

Visit our Re-post guidelines This article is copyrighted by GreenMedInfo LLC, 2015

The truth is that the GMO and vaccine agendas are the same; only, activists appear to think there is a difference.

Few things are as disturbing to me as the divide that exists between the GMO and vaccine awareness movements. If you look closely you'll see the exact same concerns: the violation of informed consent, the neglect of the precautionary principle, predominance of industry propaganda over actual science, the revolving door between government regulators and legislators and industry, and the undermining of the fundamental right of bodily self-possession, the keystone of health freedom. And yet, these two groups behave as if they are fighting their own separate battles, with the end result that they usually are.

Non-GMO Blindspot

There are numerous examples of how these movements are lost without one another. For instance, the non-GMOs movement adamantly supports organic production methods, correct? But if you look at big players, such as Organic Valley and Horizon Organic, both openly utilize vaccines in their veterinary care practices, some of which either contain genetically modified components, adventitious retroviruses that alter host DNA sequences and/or expression, or utilize pathogens which have been genetically altered in a way that may result in altered genetic expression in the vaccinated animal and/or those who consume these animal products. These obviously non-organic practices and/or consequences to the consumer are perfectly legal: the USDA Organic standards not only permit vaccination, but consider it the only pharmaceutical product that should be administered to cows in the absence of obvious disease. Clearly, what is legal is not always right. Many companies are perfectly happy milking the muti-billion dollar organic market at the expense of haplessly loyal consumers who buy "organic-washed" products.

Even the Non-GMO Project, which while performing a valuable service of independently certifying foods as non-GMO, also generates a false sense of consumer security because many of these non-GMO foods still contain pesticides, and in the case of "non-GMO" oats, agrochemicals like glyphosate (Roundup). This is because non-GMO certification is radically different from USDA organic certification. And what really needs to happen is that non-GMO products must also be verified to be clear of common GM agrochemicals like glyphosate and its metabolite byproducts (AMPA).

The goal is to be assured we aren't being poisoned by our food, is it not?

If so, the non-GMO movement needs to shift its focus to a deeper appreciation and criticism of the institutional/systemic problems that subtend the relatively myopic fixation on GMO labeling initiatives to broader concerns with environmental destruction and widespread toxicant exposures that come with modern food production methods.

GMOs in Vaccines?

And then there is a topic few on the non-GMO side seem to want to tackle head on: the present-day vaccine schedule contains a wide range of genetically modified ingredients that are being injected directly into the most vulnerable infants and children in our population. The HPV vaccine, for instance, which is comprised of a genetically modified form of yeast containing HPV-like antigens, has the worst adverse reports events (some lethal) on record. Mind you, it has never once been proven to prevent a single case of cervical cancer because proxy markers for efficacy and not clinical proof were all the FDA required for its approval. Where is the non-GMO uproar about this? How do the most vulnerable and victimized populations benefit from the non-GMO and non-vaccine movements turning away from one another, or claiming that the explosion of autism diagnoses is only caused by either GMO foods or vaccines, not both, which is the more obvious likelihood?

Even the rage against Monsanto, widely considered "the world's most evil corporation," may constitute a diversionary tactic against the increasing number of activists in need of a suitable, socially sanctioned object of catharsis. Millions marched against Monsanto, but how many were aware that Monsanto is owned by an even larger corporation, Pfizer, who has been expanding its vaccine portfolio and influence on vaccine legislation while the public eye has been largely focused on labeling GMOs. [1]:

Former Monsanto is today known as Pharmacia LLC. Pharmacia is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer Inc., which operates the Pharmaceutical business." [Source: Monsanto: Who We Are]

But you can't just blame one or two companies for the increasingly bleak picture. The direction of technological science, unguided by internal ethical principles or external regulatory controls, is towards the complete convergence of the vaccine and GMO agendas in a way that precludes informed consent and any vestige of consumer/patient choice. This abstract provides insight into what I mean:

J Biosci Bioeng. 2014 Oct;118(4):441-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2014.04.004. Epub 2014 May 1. Stable accumulation of seed storage proteins containing vaccine peptides in transgenic soybean seeds. Maruyama N1, Fujiwara K2, Yokoyama K2, Cabanos C2, Hasegawa H3, Takagi K4, Nishizawa K5, Uki Y2, Kawarabayashi T6, Shouji M6, Ishimoto M4, Terakawa T3. Abstract There has been a significant increase in the use of transgenic plants for the large-scale production of pharmaceuticals and industrial proteins. Here, we report the stable accumulation of seed storage proteins containing disease vaccine peptides in transgenic soybean seeds. To synthesize vaccine peptides in soybean seeds, we used seed storage proteins as a carrier and a soybean breeding line lacking major seed storage proteins as a host.Vaccine peptides were inserted into the flexible disordered regions in the A1aB1b subunit three-dimensional structure. The A1aB1b subunit containing vaccine peptides in the disordered regions were sorted to the protein storage vacuoles where vaccine peptides are partially cleaved by proteases. In contrast, the endoplasmic reticulum (ER)-retention type of the A1aB1b subunit containing vaccine peptides accumulated in compartments that originated from the ER as an intact pro-form. These results indicate that the ER may be an organelle suitable for the stable accumulation of bioactive peptides using seed storage proteins as carriers.

Above, a genetically modified soy bean (transgenic soy) has been engineered to express proteins that would be used to produce a vaccine against pathological brain structures found in Alzheimer's disease. Not an isolated case, there is a wide range of research now on the development of vaccines using plants and animals (bioreactors) to produce biological products, including half human (chimeric) proteins to be used in medicine. Some of these vaccines are intended to be edible. What could possibly go wrong with such GMOs? Consider that biopollution with transgenes are forever, and that if the species containing the transgenes produces pollen, it could "biorape" non-GMO plants, converting them into GM vaccine-antigen producing plants. This is not science fiction, rather, a logical inevitability once these organisms are created and released into the biosphere.

Is not the underlying concept of GMO-produced edible vaccines the perfect illustration of our point: the two movements need to acknowledge they face the same adversaries. The GMO and vaccine agendas are essentially the same, with the same controllers and the same intention of forced implementation, especially if we fail to act together.

Genetically Engineering Ourselves: DNA Vaccines

But there is an even more salient example of the merger of these two agendas: DNA vaccines. This is the next iteration of the vaccine agenda: infecting host cells with transgenes that will take over and cause infected cells to produce vaccine antigen within your body. How healthy does this sound? This is what I would call a prime example of applied transhumanism.

While millions now fight for the right to label their breakfast cereals or Starbucks latte's GMO or non-GMO, the other side of the same massive, global biotech industry is developing technology to genetically modify YOU and your children . Which is scarier? Which is more relevant? And why is the non-GMO movement not joining forces with the non-Vaccine movement, which is up against a tidal wave of legislation to effectively make compliance with all present and future vaccine recommendations mandatory (and there are over 140 in development!). California was lost to this carefully architected human rights monstrosity, and now the dominos are set to fall all over the country, including the state you live in.

This is a dismal picture, but there are signs that leaders in the movement are waking up to the necessity of collaboration, and are keen to the fact that the exact same controllers – individuals, corporations and governments -- are orchestrating both the pro-GM and pro-vaccine agendas, and benefiting profoundly by fragmenting us.

Perhaps next time you are thinking about ousting GMOs by "voting with your fork," you would be well served to consider with equal vehemence that removal of exemptions against GMO-containing vaccines is worse than "forced feeding."

[1] https://www.pfizer.com/system/files/presentation/ProxyStatement2015.pdf