Wednesday September 18, 2019
SNc Channels:



May-28-2011 21:30printcomments

Children of the Corn: GMOs Don't Qualify As Food

Antibodies from women with a rare condition known as immune infertility are used in the creation of GMO food.

GMO corn
If GMOs are highly associated with infertility and spontaneous abortions in animals, is a similar rate of infertitlity (20%) occurring in people and are there increases in spontaneous abortion?



GMO, glyphosate and population reduction



The questions raised by "[s]permicides hidden in GMO corn provided to starving Third World populations through the generosity of the Gates’ foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Kofi Annan’s AGRA" are many and profound.

1. Isn't GM technology directed beyond third world countries but at all countries in the world, and first and most heavily in the US?

2. Is there a relationship, since the introduction of GM-crops in the US, of how steeply birthrates in the US have fallen?

U.S. birthrates overall are at an all time low. Continuing a 12-year decline, the U.S. birth rate has dropped to the lowest level since national data have been available ...   Bt-corn was introduced in the US in 1996, three years before the dramatic decline began. "Some seven million acres were planted to Bt corn in 1997 with hybrids primarily from Mycogen, Novartis (formerly Ciba), and Northrup King.  Mycogen and Novartis both produce pharmaceutical contraceptives.  

5. How would researchers begin to answer questions under number 3 and number 4? when in the US and in many countries, despite consumer demand for labeling, the corporations involved have exerted tremendous pressure to keep GMOs unlabeled and are pushing through Codex to have all GMOs internationally be unlabeled?

Doesn't keeping GMOs unlabeled undermine in any country in which this is the case, scientists' capacity to trace them epidemiologically and to investigate their impact biologically?

Teen birthrates in the US are inexplicably plummeting.  Corporate media, offering no evidence, suggests this is due to the economy, but does not offer a comparison to previous serious economic downturns generating any previous teen birthrates decline.  Is there any data showing that teens forgo sex or become more careful about contraception out of concern about jobs?  Are unemployed teens, stressed and with time on their hands, more careful, or the opposite?

3.  If GMOs are highly associated with infertility and spontaneous abortions in animals, is a similar rate of infertitlity (20%) occurring in people and are there increases in spontaneous abortion?  Would GMOs not affect humans who eat not only the crops but the animals who are already so seriously affected by the crops?

4.  Where did the Epicyte/USDA corn go?  To what countries?  To the US as well?  To US consumers?

Isn't keeping GMOs unlabeled a virtual form of mandating them, since that lack of information leaves a population prey to them?  Does a population have a right to sue the government based on such forced exposure?  ?  Is there any connection between a current raw milk lawsuit in which the FDA claims the public has no right to choose its food or any right to its health, and the government/corporations creating an additional means of trapping the public into consuming GMOs?

6. With what other products do manufacturers claim a range of astounding superior qualities (huge yields, ability to compensate for global warming, ....) while marketing them rapidly and aggressively, and yet want them kept unlabeled?

The FDA approved GMOs and kept them unlabeled while Monsanto lawyer Michael Taylor was there, bypassing the requirement for safety tests on human beings. Keeping GMOs unlabeled has meant that the only arena for study has been crop yield data (studies are showing that the biotech claims are exaggerated) and animal studies, but non-labeling has ensured there is little information on human impact. The FDA did not follow the law in providing pre-marketing tests for human safety in consuming GMOs, and in keeping them unlabeled, has ensured that post market safety testing is nearly impossible.

Meanwhile, GE-corn, GE-soy, GE-cotton seed oil, GE-canola, are in most processed foods in the US.  Consumers have little idea they are there, little means to distinguish them from other items, and they were never tested for safety for human consumption. Yet studies in animals repeatedly show severe organ damage and infertility/sterility.

7.  If the USDA is funding the creation of a corn crop that sterilizes, is it not committing a crime in poisoning those who are on the receiving end?  And according to the UN, is it not also committing genocide, a crime against humanity, in damaging the reproductive ability of any group?

But the UN appears to operate on two levels, one that sets international standards for moral/legal behavior and one that is complicit in immoral/illegal acts.   The UN itself is involved in forced sterilization and is interested in accelerating fertility decline in the least developed countries.  The UN is also impacted by "the generosity of the Gates’ foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Kofi Annan’s AGRA."

The USDA was also involved in developing terminator seeds as were the Rockefellers who have a long history of eugenics and genocide and are the developers of genetic engineering.  In developing corn that sterilizes, has the USDA, in fact, also now developed "terminator food"?

Food is defined as "any nourishing substance that is eaten, drunk, or otherwise taken into the body to sustain life, provide energy, promote growth, etc. and by Webster as "material consisting essentially of protein, carbohydrate, and fat used in the body of an organism to sustain growth, repair, and vital processes and to furnish energy."

But based on the incontrovertible harm done to animal organs as animals eat GMOs, do GMO-crops even meet the definition of "food" for animals since they do not sustain life, repair or vital processes, but the opposite?

And if one assumes that "sustaining life" encompasses reproduction, a basic human function that the very basis of life it self, does the USDA's funding of GMOs to sterilize human beings indicate that GMOs for human beings do not meet the basic definition of "food"?

9. While the biotech companies have balked at labeling GMOs as a means of foisting them upon the world - untested and unknown - there appears a larger problem for them now. The corporations have gotten GMOs into the market and patented using the legalism of "substantial equivalence" to normal organisms, but at the more complex biologic level of food itself, don't GMOs transparently fail to meet the definition and or the biologic function of actual food, since they do not sustain life? And does that make labeling of GMOs truly complex at that point?

10. If GMOs are not "food" by essential biologic criteria and are being designed by the US government and private corporations to damage or end the continuation of life, then would the GMO label more appropriately be weapon?



Or more specifically, a bioweapon?
bioweapon [ˈbaɪəʊˌwɛpən]

(Military) a living organism or a toxic product manufactured from it, used to kill or incapacitate

And is intentionally keeping them unlabeled so people cannot know where they are or if they are being exposed, is bioterrorism?


With the more fitting definition of GMOs, it is easier to appreciate the desire of the US government and corporations to get Codex to remove all labeling from GMOs internationally as a means of maintaining secrecy about its presence and deniability of its impact.  But if GMOs' true status is as bioweapons, is it even appropriate to include them under Codex altogether, since they do not meet the essential definition of food?  Rather, do they instead need to be dealt with under military treaties dealing with biologic weapons?

To suggest a military basis for GMOs is entirely consistent with a report created in the 1970s by Henry Kissinger for the US government. Mr. Engdahl's article described both GMOs and vaccines as means to eugenics and genocide, and food and vaccines are precisely the means Mr. Kissinger suggested as a solution to world population which he said threatened the security of the US.

Mr. Kissinger is quoted as saying “The elderly are useless eaters." The remark may be a window into Mr. Kissinger's own child rearing background at a time when that expression was commonly used against children. Childrearing practices of the day were predicated on disgust at and hatred of children and obsessive fear of their taking food. Does this dovetail with Mr. Kissinger's urging the withholding of food to force nations to reduce their births, and covert sterilization through false "humanitarian vaccines" as another means to achieve it. Was Mr. Kissinger playing out some personal psychological pain by writing a report that suggesting eliminating the births of (repulsive, worthless) children and keeping food away from those (black and brown countries) who produce such children, and in the hands of (deserving) others?

Mr. Engdahl shows without question that the USDA, through genetic engineering, has turned "food" into a means of covert sterilization. Now, it doesn't need to be withheld and nations don't need to accept, under the threat of starvation, radical reductions in the birthrate to satisfy the demands of US policy makers. Instead, with GMOs, profits can be procured with GMOs at the same time sterilization of populations can occur.

GMOs, just like vaccines, can only cause "reduction of populations" if they are "approved" by governments. Is this why the US government and corporations are using the grandest of humanitarian pretexts (to feed the world's poor starving people, to protect the world from starvation from global warming, etc) to justify forcing them - unwanted, untested, and unlabeled - on millions?

In India, a bill was introduced to make it a crime to question the safety GMOs (including in vaccines) - with prison terms attached.

Didn't the Borgias also depend on their guests not knowing what they were eating?

Comments Leave a comment on this story.


Josh August 24, 2013 11:46 am (Pacific time)

Propaganda comments, really?.. (the 2 below me) C02 is also poisionous if you get enough, so natural or not is irreverent. All pesticides are bad for you however GMO crops can be sprayed and respayed with pesticides because it doesn't kill the plants. Marijuana has many anti cancerous properties as well as cancerous. Its anti cancerous qualities can outweigh the cancerous ones easily when administated correctly. Thats why the FDA is being forced to let marijuana be more thoroughly tested for cancer after years of haulting its process. Marijuana has already passed petri dish testing on cancer cells and is successful. GMOs have not been extensively tested. A member at the head of the FDA is a monsanto associate. I have read monsanto is even trying to pass or passed legislation to shield them from lawsuits but am unsure if this is true. "Seeds of death" is a great documentary on GMO's possible devastating consequences. Look up "epicyte" or the "contraceptive corn" and stop living in Ignorance.

Anonymous June 13, 2013 5:47 am (Pacific time)

Propaganda? Really? So you think because something it natural it is safe? I hate to break it to you but nature is not benign! Some of the most toxic chemicals are natural, take arsenic and cyanide for example. Many synthetic chemicals were made based off natural chemicals, because it is easier to make in the lab versus purify them from the natural source. Organic pesticides are permitted in organic farming and have similar toxicity profiles as some of the synthetic pesticides used in conventional farming. Are you saying that because Marijuana is natural it is safe? the smoke from marijuana contains many of the same carcinogens as smoking tobacco (another "natural" substance and very well known carcinogen). Be my guest and take your chances with "natural" marijuana...I will take my chances on GMOs, which have been studied extensively, and approved as safe by regualtory agencies around the world.

Jen June 4, 2013 6:37 am (Pacific time)

This is officially the most rediculous thing I have ever read on GMOs. Come on people don't base you opinions from one rediculous article (or from several non-science based sources with no credibility). You should be way more concerned with you alcohol intake or weed smoking (known toxins) then from GMOs.

Oh thanks so much for the advice, we'll all be sure to remember that... Natural marijuana is bad - GMO's are OK, what propaganda that is.

Sean Irish April 13, 2013 3:27 pm (Pacific time)

GMO feed is ALREADY sterilizing animals. In one study, mice fed a GMO SOY diet had major fertility problems - infant death jumped from 10% to 50% - but by the 5th generation of GMO soy-fed mice, THEY WERE ENTIRELY UNABLE TO REPRODUCE.

Dyana April 12, 2013 3:08 pm (Pacific time)

I advise you to quit eating processed foods. Frankly it's not that hard to figure out where the GMO's are. 70 percent of food at the market is GM O's in it, as much as we all hate it you're better off making everything yourself and buying organic. If you're so concerned about your health why are you people buying process food in the first place that's where the GM O's are.. also produce that start with the number 8 on the sticker. Frankly anything processed that isn't 100 percent USDA Organic has GM O's.

ChiefHuntingBear April 12, 2013 2:52 pm (Pacific time)

If genetically-modified corn is being used to sterilize humans it is outrageous. Do Americans who want children have to stop eating corn because in this country there's no such thing as a non-GMO variety?

Anonymous November 30, 2012 1:02 pm (Pacific time)

Sandra, It appears that the persons who should do the trying for crimes against humanity are part of the same cabal as those doing the crime.

mary October 9, 2012 2:28 pm (Pacific time)

Thannk you who ever you are. VERY VERY well written. I came to the conclusion GMO was a bio-weapon 12 years ago when I was a speech writer and researcher for an anti GMO group in New Zealand. I can prove it.We got a moratoreum on genetic engineering in New Zealand then. Who are you by the way…. C. Stone?? I am working on a screen play on GMO and need collaborators (who “get it”). Please write me if you are interested in the project. Could promise some serious money. Write My name is Mary

SANDRA October 6, 2012 5:19 am (Pacific time)

THESE FOLKS who have done this need to be tried for crimes against humanity. This is such an unconscionable act. If they wanted to control the population, all they had to do was just present the problem to each nation, and then have them present it to the populasces. People are smart regardless of where they come from. Give them credit and give them a choice. You would be surprise at what the human race can do when presented with the problem. But you do not do it as has been and is being done, Shame on the powers that be. 86m4b

Jessica Carr July 9, 2012 4:40 pm (Pacific time)

I am so glad this is hitting news sources finally!! I was deathly ill with crohns disease for 5 years, I am now gmo free and was able to medication and rid of all symptoms!! It needs to be known what effects gmos have on the body! Please join Oregon's right to know campaign on Facebook!!

Riss June 6, 2012 5:12 pm (Pacific time)

Only buy organic!! and grow your own!

Toni April 26, 2012 10:31 pm (Pacific time)

Can't believe I just found out about this. Unfreaking believable! Sharing!

[Return to Top]


