Monday, November 14, 2005

Are We Being Murdered By Science Gone Mad - the New Nazi Rechts 2006

D'Anne Burley of The D'Anne Burley Show featured on Truthradio.com
Mon-Wed 6 pm Central Time

D'ANNE'S SCIENCE GONE MAD REPORT

IS THIS WHY
BIO-SCIENTIST
OUR BEING MURDERED?


CREATING CROSS-GENETIC EXPERIMENTS
CREATING CROSS -GENETIC DISEASE FOR WEAPONS USED AGAINST PEOPLE

CREATING NEW SPECIES

Genetically modified monkey could be key to curing some diseases


Monkeys like ANDi with modified genes may lead to better research on human diseases

January 18, 2001
Web posted at: 12:29 p.m. EST (1729 GMT)


CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE



Note from D'Anne;

From another report it states:
First, 224 monkey eggs were mixed with a virus carrying a jellyfish gene. The eggs were then fertilized.

One can just imagine that these experiments also have placed at risk new levels of cross specie diseases in this case from monkey to jellyfish and from jellyfish to monkey. Will the
y have a cure for these diseases from the cross over spieces or will it cause many within both speices to die off?

Under the microscope these new hybrid species are the cause of many new diseases which are killing many on this planet. Such as Bird Flu, Mad Cow, Cow Pox, Mouse Pox and
others where they claim not to have acure. But indeed DNA can obtain the origin of diseases down to the most complex cells. Therefore if they created it they can, do and are able to cure it.


Our these Experiments being used to elimate many of with the World population which occurs eacg millenium?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BIOTECHOLOGY GONE WILD

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
read the full article

Although there is a certain elegance in the investigation reported by Netherwood et al.1 in the February issue studying the transfer of 'transgenic' DNA from a recombinant DNA−modified plant to the people who eat it or to their microflora, arguably there is less to these experiments than meets the eye. More than anything, they seem to prove the artificiality of the semantic constructs 'transgene' and 'transgenic,' which refer specifically to the movement of genes across species or other phylogenetic groupings by means of molecular (that is, recombinant DNA) techniques.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------


