Frankenfood Continued

From Hormones, to Cloning, now Fish?

Hey folks,

Whatever happened to going out on the Boat, catching some Fish right from the River, Ocean, whatever, and going home to have some Fish and Chips? Whatever happened to going out and picking the Fruit off the trees, Vegetables from the Ground, and the Eggs from the Coups?

We haven't done this in a while, but it's time. I was actually surprised to learn, {Laughing} that I was talking about Frankenfood all the way back in 2006. So lets do it.

Let's jump into the Oon. The OPNTalk Time Machine and go all the way back to Friday, December 29, 2006 Cloned Food. Do You Want To Know? " WHOOO Open the doors. What do you see?

Cloned animals for dairy and meat? The FDA approved this with no real scientific proof that this is safe? Then you have some that do NOT want you to even know you are eating it.

Scary. Run! Get in quick. Set the dials, pull the lever, away we go to Sunday, January 13, 2008 H.S. For Sunday 011308 Cloned Food To Be Approved WHOOO OK. What do we have now?

So you are telling me that there is no difference? What about the sped up growth? What effect will this process have on those consuming the meat? Drinking the milk? Already you can see the difference in our kids maturing faster than ever, some blame the milk and hormones along with other preservatives in food NOW. What happens when they start eating cloned meat?

So they really did it. Forget it. Get in. Let's go home. So here we are. At least we can still eat Fish. What? No. Really? According to AOL News - Hungry for Genetically Engineered Fish?

(Aug. 4) -- A major U.S. fish research company has tampered with the DNA of Atlantic salmon by adding a quick-growth gene that allows the fish to eat year-around and grow more quickly. And the Food and Drug Administration is about to allow these genetically engineered salmon to head to market, the company says.

But food safety activists insist that the FDA doesn't have adequate tests and regulations to ensure the safety of modified seafood, and others question whether consumers are even ready for it.

"Far from being a benefit to consumers or the environment, this merely allows factory fish farms to double production rates," said George Kimbrell, senior attorney for the Center for Food Safety.

It's the same this folks. We could substitute Cloned, Beef, Chicken, Whatever. Now Fish. Just like all the others, they do NOT have anything to look at. No one is eating the Fish yet. But they are going to allow it?

Nevertheless, AquaBounty Technologies in Waltham, Mass., near Boston, is already producing tiny red Atlantic salmon eggs that have been injected with a gene from Pacific Chinook salmon and another gene from the ocean pout. This genetic modification gives the engineered fish the ability to grow to market size in half the time of salmon that haven't been messed with.

The fish would be the first transgenic animal application ever approved by the the FDA, according to the company, which has been developing the product and waiting for approval for 20 years.

AquaBounty says it has launched a "blue revolution," which brings together biological sciences and molecular technology "to enable an aquaculture industry capable of large-scale, efficient and environmentally sustainable production of high quality seafood. Genetically altered trout and tilapia are the next to be offered up to the nation's fishmongers.

However, the largest foreign breeders -- like Canada, which is the No. 1 supplier of Atlantic salmon to the U.S. -- say they see no reason to meddle with a good thing.

Current fish breeding practices are adequate to enable the production of a high-quality product, says the Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance.

The alliance "does not support the commercial production of transgenic fish for food production until it has been declared safe by all the relevant regulatory bodies and until the market demands it," Ruth Salmon, the group's executive director, told AOL News.

Not So Fast

The science, as inventive as it is, may be ready to go, but there is a significant infestation of obstacles, beyond the FDA's willingness to sign off on the gene modification, that must be overcome before these fast-growing fish start popping up on backyard grills.

During a happy hour conversation with AOL News at the annual International Food Technologies conference in Chicago last month, two food microbiologists, two research chefs and a market analyst talked about genetically modified animals.

Two thought the time had come to use this technology to produce cheaper, healthier and faster-to-market meat, poultry and fish. The other three predicted that they'd never see it in their lifetimes.

They knew of efforts by AquaBounty with the salmon, of two other labs that had jiggled DNA to get quick-growing jumbo shrimp and tilapia, and a third, somewhere on the New Hampshire or Maine coast, that had done something genetically to significantly shorten the seven years it takes lobsters to grow to a legal size.

