Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for November 22nd, 2016

Tumors began growing in these rat after three months of being fed GMO foods.

One thing I’ve noticed over the years; both the conservative and liberal corporate press like to deceive us. The Wall Street Journal and the New York Times are both good at this. Neither will mention certain things that might offend members of the leisure class or the management of corporate advertisers. GMO’s are a perfect example.

rapeseed-600

The blue line represents GMO crop yields and the yellow line represents traditionally planted crop yields.

There are plenty of peer reviewed studies in academic journals that demonstrate the health hazards of genetically modified foods (GMOs), and neither newspaper dares to mention any of them. But these media outlets will mention studies done by the GMO corporations purporting to show GMOs are safe for human consumption. That’s to keep us ignorant, and to keep those advertising dollars coming in.

The Times recently ran a story about how the yields of GMO crops are about the same as traditionally planted crops. There’s virtually no “discernible difference in yields,” according to the story, unless you go to the Times online. Then you discover that GMO crop yields are largely inferior (and by wide margins in most cases) to traditionally planted crops, but the editors didn’t want us to know what was right before our eyes.

maize-600

Maize crop yields. Blue line = GMO yields; yellow line = non-GMO crop yields.

You can see in the graph above that traditionally planted rapeseed yield is far superior to GMO yields. Vegetable oils are produced via rapeseed. The yield for corn is the same between GMO and traditionally planted crops. You can also see from the graph furthest below that the yield for non-GMO planted sugar beets is far greater than GMO sugar beet yields.

sugar_beets-600

Sugar beet production. Traditionally planted sugar beets have superior crop yields compared to GMO sugar beets.

In other words, the corporate media and the GMO industry have been lying to us for decades, and they still are. The graphs in this story are taken straight from the New York Times, but you had to go online to get them. Given this, it is obvious there is no rational reason for GMOs to be in the human food chain since they are largely inefficient or equal in yields compared to traditionally planted crops.

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: