Underground Film Organisation -- nothing to do with flying saucers!
An alternative view of history, politics, and current events. Citing independent and citizen journalism, investigative reporting, alternative news, and social media sources.
Ealing Council Spies on Residents' Bins
U.S. Government Charity Website Confiscates Personal Data
Government, Police Spying on Public: More Big Brother
Global Domination is on the doorstep!
Mandatory drug testing to enter pubs
Swine Flu: An excuse to retain information of you
Shadow Government and population control
The Obama deception
Who's who in the New World Order
Animal Cruelty and the horrors of meat production
GM Food: Who really stands to benefit?
Hydrogenated vegetable oil: Trans Fats
Aspartame: Sweet poison
How tasty foods change the brain: A radio report on NPR Radio in America
Donate via PayPal:
Genetically Modified Food: Who Really Stands to Benefit?
In 1973, a group of scientists tinkering with their test-tubes stepped upon a way to cut up the code for life, DNA, into little pieces. The scientists soon realized they had discovered a way to change the genetic makeup of living things. The era of Genetic Engineering had begun.
The early years in Genetic Engineering were very exciting – a new technology had been born promising great things such as the possibility to eliminate world hunger. The scientists were heralded as lifesavers, on a humanitarian mission to save the Third World from starvation.
But is a genetic fix to nature really necessary to solve the problem of world hunger? Christian Aid say the world already produces twice as much food to feed all the six billion of us on this planet right now. So what is the problem? The problem is that a mechanism unfortunately does not yet exist that could share out all that surplus food and finally solve the problem of Third World hunger once and for all.
How committed are the genetic engineers to eliminating world hunger then? A USDA report showed that only 2% of genetic engineering is actually done to improve nutrition of food, the other 98% was done to make food easier to produce for the manufacturer. From here on, the argument that the scientists' primary claim to feed the starving gets extremely shaky. Really it is looking more like a smokescreen to hide the real motive – corporate profit.
The dream that genetic engineering and genetically modified food could actually solve world hunger is essential for the genetic engineers to create public acceptance of genetic engineering. The recent creation of so called "Golden Rice" is serving this purpose right now. Genetically engineered golden rice has increased levels of vitamin A "designed to eliminate vitamin A deficiency in the Third World". But this claim is extremely tenuous; four kilograms of rice per day would have to be eaten to get enough vitamin A to have any effect. Nonetheless the gene giants say that every day people in developing countries do not eat this rice, they will go blind. These kind of scary claims are designed to stun people into accepting the need for genetic engineering whether they believe it or not.
At the government funded Rowett Institute in Aberdeen, Dr Putzai was congratulated by his Boss for successfully demonstrating that GM technology can cause immense damage to mammalian systems; however, he was swiftly thrown out of his job after the World in Action in August 1998 televised the results to the nation. Had he uncovered something about gene technology that the gene giants did not want to be known? The trans-national gene giants such as Monsanto can wield immense power and exert influence if needed over individual governments. Prof Mae Wan Ho has for a long time campaigned against GM technology. She says that anecdotal evidence indicates GM technology is seriously flawed. America is now saying that Europe is breaking international law (that it created through the WTO) by not fully accepting GM food.
An argument against GM food by Lord Peter Melchett.