Great advancements in fish science, they agree, and at least half of the group believed that the FDA was ready to approve engineered seafood. But absolutely no one thought the North American consumer and those in most of Europe were going to shell out money for genetically modified animals of any kind.

A food economics expert questioned by AOL News at the conference agreed.

"It would take a worldwide famine to get people with more than a grade school education to willingly eat any animal or fish concocted in a laboratory. They would have to be starving," said the woman who worked on the United Nation's hunger program.

{Sigh} Anytime these Kooks out there, be them Greedy Conglomerates, or just Liberal Loons, they always say that they are doing this for your own good. You will go with it, so YOU can feel good about doing good. "This will help feed the world. World hunger. This will help."

Can FDA Regulate This New Science?

U.S. federal agencies attempt to regulate biotechnology using outdated statutes, written before biotech products ever came to market, said Kimbrell, the attorney for the Center for Food Safety.

"For example, FDA plans to regulate genetically engineered animals as 'veterinary drugs,' not living creatures, and its animal drug safety review was conceived before genetic engineering became a reality," he said.

Kimbrell called the agency's tests unacceptable and increasingly dysfunctional. He said the analytical methods used do not address the issues of potential allergenicity and toxicity, and are "grossly insufficient to determine the long-term, unforeseen consequences of eating and producing the (engineered) salmon."

Not so, FDA spokesperson Siobhan DeLancey told AOLNews Wednesday.

The agency has the regulations and authority to appropriately regulate these genetically engineered fish, she said.

She didn't explain why it had to be done under the "existing New Animal Drug paradigm" but added, that FDA has issued guidance to the Industry on precisely how it would "rigorously and scientifically evaluate genetically engineered animals."

Kimbrell said his organization wants to halt the approval, commercialization or release of any new genetically engineered crops until they have been thoroughly tested and found safe for human health and the environment and said his group would consider litigation to stop it.

AquaBounty officials have said they will raise their fish in land-based facilities where ocean escapes are impossible.

This doesn't appease all.

"What about the masses of corporations that will no doubt race to produce GM fish in the crowded open ocean facilities they already utilize for fish production?" asks Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch.

Opposition to the approval of genetic engineering of fish is not new. Last year, of a coalition of 18 fisheries, consumer and food safety group shared their varied concerns on the use of the untried technology with the FDA.

Both Hauter and Kimbrell say those involved in food safety believe that if these genetically engineered fish get to market, they must be properly labeled so consumers will know what they're really buying.

But AquaBounty says FDA cannot legally obligate the fish producer to label the product as anything other than Atlantic salmon. Anything else is voluntary.

Folks, we have talked about this before. When I was a kid, little Girls looked like little Girls. Little Boys, ditto. But now? A few generations later? Now we have fully developed 10 year old Girls, and 6 foot tall Boys in High School. What changed? {Tapping hand on desk} What changed? That's right. The Food. Hormones, Chemicals, Preservatives, ETC. You can eat whatever you want. But I think I will avoid Dolly, and Charlie. I will NOT be a test subject, KNOWINGLY anyway, on the long term effects of all this garbage.
Peter

H.S. For Sunday 011308

Cloned Food To Be Approved

Hey folks,

According to the AFP / The Wall Street Journal on Friday Jan 4, 2007, in cased you missed it, the FDA is about to approve cloned food.

The US Food and Drug Administration is expected to declare milk and meat from cloned animals and their offspring safe to eat as early as next week, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

I’ve been waiting to see if it is announced that they have, but I have not seen it yet. This really bothers me. We do not know that it is safe. We do not have any long term evidence of it’s effect on the human body. Nothing. Back on December 26, 2006 I posted Cloned Food. Do You Want To Know? In that I talked about an Boston.com story that said this was already a done deal. According to Boston.com THEN.

"WASHINGTON --Federal scientists have concluded there is no difference between food from cloned animals and food from conventional livestock, setting the stage for the government to declare Thursday that cloned animals are safe for the human food supply.

The Food and Drug Administration planned to brief industry groups in advance of an announcement. The agency indicated it would approve cloned livestock in a scientific journal article published online earlier this month.

