Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Danish Farmer Reverses Illnesses in pigs by reverting to a GM-free diet
Farm Wars ^ | 6/2013 | Dr Eva Sirinathsinghji

Posted on 06/06/2013 6:33:04 AM PDT by Renfield

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

1 posted on 06/06/2013 6:33:04 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Renfield

Countdown to Monsanto defenders & HMO lovers......

They’ll be here in 3...2...1...


2 posted on 06/06/2013 6:42:49 AM PDT by surroundedbyblue (Why am I both pro-life & pro-gun? Because both positions defend the innocent and protect the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

“But but but think of all the starving children Monsanto has saved!” says the Monsanto bootlicker. “Monsanto ended world hunger?” I reply. “No,” says the crony capitalist lover, “But it would be a lot worse without Monsanto!” “Really? Wouldn’t it be better, and actually follow conservative principles, if we stopped paying farmers to dump milk and not plant fields? Couldn’t we also stop sending money and food to third-world dictators so that their subjects would feel the need to rise up Funding Fathers’ style and end their own problems?” Says the Monsanto fan to me, “Ron Paul lover!”

*I can’t stand Ron Paul, but that’s a catchy comeback for them.


3 posted on 06/06/2013 6:52:54 AM PDT by goodwithagun (My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

I guess I would want to know whether he was feeding them fishmeal and GMO soybeans before and just switched to the non-GMO to get the effect?

Or did he add in fishmeal and was that the confounding effect?


4 posted on 06/06/2013 6:54:59 AM PDT by Chickensoup (200 million unarmed " people killed in the 20th century by Leftist Totalitarian Fascists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

It’s the people who work with the animals who know best. Always. If this turns out to be true, and not an anti-gmo nut, then people really need to be taking a hard look!


5 posted on 06/06/2013 6:56:31 AM PDT by vpintheak (We are the chosen few! Be thankful for it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chickensoup

I would suggest sticking with Ford!


6 posted on 06/06/2013 6:56:57 AM PDT by catman67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

“The widespread illnesses were burdening the farm with extra costs, including medical costs to deal with rampant stomach problems. Following 12 months of GM-free feed, Mr Pederson now uses half of the national average of antibiotics, compared to above average usage prior to the feed conversion. The savings made by reducing medicinal use by two-thirds was sufficient to cover the extra expense of GM-free feed which has totalled 28,500 DKr. Further, with an extra 1.8 piglet weaned per sow, and 12 less sows dying from stomach problems per year, the farm is making an extra profit of 250,000 DKr a year, translating to roughly an extra £55 per sow.”

Capitalism at work!


7 posted on 06/06/2013 6:57:24 AM PDT by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

Of course we’ll be here. This is FreeRepublic, not some site for kneejerk leftie corporation bashing.

There is a wonderful conservative solution for those who are hysterical about Monsanto, though. If they don’t like their products, then they can not buy them.


8 posted on 06/06/2013 6:58:47 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Chickensoup
"Pederson decided to stop feeding his 450 sows with GM soybean, replacing them with fishmeal and non-GM soybean instead. "

You are correct. Taken at face value, this is not a valid experiment from which to draw conclusions. "Change one variable at a time", i.e., add fishmeal to GM soybean, and/or replace GM soybean with non-GM soybean with no other changes.

9 posted on 06/06/2013 7:01:37 AM PDT by FairWitness (Everything is easy, once you've done it once)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: catman67

HuH?


10 posted on 06/06/2013 7:05:43 AM PDT by Chickensoup (200 million unarmed " people killed in the 20th century by Leftist Totalitarian Fascists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

marked for later


11 posted on 06/06/2013 7:06:32 AM PDT by piroque ("In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
If they don’t like their products, then they can not buy them.

Easier said than done.

I think some of what we are doing in our food growing, processing and delivery systems need to be examined closely. If testing GMO against non GMO products to see if provable differences exist in health and production in farming operations, why not do the testing?

How easy would it be for those wishing to create harm, do so by messing with our food systems? Not necessarily profit motivated, but with other goals in mind?

12 posted on 06/06/2013 7:08:33 AM PDT by listenhillary (Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Chickensoup
The biggest problem I have with any anti-GM study is that they almost always hide data that doesn't support their conclusions, and unfortunately, my first reaction when reading about the fish meal was ‘they let that slip through...’

When things go from science to dogma, it creates doubt in any rational examiner as to the data being presented. To me, it would seem natural that a crop which is designed to be resistant to a pesticide regimen and is heavy coated with that pesticide would naturally contain that same pesticide in some amount especially in animal feed. And it seems to be contrary to logic to feed animals an herbicide and expect no reaction from the animals.