In the Beginning ( well we will begin here) there was Mendal

Mendel And The Human Genome Project
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1856
Gregor Mendel begins experiments cross-breeding the garden pea.
1859
Charles Darwin publishes On the Origin of Species.
1865
Mendel presents his paper on the results and his interpretation of his experiments, at the monthly meetings, 8 February and 8 March, of the Naturforschenden Vereins in Brno, the Natural Science Society.
1866
Mendel publishes Versuche über Pflanzen-hybriden in the Society's journal. He sends out offprints but these are ignored.
1871
Friedrich Miescher reports the discovery of nuclein from isolated cell nuclei; though nuclein is now understood to be a mixture of nucleic acids (DNA and RNA) and protein, this is the first work with nucleic acids.
1887
August Weisman, under the microscope, disentangles the dance of the chromosomes in meiosis (formation of the germ cells). He points out that each chromosome must carry a great number of determinants of hereditary characters, and speculates about the minute size of them.
1900
Carl Correns and Hugo de Vries, working independently, rediscover Mendel's rules and then his paper; Erich von Tschermak plays a minor role. William Bateson publicises Mendel's work to the Royal Horticultural Society of London and soon translates his paper.
1902
Walter Sutton promotes the chromosome theory of inheritance, namely, that chromosomes can be seen to behave just like the Mendelian elements (soon to be called genes) and that each chromosome must carry many of them; Theodor Boveri makes a similar observation.
1902-1909
Bateson coins the terms genetics, allelomorph, (now shortened to allele), homozygote, heterozygote and others.
1909
Archibald Garrod originates the subspecialty of biochemical genetics by demonstrating that certain human diseases are inborn errors of metabolism, inherited as Mendelian recessive characters.
1910
Thomas Hunt Morgan finds a mutant eye-colour in the fruitfly, Drosophila, and discovers sex linkage. He proposes that the genes located on the same chromosome are linked together and can recombine by exchange of chromosome segments, called crossing over.
1913
Alfred Henry Sturtevant draws the first genetic map, using cross-over frequencies between six sex-linked Drosophila genes to show their relative locations on the X chromosome.
1927
Hermann Muller demonstrates that x rays can induce genetic mutations in Drosophila.
1931
Harriet Creighton and Barbara McClintock, and Curt Stern independently, find the first direct proof, in cells under the microscope, that crossing-over takes place.
1941
George Beadle and Edward Tatum, working with the biochemical genetics of the mold Neurospora, propose the "one gene-one enzyme" theory.
1940s
Max Delbrück and Salvador Luria, and Jacques Monod independently, demonstrate that bacteria have genes.
1944
Oswald Avery, Colin MacLeod, and Maclyn McCarty publish strong evidence that DNA is the hereditary material.
1949
Frederick Sanger, working with the insulin molecule, publishes the first evidence that the sequence of amino acids in a protein chain is unique to that protein.
1949
Erwin Chargaff publishes evidence that the proportions of the four kinds of nucleotides, the components that make up a strand of DNA, are the same in all cells of a given creature but vary greatly from one species to another. DNA is set free to carry genetic information.
1953
James Watson and Francis Crick elucidate the three-dimensional molecular structure of DNA, the double helix. They relied partly on unpublished x-ray crystallographic data obtained by Rosalind Franklin and by Maurice Wilkins.
1957-'58
Crick proposes the Central Dogma of molecular biology, which states that genetic information, meaning specific sequences, can move among nucleic acids and into protein, "but that once information has passed into protein it cannot get out again".
1958
Matthew Meselson and Franklin Stahl demonstrate that DNA replicates semi-con-servatively, as the Watson-Crick structure requires.
1950s
François Jacob and Jacques Monod, in a long series of experiments, establish the existence of control functions located on the chromosome which turn the expression of genes on or off.
1961
Jacob, Crick, Sydney Brenner, and others work out the general scheme of the transcription of the information in DNA into messenger RNA and the translation of mRNA into protein. Brenner, Jacob, and Meselson find mRNA in bacterial cells.
1961
Crick and colleagues demonstrate that the genetic information is carried in three-nucleotide sets, called codons, of which there are 64, each coding for one of the 20 amino acids of protein chains; three codons turn out to be stop signals.
1961
Marshall Nirenberg and Heinrich Matthaei get the first and second codons to be identified.
1961-'67
Nirenberg, Severo Ochoa, H. Gobind Khorana, and others, in a furious race, determine the rest of the genetic code.
1970s
Paul Berg, Stanley N. Cohen, and others develop methods for cutting DNA up and recombining the fragments in novel sequences: recombinant DNA, or genetic engineering, is launched.
1977
Sanger invents a remarkable method for sequencing DNA; Walter Gilbert and Allan Maxam independently devise another.
1983
For the first time, the gene defect that causes a human disorder-Huntington's disease-is located exactly on a chromosome and so isolated for study.
1995
First bacterial genome sequenced (Haemophilus influenzae).
1995
Genomes sequenced of bacteria Mycoplasma genitalium and Escherichia coli, yeast
2000
(Saccharomyces cerevisiae), roundworm (Caenorhabditis elegans), fruitfly (Drosophila melanogaster) and mustard cress (Arabidopsis thaliana).
1999
First human chromosome sequenced (chromosome 22).
2002
The mouse genome sequenced.
2003
First full draft of the human-genome sequence completed.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Introduction of genetically modified food has raised a number of fears, some genuine and some irrational. Human fears, whether genuine or irrational, have to be attended to. New pharmaceutical products are tested for their efficacy as well as their side effects before being marketed. Any new variety of plants is tested for its qualities before being released. So too, genetically modified plants, before they are approved for cultivation, need to be tested for their quality, and particularly to ascertain whether they are in any way toxic to humans. Proper precautions and controls have to be exercised before they are marketed. It is certainly self-defeating if we wholly ban all genetically modified organisms on account of certain problems and fears.

The author did his doctoral studies in plant breeding at the Max-Planck Institute for Plant Breeding in Cologne, Germany. He is currently doing tissue culture and molecular studies of some important crops of India. The paper has been written in consultation with his team, Dr Smitha Hegde, Dr A C Augustin

e, M Anuradha and Sashikiran Nivas.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REPORTED BY BBC NEWS YOU MISSED


Monday, March 8, 1999 Published at 19:56 GMT


UK Politics

GM-row scientist 'would do it again'

Rats were fed potatoes modified with a gene from the snowdrop

The scientist at the centre of a row over the safety of genetically-modified food has said he would raise concern about his experiments again if he had to.

Dr Arpad Pusztai, a former researcher at the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, was giving evidence to the Commons Science and Technology Committee

He became embroiled in a major political row after he aired concerns about the results of his experiments on ITV's World In Action programme last year.

[ image: Dr Pusztai:
Dr Pusztai: "There ought to be concern"
The scientist fed potatoes modified with a gene from the snowdrop to rats. The gene produces a chemical that can be toxic.

It has been claimed the animals used in one experiment showed slight growth retardation, an effect on the immune system and changes in the weight of their internal organs.

Dr Pusztai was accused of confusing the results and releasing data not yet in the public domain.

