Dramatic Correlation Shown Between GMOs And 22 Diseases

Print Friendly

As Use Of GMO’s Crops Glyphosate Rise So Do Critical Diseases

There is a growing movement for labeling of GMO crops, and many would go further and ban GMOs completely. Currently there is a close vote in Oregon on a GMO labeling initiative, with advocates for labeling 0.3% behind and raising money to check ballots (we urge your support). Those who profit from GMOs spent $20 million to prevent labeling in Oregon. Several states in the Northeast have put in place laws that will require labeling.

Vermont is about to be sued to prevent GMO labeling. GMO profiteers have an unusual marketing strategy. While most companies brag about their product, the GMO industry spends hundreds of millions to hide their product. The US does not require labeling of GMOs despite the fact that 64 countries around the world label GMO foods.

Millions have marched against Monsanto urging labeling or the banning of GMO products. There is a national consensus in favor of labeling but the government has been unable to respond. Indeed, President Obama’s food czar is a former Monsanto executive. The deep corruption of government is putting the health of the American people at serious risk.

Stop GMO'sThe research highlighted below, “Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America,” was published in The Journal of Organic Systems this September and links GMOs to 22 diseases with very high correlation. We reprinted many of the graphs from the study that show an incredible correlation between the rise of GMO crops that use the herbicide glyphosate and a wide range of diseases.

Glyphosate was introduced to the marketplace in 1974 but data on its use is only available since 1990. Monsanto has genetically modified foods so that they are resistant to glyphosate, a herbicide Monsanto sells, resulting in a dramatic increase in the use of glyphosate. The study points out that research has shown that “glyphosate disrupts the ability of animals, including humans, to detoxify xenobiotics. This means that exposures to the numerous chemicals in food and the environment, such as endocrine disrupting chemicals and carcinogens, could be causing levels of  damage that would not occur if the body were able to detoxify them.”

Correlation is not proof of causation. But the authors point out “we have data for 22 diseases, all with a high degree of correlation and very high significance. It seems highly unlikely that all of these can be random coincidence.” They point out that according to “the American Academy of Environmental Medicine’s position paper on genetically modified (GM) foods: ‘[S]everal animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food consumption including infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signaling, and protein formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system.’”

The conclusions of the study are:

“These data show very strong and highly significant correlations between the increasing use of glyphosate, GE crop growth and the increase in a multitude of diseases. Many of the graphs show sudden increases in the rates of diseases in the mid-1990s that coincide with the commercial production of GE crops. The large increase in glyphosate use in the US is mostly due to the increase in glyphosate-resistant GE crops.

“The probabilities in the graphs and tables show that it is highly unlikely that the correlations are a coincidence. The strength of the correlations shows that there is a very strong probability that they are linked somehow. The number of graphs with similar data trends also indicates a strong probability that there is a link. Although correlation does not necessarily mean causation, when correlation coefficients of over 0.95 (with p-value significance levels less than 0.00001) are calculated for a list of diseases that can be directly linked to glyphosate, via its known biological effects, it would be imprudent not to consider causation as a plausible explanation.

“We do not imply that all of these diseases have a single cause as there are many toxic substances and pathogens that can contribute to chronic disease. However, no toxic substance has increased in ubiquity in the last 20 years as glyphosate has. . . . Another critical issue is that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor and it has been argued that there are no safe levels of endocrine disruptors. This would imply that the current permitted residue levels in food could be causing multiple health problems that have been documented in the scientific literature to be caused by endocrine  disrupting chemicals.” [Citations omitted]

GMO Kid not science experimentA root cause of the problem is that United States’ regulatory structure is backward, making people into guinea pigs instead of protecting them. As the researchers write:

“… the regulatory approach in the US is reactionary rather than precautionary. Instead of taking preventive action when uncertainty exists about the potential harm a chemical or other environmental contaminant may cause, a hazard must be incontrovertibly demonstrated before action is initiated. Instead of requiring industry to prove the safety of their devices or chemical products, the public bears the burden of proving that a given environmental exposure is harmful.”

