グリホサートのテスト結果があり、テストされたほとんどのママとサポーターがGMOとグリホサートをよく知っており、数ヶ月または数年にわたってそれらを避けてきたことを考えると、結果は驚くべきものです。
時間とお金をsamplesしみなく尿と水のサンプルを送ってくれたすべてのママとサポーターに感謝します。母乳サンプルのテストに資金を提供してくれたサステナブルパルスと、サンプルを一晩送ってくれたママに感謝します。 。
概要：
http://sustainablepulse.com/2014/04/06/worlds-number-1-herbicide-discovered-u-s-mothers-breast-milk/
Stephanie Seneff, Senior Research Scientist, MIT
"It is certainly disheartening to know that glyphosate is present in breast milk, but lest you think this means you should not nurse your baby, please be aware that soy-based formula probably also contains glyphosate, possibly in even higher concentrations. The US government has conducted very few studies measuring the amount of glyphosate residue in food, but a report issued by the Department of Agriculture in 2011 showed that over 90% of 300 samples of soy contained glyphosate, and nearly 96% contained AMPA, a derivative of glyphosate. Today, 90% of the soy crop in the US is "Roundup Ready," which means you can spray Roundup on it and it won't die. Contrary to what was claimed, this growth in Roundup Ready crops has led to a tremendous increase in the amount of Roundup applied to our core crops over the past decade.
I had been intensely researching possible connections between autism and a variety of different toxic chemicals in the environment for many years before I thought to take a look at glyphosate as a possible contributor to autism. This delay was of course a consequence of the widely disseminated message that glyphosate is nearly nontoxic to humans. However, once I started looking, I was astonished to find that all of the many comorbidities associated with autism could be explained by glyphosate's known mode of action on biological systems. Anthony Samsel and I have teamed up to write two papers detailing our findings on the diverse ways in which glyphosate disrupts human physiology, and linking glyphosate to a number of diseases and conditions that are currently on the rise in the US - a partial list includes autism, obesity, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, and various gut disorders like Celiac disease and inflammatory bowel disease. We are still researching this topic, and nearly every day we are discovering new ways in which glyphosate can negatively impact health. The problem is that the effects are insidious -- glyphosate erodes your health slowly over time, so that it's hard for people to realize what's happening to them until it's too late."
完全なレポート：
これらをオンラインおよびローカルメディアで共有してください。
Parents need to know if their children are being poisoned with glyphosate: which is an antibiotic: antibiotics kill gut bacteria which is 70% of immune system and a chelator: strips the body of the vital nutrients needed to fight cancer, illness and grow.
また、内分泌障害者でもあり、ホルモンと先天性欠損症に影響を与えます。
Glyphosate is sprayed on GMOs during growing, on many staple food crops (wheat, sugar, rice, soy, corn etc) as a drying agent at harvest and on the soil of 160 of our non organic food crops.See our "Samsel" blogs for the EPA list
親、私たちの子供たちは、精神疾患、糖尿病、肥満、喘息、アレルギー、自閉症、自己免疫疾患などに関連している有毒化学物質の毎日の摂取によって攻撃されています！
1つの化学物質が非常に大きな害の原因になることはありそうにないかもしれませんが、グリホサートがどのように機能するかを学ぶと（基本的には免疫系を破壊することによって雑草エイズを与える）、それはすべて理にかなっています。
グリホサートが腸内細菌を破壊し、腸内細菌がトリプトファン、セラトニン（インスリンを調節する）、およびメラトニンが生成される場所であることがわかると、それはすべて理にかなっています。
グリホサートが血液脳関門を破壊し、ワクチンや環境から脳に毒素を送り込むことを知ったとき、それはすべて理にかなっています。
グリホサートが肝臓の解毒能力を損ない、重金属が体内に蓄積することを知ると、それはすべて理にかなっています。
意味をなさないのは、EPAとFDAがこれを許可しているということです。
サムセルと共同執筆したステファニー・セネフ博士からのコメント。グリホサートに関する2つの論文で、どちらも「データ」の下にあります。
Stephanie Seneff, Senior Research Scientist, MIT
"It is certainly disheartening to know that glyphosate is present in breast milk, but lest you think this means you should not nurse your baby, please be aware that soy-based formula probably also contains glyphosate, possibly in even higher concentrations. The US government has conducted very few studies measuring the amount of glyphosate residue in food, but a report issued by the Department of Agriculture in 2011 showed that over 90% of 300 samples of soy contained glyphosate, and nearly 96% contained AMPA, a derivative of glyphosate. Today, 90% of the soy crop in the US is "Roundup Ready," which means you can spray Roundup on it and it won't die. Contrary to what was claimed, this growth in Roundup Ready crops has led to a tremendous increase in the amount of Roundup applied to our core crops over the past decade.
