Russia blocks the GMO dictatorship
The United States is trying to establish a global GMO dictatorship, and Russia is standing in the way. American scientists have found that RT and Sputnik publish more GMO stories than their U.S. competitors.
The United States is trying to establish a global GMO dictatorship, and Russia is standing in the way. American scientists have found that RT and Sputnik publish more GMO stories than their U.S. competitors.
Russia stands in the way of a U.S. global GMO dictatorship
Author – Gasanov Kamran
American scientists found, to their dismay, that RT and Sputnik have overtaken their U.S. competitors in the number of publications about GMOs. The researchers voiced concern that activity by Russian media could harm the American GMO industry, which intends to establish dominance over the global food market.
Are Russian media writing too much about GMOs, or are American media writing too little?
In late February, specialists at Iowa State University published a study showing that RT and Sputnik produced more articles containing the word "GMO" than long-standing players of the U.S. media industry — Huffington Post, Fox News, CNN, Breitbart News, and MSNBC — combined.
The study was conducted by associate professor of sociology Shaun Dorius and associate professor of agronomy Carolyn Lawrence-Dill. According to the Sustainable Pulse portal, the scientists' lab is partially funded by the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA). NCGA is a lobbyist for genetically modified products.
The Iowa institute grew nervous on learning that RT and Sputnik write a great deal about GMOs. This may "have a clearly negative impact on the U.S. industry and place Russia in an advantageous position," Dorius complains. Sustainable Pulse director Henry Rowlands points out that the Iowa scientists do not ask why U.S. media do not cover the GMO topic — even though consumer interest in, and negative reaction to, artificial food production technology is growing everywhere, including in America.
The accusations against Russian journalists trying to raise consumer interest in a harmful technology are unfolding against the backdrop of two trends. First, the anti-Russian campaign launched by Democrats. After Donald Trump's victory in the presidential election, Congress, the FBI, and other agencies have been searching at full speed for evidence of "Russian interference."
By controlling food, you control the population. Henry Kissinger
Second — perhaps less talked about but far more dangerous in its consequences — is the U.S. attempt to establish a global GMO dictatorship, which Russia is resisting.
Let us start with the more specific. On February 8, Bayer filed a lawsuit against the Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS), which is preventing the German company from merging with the world's largest producer of seeds and pesticides — the American Monsanto. The $66 billion agreement to merge the two multinationals was signed back in 2016. According to FAS head Igor Artemyev, the agency is requiring Bayer to transfer a "significant" portion of its technologies to the Russian agro-industry. The stakes are high. The merger would create the world's largest producer of herbicides and seeds, including genetically modified ones, that would leave no stone standing of the domestic agricultural sector. As for Russian public opinion, according to a VTsIOM survey, 82% of Russians consider GMO products dangerous to health.
When discussing the U.S. global strategy, some recall the military and the expanding NATO bloc. Others speak about finance, the Federal Reserve, and the dollars that have flooded the world. Still others point to international organizations — the WTO, IMF and the World Bank — as conduits of U.S. economic expansion. But there is one more global project whose influence we feel at least three times a day.
"By controlling oil, you control entire states; by controlling food, you control the population," former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger used to say.
The United States accounts for 95% of the world's GMO seed turnover. An analysis of American diplomats' correspondence proves that liberalizing the global market for transgenic goods is one of America's foreign policy priorities. The State Department, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), diplomatic missions, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture are at the forefront of this food campaign. To carry out their strategy, American corporations buy shares of traditional agricultural holdings in order to redirect them to GMOs.
At the same time, studies that prove the "safety" and benefits of the new technologies are being funded. Biotech giants obstruct independent research. At the legislative level, market liberalization is being pushed through. In 2013, Barack Obama signed H.R.933, which became known as the "Monsanto Protection Act." This act effectively granted the corporation immunity against any lawsuits over GMOs.
Russia and the EU prevent the U.S. from flooding the world with transgenic products
And here GMO defenders unexpectedly discover that Russia is hampering their plans at the level of media and legislation.
The U.S. government and the GMO industry are currently concerned that Russia and a number of countries in the European Union will reap huge gains from the growing global demand for certified products that do not contain GMOs or pesticides. Russia is among the 38 countries (including 20 in the EU) that have banned the cultivation of genetically modified crops produced mainly by multinational companies based in the U.S., such as Monsanto, and largely supported by the U.S. government — Henry Rowlands said.
