Altered Genes, Twisted Truth
NOTE: All these points are solidly documented within the book. They will form the first part of the Executive Summary. The second part (which is not yet completed) will provide a chapter-by-chapter summary.
• Numerous scientists (including those on the US Food and Drug Administration’s Biotechnology Task Force) have concluded that the process of creating genetically engineered (GE) foods radically differs from conventional breeding and entails greater risk.
• Consequently, not only has there never been a consensus within the scientific community that GE foods are safe, many eminent experts have issued cautions, as have respected scientific organizations like the Royal Society of Canada and the Public Health Association of Australia.
• In contrast to the experts who counsel caution, many of the scientists and scientific institutions that promote GE foods have systematically suppressed evidence and distorted the truth in order to advance them.
• In fact, the GE food venture has been chronically and crucially reliant on such deceptions and could not have survived without them.
• For instance, GE foods first achieved commercialization only because the US Food and Drug Administration covered up the extensive warnings of its own scientists about their abnormal risks, lied about the facts, and deliberately violated federal food safety law by allowing them onto the market without having been proven safe through standard testing.
• Yet, the FDA and other GE proponents have created so much confusion that although US food safety law in regard to GE foods is much stricter than EU law, most people are under the illusion it’s weaker – and don’t realize that these inadequately tested foods have entered the American market, not due to the law’s failings, but to the FDA’s failure to obey it.
• Moreover, not only did GE foods gain entry to the market through a major fraud, their continued marketing has depended upon its continuation – and its augmentation by a stream of misleading statements from scientists and scientific institutions that have likewise abused their positions of authority.
• Through this disinformation, the manifold problems caused by GE foods have been obfuscated; and if they had instead been openly and accurately reported, the agricultural bioengineering enterprise would have collapsed.
• For example, most people are unaware that, contrary to the claims of biotech advocates, humans have indeed been harmed by consuming the output of genetic engineering – and that the technology’s first ingestible product (a food supplement of the essential amino acid L-tryptophan) induced an epidemic that killed dozens of people and seriously sickened thousands, permanently disabling many of them. Moreover, the evidence points to the genetic alteration as the most likely cause of the unusual contamination that rendered the supplement toxic.
• Nor is it widely known that numerous laboratory animals have also suffered from eating products of genetic engineering and that well-conducted tests with GE crops have yielded many troubling results, including intestinal abnormalities, liver disturbances, and impaired immune systems.
• Additionally, besides being unsound from the perspective of biological science, the GE food venture is unsound (and outright reckless) when examined in light of computer science; and compared to the careful manner in which software engineers revise life-critical information systems, the radical way in which biotechnicians alter complex cellular information systems is not really “bioengineering” but biohacking.
• Thus, contrary to the assertions of its proponents, the massive enterprise to reconfigure the genetic core of the world’s food supply is not based on sound science but on the systematic subversion of science – and would implode if subjected to an open airing of the facts.