Doctor Says Genetically Modified Wheat a Perfect, Chronic Poison

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Doctor Says Genetically Modified Wheat a Perfect, Chronic Poison

Wednesday, December 5, 2012 11:35

By Lisa Garber
theintelhub.com
December 5, 2012

Many of us are shunning wheat for lots of reasons, but we usually cite gluten as the culprit. Cardiologist and author Dr. William Davis, however, says it’s not gluten that makes modern wheat a “perfect, chronic poison.” It’s the fact that genetically modified wheat has become the wheat we know today.

Davis spoke on “CBS This Morning” earlier this year about one of agribusiness’s biggest creations—the word “creation” not used lightly.
Genetically Modified Wheat – Increased Appetite, Altered Genome

“[Modern wheat is] an 18-inch tall plant created by genetic research in the ‘60s and ‘70s This thing has many new features nobody told you about, such as there’s a new protein in this thing called gliadin. It’s not gluten. I’m not addressing people with gluten sensitivities and celiac disease. I’m talking about everybody else because everybody else is susceptible to the gliadin protein that is an opiate. This thing binds into the opiate receptors in your brain and in most people stimulates appetite, such that we consume 440 more calories per day, 365 days per year.”

Increasing hankerings and padding on pounds aren’t all genetically modified wheat is capable of doing. A new GM wheat in development by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CIRO), an Australian governmental research agency, may permanently alter the genes of the humans and animals that consume it.

“Through ingestion,” says Professor Jack Heinemann of the University of Canterbury Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety, “these olecules can enter human beings and potentially silence our genes.” The double stranded RNAs present in this genetically modified wheat would also survive cooking, digestion, and generations of life.

But what about all the hype over whole grains? Several health resources like the Mayo Clinic advocate ditching white wheat for less processed varieties, but Davis claims that is like replacing unfiltered with filtered cigarettes.GM Whole Grains Like Filtered Cigarettes

“That’s the logic of nutrition; it’s a deeply flawed logic.”

Instead of genetically modified wheat, Davis advocates eating “real foods” like avocados, olives, olive oil, eats, and vegetables. While Davis does tell consumers to favor food least likely to be changed by agribusiness, the CBS source, unfortunately, does not directly address variables like organic and small-scale farming versus conventionally raised and pesticide-drenched vegetables or pasture-raised versus factory-farmed meats.
GM Not the Answer to Feeding the Nation

Genetically modified foods pose a threat to people (not just consumers), animals, and the planet Pesticides for GM corn pollute our water and often contaminate organic products. Although the issue of feeding the world is a complex and emotional one, GM food—and the poisoning of entire populations of people—is not the answer.

http://naturalsociety.com/gm-wheat-p...-human-genome/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505269_1...n-doctor-says/

http://naturalsociety.com/genetically-modified-foods/

http://naturalsociety.com/insecticid...lluting-water/

http://naturalsociety.com/organic-fo...os-pesticides/

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative...n-2508446.html

[Fish]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Yet, it was published on a university site. They must have thought something of it to post that it once grew wild.<---- the latter being the reason I used it. It matched what my doctor told me.

Everything grew wild at some point in the past. That's not a shocking revelation...

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

This is the second post where you've put words into my posts I did not use, such as "wheat is bad". I did not make a blanket generality but a specific statement about the rise in allergies.

This is what I posted:



Let me know when you can read instead creating a bunch of straw man arguments.

I'm growing "new" wheat. Even though it has come about just like you're "old" wheat that is a different plant.

You stated there is a rise in gluten intollerance or wheat allergies. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you are asserting that sickness and disorders are bad.

You then stated that the gluten intollerance and wheat allergies are due to how the "new" wheat has been "altered". I'm assuming you mean bred. Which mind you is the same way that you "old" wheat is/was bred. Because there really isn't any way to alter it during growth. If you are referring to how it is processed into foods and flours, then it isn't the problem with the wheat, it is a problem with the processing.

So if you're asserting that my "new" wheat is different than you're "old" wheat because of the way it has bred and has led to intollerance and disorders that are assumed to be bad, then yeah, you're saying my wheat is bad.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

I'm growing "new" wheat. Even though it has come about just like you're "old" wheat that is a different plant.

You stated there is a rise in gluten intollerance or wheat allergies. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you are asserting that sickness and disorders are bad.

You then stated that the gluten intollerance and wheat allergies are due to how the "new" wheat has been "altered". I'm assuming you mean bred. Which mind you is the same way that you "old" wheat is/was bred. Because there really isn't any way to alter it during growth. If you are referring to how it is processed into foods and flours, then it isn't the problem with the wheat, it is a problem with the processing.

So if you're asserting that my "new" wheat is different than you're "old" wheat because of the way it has bred and has led to intollerance and disorders that are assumed to be bad, then yeah, you're saying my wheat is bad.

No that's your extrapolation.

Alteration changes the food is what I am saying. That alteration can affect reaction to the food. Even fermenting a food can change a person's reaction.
Also, to those in natural health, nature is preferred as it has things in it man has yet to isolate.

Plus, academia is a profession that has been monopolized by the state. This was one of your and some other's sources. I am not very pro-state because it's ham-fisted way of doing things generally. This is not to say all they do is bad.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

No that's your extrapolation.

Alteration changes the food is what I am saying. That alteration can affect reaction to the food. Even fermenting a food can change a person's reaction.
Also, to those in natural health, nature is preferred as it has things in it man has yet to isolate.

Plus, academia is a profession that has been monopolized by the state. This was one of your and some other's sources. I am not very pro-state because it's ham-fisted way of doing things generally. This is not to say all they do is bad.

JFC you're a dumb gypsy.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by Fish

JFC you're a dumb gypsy.

Thank you for conceding.

That happens to be the standard point of view of natural health industry...certainly the ones that are organic, insist on whole food vitamins due to the co-factors than have not been isolated by man yet, or eat grass-fed beef?

Explain to me why I cannot eat safflower oil, but when I use it on my skin with an organic product I don't get the same hives then?

Could it be a different kind?

[theelusiveeightrop]

Opiates make you eat? Wildly misinformed. Doctor of what? Quack.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by theelusiveeightrop

Opiates make you eat? Wildly misinformed. Doctor of what? Quack.

Who said opiates make "you eat?" Typical msm viewpoint on the "quack" point.

You do know that medical doctors called chiros quacks for years?
Their AMA was found quilty of slandering a whole profession in order to eliminate it. Some people hate competition and free markets.
Meanwhile, how many die from properly prescribed pharmaceuticals? It's no wonder that these same folks have tried to get vitamin supplements regulated or buy them out, then replace the amounts in them to weaker amounts.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Thank you for conceding.

That happens to be the standard point of view of natural health industry...certainly the ones that are organic, insist on whole food vitamins due to the co-factors than have not been isolated by man yet, or eat grass-fed beef?

Explain to me why I cannot eat safflower oil, but when I use it on my skin with an organic product I don't get the same hives then?

Could it be a different kind?

There is nothing to be isolated. The entire genome has been sequenced. And you have no comprehension of what that means. So we're left at an impasse here with you arguing that your homeopathic acquaintance knows more about the genetic structure of wheat than the agriculture industry worldwide who have been working on it for decades. And your only justification for your position, is that you ingested some form of wheat and got allergies, then ingested another form and didn't. It's clear that you don't understand the topic, and are only relying on your personal experience, and extrapolating that to the entire history of wheat production.

Your little personal anecdote about reaction to safflower oil is irrelevant. Whatever reactions you may have to ingesting or topically applying that to your own skin isn't applicable to anyone but you. That is proof of nothing but your own ****ed up immunological makeup.

[Huffmeister]

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

One is natural and the other causes random unknown mutations, I'll let you guess which is which.

"Random unknown mutations" is exactly what nature has been doing for the last few billion years. So they sound like exactly the same thing.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

No that's your extrapolation.

What the goddamned ****? What did I extrapolate? The only ****ing thing I extrapolated was that your term "alteration" means something other than breeding. At which point, you're a ****ing idiot because there is no other way to alter the plant until the grain is processed.

I guess you could say that I extrapolated that you think gluten intollerance and allergies are bad. If they aren't bad, then why the **** are you arguing so passionately about it?

What the **** did I extrapolate?