The agency "concludes that meat and milk from clones and their progeny is as safe to eat as corresponding products derived from animals produced using contemporary agricultural practices," FDA scientists Larisa Rudenko and John C. Matheson wrote in the Jan. 1 issue of Theriogenology."

I said this.

So you are telling me that there is no difference? What about the sped up growth? What effect will this process have on those consuming the meat? Drinking the milk? Already you can see the difference in our kids maturing faster than ever, some blame the milk and hormones along with other preservatives in food NOW. What happens when they start eating cloned meat?

It was an honest question then, even more so now. Back to the AFP

The federal agency decision would come after more than six years of deliberation on the issue, the newspaper said, without naming its sources.

FDA spokeswoman Kimberly Rawlings told AFP that the food agency "is still working to finalize our risk assessment activities" and that it could not say when the process would be complete.

I sure hope so.

The FDA ruled in 2006 that milk and meat from cloned cattle, swine and goats were no different from healthy, conventionally bred animals, but has asked producers not to sell products from cloned animals pending a safety ruling.

As I told you.

It previously described cloning as a more advanced form of breeding technology already used in the cattle industry, such as artificial insemination, embryo transfer and in vitro fertilization, the Journal said.

No it isn’t. NONE of those include the injection of Spend up Growth drugs, all the chemical and other manipulation that they MUST use to clone. It is NOT the same thing. We do NOT know, as Ms. Kimberly Rawlings just told you.

Even if the agency does approve such products, it could be three to five years before US consumers see milk and meat from offspring of cloned animals on store shelves, the newspaper said.

It said that because cloned cattle cost 15,000 to 20,000 dollars per copy, most cloned animals would be used for breeding.

A green light from the FDA would be a milestone for biotech companies that want to center their business on producing copies of prize dairy cows and other farm animals, it added.

Meat or dairy products from cloned animals or their offspring would however likely face deep-seated opposition from consumers groups, some of whom still routinely refer to foods such as genetically-modified corn as "Frankenfood."

"Most consumers do not find this appealing," the paper quoted Marguerite Copel, from Dean Foods Co., one of the top US milk producers, as saying, adding that the company would not sell milk from cloned animals.

Good, then I would be buying from companies like them. I agree, we already have "Frankenfood." and we already have sides effects. Do you REALLY want to eat cloned meat?

The paper said consumer wariness could also lead to a backlash from opponents in US Congress and markets such as the European Union over concerns that it is too early to say for sure if food from cloned animals is safe.

Yes but here is the problem. Some do not even WANT you to KNOW what you are eating. Remember this?

"Consumers are going to be having a product that has potential safety issues and has a whole load of ethical issues tied to it, without any labeling," said Joseph Mendelson, legal director of the Center for Food Safety.

They do not even want to tell you the food is cloned. Get this.

Further concerns center on the higher number of health problems that cloned animals tend to experience at birth, compared to conventionally-bred animals.

The US food industry was divided on the issue, the paper said, with some big food companies saying they are not interested in products from cloned animals or their offspring, while others are actively exploring the possibilities.

Some in the meat industry consider that consumers would come to prefer products from cloned animals, given leaner and larger cuts of meat, it said.

"These animals are not some kind of freaks of nature," James Hodges, president of The American Meat Institute Foundation told the newspaper.

No, they are freaks of man. THAT is the point.

The European Food Safety Authority, the European Union's equivalent of the FDA, would likely deliver its own initial assessment on food from cloned animals next week, but a final decision was not expected for months, it added.

Regulators in countries such as Australia, Canada, France, Japan and New Zealand, which already have livestock clones, although they rarely enter the food chain, would be closely watching the FDA decision, the paper said.

This is scary to me at least. I do not know about you, but I have no desire to become a live experiment on the effects of man-made meat. I do not want to eat, drink, or partake of anything of the MANATURE. {Man made Nature} I most DEFINITELY want to know if what I’m about to buy is cloned.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk - Cloned Food. Do You Want To Know?
Boston.com - FDA set to OK food from cloned animals
AFP - US regulators set to approve cloned meat, milk: report

Want To Eat Healthy, You Are Mentally Diseased

People wonder why I call It Psychobabble?

Hey folks,

OK. You KNOW how I feel about Psychology. I understand the need that some have, and the BENEFIT of talking out one's problems, with those that understand how to listen. I LOVE Doctor Laura, and have known a few Doctors that are GREAT.

However, just like the Pharmaceutical feel, there are Drugs that CAN help, and then there is abuse. Over Prescriptions for Profit, etc. Psychology is the same. Although some of it can help, a lot of it is complete Bunk. Ever notice how many new "Disorders," and or sicknesses pop up from year to year? Seriously. From EAD, Restless Leg Syndrome, to EVERYONE being "By Polar." If your kid is, well, being a kid, now you can drug them, and say they have ADHD or AD/HD or ADD. There is even a sickness called Eco-Anxiety. Remember that? Eco-Anxiety, the growing angst experienced by those who can't handle the thought that they — or anyone — are in some way contributing to global warming, species extinction and dwindling natural resources. The Cure? Hug a Tree. Not kidding.

Anyway, now, brought to you by the Psychobabble Community, you are now Mentally disturbed, if you have a desire to eat healthy. Again, NOT Kidding. According to Vegsource.com - Choosing Healthy Foods Now Called a Mental Disorder naturalnews.com Mike Adams 06/29/10

In its never-ending attempt to fabricate "mental disorders" out of every human activity, the psychiatric industry is now pushing the most ridiculous disease they've invented yet: Healthy eating disorder.

This is no joke:

Told you. Not kidding.

If you focus on eating healthy foods, you're "mentally diseased" and probably need some sort of chemical treatment involving powerful psychotropic drugs. The Guardian newspaper reports, "Fixation with healthy eating can be sign of serious psychological disorder" and goes on to claim this "disease" is called orthorexia nervosa -- which is basically just Latin for "nervous about correct eating."

"Nervous about correct eating." {Laughing} Maybe they should go hug a Twinkie.

But they can't just called it "nervous healthy eating disorder" because that doesn't sound like they know what they're talking about. So they translate it into Latin where it sounds smart (even though it isn't). That's where most disease names come from: Doctors just describe the symptoms they see with a name like osteoporosis (which means "bones with holes in them").

This sounds like something I would write. Who wrote this. Oh, here it is. Mike Adams. Way to go Mike.

Getting back to this fabricated "orthorexia" disease, the Guardian goes on to report, "Orthorexics commonly have rigid rules around eating. Refusing to touch sugar, salt, caffeine, alcohol, wheat, gluten, yeast, soya, corn and dairy foods is just the start of their diet restrictions. Any foods that have come into contact with pesticides, herbicides or contain artificial additives are also out."

Vegans. Well, I always knew Vegans were nuts. JUST KIDDING. My Wife IS one. Well, then agai,,, Never mind. REALLY Just kidding. OK. Back to Mike.

Wait a second. So attempting to avoid chemicals, dairy, soy and sugar now makes you a mental health patient? Yep. According to these experts. If you actually take special care to avoid pesticides, herbicides and genetically modified ingredients like soy and sugar, there's something wrong with you.

But did you notice that eating junk food is assumed to be "normal?" If you eat processed junk foods laced with synthetic chemicals, that's okay with them. The mental patients are the ones who choose organic, natural foods, apparently.

Hug a Twinkie!. Told you so. {Smile}

What is "normal" when it comes to foods?

I told you this was coming. Years ago, I warned NaturalNews readers that an attempt might soon be under way to outlaw broccoli because of its anti-cancer phytonutrients. This mental health assault on health-conscious consumers is part of that agenda. It's an effort to marginalize healthy eaters by declaring them to be mentally unstable and therefore justify carting them off to mental institutions where they will be injected with psychiatric drugs and fed institutional food that's all processed, dead and full of toxic chemicals.

The Guardian even goes to the ridiculous extreme of saying, "The obsession about which foods are "good" and which are "bad" means orthorexics can end up malnourished."

Follow the non-logic on this, if you can: Eating "good" foods will cause malnutrition! Eating bad foods, I suppose, is assumed to provide all the nutrients you need. That's about as crazy a statement on nutrition as I've ever read. No wonder people are so diseased today: The mainstream media is telling them that eating health food is a mental disorder that will cause malnutrition!