So there appears to be multiple vectors in this study; is the genetic modification the actual difference? Supposedly it is less nutritious; that would be an issue. Did the pigs get a far lower dose of herbicides and pesticides due to the change? And how much of an effect did the extra nutrition from the fish meal change all of this?

It would seem to me that it would not be hard at all to conceive and implement actual testing of this theory. Three populations of pigs, each given a very specific feed, and see what the difference is. According to the farmer, the results of the change were dramatic once the switch was made, so it doesn't even sound like it'd be a long study.

I suspect I know what the various results would be, but would certainly welcome a surprise.

13 posted on 06/06/2013 7:11:12 AM PDT by kingu (Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FairWitness

I am no fan of GMO foods but I want them to stand or fall with decent data.


14 posted on 06/06/2013 7:11:37 AM PDT by Chickensoup (200 million unarmed " people killed in the 20th century by Leftist Totalitarian Fascists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

Hmmm, you know...maybe we should just let God do that...


15 posted on 06/06/2013 7:19:59 AM PDT by GBA (Here in the Matrix, life is but a dream.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

Danish farmer? I thought GM plants were pretty much banned in Europe. The EU could not compete with the product so they smeared and banned.


16 posted on 06/06/2013 7:27:15 AM PDT by jdsteel (Give me freedom, not more government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: listenhillary

“why not do the testing?”

If you’re worried, then do the testing. This is not any kind of test, though, this is just anecdotal fluff that can’t be verified. Get a control group and controlled environment, follow proper methodology, and then show us the GMO stuff is actually bad. Otherwise, it’s just hysteria.


17 posted on 06/06/2013 7:31:43 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: goodwithagun
Putting aside emotionalism like "world hunger" and "starving children" and subjectivism like "it" (what is "it"?) "would be a lot worse" we can talk about facts: namely that Monsanto has been motivated by profit to help vastly improve crop yields.

For this accomplishment they have received exactly what they sought: money.

You don't like the methods, you don't like the crops.

Fine.

Buy a farm and grow ones you like, or buy from a supplier that you do like.

I'm not sure what farm subsidies have to do with this - supporters of farm subsidies would argue (in my opinion falsely) that the subsidies are the only things enabling them to compete with Monsanto.

If they went away, Monsanto would survive.

While we can debate the merits of ending the international grain trade, food shortages do not cause people to "rise up Funding [sic] Fathers' style" - the Founding Fathers did not take up arms because they were hungry.

In fact, they would probably have been more worried about food than suffrage if they were hungry. It was their prosperity that enabled them to sustain the long war.

18 posted on 06/06/2013 7:35:53 AM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue
Thats right whiner - get used to folks exercising free speach.. I know it must offend but that's the way it will be for a while.

BTW when an article begins with "...A Danish farmer has gained huge public recognition.. you pretty much can appreciate what the point was all along.

...ya do the hokey pokey and you turn yourself around...

19 posted on 06/06/2013 7:43:11 AM PDT by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
Just not buy them?

What if the use of GMO is never on the label?

20 posted on 06/06/2013 7:45:34 AM PDT by slowhandluke (It's hard to be cynical enough in this age.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kingu
I have no ax to grind for the benefit or detriment of Monsanto, but buried in this article's invective is the statement, "..the devastating health impacts of glyphosate-based herbicides and the associated GM crops modified to tolerate it."

It seems to me that the "research" in this article lept to the devastating effects of GM crops without addressing fully the obvious component of the glyphosate herbicides that are incorporated in the crops. In short, acknowledging that the modification of crops was to accommodate the herbicides, it is very likely that the GM crops themselves are inherently non-toxic.

I come away from this article with the impression that evil GM crops are inherently disease inducing, not that the GM crops are poisonous because of the induced component of glyphosate herbicide. The low information voter, and liberals, will scan this article to reinforce the growing misconception that GM equals bad.

What may be the biggest irony of this development in GM agriculture and public perception is that this has all come about because of the Greenies rabid hatred of effective, cheap pesticides, e.g. DDT, and herbicides.

This has become a vicious cycle of big agriculture trying to stay one step ahead of the next round of prohibited substances and techniques, and the green, vegan, hippy environmentalist trying to shut down all industry and return the world to a peasant based rural setting where the life expectancy of the noble's serfs is 35 years.

21 posted on 06/06/2013 7:48:25 AM PDT by Thommas (The snout of the camel is in the tent..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

It’s not the job of the Capitalist to defend corporations, but to defend a free market.

Many large corporations are not interested in any type of free-market.


22 posted on 06/06/2013 7:48:54 AM PDT by Tea Party Terrorist (Those who work for a living are now outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tea Party Terrorist

“It’s not the job of the Capitalist to defend corporations, but to defend a free market.”

It’s not the job of a capitalist to reflexively bash corporations that have been targeted by the left, either.


23 posted on 06/06/2013 7:52:52 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Monsanto gets quite a lot of our tax dollars as well. They have allies on both sides of the aisle. If their methods are so wonderful they can use their own profits for research, development, marketing, etc., instead of the profits from my paycheck. Monsanto is not the only corporation doing this, but this article isn’t about all of them. Because I dislike them I don’t directly purchase their products. We grow as much of our own food as possible from hierloom seeds and purchase meat and eggs from a local farmer that shares our ideas on food production. You see? I practice what I preach. Please don’t accuse me of doing otherwise. I have no problem with companies making money. I do have problems with crony capitalism tethered to an attempt to control my food supply.


24 posted on 06/06/2013 7:55:19 AM PDT by goodwithagun (My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue
Once again you can't resist proving to us that you've been spared from the ravages of scientific knowledge. You also seem intent on proving, yet again, that in addition to being a scientific illiterate, you are also an anti-capitalist.

Only this combination could create a kind of person who scoffs at the "science" proving anthropogenic global warming, yet embraces the nonsense in this article.

But here you are......

25 posted on 06/06/2013 7:57:42 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

What has to be understood is that fascists like the idea of a few huge businesses that drown out all small competitors.

There should be competition, and the small businesses need to compete on fair terms without the government favoring the big guys (or the small guys, for that matter.)


26 posted on 06/06/2013 7:59:44 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: slowhandluke

Well, then petition the companies to label them. You are the consumer, you have the power.


27 posted on 06/06/2013 8:00:27 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

Monsanto is the closest thing to a corporate manifestation of Satan that you can achieve on Earth.


28 posted on 06/06/2013 8:03:19 AM PDT by Lazamataz ("AP" clearly stands for American Pravda. Our news media has become completely and proudly Soviet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Well, Obama and the left are a bunch of fascists, and they hate Monsanto, so I don’t see that really supporting your thesis.


29 posted on 06/06/2013 8:05:09 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Tea Party Terrorist
Like so many others, you mistake effective competition with crony capitalism. Monsanto is successful because they provide products and services that the market wants. No one is placing a gun to the heads of the millions upon millions of free people who freely purchase Monsanto products.

Why otherwise conservative people enthusiastically join the left when this issue comes up remains a mystery, and is truly unfortunate.

30 posted on 06/06/2013 8:07:19 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
If they don’t like their products, then they can not buy them.

Fine with me, if they would allow food to be marked GMO. But this is not capitolism at work, this is crony capitolism its evil brother. Monsanto, by hook or crook fights truth in labeling laws, and anti monopoly laws so that he is only guy on the block, and he sells poison to people.

I would love it if it was just capitolism. But its politics instead.

31 posted on 06/06/2013 8:11:33 AM PDT by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MrB
What has to be understood is that fascists like the idea of a few huge businesses that drown out all small competitors.

You must really hate Wal-Mart as well. The dollar vote has made these companies successful, not unfair competition. Markets work, yet some people continue to resist them.

The same people who attack Monsanto for protecting their intellectual property, will demand our government do more to stop the Chinese from pirating American technology.

Why that inconsistency is lost on so many is mind-boggling.

32 posted on 06/06/2013 8:12:50 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Really? Leftists hate Monsanto? Maybe the sheeperals do, but control of the food supply is a major goal of the left.


33 posted on 06/06/2013 8:14:19 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Thommas

“What may be the biggest irony of this development in GM agriculture and public perception is that this has all come about because of the Greenies rabid hatred of effective, cheap pesticides, e.g. DDT, and herbicides.”

No, not quite. The left doesn’t really hate DDT, or Roundup, or GMO crops. Those are just targets of convenience on the way to their real goal, which is population control. Anything that helps produce more food per acre will be targeted by them eventually.


34 posted on 06/06/2013 8:15:26 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Yes, really, they hate Monsanto and they are the ones behind the campaign against them. Always have been.


35 posted on 06/06/2013 8:16:20 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MrB

“control of the food supply is a major goal of the left.”

Yes, this is true, and this is why they target Monsanto. They don’t want to just control the food supply, they want to reduce it, in order to achieve population control. Monsanto crops produce too much food for hungry mouths, so they must be eliminated.


36 posted on 06/06/2013 8:17:29 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: American in Israel
Monsanto, by hook or crook fights truth in labeling laws

You have no idea what you're talking about. If you are going to accuse a company of violating labeling laws, don't you think you should, at least, know something about those laws? The FDA only requires labeling if a food raises questions related to nutrition or safe use. There is no legitimate scientific evidence that brings the nutritional content and safety of GMO food into question.