The scientist told MPs the tests had not been carried out on a commercial basis but the results had raised concerns.

He said: "What we had to put over, and I think I probably did it too well, looking at it now, based on our experience, there ought to be a concern.

"When you say there is a concern they will probe into it what is this concern."

Dr Pusztai said he was not sufficiently famous for anyone to take notice of him.

He told the committee that on the basis of experiments where it was possible to see some affects on the growth, the immune system and organ weights of rats "you have to say something".

Dr Pusztai went on: "You feel frustrated, you have to do something about it".

The scientist admitted he had been naive but said he would do the same thing again.

He said: "I would contest that what I found essentially it certainly gave me a concern and it was very much shared by the institute this concern.

"In one sense what I achieved is that we are all sitting here and talking about it."


====================================================
UK Politics

GM food banned from Commons
Click here for the full BBC Report

BUT THE UNITED STATES HAS NO BANNED OF THIS WHY AND WHY ARE MORE AND MORE PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES GETTING SICKER?


The government still issues licences for genetically modified crop tests

Genetically-modified food has been banned from restaurants and bars in the House of Commons.

Full-time catering managers have decided to avoid using genetically-modified (GM) food - developed from crops given genes from other species - until more is known about the long-term effects.

The ban has led to accusations of double standards since the government is still issuing licences for GM crop tests.

Some MPs have complained that they were not consulted about the decision.

In a recent parliamentary answer, Dennis Turner, the Labour MP who chairs the Commons catering committee, revealed managers had decided wherever possible they would avoid using GM food.

Mr Turner has called for the Agriculture Select Committee to hold an inquiry into genetically modified food.

He said the decision was not an absolute ban and stressed it was not always possible to tell from labels whether food had been modified.


[ image: Food for thought: Genetically modified crops]
Food for thought: Genetically modified crops
But another Labour member of the Catering committee, Lindsay Hoyle, complained MPs had not been consulted.

Mr Hoyle said he was "appalled" by what had happened and called for the committee to debate the affair.

The Chorley MP said that the decision had been "taken by officers of the catering committee without any reference to MPs".

"They decided it was in the best interests of MPs not to have the food. The committee had never discussed it - that's the real issue."

There are more than 30 bars and restaurants in the Palace of Westminster.

Mr Turner insisted he did not want to protect or coccoon MPs and said the whole country - not just the House of Commons - needed proper advice.

Inquiry move welcomed

The move at the Commons has been welcomed by the Liberal Democrat MP, Norman Baker, who originally questioned the use of the food.

But he warned that people were already eating genetically modified food without realising it.

"We have stuff coming into this country which is not segregated at source, so it is not possible to say whether it is GM-free.

"Unless the government challenges the practices of the biotech companies, we will be flooded with these foods."

'Double standards'

A food and biotech campaigner from Friends of the Earth, Pete Riley, expressed digust at what he said were parliamentary double standards.

"Genetically engineered foods are banned from parliament yet they are being forced on the general public despite the fact that opinion polls show they don't want them.

"The government should listen to the growing clamour and call a moratorium on the development of these controversial crops until it can proved that they are safe."

Hugh Warwick, of the Genetics Forum think-tank, said the MPs' action was "outrageous".

"This shows hypocrisy at the heart of government. MPs have decided they want nothing to do with genetically modified food while ministers are denying the public this choice.

"Instead, they are sanctioning genetically modified crop trials."


Food safety spawns public concern
By Bai Xu (China Daily)
Updated: 2005-03-26 05:4
4

Xi Ping, a Shanghai resident, had already consumed a dozen bottles of a name-brand pickle product when he learned from a television report that his favourite food contains Sudan I, a carcinogenic dye used mainly to colour shoe polish and other waxes.


All KFC outlets in China have stopped selling New Orleans roast chicken wings and chicken hamburgers Wednesday after the cancer-causing food coloring, Sudan I, was found in the sauce Tuesday. [file photo]
"I have been taking poison without even knowing it," he said, bitterly. "I had wondered how the vegetables could be made so delicious looking...now I know. And I learned it's dangerous."

In no way is Xi's story exceptional. In recent weeks, Sudan I has been found in a variety of foods sold in a dozen Chinese provinces and municipalities, including Beijing, the nation's capital.

The dye is used as an additive not only in tomato paste and ketchup, but also in chili sauce, pepper oil and pickles that are prepared with traditional methods. Fast food outlets, including some KFC branches, have used the dye-tainted products.

The latest discovery of Sudan I in foods follows another food-related tragedy that shocked the nation and is still fresh in people's minds. Thirteen infants died of malnutrition and 171 fell ill in Fuyang, East China's Anhui Province, after being fed with a blend of infant formula that contained mainly starch and little dried milk.