I had been intensely researching possible connections between autism and a variety of different toxic chemicals in the environment for many years before I thought to take a look at glyphosate as a possible contributor to autism. This delay was of course a consequence of the widely disseminated message that glyphosate is nearly nontoxic to humans. However, once I started looking, I was astonished to find that all of the many comorbidities associated with autism could be explained by glyphosate's known mode of action on biological systems. Anthony Samsel and I have teamed up to write two papers detailing our findings on the diverse ways in which glyphosate disrupts human physiology, and linking glyphosate to a number of diseases and conditions that are currently on the rise in the US - a partial list includes autism, obesity, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, and various gut disorders like Celiac disease and inflammatory bowel disease. We are still researching this topic, and nearly every day we are discovering new ways in which glyphosate can negatively impact health. The problem is that the effects are insidious -- glyphosate erodes your health slowly over time, so that it's hard for people to realize what's happening to them until it's too late."
声を上げなければなりません。遺伝子組み換え食品や農薬を散布した食品の購入をやめなければなりません！
Please join us in 4th of July parades to let everyone know about GMOs and pesticides in your town in a single day! If not you who? If not now, when?
Plus it's FUN and so easy to join into a parade. Sign up at www.momsacrossamerica.com/events_all
Write to the EPA Roundup Review manager: [email protected]
Donate to MAA. www.momsacrossamerica.com/donate
遺伝子組み換え生物とグリホサートについて世界が知る必要があります。
すべての収益は、人々の健康と自由を強化することに向けられます！
今すぐ子供たちを守らなければなりません。
ありがとうございました。
禅ハニーカット
アメリカ中のママ
PS良いニュースは、体からグリホサートの検出可能なレベルを除去できることです！オーガニックのみ購入！または非GMO ANDオーガニック。ありがとうございました！
この投稿が好きですか？
7反応を表示しています
でサインイン
あなたが本当にこの分析を見たなら、それは最終的な死骸、完成した結果だけを見ました。それが見ていなかったのは、動物が生まれてからその寿命が終わるまでの旅でした。つまり、システムの実際のコストではなく、システムの「生存者」に関するものです。悲しいことに、他の多くの分野と同様に、デンマークで示された問題は今や当たり前になり、恐ろしい方程式に織り込まれています。モニカ・クリューガーの観察は動物の生涯に関するものなので、もちろん別の話です！あなたが学ぶ必要があるもの…
そして、マイケル・ポーランの観察が私たちに与える残りの部分を忘れないでください：
「私は肥育場の管理者に、なぜ彼らが液化肥を近隣の農場に噴霧しなかったのかを尋ねました。農民はそれを望まない、と彼は説明した。窒素とリンのレベルが非常に高いため、作物に噴霧すると殺されます。彼は、肥育場の廃棄物には重金属やホルモンの残留物も含まれているとは言いませんでした。残留化学物質は、科学者が異常な性的特徴を示す魚や両生類を発見した下流の水路に行き着きます。」
―マイケル・ポーラン、雑食動物のジレンマ：4つの食事の自然史
だからチャックを起こして、夢を見て…
Big problems with GM feed
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Changing_from_GMO_to_non-GMO_soy.php?comment=1
Re the Seralini study in a statement, the peer review journal, FCT’s publishers Elsevier clearly said:
“Unequivocally, the Editor-in-Chief found no evidence of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of the data”
• But the editor said “no definitive conclusions can be reached with this small sample size” (number of rats in the study) and the strain of rat used “regarding the role of either NK603 or glyphosate in regards to overall mortality or tumor incidence”
• The results presented were correct but inconclusive
• The retraction is based only on this inconclusiveness
The study was established as a chronic toxicity study (10 rats needed) not a carcinogenicity study (40 rats needed) and the sample sizes are therefore in accordance with these established protocols.
