-
-
Who owns nature?: Monsanto & biotech companies move to monopolize biodiversity
They may be moving to do so but they are coming up against much resistance from farmers, consumers, and various organizations that see their patenting of seeds for what it is: a move to control food and water to exploit the poor and this planet for profit.The encouraging news is that more people every day are waking up to the truth about our food and buying locally, growing food themselves, and fighting back. And we must fight back. Our future depends on it.
From article:
New report warns of corporate concentration, commodification of nature; highlights global resistance grounded in 'Food Sovereignty.'
ETC Group today releases a 48-page report, 'Who Owns Nature?' on corporate concentration in commercial food, farming, health and the strategic push to commodify the planet's remaining natural resources.
In a world where market research is becoming increasingly proprietary and pricey, ETC Group's report names names, discloses market share and provides top 10 industry rankings up and down the corporate food chain. Not all the corporations identified in ETC Group's new report are household names, but collectively they control a staggering share of the commercial products found on industrial farms, in our refrigerators and medicine cabinets.
An international advocacy organization based in Canada, ETC Group has been monitoring corporate power in the industrial life sciences for the past 30 years. The report reveals that:
From thousands of seed companies and public breeding institutions three decades ago, 10 companies now control more than two-thirds of global proprietary seed sales From dozens of pesticide companies three decades ago, 10 now control almost 90% of agrochemical sales worldwide From almost 1,000 biotech start-ups 15 years ago, 10 companies now account for three-quarters of industry revenues The top 10 pharmaceutical companies control 55% of the global drug market
With collapsing systems - eco, climate, food and financial - as the backdrop, Who Owns Nature? warns that, with engineering of living organisms at the nano-scale (a.k.a. synthetic biology), industry is setting the stage for a corporate grab that extends to all of nature.
'About one-quarter of the world's biomass has already been commodified, explains ETC Group's Pat Mooney.'With extreme genetic engineering, we're seeing new corporate strategies to capture and commodify the three-quarters of the world's biomass that has, until now, remained beyond the market economy.'
snip
Who Owns Nature? reports on daunting trends in corporate concentration and technology convergence, but it also points to a very different reality and a powerful contrast to the corporate-controlled life sciences. Although a single company - Monsanto - accounts for almost one-quarter of proprietary seed sales, about three-quarters of the world's farmers routinely save seed from their harvest and grow locally-bred varieties. Wal-Mart may be the world's largest buyer and seller of retail food, but 85% of global food is consumed close to where it is grown - much of it outside the formal market system.
'There is vast and growing resistance to the dislocation and devastation caused by the agro-industrial food system,' points out Silvia Ribeiro of ETC Group. 'In the global struggle for Food Sovereignty, the playing field isn't level, but the scope of resistance is massive - peasant farmers, fisher people, pastoralists and allied civil society and social movements are fighting for locally controlled and socially just food and health systems.'
To download the full report:
http://www.etcgroup.orgThey may be moving to do so but they are coming up against much resistance from farmers, consumers, and various organizations that... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Biotech snake oil: a quack cure for hunger
Commercialized GM crops are confined to soybeans, corn, cotton and canola. Soybeans and corn predominate, and are used mainly to feed animals or fuel cars in rich nations. For instance, Argentina and Brazil export the great majority of their soybeans as livestock feed, mainly to Europe and Japan, while more than three fourths of the U.S. corn crop is either fed to animals or used to generate ethanol for automobiles. Expanding soybean monocultures in South America are displacing small farmers, who grow food crops for local consumption, and thus contribute to food insecurity, especially in Argentina and Paraguay. The only other commercial GM crops are papaya and squash, both grown on miniscule acreage.
Most revealing, however, is what the biotech industry has engineered these crops for. Hype and promises of future innovations notwithstanding, there is not a single commercial GM crop with increased yield, drought-tolerance, salt-tolerance, enhanced nutrition or other attractive-sounding traits touted by the industry. Disease-resistant GM crops are practically non-existent.
We have yet to see genetically modified food that is cheaper, more nutritious or tastes better, says Hope Shand, research director for the Ontario-based ETC Group. Biotech seeds have not been shown to be scientifically or socially useful.
The industry's own figures reveal that GM crops incorporate one or both of just two traits; herbicide tolerance and insect resistance. Insect-resistant cotton and corn produce their own built-in insecticide to protect against certain, but far from all, insect pests. Herbicide-tolerant crops are engineered to withstand direct application of an herbicide to kill nearby weeds. These crops predominate, with 82 percent of global biotech crop acreage.
Herbicide-tolerant crops (mainly soybeans) are popular with larger farmers because they simplify and reduce labor needs for weed control. They have thus helped facilitate the worldwide trend of consolidating farmland into fewer, ever bigger farms, like Argentina's huge soybean plantations. According to a 2004 study by Charles Benbrook, former executive director of the Board on Agriculture of the National Academy of Sciences, herbicide-tolerant crops have also led to a substantial increase in pesticide use. Benbrook's study found that adoption of herbicide-tolerant crops in the United States increased weed-killer use by 138 million pounds from 1996 to 2004 (while insect-resistant crops reduced insecticide use by just 16 million pounds over the same period).
The vast majority of herbicide-tolerant crops are Monsanto 's Roundup Ready varieties, tolerant to the herbicide glyphosate, which is sold under the brand-name Roundup. The dramatic rise in glyphosate use associated with Roundup Ready crops has spawned an epidemic of glyphosate-resistant weeds, just as bacteria evolve resistance to an overused antibiotic. Farmers respond to resistant weeds by upping the dose of glyphosate and by using greater quantities of other herbicides, such as the probable carcinogen 2,4-D (a component of Agent Orange) and the endocrine-disrupting weed killer atrazine, recently banned in the European Union. Glyphosate-resistant weeds and rising herbicide use are becoming serious problems in the United States, Argentina and Brazil.
Commercialized GM crops are confined to soybeans, corn, cotton and canola. Soybeans and corn predominate, and are used mainly to... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Cancer-fighting Beer?!
Have you ever picked up a cold, frosty beer on a hot summer's day and thought that it simply couldn't get any better?
Well, you may have to think again.
A team of researchers at Rice University in Houston is working to create a beer that could fight cancer and heart disease. Taylor Stevenson, a member of the six-student research team and a junior at Rice, said the team is using genetic engineering to create a beer that includes resveratrol, the disease-fighting chemical that's been found in red wine.
Scientists at the University of Wisconsin in June had called resveratrol, which is a natural component of grapes, pomegranates and red wine, a key reason for the so-called French Paradox -- the observation that French people have lower rates of heart disease despite a cuisine known for its cream sauces and decadent cheeses, all loaded with heart-clogging saturated fats.
The Wisconsin researchers had noted that adding small doses of resveratrol to the diet of middle-aged mice significantly slows their aging and keeps their hearts healthy. And they added that giving high doses to invertebrates extends their life spans, and high doses also stave off premature death in mice fed a high-fat diet.
Stevenson said that the Rice research group, most of the members of which aren't old enough to legally drink alcoholic beverages, came up with the idea of adding resveratrol to beer during a casual conversation about potential projects to undertake. "The idea is that it may have greater effects [in beer than in wine]," he added. "The amount of red wine you'd need to drink to get the same results they get with rats in labs is about half a bottle a day."
He explained that the amount of resveratrol in wine varies from bottle to bottle, since it depends on growing conditions for the grapes and other variables. The researchers felt they could design a beer with higher and more consistent concentrations of the cancer-fighting chemical.
The students, using their own Dell, Lenovo ThinkPad and Gateway laptops, are now in the process of developing a genetically modified strain of yeast that will ferment beer and produce resveratrol at the same time. Stevenson said that as the research advances, the team will need to use one of Rice University's computer grids to run compute-heavy genetic models.
The Rice effort is the latest in a series of projects that use technology to find cures to major health concerns like cancer and heart disease.
In August, scientists at Stanford University announced that they have found a way to use nanotechnology to have chemotherapy drugs target only cancer cells, keeping healthy tissue safe from the treatment's toxic effects.
CONT'D::Have you ever picked up a cold, frosty beer on a hot summer's day and thought that it simply couldn't get any better? ... more-
-
-
-
- aschneider
- added this
-
-
STAMINALI: ETICA E RICERCA AL CENTRO DI 8 NUOVI ACCORDI FIRMATI DALLA BEIKE
Beike Biotechnology Co Ltd, leader mondiale nella ricerca sulle cellule staminali e nei trattamenti mediante medicina basata sull’evidenza, ha annunciato di aver firmato otto distinti accordi di reciproca cooperazione con alcune delle più importanti organizzazioni della Cina e del mondo nel settore della biotecnologia. Quale parte integrante degli accordi Beike ha anche istituito un " Comitato consultivo di esperti di cellule staminali" e un’apposita "Commissione per la sicurezza dei dati e del monitoraggio" con il compito di valutare la ricerca futura realizzata da Beike.
Le collaborazioni citate, inizialmente discusse in occasione del recente forum cinese ‘China Stem Cell Technology 2008’ tenutosi presso la China Medical City , intensificheranno gli interventi della Beike nella fornitura sicura, efficace e d'avanguardia dei trattamenti con le cellule staminali per i pazienti provenienti da tutto il mondo. Le otto organizzazioni che condivideranno le risorse, la ricerca di informazioni e le migliori pratiche con Beike Biotech sono le seguenti:
- AELCELL di Stanford California
- Università Medica Nanjing
- China Medical City
- Università Tecnica Zhong Hua
- Università del Texas Health Science Center a Houston
- Ospedale Jiangsu People' n. 2 della Nanjing Medical University
- Ospedale Wu Hu City n.2 di Anhui, Cina.
Questi accordi di cooperazione reciproca aumenteranno notevolmente la capacità di Beike di integrare in tempo reale nella sua rete le informazioni sulla ricerca, rafforzando la posizione di Beike come leader asiatico e come una delle società biotecnologiche d’avanguardia al mondo che forniscono soluzioni con le cellule staminali per una serie di patologie.
Pertanto -dichiara il Dr. Hu- siamo molto entusiasti di collaborare con otto dei centri leader mondiali della ricerca sulle cellule staminali, in modo che insieme potremo fornire più rapidamente dei trattamenti sempre più efficaci a chi oggi ne ha bisogno".
A margine del Forum, Beike ha cercato anche un certo numero di medici altamente qualificati, cinesi e stranieri, per costituire una nuova "Commissione per la sicurezza dei dati e del monitoraggio" che sovraintenderà il lavoro di Beike per la ricerca sulle cellule staminali. La commissione, che è presieduta dal dottor Li Zhanquan dell’Ospedale popolare cinese di Liaoning, e comprende anche il Dr Geng Yongjian della University of Texas Medical School, opererà in linea con lo spirito della Dichiarazione di Helsinki, con il Consiglio delle Organizzazioni Internazionali delle Scienze Mediche (CIOMS), con la Commissione di Orientamento etico internazionale per le ricerche Biomediche sugli esseri umani, con le Linee guida per la buona pratica clinica dell’ Organizzazione Mondiale della Sanità (OMS) e con la Conferenza internazionale sull'armonizzazione (ICH) dei requisiti tecnici per la registrazione dei prodotti farmaceutici per uso umano. I membri della commissione esamineranno i dati dei protocolli e applicheranno rigorosamente gli standard di sicurezza internazionali per specifici studi clinici pianificati da Beike da condurre ancora quest’anno.
Inoltre un " Comitato consultivo di esperti di Cellule Staminali" è stato istituito tra le migliori istituzioni scientifiche cinesi per fornire consulenza alla Beike sulle questioni etiche base e per la ricerca clinica sulle cellule staminali, esaminando il project-team nella sperimentazione clinica per il monitoraggio dei dati rilevati e l’applicazione delle migliori pratiche di sicurezza. I cinque membri, a rotazione, del comitato consultivo di esperti sulle cellule staminali, che inizialmente include il Dr Wang Zhonggao della prestigiosa Accademia Cinese delle Scienze e il dottor Zhu Chen Hao della Accademia di Ingegneria Cinese, forniranno indicazioni sulle questioni etiche e esamineranno le prove cliniche per la sicurezza e il monitoraggio, aderendo a tutti i protocolli internazionali di cui sopra, come Helsinki, CIOMS, OMS, e ICH.
website: www.beike.ch
Beike Biotechnology Co Ltd, leader mondiale nella ricerca sulle cellule staminali e nei trattamenti mediante medicina basata... more-
-
-
-
- StemCellsReporter
- added this
-
-
Are biotech crops a moral choice?
The most common argument from proponents of GM crops is that genetically engineered food will be necessary to feed a growing world population. They argue that, if the world population continues to grow, it will be necessary to increase crop yield by new technologies, such as genetic engineering.
There is very little evidence to support this argument. In fact, most of the data points in the opposite direction. In 2003, Aaron deGrassi, a researcher at the Institute of Development Studies at Sussex University, published an analysis of the GM crops which biotech companies are developing for Africa.
These included cotton, maize and sweet potato. He discovered that conventional breeding and ecological management produced a far higher yield, at a fraction of the cost of genetic engineering. At that time, the GM research on sweet potato was approaching its 12th year. 12 scientists were involved and the project had already cost €6m. The result indicated that the yield had increased by 18%.
On the other hand, conventional sweet potato breeding, working with a much smaller budget, had produced a virus-resistant variety with 100%. More importantly for small, subsistence farmers, the non-transgenic sweet potato had not been patented. [GMW: It also emerged subsequent to deGrassi's report that the final trial results showed the GM sweet potato had failed completely in term sof both virus resistance and increasing yields.]
A 2007 study, conducted by Kansas State University agronomist Dr Barney Gordon over the past three years, suggests that the yield from RoundupReady soya was 9% less than conventional varieties. A report from the United States Department of Agriculture stated in April 2006 that currently available GM crops do not increase the yield potential of a hybrid variety. In fact, yield may even decrease if the varieties used to carry the herbicide tolerant or insect resistant genes are not the highest yielding cultivars.
If GM crops are vital for combating hunger, it seems strange that they have not been endorsed by the Food Security Report from the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) published in 2008.
This report is a collaboration between public bodies such as the World Bank, the United Nations Environment Programme, the World Health Organisation and representatives from governments, NGOs and scientific bodies. It is a thorough sifting of the evidence about agriculture, food production and security, running to 2,500 pages. It took four years to complete, and invoved the work of 400 scientists.
The report does not endorse the claim that GM crops will feed the world. It argues that a drastic change in agricultural practices will be necessary in order to counteract soaring food prices, hunger, social inequality and environmental degradation.
It maintains that GM crops are controversial, and that they will not play a substantial role in addressing the challenge of climate change, loss of biodiversity, food security, poverty and hunger. It did not rule out a role for GM crops in the future, but highlighted the problems which the current regime of patenting seeds has on farmers and researchers.
snip
Robert Watson, the director of the IAASTD, and chief scientist at the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, responded to a question from the Daily Mail – Are GM crops the simple answer to hunger and poverty? with the words – I would argue, no.
The report concludes that 'Assesment of the technology lags behind its development, information is anecdotal and contradictory, and uncertainty about possible benefits and damage is unavoidable.'
The GM lobby often accuses those opposed to GM as being anti-science. Nothing is further from the truth.
The most common argument from proponents of GM crops is that genetically engineered food will be necessary to feed a growing world... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
The risk of nutritionally enhanced GM plants on human health
The above paragraphs summarize published data that clearly show the following:
(1) Compounds structurally related to a common small molecule can have a lethal effect when present as even a minor contaminant in a food supplement.
(2) The GM enhancement of a metabolic pathway by the overexpression of genes for that pathway can have unpredictable consequences in the form of synthesizing a toxin.
(3) Finally, in the case of golden rice, it is argued that biologically active compounds derived from aberrant plant carotenoid synthesis could have profound effects on human development.
Similar arguments can be made for NEP-derived fatty acids that are directly incorporated into brain lipids and about NEPs overproducing vitamin E. Aberrant fatty acid composition of brain lipids is implicated in Alzheimer’s disease,45,46 and vitamin E has a role similar to RA in mammalian development.47 The excess consumption of a nutrient can also have negative effects. For example, a clinical trial with vitamin E supplementation showed that a relatively small dose increased the risk of heart failure,48 and smokers who supplemented their diet with -carotene had an increased risk of lung cancer.49 Therefore, there is a potential for nutrient toxicity in NEPs because upper tolerable levels of many nutrients are not well established (p. 107)35 and are likely to vary between individuals and lifestyles.
The information presented here shows that not only the potential harm of the product should be considered for risk assessment, but the GM process itself. The data clearly invalidate the argument that "the regulatory trigger for risk assessment should be based upon the physical features of the product rather than the process by which the product was generated."50 While it is true that traditional breeding methods can give rise to potentially hazardous products, the most recent assessment of GM food safety by the National Research Council35 stated that GM “has a higher probability of producing unanticipated changes than some genetic modification methods" (p. 118), but it curiously concludes by stating that the risk of GM technology is no greater than conventional breeding methods.
There are, in fact, no data comparing the food safety profiles of GM versus conventional breeding, and the ubiquitous argument that since there is no evidence that GM products make people sick, they are safe (see, for example, McHughen and Smyth,50 Bradford et al.,51 and Miller et al.52) is both illogical and false. There are, again, simply no data or even valid assays to support this contention.53 Without proper epidemiological studies, most types of harm will not be detected, and no such studies have been conducted.
The necessity of labeling all GM products and particularly NEPs is therefore critical if there is any hope of monitoring adverse health consequences due to their consumption. For example, it would have been impossible to identify the source of the toxic tryptophan supplement if the product were not traceable through labeling. It follows that before NEPs producing biologically active molecules such as -carotene, omega-3 fatty acids, or vitamin E are introduced into the food chain, great care must be taken to do rigorous, multigenerational animal safety assessments with the hope of identifying risks to health (for methods, see, for example, the 2007 publication by the National Toxicology Program54 and Pusztai and Bardocz55). In addition, the products must be labeled and traceable, and the unpredictable and unintended metabolic changes that may occur in NEPs require the thorough testing of the entire edible portion of the plant, not just the designated product as is almost always done by biotech companies...
David R. Schubert
Cellular Neurobiology Laboratory, The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, California
JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL FOOD
J Med Food 11 (4) 2008, 000–000
The above paragraphs summarize published data that clearly show the following: (1) Compounds structurally related to a common... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
USDA biotech regulations on "pharma" crops could allow drugs in food
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) today denounced newly proposed U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) rules governing genetically engineered crops, including food crops engineered to produce pharmaceutical and industrial products. The proposed rules, UCS charged, would not protect the U.S. food supply from potential contamination by drugs from "pharma" crops, and could allow drugs that it deems "safe" to enter the food supply. This contamination could occur through cross-pollination or seed mixing between pharma food crops and crops intended for consumption.
The USDA ignored recommendations for a ban on the outdoor production of pharma food crops from the Grocery Manufacturers Association, major food companies, UCS, and more than 100 environmental, agricultural, health, and consumer organizations.
Below is a statement by Jane Rissler, UCS's Food and Environment Program deputy director:
"Under the proposed rules, USDA's new motto is 'Only safe levels of drugs in U.S. food.' If these proposals are enacted into law, American consumers must accept the possibility of drugs in their breakfast cereal or other common foods. Moreover, these rules likely will lead to contamination scares, which will hurt the food industry.
"The USDA proposal, unlike the ban we recommended, offers no incentives to drug companies to pursue already existing, safer methods for producing drugs.
"In its rush to enact the proposed rules into law before the end of the Bush administration, the USDA has given short shrift to public participation. The department is allowing only 45 days for the public to analyze and comment on this major proposal, which will determine the government's approach to regulating genetically engineered organisms for years to come.
"The proposed rules also overhaul the existing regulatory system for genetically engineered crops other than pharma crops. Some of the proposed changes represent steps in the right direction such as making the regulatory program more coherent and comprehensive, expanding the scope of genetically engineered organisms subject to government oversight, and allowing the department to consider impacts on public health."
For UCS's Web feature profiling innovative biotechnology companies that are developing drugs more safely, go to
http://ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/solutions/sensible_pharma_crops/sensible-pharma/.
For the location of pharma crops that have been grown outdoors across the country, go to
http://go.ucsusa.org/food_and_environment/pharm/index.php?s_keyword=XX.
_________________________
Here we go again.The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) today denounced newly proposed U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) rules governing... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
How Monsanto really makes GMOs
GMO's are made by manipulation of extremely deadly viruses & bacteria that have been engineered to be IMMUNE TO ANTIBIOTICS, such as E. coli (Pause video at 8:08). Monsanto spends millions of dollars each month to "sugar" coat and hide the truth of what they are doing or what is really behind how GMO's are made.
This video straight-forwardly explains the scientific facts how Monsanto manufactures their GMO's (Genetically Modified Organisms) by removing all the corporate propaganda, the "smoke & mirrors" if you will.
**Please be warned, the once the mask is removed from what you are eating & feeding your children each day, it will outrage you and shock you to the core.
Monsanto's greed combined with their quest to totally monopolize all aspects of food on the planet, has knowingly allowed the proverbial Reaper free upon the world.
GMO's are now acting much like the deadly virus and pre-cancer cells they are made from... by infecting other organisms that were once pure and healthy.
The people of the world should be demanding Monsanto be held for crimes against humanity for the atrocities they have committed and what can be reasonably seen as the start of the end to all life as we know it.
The Bee's disappearance is in perfect unison with the time line of Monsanto's release of GMO's; this can not be argued but due to Monsanto's influence of corruption in governments across the globe, any scientist that tries to inform the public and raise the alarm about the Bee's & GMO's is destroyed financially, as well as their careers'.
Monsanto is the MOST ruthless corporation in the world, which basically controls many governments due to their near limitless resources, money and their "campaign contributions".
They buy WHO they need and crush those that try to stand in their way.
Now that you know, what will you do?
Will YOU decided to fight, right now, this very day or will you put it off for some other time?
After watching these videos, will you also knowingly look the other way and FEED your family GM foods; even though you now know you could be killing or permanently harming your child/family??? If so, call Monsanto for a job, for you have disgraced and shamed yourself for knowingly poisoning the people you claim to love and PROTECT!
....BUT
If you are OUTRAGED at Monsanto's poisoning our food, milk (see my other video on milk!) and health; Please do the following actions, do them once a week... make a difference:
1) Call and WRITE (pen & paper) you're Legislators
(Emails are the very last thing you should do; most are scanned by software and are blocked/deleted when they contain certain key words. This is a fact.)
Demand:
2) That they FULLY endorse: "H.R. 6636 GENETICALLY ENGINEERED FOOD RIGHT TO KNOW ACT"
3) An immediate moratorium on all GMO's and their Byproducts!
4) FDA change their findings on GMO's being "Generally Recognized As Safe"! This was done with ZERO testing by the FDA!
5) Demand a full investigation into the criminal conflicts of interest as it pertains to the head personal of Monsanto and the FDA being one in the same.
6) Demand congress pass a "whistle blowers protection" for all professional scientists so that Corporations, Universities and Colleges can no longer manipulate their research.
___________-
This is the description of the video written by the member who uploaded it. I concur with it. We need to wake up. Now.GMO's are made by manipulation of extremely deadly viruses & bacteria that have been engineered to be IMMUNE TO... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
CELLULE STAMINALI - Italiano riceve riconoscimento dal Governo cinese
SHENZHEN, CINA - Gianni Demarin, originario di Monza (Mi) e residente in Svizzera, la scorsa settimana ha ricevuto un importante riconoscimento da una rappresentante del governo centrale di Pechino, la direttrice generale del polo di alta tecnologia di Shenzhen (SHIP – Shenzhen Hi-Tech Industrial Park) l’Onorevole Qiu Xuan. Il riconoscimento gli è stato consegnato per il suo costante impegno nel diffondere le informazioni sui risultati ottenuti nelle biotecnologie mediche, scienza per la quale la Cina punta ad ottenere la leadership mondiale.
« È stata per me una vera sorpresa – dichiara Demarin – anche perché non sapevo che qualcuno avesse in mente di concedermi un onore del genere. È stato molto emozionante sentirmi dire « Thank you for your help » da una rappresentante del governo cinese. Sono molto orgoglioso di poter diffondere i risultati che si ottengono con le cellule staminali da cordone ombelicale sui pazienti affetti da patologie neurodegenerative, ma mettere d’accordo due mentalità scientifiche completamente diverse come quella asiatica e quella occidentale è tutt’altro che cosa facile. Ma si parla di qualcosa che migliorerà o salverà vite umane, quindi i miei sforzi in quella direzione sono ampiamente giustificati ».
Alla consegna del riconoscimento hanno partecipato anche il presidente e fondatore del Gruppo Beike, Dr. Hu Xiang ed il direttore generale Beike alle operazioni internazionali, l’italo-australiano Dr. Enrico Bisello.
Direttore generale per l’Europa di Beike Europe, società che si occupa di creare un canale diretto per le cure dei cittadini europei presso strutture ospedaliere cinesi, Demarin viene da una formazione trentennale nell’ambito della comunicazione di massa, motivo per il quale è stato chiamato alla direzione di questa filiale svizzera che ha come obiettivo quello di creare una collaborazione tra la scienza orientale e quella occidentale, nonché la diffusione tramite i mass-media di informazioni utili ai malati.
« Gli ostacoli da superare sono molti, primo su tutti quello dell’orgoglio per le scelte scientifiche da entrambe le parti. Altro ostacolo non indifferente è l’importante ingerenza economica e politica che l’industria del farmaco ha nella scienza occidentale. Ma sono convinto che i veri scienziati nostrani siano alla ricerca di un dialogo con i cinesi, che già si sono dimostrati aperti in questa direzione » .
SHENZHEN, CINA - Gianni Demarin, originario di Monza (Mi) e residente in Svizzera, la scorsa settimana ha ricevuto un importante... more-
-
-
-
- StemCellsReporter
- added this
-
-
Codex Alimentarius, food, and Monsanto
The recent news regarding the FDA and irradiation of foods and their decision regarding genetically modified animals and crops is all related to the Codex Alimentarius.This video brings some of that to light to give people information about a global plan to control our food supply and work to weaken the effects of vitamins and supplements. It is information we all need to fight this and to protect our health and safety.The recent news regarding the FDA and irradiation of foods and their decision regarding genetically modified animals and crops is... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Genetically modified crops' days may be numbered
Pressure from the president of the European Commission has not succeeded in advancing the cause of transgenic crops. In spite of the power wielded by the executive organ of the European Union, the bloc's member countries are gradually discontinuing the use of genetically modified seeds.
This is due in large measure to the difficulty of convincing European farmers to adopt the transgenic crop production model, which is being promoted by biotech giants, but also to increasingly vociferous protests from civil society, which is demanding that governments take an active role, according to an expert interviewed by IPS.
Genetically modified (GM) organisms, also called transgenics, are made in laboratories by inserting genes from other species of plants or animals into their original DNA, in order to improve their properties or confer resistance to external factors like pests or insecticides. Vectors, often viruses or bacteria, are used to insert the foreign genes.
In Spain and Portugal, which have the largest areas in the EU devoted to GM maize cultivation, people are beginning to question the benefits of sowing and harvesting transgenic varieties of maize, a crop native to the Americas which was the staple food of a number of indigenous cultures.
Maize was slow to be introduced in Europe, because the Central American areas where it was grown were colonised by the Spanish at the time when the Roman Catholic Church was conducting the Inquisition, and they believed that Europeans should not eat the same food as indigenous peoples because, in their view, the latter were not "children of God."
Widely used now as feed for animals, maize has been the subject of fierce controversy within the European Commission.
On the one hand, Commission President Jos; Manuel Duro Barroso is in favour of significantly increasing the production of GM maize within the EU. On the other, European Commissioner for the Environment, Stavros Dimas, is dead set against it.
The European Commission works like a cabinet government and is made up of 27 Commissioners, one from each EU member state, although they must represent the interests of the EU as a whole, not just their home country.
In October 2007, Dimas opposed European Commission approval for cultivation in the EU of two GM varieties of maize, Bt-11 and 1507, because "possible long-term risks to the environment and biodiversity are not completely known, and environmental effects resulting from the cultivation of the GM maize lines are unacceptable."
"However, the majority of the Commissioners are in favour of GM maize, and the final decision has been postponed twice because a consensus could not be reached," Portuguese biologist Margarida Silva, the national coordinator of Plataforma Transgnicos Fora, comprising 12 Portuguese non-governmental organisations working on agriculture and the environment and networking with likeminded NGOs in the EU, told IPS.
Duro Barroso tried to convince Dimas to withdraw his objections in April, while simultaneously requesting an assessment by the European Food Safety Authority, "with the purpose of undermining the legitimacy of Dimas' stance," according to Silva, who is also a university professor.
Silva said that "the movement against transgenics is growing in civil society throughout Europe, and GM crops have already been banned in several countries."
snip
A huge, unified movement of people in favour of declaring a moratorium on the cultivation of GM crops has emerged in Spain and Portugal, following a similar decision taken in March by the French government that invoked the "safeguard clause" allowing an EU member state to bypass a community directive.
Silva said France based its decision "on a set of 25 scientific studies indicating risks to the environment, farming and human health derived from the cultivation of GM maize."
_______________
Photo credit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_penfold/2657046712/
Pressure from the president of the European Commission has not succeeded in advancing the cause of transgenic crops. In spite of... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Poison in your stomach: genetically modified eggplants
After experimenting with rats, goats, sheep and cows, it is now the turn of Indian people. In a few months from now, if the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) of India has its way, the first genetically modified food crop Bt Brinjal will be on your table.
Whether it is the laboratory rats or higher mammals, the animal kingdom has been more discerning possibly owing to a sixth instinct which human beings sadly lack. There is otherwise no explanation for why laboratory rats, for instance, should always be spurning GM foods. And when force fed, rats have invariably developed tumours and deformed body organs, including kidneys and livers, as well as serious diseases and ailments.
We have heard repeatedly of the death of sheep and goats when left to graze in the Bt cotton fields of India. First it was reported from Andhra Pradesh, and now newspaper reports point to the south-Indian state of Orissa. However, not much is public about how the cattle react. Several farmers in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Haryana have told me that cows avoid the Bt cotton fields when left to openly graze.
The Bt gene that has been infused in Bt cotton (or Bt corn on which most of the laboratory rat studies have been conducted) is no different from the same gene drawn from a soil bacterium scientifically called Bt that is now being incorporated in Brinjal. This gene releases a toxin within the plant that kills fruit-and-shoot borer insects. The Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Company (Mahyco), which is spearheading research on Bt Brinjal, claims that the genetically-modified Brinjal is safe for human consumption.
I have never been placated by the safety claims made by these companies. For several decades now we were told that cigarette smoking wasn't harmful to human health, that chemical pesticides were completely safe, and that white sugar poses no danger to the human body. These are not the only products that received the safety certificate - the list is endless. And yet decades later, after inflicting a heavy human cost the world over, most of these products are being banned or phased out. Long since sugar-based food products hit the market and were vouched safe, diabetes has suddenly assumed epidemic proportions.
Diabetes is a case in point: notwithstanding that the disease is growing at an alarming scale, the disappearance of the traditionally-cultivated Brinjal from the market will surely take away one of the simple home remedies and widely-practiced dietary solutions to combating the Type-2 diabetes. I too suffer from Type-2 diabetes, and therefore find it appalling that no scientific organisation, including the GEAC, is coming clean on what the genetically modified Brinjal will mean for people like me.
snip
If you don't believe me, let us listen to Prof Dave Schubert of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in California: The Bt toxin is 1000 times more concentrated than in Bt sprays, which do not themselves have a history of safe use. In other words, what Dr Schubert says is that genetically modified Bt plants, and that includes Bt Brinjal, carry a toxin that is a thousand times more potent than what is used to kill insects. Strains of Bt have been used as sprays to control harmful insets. Spine chilling, isn't it?
The problem is that once Bt Brinjal enters the market, there is no way you can distinguish it from the normal ones. Your vegetable vendor will never be able to sell you the normal Brinjal that you are so used to buying. Moreover, once the genie is out, there is no way to call it back.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
India is once again to be the guinea pig to make biotech companies profits. As the article states, there is no shortage of eggplants (brinjal) in India. There is no other reason for this but profit at the expense of health. And once again without disclosure. It is despicable.After experimenting with rats, goats, sheep and cows, it is now the turn of Indian people. In a few months from now, if the... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Film review: The World According To Monsanto
The most important documentary you will see this year.
How much outrage can a single multinational corporation inspire? How much damage can they inflict? The breathtaking new film, The World According to Monsanto, features a company that sets the new standard. From Iowa to Paraguay, from England to India, Monsanto is uprooting our food supply and replacing it with their patented genetically engineered creations. And along the way, farmers, communities, and nature become collateral damage. The Gazette says the movie "will freeze the blood in your veins." The Hour says it's a "horrifying enough picture" to warrant "fury." But most importantly, this critical film opens our eyes just in time. The film is the work of celebrated award-winning French filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin, whose three years of work on four continents exposes why Monsanto has become the world's poster child for malignant corporate influence in government and technology.
Combining secret documents with accounts by victims, scientists and policy makers, she guides us through a web of misleading reports, pressure tactics, collusion, and attempted corruption. And we learn how the company systematically tricked governments into allowing dangerous genetically modified (GM) foods into our diet-with Monsanto in charge of determining if they're safe.
Deception, Deception, Deception
The company's history with some of the most toxic chemicals ever produced, illustrates why they can't be trusted. Ask the folks of Anniston, Alabama, where Monsanto's PCB factory secretly poisoned the neighborhood for decades. PCBs are Monsanto's toxic oils used as coolants and lubricants for over 50 years and are now virtually omnipresent in the blood and tissues of humans and wildlife around the globe. But Anniston residents have levels hundreds or thousands of times the average. They all know their levels, which they carry as death sentences. David Baker, who lost his little brother and most of his friends to PCB-related diseases such as cancer, says Anniston kids used to run up to him, report their PCB level and ask, "How long you think I got?"
Ken Cook of the Environmental Working Group says that based on Monsanto documents made public during a trial, the company "knew the truth from the very beginning. They lied about it. They hid the truth from their neighbors." One Monsanto memo explains their justification: "We can't afford to lose one dollar of business."
snip
Replacing Nature: "Nothing Shall Be Eaten That We Don't Own" Monsanto is the world's largest seed company and many are concerned. Troy Roush says, "They are in the process of owning food, all food." Paraguayan farmer Jorge Galeano says, "Its objective is to control all of the world's food production." Renowned Indian physicist and community organizer Vandana Shiva says, "If they control seed, they control food; they know it, it's strategic. It's more powerful than bombs; it's more powerful than guns. This is the best way to control the populations of the world." The World According to Monsanto is aptly named. It is about Monsanto seeking to recreate the world in its own image, for its own benefit. They intend to replace (and patent) the entire food supply. And since their genetic pollution self-propagates in the environment, it will outlast the effects of global warming and nuclear waste. Such widespread permanent influence may not be safe with any individual or company. With Monsanto's record, the results can only be catastrophic. This powerful documentary might just inspire a global rejection of Monsanto's plans for our world. If so, it will be the most important film in history.
The most important documentary you will see this year. How much outrage can a single multinational corporation inspire? How... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Monsanto sues farmer over seed patent... court to rule
Monsanto is the owner of the patented herbicide Roundup and the also-patented Roundup Ready herbicide-resistant seed.
At issue in this case is David's right to plant Roundup Ready soybean seeds that he produced from plants grown from Roundup Ready seeds he purchased from Monsanto.
David lost the case, both at trial and at the federal circuit, and was fined $786,989. Last week, David appealed to the Supreme Court.
Presently, farmers must buy Monsanto seed annually to grow a Roundup Ready crop.
Some experts believed that a recent Supreme Court ruling on patent exhaustion indicated that the Supreme Court would grant David's appeal (if patent exhaustion was the issue presented on appeal).
Patent exhaustion means that the first sale of the patent seed exhausts the patent owner's rights.
Under this doctrine, Monsanto could not prevent use of its seed after the first sale.
David did not request the Supreme Court to consider the exhaustion doctrine because he did not believe the earlier ruling to be applicable because Monsanto's license agreement restricts use of the seed distinguishing his client's case from the case at hand.
Some patent experts believe the Supreme Court will therefore deny the appeal. David's lawyer strenuously disagrees.
The result? Monsanto's right to prevent farmers from planting herbicide resistant seeds they grow from Monsanto-patented seeds will remain in place until another suitable case makes its way through the court system. This could take decades.
David's lawyer informs me that $7.25 of the $21 cost of one “unit of Roundup Ready seed is attributable to the Monsanto technology fee.
Monsanto did not respond to my calls for current price structure.
*************
I find it hard to believe that the Supreme Court in this case will rule in favor of the farmer regarding the patent. But then, it is possible though unlikely now that the patent exhaustion doctrine was not brought up in the appeal, which to me makes no sense. I wonder if they got to him? If they grant the appeal and he wins it will set a precedent for farmers everywhere who have purchased Monsanto's Roundup Ready seeds to not be obligated to purchase them every year, thus being able to save seeds as has been the practice of agriculture for centuries.
I truly find it despicable that Monsanto thinks it has the right to patent life itself and control the planting of seeds, and to then sue farmers who wish to use seeds taken from their own crops. Of course Monsanto has the clout and $$$$$$$$$$ to come down hard in influencing the decision on this appeal, as a ruling for the farmer could mean great loss of income to Monsanto. I will keep my fingers crossed for that. Kudos to this farmer for standing up to them and for farming as it should be.Monsanto is the owner of the patented herbicide Roundup and the also-patented Roundup Ready herbicide-resistant seed. At issue... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Don't believe the GMO apologists
Avarice and greed in the name of exploiting a food crisis brought on not by food shortages, but high prices of oil and feed and political corruption propagated by the very governments and agencies like the World Bank that are now pushing GM foods that are untested. Notice a pattern here?
From the article:
Arguments about genetic modification, often wrongly characterised as science versus irrational nature-worshippers, have lost none of their passion. On one side are those who yearn for simple, high-tech solutions to complex problems. Against GM, there are ecological realities and scientific evidence. There is overwhelming evidence that farming took a wrong turn after the last war, with widespread use of artificial nitrogen fertilisers and sprays.
In Britain, we lost up to 95 per cent of our ancient woodlands, flower meadows, hedges and wildlife and saw massive losses of farms and farm workers' jobs. Farming became more oil-dependent. Our food lost vitamins, taste and diversity and our diet became unhealthy.
As the environmental and human cost of industrial farming became harder to deny, along came a new miracle cure ; genetic engineering. Twenty years ago, GM promised unbelievable wonders ; fruit that would never freeze, crops needing no fertiliser or sprays and food with vitamins and medicines engineered in. All food would soon be GM. Geneticists would engineer anything we wanted, taking a gene from a fish here, a pig there, adding a bacteria gene and maybe a bit of a virus.
The greatest coup by the GM companies, and their greatest scientific fraud, was to ensure no GM food had to be tested for safety. In America, they established the concept of "substantial equivalence" which means that if a GM crop looks like its non-GM equivalent and grows like it, then it is it no safety testing is needed before people eat it. GM maize could have added virus and antibiotic resistance genes, and a gene that makes it express an insecticide in every leaf, stem and root but to the US government it looks and grows like maize, so it is safe to eat.
GM crops face mounting scientific evidence of uncertainty, risk and danger. But now, because of rising food prices, the GM industry's claim that GM is needed to feed the world is suddenly newsworthy again. However, a key reason for soaring food prices higher oil costs leading to higher fertiliser prices also presents a massive threat to GM crops. All current and planned GM crops depend on artificial, oil-based fertiliser to grow, and all need to be treated with pesticides to survive.
In 2006, the pro-GM US Department of Agriculture observed that "currently available GM crops do not increase yield potential" a point already made by a 2004 UN Food and Agriculture Organisation report which acknowledged that "GM crops can have reduced yields". The recently published UN IAASTD report, the work of more than 400 international scientists, about the future of global food production under the challenges of climate change and population pressure, concluded that GM crops do not have much to offer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GM foods: 'un'natural selection.
Avarice and greed in the name of exploiting a food crisis brought on not by food shortages, but high prices of oil and feed and... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Dr. Vandana Shiva: Why Prince Charles is right: we need GM free food for food security
Corporate monopoly over our food systems is a food security disaster. And while in some places like India these disasters have already had an impact at a global level, they are a disaster in the making.
It is therefore unscientific, illogical and irresponsible for the Environmental Minister Mr Woolas to say that Prince Charles must provide "proof" that a disaster has happened.
I would imagine that he is aware of the environmental principle on which the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change rest.