Shut up and swallow your Soylent Green

"SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!!" Love that movie.

It's just like I reported years ago: You're not supposed to question your food, folks. Sit down, shut up, dig in and chow down. Stop thinking about what you're eating and just do what you're told by the mainstream media and its processed food advertisers. Questioning the health properties of your junk food is a mental disorder, didn't you know? And if you "obsess" over foods (by doing such things as reading the ingredients labels, for example), then you're weird. Maybe even sick.

That's the message they're broadcasting now. Junk food eaters are "normal" and "sane" and "nourished." But health food eaters are diseased, abnormal and malnourished.

But why, you ask, would they attack healthy eaters? People like Dr. Gabriel Cousens can tell you why: Because increased mental and spiritual awareness is only possible while on a diet of living, natural foods.

Eating junk foods keeps you dumbed down and easy to control, you see. It literally messes with your mind, numbing your senses with MSG, aspartame and yeast extract. People who subsist on junk foods are docile and quickly lose the ability to think for themselves. They go along with whatever they're told by the TV or those in apparent positions of authority, never questioning their actions or what's really happening in the world around them.

Wait. Interesting point.

In contrast to that, people who eat health-enhancing natural foods -- with all the medicinal nutrients still intact -- begin to awaken their minds and spirits. Over time, they begin to question the reality around them and they pursue more enlightened explorations of topics like community, nature, ethics, philosophy and the big picture of things that are happening in the world. They become "aware" and can start to see the very fabric of the Matrix, so to speak.

This, of course, is a huge danger to those who run our consumption-based society because consumption depends on ignorance combined with suggestibility. For people to keep blindly buying foods, medicines, health insurance and consumer goods, they need to have their higher brain functions switched off. Processed junk foods laced with toxic chemicals just happens to achieve that rather nicely. Why do you think dead, processed foods remain the default meals in public schools, hospitals and prisons? It's because dead foods turn off higher levels of awareness and keep people focused on whatever distractions you can feed their brains: Television, violence, fear, sports, sex and so on.

But living as a zombie is, in one way quite "normal" in society today because so many people are doing it. But that doesn't make it normal in my book: The real "normal" is an empowered, healthy, awakened person nourished with living foods and operating as a sovereign citizen in a free world. Eating living foods is like taking the red pill because over time it opens up a whole new perspective on the fabric of reality. It sets you free to think for yourself.

But eating processed junk foods is like taking the blue pill because it keeps you trapped in a fabricated reality where your life experiences are fabricated by consumer product companies who hijack your senses with designer chemicals (like MSG) that fool your brain into thinking you're eating real food.

If you want to be alive, aware and in control of your own life, eat more healthy living foods. But don't expect to be popular with mainstream mental health "experts" or dieticians -- they're all being programmed to consider you to be "crazy" because you don't follow their mainstream diets of dead foods laced with synthetic chemicals.

But you and I know the truth here: We are the normal ones. The junk food eaters are the real mental patients, and the only way to wake them up to the real world is to start feeding them living foods.

Some people are ready to take the red pill, and others aren't. All you can do is show them the door. They must open it themselves.

In the mean time, try to avoid the mental health agents who are trying to label you as having a mental disorder just because you pay attention to what you put in your body. There's nothing wrong with avoiding sugar, soy, MSG, aspartame, HFCS and other toxic chemicals in the food supply. In fact, your very life depends on it.

Oh, and by the way, if you want to join the health experts who keep inventing new fictitious diseases and disorders, check out my popular Disease Mongering Engine web page where you can invent your own new diseases at the click of a button! You'll find it at: Natural News - Disease Mongering Engine

Now believe what you want about the Mind Control angle. It is an interesting point. But what got my attention was the whole new "Disorder" thought up by people that stand to make money off of your supposed Metal Health issue. I love this piece. So just remember, if you suffer from Orthorexia Nervosa, or any of them,from EAD, Restless Leg Syndrome, to "By Polar," ADHD or AD/HD or ADD, or even Eco-Anxiety, it's not your fault. You are sick, and THEY can help you.

People wonder why I call It Psychobabble. Be right back.
Peter