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Alteration changes the food is what I am saying. That alteration can affect reaction to the food. Even fermenting a food can change a person's reaction.
Also, to those in natural health, nature is preferred as it has things in it man has yet to isolate.

What the **** are you talking about? Alterations to something changes it? My ****ing GOD! How did we miss that? Again, I assume you are talking about breeding. If you breed different characteristics into a plant it is going to be different. That's the point.

Fermenting changes how someone reacts to it? So if someone eats fermented corn they'll respond differently than if they eat cornmeal? I don't get what the hell you are saying.

Nature is preferred? You think I'm growing wheat in a lab? Or are you suggesting that your spelt is better than wheat? Because spelt has been hybridized too. And in the exact same manner that wheat has. If it is better it is because it is a different ****ing plant.

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Plus, academia is a profession that has been monopolized by the state. This was one of your and some other's sources. I am not very pro-state because it's ham-fisted way of doing things generally. This is not to say all they do is bad.

LOL WUT? So it is all a conspiracy? It is all the states fault because they have done research on a product that the industry chose to grow a plant that makes a seed that you're allergic to?

[Radar Chief]

Originally Posted by Fish

There is nothing to be isolated.

Originally Posted by Buehler445

What did I extrapolate?

You guys realize you’re arguing with a crazy person, right?
I mean, go right ahead, just so you know.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by Radar Chief

You guys realize you’re arguing with a crazy person, right?
I mean, go right ahead, just so you know.

Ohhhhhh. She's crazy?

I thought maybe I was getting trolled.

This thread reminds me why I stay the **** out of the DC. JFC.

[Buehler445]

http://www.kew.org/science/ecbot/pap...t2001wheat.pdf

Oh, and Buc, read pages 39 and 40 of this scanned paper. It is from the Institute of Archaeology, from the University College London, so it isn't some "ham handed" "state" school that just ****s everything up.

It marks your precious spelt as a domesticated hulled wheat. It marks "bread wheat" as domesticated freethreshing wheat. It then goes on to say, "Domestication is the process by which humans take reproductive control of plants or animals, modifying them for their own purposes. Selection pressures applied - consciously or unconsciously - in cultivation and harvesting have resulted in significant adaptations of crops to human needs." This means that the ancients have "altered" your precious spelt.

Also read this.
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/afcm/spelt.html

Spelt (Triticum aestivum var. spelta) is a sub-species of common wheat. It has been grown in Europe for about 300 years. Spelt was introduced to the United States in the 1890s.

Most of the nation's spelt acreage is in Ohio. That state grows between 100,000 and 200,000 acres of spelt annually, about 10 times more than any other state. A few varieties of spelt were developed in the early part of this century. They are no longer identifiable, and spelt has been considered an undeveloped crop. In 1986, The Ohio State University released an improved winter variety, named 'Champ'.

Spelt is often erroneously called "speltz." Sometimes emmer, another subspecies of wheat that includes dururn wheat, is incorrectly called spelt.

Spelt you buy is treated and has been treated throughout human history the same as wheat. In fact, OSU came out with a new variety, just like KSU, OSU, and aTm do with wheat.

And that took me 5 mintues to research.

[Dave Lane]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

KSU, Texas A&M, and to a lesser extent Oklahoma State have most of the talent involving wheat gentics in the US. In fact, before Monsanto and Syngenta got in the game a decade or so ago, ALL OF THE WHEAT IN THE NATION came from "state" schools. Wheat genetics for a long time were considered public information and couldn't be privatized.

JFC.

And for ****s ****ing sake, he's an ALLERGY doctor trained in NUTRION. And you're thinking he knows more about wheat than "state" schools who are responsible for about 85% of the wheat genetics in the country?

My god. Why the **** do I post in the DC?

Oh crap now you will probably get 2 neg reps from BEP. You are probably a sick puppy. I am.

[Dave Lane]

Originally Posted by Bump

you are probably right about the article being BS. But they sure as hell wouldn't alert people if it really would kill. In fact, they would do everything that they could to cover it up and would do it again for profits.

You do realize that the "scientists" and whatever bogey men you imagine eat the same food the rest of us do.

So if it was poison and they and their families are going to be poisoned by it you don't think they would object?