The case was cracked last May. Several local officials were disciplined for dereliction of duty or inaction. Some heartless merchants were jailed for producing or selling the so-called "powdered milk."

About the same time, 40 people in Guangdong Province were hospitalized after drinking liquor adulterated with industrial alcohol. Fourteen died in that incident.

As a deputy to the National the People's Congress (NPC), China's top legislature, Zhang Wenrong, a businessman in Shanghai, spent nearly six months beginning last June in an investigation of foods sold in 221 local markets.


Will Genetically Modified Food be the death of Us?

They are doing this to our food, water and even diseases and it seems that more and more people on this planet are coming down with uncurable alliments for which there are no cures.

There are decreasing levels of vitamins within the foods we eat and it is rumoured that most of the food within the fast food industry is coming from genetically process foods.

People are gaining more and more weight not from over eating but from having toxins within there system from eating foods gor which they maybe allergic too.

There is bird flu which normally would not pose a threat to man but because of these cross genetically links we are seeing more and more dying from experiements in my view that have gone out of control.


Peace!

D'Anne Burley

Other Articles or nightmares......

Guardian Unlimited
Sign in | Register
Go to:
Guardian UnlimitedThe Guardian
Home UK Business Online World dispatch The Wrap Newsblog Talk Search
The Guardian World News guide Arts Special reports Columnists Audio Help Quiz


UK News

Search this site




In this section
Two friends feared drowned after being swept from rocks

Unions: Former Aslef leader wins unfair sacking claim

4 years for woman who killed over parking space

Arts: Roll Deep take urban best album award

Police criticised over inquiry into deaths of army recruits

Survey finds most soldiers unhappy with service life

The 1918 flu pandemic remembered

Fresh bird flu outbreaks hit Asia

Five jailed for trying to stir up race hate violence

Three men remanded in custody on terror charges



Scientists create GM mosquitoes to fight malaria and save thousands of lives

· Plan to breed and sterilise millions of male insects
· Leader says project almost ready for testing in wild


David Adam, environment correspondent
Monday October 10, 2005
The Guardian


Genetically modified mosquitoes could soon be released into the wild in an attempt to combat malaria. Scientists at Imperial College London, who created the GM insects, say they could wipe out natural mosquito populations and save thousands of lives in malaria-stricken regions.

Led by Andrea Crisanti, the team added a gene that makes the testicles of the male mosquitoes fluorescent, allowing the scientists to distinguish and easily separate them from females. The plan is to breed, sterilise and release millions of these male insects so they mate with wild females but produce no offspring, eradicating insects in the target region within weeks.



HOW ABOUT TESTING GMO CROPS BESIDES CHICKENS or BSE !!!!
------------------STORY BELOW_________________
Most offspring died when mother rats ate GM soy diet
GMO's MAY NOT BE SAFE AFTER ALL
By Jeffrey M. Smith, Seeds of Deception
Nov 1, 2005,

Click here to read the full report


The Russian scientist planned a simple experiment to see if eating genetically modified (GM) soy might influence offspring. What she got, however, was an astounding result that may threaten a multi-billion dollar industry.

Irina Ermakova, a leading scientist at the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), added GM soy flour (5-7 grams) to the diet of female rats. Other females were fed non-GM soy or no soy at all. The experimental diet began two weeks before the rats conceived and continued through pregnancy and nursing.

Ermakova�s first surprise came when her pregnant rats started giving birth. Some pups from GM-fed mothers were quite a bit smaller. After 2 weeks, 36% of them weighed less than 20 grams compared to about 6% from the other groups (see photo below).


Photo of two rats from the Russian study, showing stunted growth - the larger rat, 19 days old, is from the control group; the smaller rat, 20 days old, is from the "GM soy" group.
But the real shock came when the rats started dying. Within three weeks, 25 of the 45 (55.6%) rats from the GM soy group died compared to only 3 of 33 (9%) from the non-GM soy group and 3 of 44 (6.8%) from the non-soy controls.

Ermakova preserved several major organs from the mother rats and offspring, drew up designs for a detailed organ analysis, created plans to repeat and expand the feeding trial, and promptly ran out of research money. The $70,000 needed was not expected to arrive for a year. Therefore, when she was invited to present her research at a symposium organized by the National Association for Genetic Security, Ermakova wrote �PRELIMINARY STUDIES� on the top of her paper. She presented it on October 10, 2005 at a session devoted to the risks of GM food.

Her findings are hardly welcome by an industry already steeped in controversy.


GM Soy�s Divisive Past