Groundbreaking study identifies two bacteria in the gut that trigger MS

expose-news.com ^ | August 5, 2025 | Rhoda Wilson, Dr. Jessica Rose

[HereInTheHeartland]

What you are promoting is an elitist anti science position .
The Sri Lanka disaster is relevant as it was done when a small group elite leaders imposed an edict on the nations agricultural system. People starved .
It’s the same mentality you are promoting. Yes you can find an unsound study saying GMO’s aren’t safe.
There are dozens showing the opposite.
These ideas come from elites and steal money through higher costs from normal people trying to feed their families .
Again the same mentality of the greenies wanting to ban fossil fuels. It’s a religious belief for these people .
And don’t say it’s off topic.
It’s part of the same mish mash of un scientific beliefs.

[linMcHlp]

bttt

[so_real]

Wrong, and you are utterly off topic. I have stated specifically I support hybridization and modern farm mechanization, but oppose genetically modifying organisms to turn our agriculture into pesticide manufacturing plants poisoning the food we ultimately consume. Rather than accepting my assertion, you have thrown-up all manor of Luddite attributes to my person that exist exclusively in your own head. You acknowledge that handling pesticides is dangerous, but close your eyes and plug your ears rather than consider consuming pesticide producing vegetation is likewise dangerous. If not wanting to consume pesticides is "elitist" then we should all be elitist, but that description for the term likewise only exists inside your own head. The desire not to consume pesticides is not remotely "elitist".

https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/2021PDPAnnualSummary.pdf

More than 99 percent of the products sampled through PDP had residues below the established EPA tolerances. Ultimately, if EPA determines a pesticide use is not safe for human consumption, EPA will mitigate exposure to the pesticide through actions such as amending the pesticide label instructions or changing or revoking a pesticide residue tolerance, or not registering a new use.

So more than 99% of the sampled food items contained pesticide residue, and 1% contained pesticide residue at higher than EPA deemed safe level exposure. I look forward to the labeling instructions showing where the GMO pesticide producing agriculture falls into that spectrum. If only the "food lobby" were not spending 100s of millions of dollars desperately trying to prevent GMO food labeling:

Food Lobby Spends $101 Million in 2015 to Avert GMO Labeling
https://www.ewg.org/research/food-lobby-spends-101-million-2015-avert-gmo-labeling

Gee, I wonder what they are trying to hide. If you have your way, we'll never know, will we, and your neighbors will continue consuming pesticides and suffering for it ... or, hopefully, they will wise up and stop eating the glue.

[HereInTheHeartland]

“Gee, I wonder what they are trying to hide.”

You are quoting the Environmental Working Group another radical leftwing group. They are funded by the organic food industry and likely other radical leftist groups.
Why are you spouting extreme leftist information on Free Republic?

[so_real]

Nope, "gee, I wonder what they are trying to hide" is an expression I use frequently. I use it with the Pfizer covering up mRNA vaccine safety studies. I use it with Congress covering-up sexual assault case pay-offs. I use it with Epstein redactions covering-up for the island visitors. Etc, etc, etc. Only in your brain do you attribute my use of such a common phrase to an activist group. Just another strawman argument in a series of strawmen you've constructed. And, quite literally, everyone on Free Republic who knows me would not confuse me with a "leftist" anything. So, shooting the messenger logical fallacy? Stay on topic.

[HereInTheHeartland]

I’m glad they are spending money lobbying.
Your leftist friends have huge resource amounts they are using to stop agriculture.
Glyphosate in particular they are trying to ban .
Do you realize that usage of that has allowed a much lower amount of tillage to be done thus saving precious topsoil ?
Yes that needs to be defended!!!

[so_real]

You are "glad they are spending money lobbying" to prevent truth-in-advertising labeling in GMO foods. It's settled then. Your ambition is to enable pesticide laden agriculture to be put into the mouths of your friends and neighbors without their knowledge. You wouldn't even allow them the opportunity to read the label and choose for themselves what they will and will not serve to their families. Is that correct? If so, I think we have reached the heart of the debate. And when submitted to vote, the conclusion as to which of us has the conservative viewpoint, and which one of is either leftist at worst or RINO at best is clear.

[HereInTheHeartland]

“to prevent truth-in-advertising labeling in GMO foods”

I’m GLAD they are spending money to counter left wing fake science lies. The EWG you quoted is one of the worst.
Their leader is a wacko.

[so_real]

You keep tossing up strawmen to attack. Celebrating the use of hundreds of millions of dollars to prevent transparency is never a conservative position -- not in government, not in vaccinations, not in criminal acts, and not in food production. But I'm glad you are here on this conservative forum regardless. Keep reading.

[HereInTheHeartland]

“ Celebrating the use of hundreds of millions of dollars ”

But it’s ok for your EWG friends to make up fake science and disparage farmers?
Cmon man.
People that support EWG aren’t conservatives .
EWG is to the left of the Sierra Club.
Ken Cook who runs it is radical left

[HereInTheHeartland]

“ Your ambition is to enable pesticide laden agriculture to be put into the mouths of your friends and neighbors without their knowledge. ”

And this sentence in one of your earlier posts CLEARLY shows what you think of farmers.
Man oh man.
In all seriousness you really should spend time on a modern farm.
Not some hippie on the edge of town with 2 acres of organic chard .
But a real farm that feeds people .

[so_real]

More strawmen. I don't know the EWG or have EWG friends. Only in your mind does such a link exist. And you keep tossing it up like a strawman so you can beat it down. Go ahead. Beat it to death. It does not affect me even tangentially. After all the lies you've tossed into this thread, when you say the EWG are or are not conservative, I can't trust you. I'd have to look them up to discover their views for myself because I simply cannot trust your interpretation of their views given your gross and persistent misrepresentation of my views. My point stands -- you celebrating the use of hundreds of millions of dollars to prevent transparency and enable the food industry to embed pesticide production into the DNA of the food we eat is not and will never be a conservation position. We encourage full transparency. We encourage truth in advertising. We encourage product labeling. We encourage analysis based on merit. We encourage freedom of choice. You are actively advocating the opposite of all these things while accusing *others* of being "leftist". That is wild to me. You are an interesting character.

[so_real]

"conservative position", not "conservation position", rather.

[so_real]

“ Your ambition is to enable pesticide laden agriculture to be put into the mouths of your friends and neighbors without their knowledge. ”

And this sentence in one of your earlier posts CLEARLY shows what you think of farmers.

No. Try reading that again slowly to gain comprehension. That sentence from one of my earlier posts CLEARLY shows what I think of YOU. The word "Your" in the sentence subject "Your ambition" is a clear giveaway that I am referring to YOU and not to farmers as a collective group. And in that very same post, I followed up my analysis with an opportunity for YOU to refute my conclusion with the question "Is that correct?". And, interestingly, you didn't refute it. I have to presume my analysis was correct and that is indeed your ambition.

Fortunately, not all farmers are like you and not all advocate hiding the presence of GMO pesticides in produced food. Some are actually advocating for truth-in-advertising GMO product labeling. Indeed, over 400 organizations across the spectrum of food production supported the "Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015". It's a shame that bill died in the Senate as the folks you celebrate lobbied against it.