As to next steps, the researchers urge independent scientific research (sadly, too much research is funded by corporations that profit from GMO crops]. They write:

“The data presented in this paper highlight the need for independent scientific research to be conducted, especially in the areas of the endocrine disruption, cancer precursor, oxidative stress, gut microbiome and the Cytochrome P450 pathways. It is our hope that, in addition to more basic research in the form of toxicology and carcinogenic studies, epidemiology studies will be undertaken by experts in each of  these disease categories.”

NonGMO project sealIn the meantime, people need to continue to take political action to require labeling, urge a new regulatory structure that applies the precautionary principle and urge the banning of GMO crops now that correlation to disease is being shown. There are a few things you can do to protect yourself from GMO foods: (1) Buy organic, (2) Look for the Non-GMO seal, (3) Avoid crops where GMO’s are common.

The eight GM food crops are Corn, Soybeans, Canola, Cottonseed, Sugar Beets, Hawaiian Papaya (most) and a small amount of Zucchini and Yellow Squash. Sugar is likely to contain GMO beets unless it is labeled as pure cane sugar. Dairy is also likely to be GMO unless it is labeled No rBGH, rBST, or artificial hormones. Here’s a non-GMO shopping guide for further assistance.

Below are some of the key charts from the Journal of Organic Systems study.

 

Adoption of GMO crops in US

Liver cancer and GMOs

Kidney Cancer and GMOs

Urinary and bladder cancer and GMO

Thyroid cancer and GMOs

Hypertension and GMOs

Stroke and GMOs

Obesity and GMOs

Diabetes and GMOs

Diabetes prevalence and GMOs

Lipoprotein Disorder Deaths and GMOs

Renal disease deaths and GMOs

Inflamatory bowell disease and GMOs

Intestinal infection and GMOs

Autism and GMOs

Senile Dementia and GMOs

Alzheimer's and GMOs

Parkinson's and GMOs

 

For more information visit the Organic Consumers Association Millions Against Monsanto Campaign.

Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers co-direct Popular Resistance which provides daily movement news and resources. Sign up for their daily newsletter; and follow them on twitter, @PopResistance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Pingback: GMO Contamination Denial: Controlling Science | limitless life()

  • Chelsea

    Let’s just keep in mind. By no means does correlation prove causation. There could be many other factors at play here. This is just yet another example of media failing to state crucial information like that.

  • paul3028

    If glyphosate, introduced in 1974, is the real problem, as opposed to GMO, then wheat and cane sugar studies will also correlate. I read that celiacs is 4x more prevalent today than in the 1950′s, is this GMO wheat? Or Glyphosate causing this? Sugar cane is ripened with glyphosate. coffee plantations use it to control weeds. People spray it on their lawns and gardens, it is very difficult to avoid the stuff. That’s a problem in itself. Glyphosate, agent oranges ‘gentle cousin’, being a weed killer, is a much more likely suspect than GMO, as it is a biological weapon that we still don’t know the long term consequences of using, or even how it actually works to kill weeds. Other popular agricultural weed killers should also be examined with these long term correlation studies.

  • joviss

    Another case of you can show them and explain it to them but you can’t understand it for them.

  • Pingback: Spray & Pray | Plot58()

  • Pingback: WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO CHOOSE NON GMO FOODS??? TcL explains…. | Tincture Couture()

  • joviss

    It’s all a big coincidence!!!

  • Pingback: What You Should Know About GMO |()

  • Pingback: GM Foods: You Have the Right to Know | mignotasefa()

  • Pingback: National GE Labeling Now Being Sought | mignotasefa()

  • Eric Bjerregaard

    Yep, Sometimes it is a coincidence as it likely is when the correlation of organic food consumption and such problems is shown. Sometimes an increase can be due to a changed definition as is with autism,leading to more diagnoses.

  • Ewan R

    The data is a great refutation of itself.

    If increase in use of thing X increases disease Y and disease Y has an onset period of Z (period of time between when it is caused and when it becomes apparent) then one would minimally expect to see a period of time Z lag between increase in X and increase in Y.

    All these correlations show either a concurrent increase (same year) or in many cases an increase in Y which precedes the increase in X (liver cancer causes GE crops perhaps?).

    In my opinion this is the ultimate achilles heel of the approach that both Swanson and Seneff have taken – none of their correlations match these expectations, if they’d been a bit cleverer about doctoring their figures they’d have taken this into account (as there are doubtless a number of spurious correlations that at least beat this pretty low bar)

    Because, while it is true that correlation does not equal causation, this doesnt mean that the two are not sometimes tied together (if they weren’t it’d be a funny old world)

  • Exadyne

    There is so much wrong with what you said, but i think the most important bit of ignorance is:
    ” or even how it actually works to kill weeds.”
    HOW DO YOU THINK THEY KNOW HOW TO MAKE GMOS THAT RESIST IT WITHOUT KNOWING HOW IT WORKS ON PLANTS? Yes, I’m internet yelling because your claim is that glaringly bad.
    Glyphosate works on plants by preventing metabolic pathways that produce aromatic amino acids. Glyphosate resistant GMOs have a slight alteration in one of the sites of a cell receport that makes it possible to still produce aromatic amino acids but glyphosate will not bind.
    Your timelines for celiac disease also don’t make sense – if glyphosate is the source of celiac disease, why did it exist in the 1950s at all, before glyphosate’s introduction in 1974?

  • Eric Bjerregaard

    How come the correlation with the increased use of electronic gadgets to spread ant-g.e. bunk is not blamed?

  • Pingback: False freedom of information « Defense Issues()

  • HW developer

    so, since you brought it up, what is your estimate of Z?

  • Pingback: Topics for show 05/17/2016 – Mad Scientists Exposed()

  • Linda Illingworth,RD

    because celiac disease is genetically driven….the environment can turn it on or off.

  • Exadyne

    What turned it on before glyphosate?
    Why isn’t it just a post hoc fallacy – is there nothing else like awareness and diagnostic criteria that better explains the 4x rate? Does the increase even correlate in any sense with the rate of glyphosate use?
    Do you understand there is no commercially available GMO wheat?
    Do YOU at least acknowledge that we actually know how it kills weeds?

  • Exadyne

    Or it is some third thing driving both. It isn’t true coincidence that ice cream consumption and murder rates rise together. It isn’t that murder causes ice cream or ice cream causes murder, it is that hot days raise both.

    In this case, our scientific abilities, particularly in the fields of biology are rising. This means we as societies become more affluent (more people seek diagnosis because treatments become affordable) and better at both identify diseases and at making GMOs.
    We also have things like GMOs let us produce more food, less people die of malnourishment, more people make it to older ages (also, again that science and technology improvements stuff), so more people live to the ages where Parkinson happens. We also have overnutrition now, and most definitely increase weight is associated with all the diseases above as well, particularly diabetes. In turn, diabetes can drive diseases like dementia and Alzheimer’s.

  • Pingback: Anonymous Youngstown – Avoiding GMOs 2016 | Healthy Food Tips()

  • Lisbeth

    Here’s some even better data. It doesn’t show what is causing what, but it indicates an impending crisis by 2025.

    U.S. Health – 1995 – 2025 (projected)

    Chronic (1995) 118 million – (2025) 168 million
    Autoimmune (1995) 1 in 21 – (2025) 1 in 4
    Diabetes (1995) 8 million – (2025) 48 million
    Autism (1995) 1 in 500 – (2025) 1 in 12
    Obesity (1995) 29% – (2025) 44%
    Asthma (1995) 1 in 16 – (2025) 1 in 8
    Depression (1995) 2.2% – (2025) 13.4%
    Anxiety (1995) 11.7% – (2025) 25.2%
    Disablity (1995) 14% – (2025) 26%
    Cancer (1995) Expected stable.
    Dementia (1995) Inconclusive.
    Opiate RX (1995) 85 million – (2025) 250 million
    Stim RX (1995) 13 million – (2025) 48 million
    Antidep RX (1995) 13.5 million – (2025) 71 million

    Cost/Burden (1995) 1 trillion – (2025) 5.2 trillion

  • Lisbeth

    You can examine the numerous modifications made to the food supply in 1994. Given that food goes into people’s bodies, it would be the prime candidate for the cause of a massive non-infectious epidemic, which, by 2025 will be a national health crisis.

  • Pingback: BAN GMOs – fascinatingnatureblog()