In which case the study’s finding, that male rats in the treated groups suffered severe liver and kidney dysfunction remain valid as the editor said this study was correct.
Liver congestions and necrosis were 2.5 to 5.5 times higher than in the control group. There were also 1.3 – 2.3 times more instances of “marked and severe” kidney disease.
Even if we set aside the mortality and tumor findings the evidence of chronic toxicity demands that the study is taken seriously and acted upon by the regulatory authorities. Again there is a clear need to replicate this study because:
• If Séralini’s study is flawed and insufficient; so are those of Monsanto for the EU
• If the rats used by Séralini are the wrong strain; so are those of Monsanto for the EU
• If the sample sizes used by Séralini are too small; so are those of Monsanto for the EU
Given that FCT retracted Séralini’s study they should surely revisit the EU ones they published which supported Monsanto’s application.
The only difference was Seralini kept his rats for their lifetime as opposed to Monsanto’s much shorter 90 days!
Andy, here is why we need to adopt the precautionary principle. So I am sure you will all agree that both MMA’s findings as well as Seralini’s should now undergo trials that everyone agrees is the way to remove all doubt. Agreed?
Re the Seralini study in a statement, the peer review journal, FCT’s publishers Elsevier clearly said:
“Unequivocally, the Editor-in-Chief found no evidence of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of the data”
• But the editor said “no definitive conclusions can be reached with this small sample size” (number of rats in the study) and the strain of rat used “regarding the role of either NK603 or glyphosate in regards to overall mortality or tumor incidence”
• The results presented were correct but inconclusive
• The retraction is based only on this inconclusiveness
The study was established as a chronic toxicity study (10 rats needed) not a carcinogenicity study (40 rats needed) and the sample sizes are therefore in accordance with these established protocols.
In which case the study’s finding, that male rats in the treated groups suffered severe liver and kidney dysfunction remain valid as the editor said this study was correct.
Liver congestions and necrosis were 2.5 to 5.5 times higher than in the control group. There were also 1.3 – 2.3 times more instances of “marked and severe” kidney disease.
Even if we set aside the mortality and tumor findings the evidence of chronic toxicity demands that the study is taken seriously and acted upon by the regulatory authorities. Again there is a clear need to replicate this study because:
• If Séralini’s study is flawed and insufficient; so are those of Monsanto for the EU
• If the rats used by Séralini are the wrong strain; so are those of Monsanto for the EU
• If the sample sizes used by Séralini are too small; so are those of Monsanto for the EU
Given that FCT retracted Séralini’s study they should surely revisit the EU ones they published which supported Monsanto’s application.
The only difference was Seralini kept his rats for their lifetime as opposed to Monsanto’s much shorter 90 days!
Here is why we need to adopt the precautionary principle. So I am sure you will all agree that both MMA’s findings as well as Seralini’s should now undergo trials that everyone agrees is the way to remove all doubt. Agreed?
“Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”
– Philip Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications1
“Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety.”
– US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)2
“It is not foreseen that EFSA carry out such [safety] studies as the onus is on the [GM industry] applicant to demonstrate the safety of the GM product in question.”
– European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)3
“One thing that surprised us is that US regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by the biotech crop developer, and those data are not published in journals or subjected to peer review… The picture that emerges from our study of US regulation of GM foods is a rubber-stamp ‘approval process’ designed to increase public confidence in, but not ensure the safety of, genetically engineered foods.”
– David Schubert, professor and head, Cellular Neurobiology Laboratory, Salk Institute, commenting on a comprehensive peer-reviewed study of US government’s regulation of GMOs that he co-authored.
Who is really testing them?
“Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”
– Philip Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications1 (the FDA is the US government’s Food and Drug Administration, responsible for food safety)
“Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety.”
– US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)2
“It is not foreseen that EFSA carry out such [safety] studies as the onus is on the [GM industry] applicant to demonstrate the safety of the GM product in question.”
– European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)3
“One thing that surprised us is that US regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by the biotech crop developer, and those data are not published in journals or subjected to peer review… The picture that emerges from our study of US regulation of GM foods is a rubber-stamp ‘approval process’ designed to increase public confidence in, but not ensure the safety of, genetically engineered foods.”
– David Schubert, professor and head, Cellular Neurobiology Laboratory, Salk Institute, commenting on a comprehensive peer-reviewed study of US government’s regulation of GMOs that he co-authored5,6