With their actions, the Iowa scientists seek to halt the trend that emerged after 2015, when the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded that use of the herbicide glyphosate may contribute to cancer in humans. 80% of the GM seeds cultivated worldwide are resistant precisely to this agrochemical, which is also used in traditional agriculture and is the most widely used herbicide. Other health risks of GMO seed use include infertility, obesity, and allergic reactions. The planet's biodiversity is also under threat. Fields where transgenic crops have been planted can no longer support traditional crops. GMO seeds disrupt the ecosystem and pollute the soil with toxic chemicals. If Russia follows the example of EU countries and gradually phases out glyphosate-containing herbicides, "this will deal huge damage to the American GMO industry," Rowlands noted.
The activist believes that the anti-Russian trend that has taken hold in American politics is a convenient tool in the hands of the "GMO crowd."
For the American GMO industry and the U.S. government, this is a great opportunity to tie a movement they dislike (he is referring to the anti-GMO movement) to a foreign government that challenges them on many fronts (i.e., Russia), Rowlands said.
However, for the American consumer, in the expert's view, the entire fuss around GMOs "has nothing to do with Russia and stems from the basic instinct to protect one's children."
Commenting on the Iowa institute's research, the RT press office said the Russian channel is not running a campaign against biotech companies.
American scientists may be far behind the British, but RT is not running any campaign against GMO products. We cover this topic regularly because it concerns our international audience. Following the motto "Question more," we tell viewers what mainstream media do not. That is exactly what the findings of the American scientists confirm.
Results of an independent Russian study on the impact of GMOs on mammals
Author – OAGB
The results of a study carried out by the National Association for Genetic Safety together with the A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 2008–2010 indicate a significant negative impact of GM-containing feed on the reproductive function and health of laboratory animals.
As became known, on April 14 in Moscow the leaders of the National Association for Genetic Safety (OAGB) presented the results of an independent study of the impact of feed containing components of genetically modified organisms on biological and physiological indicators in mammals.
"Animals showed delayed development and growth, a disturbance of the sex ratio in litters with an increasing share of females, a reduction in the number of pups per litter, up to their complete absence in the second generation," says Alexei Surov, deputy director of the IPEiE RAS, Doctor of Biological Sciences. "A significant decrease in the reproductive ability of males was also noted."
According to OAGB president Alexander Baranov, the main effect of GM feed identified during the study was the absence of a third generation in animals from the experimental groups.
"The main conclusion of our study is the discovery of a biological prohibition on reproduction," Alexander Baranov says. "Nature put a stop to the genetic prospects of animals fed GM feed."
Ecologists note that such experiments are conducted catastrophically rarely. The most recent independent studies of GMO consumption in animals known worldwide were carried out at the RAS Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology (2005) and at the University of Caen (France, 2006).
The CIS Alliance "For Biosafety" supports such research, believing it serves the interests of overall safety, and that governments must continuously allocate funds for such activity. "Unfortunately, this happens extremely rarely. Meanwhile in Russia, budget funds go not only to the creation of GMOs but, without much oversight, also to fashionable trends — in particular, the introduction of new materials based on nanotechnologies — and academic degrees are handed out generously. Yet this area is even less studied than the creation and functioning of GMOs," comments Viktoriya Kopeikina, secretary of the CIS Alliance "For Biosafety."
About the OAGB study
The experimental study was carried out on a laboratory population of Campbell's hamsters (Phodopus campbelli), chosen because they have rapid generational turnover, which makes it possible to track long-term consequences. Family pairs were formed from sexually mature animals of the same age and divided into four groups of five reproductive pairs each. The first group (Soy-0) received vivarium feed with the addition of pure non-transgenic soy. The second (GM-soy-1) and third (GM-soy-2) groups differed in the quantitative content of the genetically modified soy added to the vivarium feed. The control group received vivarium feed without any additives.
During the experiment, general biological and physiological indicators were recorded, such as the number, size, deaths, development and other parameters, and the condition of litters of different generations in each group. New reproductive pairs for the next generations were formed from these litters, and they were fed with the same feed.
The experimental study of three generations of Campbell's hamster yielded the following general, physiological, and pathohistological findings:
• General biological: delayed development and growth; disturbance of the sex ratio in litters with an increasing share of females; reduction in the number of pups per litter, up to their complete absence in the second generation of the GM-soy-1 and GM-soy-2 groups, compared to the control and pure-soy groups.
• Physiological and pathological-anatomical: developmental disorders of the reproductive system in males and females in the GM-soy 1 and GM-soy 2 groups were identified compared to the control specimens.
Book a visit — we will pick a convenient time.