The principle is called the Precautionary Principle. It is based on the recognition that when an activity or technology has the potential to cause harm, and there is no conclusive evidence to establish the harm that can be caused, then policy and decision making must err on the side of caution.
The Environment Minister also said "Government ministers have a responsibility to base policy on science and I do strongly believe that we have a moral responsibility to the developing world to ask the question: 'Can GM crops help'?
Minister, if you could travel with me through Vidarbha and see the tears in the eyes of farmers' widows, you would be compelled to ask the question:'Can GM crops harm'? That is your moral responsibility.
It is also your responsibility to sincerely base your decisions on real science, not pseudo science. Science based policy would recognise that an agriculture that conserves biodiversity also produces more food and nutrition per unit acre.
Science based policy would recognise that if farmers fall into debt, it is not an instrument for ending poverty, but a recipe for ending the lives of small farmers.
A science based policy would not blindly spread GM crops to Africa without assessing their role in India's agrarian crisis. A science based policy would not be based on unscientific principle of "substantial equivalence" which has prevented independent and serious testing of GM foods and crops.
That is why the Supreme Court of India has served notice on the Government of India to ask why a GMO moratorium should not be imposed till proper testing protocols and tests and facilities for biosafety are in place.
end of excerpt.
``~~~
Dr. Vandana Shiva is one of the most passionate and knowledgable scholars and environmental activists on the topic of GM foods, the global water crisis, Monsanto ( bio technology), sustainability, and environmental democracy. I trust her words and her judgement on this implicitly as I too have done the research. The world needs to listen to and read her words as she speaks truth about the monopoly taking form to control both our food and water in the guise of companies stating they are pushing GM organisms on us for our own benefit, when it is really for their own.
GM foods and the poisons sprayed on them that are in our water and food are not sustainable and will not save this world from a food crisis, but may well perpetuate it especially in areas of severe drought. We have all the conventional food we need to feed this world save political corruption (World Bank) and those in power looking to deny it to those who need it most to suit their own political, economic, and ideological agendas. I hold Dr. Shiva in the highest esteem and take her word on this based on her years of experience over anyone looking to defend the monstrous crime being perpetrated by these biocompanies on our environment and our health.Corporate monopoly over our food systems is a food security disaster. And while in some places like India these disasters have... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
STEM CELL: no more darkness for Rylea
Ryleas was diagnosed with Optic Nerve Hypoplasia, an abnormal deficiency of cells: in her case ONH was extremely severe, resulting in her complete loss of vision. Such a condition is normally linked with hormonal imbalances in the brain which can affect a child's growth, although in Rylea’s case Optic Nerve Hypoplasia does not seem to have affected her in being a very lively and happy child. Sight apart, in all other respects Rylea is healthy and energetic.
Through stem cell treatment her family hoped to restore the cell count in the nerves and to see some response to visual stimulus, specifically pupil dilation or retraction. Rylea’s treatment (umbilical cord stem cell injections with visual rehabilitation therapy) began on July 3rd, 2007 in a chinese hospital named Beike.
Before the treatment
In affecting her optic nerves, Rylea's illness has entirely deprived her of light perception and vision: in a word, she was blind. In early tests of shape recognition (slotting shapes through appropriate holes), Rylea relied on touch and memory, and did not attempt to identify shapes through sight..
After the treatment
Rylea showed important signs of light sensitivity less than two weeks after the treatments began. In a darkened room Rylea responded to a flashlight when shone in her eyes. Rylea's mother initially hoped to be seeing improvement over a period of up to six months: in this respect the treatment far exceeded her expectations.
The following is an excerpt from Rylea's blog (www.nomoredarkness.com). It covers her progress shortly after her return to America.
- 8 August 2007
“We met Dr. Brothers (Rylea's eye doctor) this morning. It was exciting for him to see her and respond to the light as it had been for us. He examined her eyes and Rylea showed him how she could tell which eye he was shining the light into. Then he turned the lights down low and took her in front of the wall where the eye chart shines. He asked her if she could see that light, and she pointed to it. Then he asked her if she could see the picture of the "E”... she said yes and was even able to point to the 3 ends of the "E". Watching this was very emotional for both Dr. Brothers and myself since it was by far more than either of us had expected to see as a result of the stem cell transplants”
- 12 August 2007
“Rylea asked me to go get the pen light this morning...so of course I did... we shined it in her eyes and she was able to grab the light. Then I told her that I wanted to show her something then I wanted her to tell me what she saw...so I held my breath so she couldn't feel me breathing on her. I asked her what she saw and she said, "I SAW MY MOMMY!!!" - So I asked her what I looked like and she said, "Mommy, you are beautiful!!!" She was able to identify everyone in the room immediately. What a miracle, what an absolute answer to many, many prayers!”
Stem Cells Treatments: www.beike.ch
On September 3rd, 2007, Rylea's mother was interviewed by Missouri's Joplin Globe newspaper: please read the complete interview at:
http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/local_story_245195943.html?start:int=15
Ryleas was diagnosed with Optic Nerve Hypoplasia, an abnormal deficiency of cells: in her case ONH was extremely severe, resulting... more-
-
-
-
- StemCellsReporter
- added this
-
-
STAMINALI: Rylea nasce cieca, ora ci vede
A Rylea era stata diagnosticata una Ipoplasia del Nervo Ottico, ovvero una anormale deficienza delle cellule: nel suo caso la malattia era particolarmente severa, e il risultato era la totale privazione della vista. Una situazione del genere è normalmente collegata a uno “sbilanciamento” ormonale nel cervello che puo’ causare svariati effetti negativi sulla crescita di un bambino. Va detto comunque che nel caso di Rylea l’Ipoplasia del Nervo Ottico non doveva essere correlata a tale sbilanciamento, visto che era vivace e di carattere allegro. Insomma, a prescindere dalla vista era sotto qualsiasi altro aspetto sana e piena di energia.
Grazie alle staminali la famiglia sperava di riportare a un livello normale il numero di cellule nervose e di ottenere pertanto una qualche risposta agli stimoli visivi, in particolare la dilatazione e contrazione della pupilla. Il trattamento in Cina di Rylea (iniezioni di cellule staminali del cordone ombelicale affiancate a esercizi di riabilitazione visiva) inizio’ il 3 luglio del 2007 presso la Beike, l'unico centro di altissima specializzazione per le cure con le cellule staminali esistente al mondo.
Prima del trattamento
Nel colpire i suoi nervi ottici, la malattia di Rylea l’aveva totalmente privata della capacità di vedere o anche solo di percepire la luce: in una parola, era cieca. Quando le venne fatto un primo test riguardante la capacità di riconoscere le forme (test consistente nell’inserire oggetti di una data sagoma entro degli spazi appropriati) Rylea si affidava unicamente al tatto e alla memoria, e non tentava neppure di identificare le forme grazie alla vista.
Dopo il trattamento
Rylea mostro’ segnali significativi di sensibilità alla luce a meno di due settimane dall’inizio del trattamento. In una stanza buia mostrava di reagire a una luce intensa, quando questa le veniva diretta negli occhi. La mamma aveva sperato di vedere i primi progressi entro sei mesi, e sotto questo aspetto il risultato del trattamento era andato molto oltre le sue speranze.
Quanto segue è un breve estratto dal blog di Rylea (www.nomoredarkness.com). Ie riguarda cio’ che è successo poco dopo che la bimba era tornata in America.
- 8 agosto 2007
“Stamani abbiamo visto il dottor Brothers, lo specialista che la segue. E’ stato tanto eccitante per lui vederla reagire alla luce quanto lo era stato per noi. Le ha esaminato gli occhi e Rylea gli ha fatto vedere che poteva indicargli in quale occhio stava dirigendole la luce. Poi il dottore ha spento le luci e l’ha fatta mettere di fronte al muro sul quale si trovava la tabella luminosa per l’esame della vista. Le ha chiesto se riusciva e vedere la luce, e lei gliel’ha indicata col dito. Poi le ha chiesto se riusciva a vedere la lettera “E”… e lei ha detto di si’, ed è stata anche capace di indicare col dito le tre estremità della “E”. Sia io che il dottor Brothers eravamo emozionantissimi, perché tutto cio’ andava ben oltre cio’ che entrambi ci aspettavamo dal trapianto di staminali”.
- 12 agosto 2007
“Stamattina Rylea mi ha chiesto di andare a prendere la penna che proietta il fascio di luce… e io subito l’ho presa ovviamente… gliel’ho diretta negli occhi, e lei è stata in grado di afferrare la penna. A quel punto le ho detto che le avrei mostrato qualcosa, e che poi lei avrebbe dovuto dirmi cosa vedeva… ho trattenuto il respiro perchè non potesse individuarmi. Le ho chiesto cosa vedeva e lei ha detto “VEDO LA MIA MAMMA!!!” – Io le ho chiesto come le sembravo e lei ha detto “Mamma, sei cosi’ bella!!!” – Dopodiché, è stata immediatamente in grado di identificare chiunque si trovasse nella stanza. Che miracolo, che assoluta risposta a tante, tante preghiere!”
Trattamenti con le staminali sul sito: www.beike.ch
A Rylea era stata diagnosticata una Ipoplasia del Nervo Ottico, ovvero una anormale deficienza delle cellule: nel suo caso la... more-
-
-
-
- StemCellsReporter
- added this
-
-
Bacteria and nanofilters: the future of clean water technology
Bacteria often get bad press, with those found in water often linked to illness and disease. But researchers at The University of Nottingham are using these tiny organisms alongside the very latest membrane filtration techniques to improve and refine water cleaning technology.
These one-celled organisms eat the contaminants present in water. whether it is being treated prior to industrial use or even for drinking in a process called bioremediation.
The water is then filtered through porous membranes, which function like a sieve. However, the holes in these sieves are microscopic, and some are so small they can only be seen at the nanoscale. Pore size in these filters can range from ten microns ten thousandths of a millimetre to one nanometre a millionth of a millimetre.
These technologies can be developed into processes which optimise the use of water whether in an industrial system or to provide drinking water in areas where it is a scarce resource.
The research is led by Nidal Hilal, Professor of Chemical and Process Engineering in the Centre for Clean Water Technologies a world-leading research centre developing advanced technologies in water treatment.
Current membrane technology used in water treatment processes can decrease in efficiency over time, as the membranes become fouled with contaminants. By using bioremediation the membranes can be cleaned within the closed system, without removing the membranes. Researchers at the centre have de
-
-
-
Who owns nature?: Monsanto & biotech companies move to monopolize biodiversity
They may be moving to do so but they are coming up against much resistance from farmers, consumers, and various organizations that... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Biotech snake oil: a quack cure for hunger
Commercialized GM crops are confined to soybeans, corn, cotton and canola. Soybeans and corn predominate, and are used mainly to... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Cancer-fighting Beer?!
Have you ever picked up a cold, frosty beer on a hot summer's day and thought that it simply couldn't get any better? ... more-
-
-
-
- aschneider
- added this
-
-
STAMINALI: ETICA E RICERCA AL CENTRO DI 8 NUOVI ACCORDI FIRMATI DALLA BEIKE
Beike Biotechnology Co Ltd, leader mondiale nella ricerca sulle cellule staminali e nei trattamenti mediante medicina basata... more-
-
-
-
- StemCellsReporter
- added this
-
-
Are biotech crops a moral choice?
The most common argument from proponents of GM crops is that genetically engineered food will be necessary to feed a growing world... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
The risk of nutritionally enhanced GM plants on human health
The above paragraphs summarize published data that clearly show the following: (1) Compounds structurally related to a common... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
USDA biotech regulations on "pharma" crops could allow drugs in food
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) today denounced newly proposed U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) rules governing... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
How Monsanto really makes GMOs
GMO's are made by manipulation of extremely deadly viruses & bacteria that have been engineered to be IMMUNE TO... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
CELLULE STAMINALI - Italiano riceve riconoscimento dal Governo cinese
SHENZHEN, CINA - Gianni Demarin, originario di Monza (Mi) e residente in Svizzera, la scorsa settimana ha ricevuto un importante... more-
-
-
-
- StemCellsReporter
- added this
-
-
Codex Alimentarius, food, and Monsanto
The recent news regarding the FDA and irradiation of foods and their decision regarding genetically modified animals and crops is... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Genetically modified crops' days may be numbered
Pressure from the president of the European Commission has not succeeded in advancing the cause of transgenic crops. In spite of... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Poison in your stomach: genetically modified eggplants
After experimenting with rats, goats, sheep and cows, it is now the turn of Indian people. In a few months from now, if the... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Film review: The World According To Monsanto
The most important documentary you will see this year. How much outrage can a single multinational corporation inspire? How... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Monsanto sues farmer over seed patent... court to rule
Monsanto is the owner of the patented herbicide Roundup and the also-patented Roundup Ready herbicide-resistant seed. At issue... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Don't believe the GMO apologists
Avarice and greed in the name of exploiting a food crisis brought on not by food shortages, but high prices of oil and feed and... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
Dr. Vandana Shiva: Why Prince Charles is right: we need GM free food for food security
Corporate monopoly over our food systems is a food security disaster. And while in some places like India these disasters have... more-
-
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
-
-
STEM CELL: no more darkness for Rylea
Ryleas was diagnosed with Optic Nerve Hypoplasia, an abnormal deficiency of cells: in her case ONH was extremely severe, resulting... more-
-
-
-
- StemCellsReporter
- added this
-
-
STAMINALI: Rylea nasce cieca, ora ci vede
A Rylea era stata diagnosticata una Ipoplasia del Nervo Ottico, ovvero una anormale deficienza delle cellule: nel suo caso la... more-
-
-
-
- StemCellsReporter
- added this
-
-
-
