seemed impossible was happening in Washington in early January 2013: Wal-Mart, General Mills, Pepsi-Frito Lay, Mars, Coca-Cola and other major food conglomerates were meeting in secret with the FDA to lobby FOR a mandatory federal GMO labeling law.

Ronnie Cummins, of Organic Consumers Association, who exposed the meetings asked, “Is Big Food just cozying up to the FDA so they can derail the growing organic and anti-GMO movement, and finagle a federal labeling law so toothless it won’t be worth the ink it takes to sign it?“

Then, with Washington States’ labeling initiative in mind, some 20 of the biggest food companies, including Wal-Mart, PepsiCo and ConAgra, met with labeling advocates at the Meridian Institute in January to discuss strategies on quelling consumer uprisings over GMO. The NY Times reported:

“The big food companies found themselves in an uncomfortable position after Prop. 37, and they’re talking among themselves about alternatives to merely replaying that fight over and over again,” said Charles Benbrook, a research professor at Washington State University who attended the meeting.

“They spent a lot of money, got a lot of bad press that propelled the issue into the national debate and alienated some of their customer base, as well as raising issues with some trading partners,” said Mr. Benbrook, who does work on sustainable agriculture.

So the outstanding question is obvious. Why would the same industry that paid big bucks to defeat Prop 37 and keep their heavily GMO-sourced junk foods unlabeled turn around and pressure the FDA for federal labeling laws?

According to Michele Simon (AppetiteforProfit.com), the use of federal regulators — already in the pockets of Big Agra and biotech — could be useful in staving off grassroots efforts aimed at state battles that may yield stricter laws, including liability and outright bans of GMO. Simon writes:

“But missing from both of these accounts is the ominous potential downside of federal GMO labeling: a sneaky legal concept known as preemption. [...] Preemption simply means that a higher law trumps a lower law: so federal trumps state, and state trumps local. But in practice, it’s industry’s way of ensuring uniformity and stopping grassroots efforts. How I do know this? From years of experience of seeing it happen in various public health issues.”

If the biggest industry players are ready to cave on GMO labeling, Whole Foods then knows that it MUST move towards mandatory labeling. Why? As much as we’d like to believe in altruism or the preeminence of consumer pressure, it is most likely because Whole Foods knows its entire business image is based around healthy and ‘organic’ foods.

Thus, in making themselves the first big grocer to require the labeling of all genetically-modified ingredients, Whole Foods preserves its reputation among shoppers who are making an effort to avoid GMOs, and clearly they realize that customer trust and the perception of integrity is key to remaining profitable in a changing market.

While any labeling effort is positive in the struggle for the right to know what we’re eating, activists and consumers alike should be wary of half-measures implemented by Washington appointees who represent anything but our best interests.

Only vigilance will keep enough pressure on industries to one day roll back insane, untested laboratory foods and make it possible for the average citizen to eat real food.

Tags: gmo, U.S. economy
Posted in Health News

Nanny Mike’s Soda Ban Struck Down by Judge

Tuesday, March 12th, 2013

Kurt Nimmo
GCN Live.com
March 12, 2013

The National Enquirer of Gotham City, Mortimer Zuckerman’s New York Daily News, has come down squarely on the side of Mayor Michael Bloomberg in his effort to tell people what they can and cannot drink.

“In putting Mayor Bloomberg’s soda ban on ice, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling did a huge disservice to the health and welfare of hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers,” the newspaper opines today. “Tingling concluded that the prohibition against selling sugared beverages in containers larger than 16 ounces was both arbitrary and beyond the authority of the Board of Health, which approved the regulations” scheduled to go into effect today.

The judge deemed Bloomberg’s on high dictate outlawing large sugary drinks “arbitrary and capricious.”

Nanny Mike acted like a tyrant when he imposed the ban, arrogantly disregarding the will of his subjects. More than 60 percent of New Yorkers oppose the drink ban, according to the New York Times.

“The best science tells us that sugary drinks are a leading cause of obesity,” Bloomberg said in response to the ruling. “Some people say just talk about the problem, raise awareness… but it’s not enough to talk and it’s not enough to hope. We have a responsibility as human beings to do something.”

Bloomberg’s hand-picked Board of Health disregarded the City Council, the sole legislative body with the legal ability to enact the rule, when it empowered cops to arrest proprietors for selling what Nanny Mike has described as “empty calories.” Judge Tingling said Bloomberg fashioned an “administrative Leviathan” at the Board of Health and it would enforce rules on citizens and businesses “limited only by its own imagination.”

In response to the judge’s ruling, a squad of lawyers representing the Bloomberg administration said its Soviet of Health can tell New Yorkers what they are permitted to drink and has the imperious “legal authority and responsibility” to address obesity in the city.

In response to the ruling, Bloomberg exploited the children, a favorite tactic of autocratic overlords, including gun-grabbers. “I’ve got to defend my children, and yours, and do what’s right to save lives,” Bloomberg rationalized. “Obesity kills. There’s no question it kills.”