Additionally, labeling mandates based solely on an alleged consumers’ ‘right to know,’ rather than on a product’s measurable characteristics, is in violation of the Constitution. This fact has been established by our courts.

You are not allowed to demonize a product, or to create fear about a product, unless you can prove that there is a problem with the nutrition or safety of that product. But that's exactly what the Luddites want to do. The organic food industry is doing all they can to foment anti-GMO hysteria. That way, more and more people can pay higher and higher prices for food that delivers absolutely zero additional benefits.

You may not like the law, but please stop denying what the law is.

37 posted on 06/06/2013 8:18:18 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

The methodology here is to get Monsanto “playing ball” with the gov’t/left by giving them special protections in exchange for more leftist/gov’t control.

Eventually you have the gov’t controlling Monsanto completely, and Monsanto controlling the food supply [nearly] completely, then you turn the screws on Monsanto and the food supply.


38 posted on 06/06/2013 8:19:53 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Monsanto is the closest thing to a corporate manifestation of Satan that you can achieve on Earth.

Then clearly a justification for killing the employees in the parking lot is provided, no? What is stopping you? While at it - anyone else we want to demonize to justify our righteous vengeance?

39 posted on 06/06/2013 8:22:03 AM PDT by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: corkoman
Then clearly a justification for killing the [Monsanto] employees in the parking lot is provided, no? What is stopping you?

Being an ass-monkey is totally optional; not sure why you selected that elective and voluntary behavior.


40 posted on 06/06/2013 8:33:49 AM PDT by Lazamataz ("AP" clearly stands for American Pravda. Our news media has become completely and proudly Soviet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

If this can happen to pigs that eat GM corn, imagine what it is doing to humans, even now?


41 posted on 06/06/2013 8:34:59 AM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

In my drunken stupor Ive got to admire your ingenuity.


42 posted on 06/06/2013 8:35:03 AM PDT by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: corkoman

LOL

Okay, that was funny raght thar...


43 posted on 06/06/2013 8:35:51 AM PDT by Lazamataz ("AP" clearly stands for American Pravda. Our news media has become completely and proudly Soviet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

replacing them with fishmeal and non-GM soybean instead


So he changed two variables that we can see. And most likely there were other ones.

My observation is that as we have increased yields of crops, oil and protein content have been decreased. It may be that he was not preparing a good feed.

Too much going on here to point at GM.


44 posted on 06/06/2013 8:39:38 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mase

And you continue to prove for us your support of those wishing to obtain control of the food supply, your support for a “product” that has not been proven safe, and your ongoing, unrelenting support for an industry steeped in deception & crony capitalism

Do you even support the labeling of GMO products? If not, why not? Are you anti-free market??

I am not the anti-capitalist. Those who pledge their support to the GMO industry, specifically Monsanto, are the anti-capitalists.


45 posted on 06/06/2013 8:54:52 AM PDT by surroundedbyblue (Why am I both pro-life & pro-gun? Because both positions defend the innocent and protect the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

“There is a wonderful conservative solution for those who are hysterical about Monsanto, though. If they don’t like their products, then they can not buy them.”

If only it were that simple. Monsanto’s junk products are overtaking the market due to their legislative & judicial protection. And their heavy-handedness has also prevented required labeling of products that contain GMOs. Ever ask yourself why a company would try so hard & spend so much money to stifle competition & the free market??

Hm...


46 posted on 06/06/2013 9:00:13 AM PDT by surroundedbyblue (Why am I both pro-life & pro-gun? Because both positions defend the innocent and protect the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

bmflr


47 posted on 06/06/2013 9:08:48 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American in Israel

I’m not buying into it. Monsanto lobbies for favorable legislation just like millions of other business. They are not a monopoly, and food is not poison.


48 posted on 06/06/2013 9:12:34 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

“Monsanto’s junk products are overtaking the market due to their legislative & judicial protection.”

No, they have overtaken the market because they deliver a superior product that consumers demand over their competition.

“And their heavy-handedness has also prevented required labeling of products that contain GMOs.”

Prevented required labeling? If the laws don’t get passed, then the labeling is not required. If you want the labeling, then write your representatives, instead of bashing Monsanto.

“Ever ask yourself why a company would try so hard & spend so much money to stifle competition & the free market??”

Every company tries to stifle competition and dominate the market. That’s how business works.


49 posted on 06/06/2013 9:16:18 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MrB

“The methodology here is to get Monsanto “playing ball” with the gov’t/left by giving them special protections in exchange for more leftist/gov’t control.”

If that is the plan, then why is the left demonizing them instead of giving them special protections? I guess some cogs in the great conspiracy did not get the memo.


50 posted on 06/06/2013 9:19:48 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson