Watchman News

Editor’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published October 16, 2018.

Recent research into the health effects of artificial sweeteners deliver yet another blow to safety claims. The animal study,1,2,3,4,5 published in the journal Molecules, found all artificial sweeteners currently approved and deemed safe by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration cause DNA damage in, and interfere with the normal and healthy activity of gut bacteria. The artificial sweeteners included in this study included:

Artificial sweetener
Brand name(s)

Aspartame
NutraSweet, Spoonful, Canderel, Equal, NatraTaste Blue

Sucralose
Splenda, Zerocal, Sukrana, SucraPlus, Candys, Cukren and Nevella

Saccharin
Sweet ‘N Low, Sweet Twin, Sugar Twin, Necta Sweet

Neotame
Newtame

Advantame
(No brand names)

Acesulfame potassium-k
Sunnette, Sweet One, ACE, ACE K, Sweet ‘N Safe

All Artificial Sweeteners Are Toxic to Gut Bacteria

As reported by Business Insider,6 the research team concluded that all of these sweeteners “had a toxic, stressing effect, making it difficult for gut microbes to grow and reproduce.” While the authors do not directly refer to them as having antibiotic effects, when something is killing bacteria, that’s essentially what’s happening.

According to the researchers, the effects on your gut health may in turn affect your body’s ability to process regular sugar and other carbohydrates. According to this study, the toxic limit for these artificial sweeteners appears to be around 1 milligram per milliliter (mg/mL).

Ariel Kushmaro, Ph.D., professor of microbial biotechnology at Ben-Gurion University and lead author, told Business Insider, “We are not claiming that it’s toxic to human beings. We’re claiming that it might be toxic to the gut bacteria, and by that, will influence us.”

Sweetener-Specific Effects

While, overall, all six artificial sweeteners were found to have toxic effects on gut bacteria, there were individual differences in the type and amount of damage they produced. For example:

Saccharin caused the greatest, most widespread damage, exhibiting both cytotoxic and genotoxic effects, meaning it is toxic to cells and damages genetic information in the cell (which can cause mutations).
Neotame was found to cause metabolic disruption in mice, and raised concentrations of several fatty acids, lipids and cholesterol. Several gut genes were also decreased by this sweetener.
Aspartame and acesulfame potassium-k — The latter of which is commonly found in sports supplements — were both found to cause DNA damage.

Hazards of Sucralose

Previous studies have also revealed an extensive list of safety concerns for sucralose (a synthetic organochlorine sweetener), some of which are very similar to those found in the featured study, including:7

Genotoxicity (DNA damage) and potentially adverse epigenetic effects

The generation of toxic compounds (chloropropanols) when heated

Destruction of gut bacteria;8 one study9 found it can kill as much as 50% of your microbiome, and appears to target beneficial microorganisms

Alterations in glucose, insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 levels and responses,10 which raises the risk for diabetes

Decreased red blood cells, a sign of anemia, at levels above 1,500 mg per kilo per day

Increased male infertility by interfering with sperm production and vitality, as well as brain lesions at higher doses

Kidney enlargement and calcification

Significantly increased risk for miscarriage (in rabbits, spontaneous abortions affected nearly half the rabbit population given sucralose, compared to zero aborted pregnancies in the control group)

Significantly increased death rate (a 23% death rate in rabbits, compared to a 6% in the control group)

Bioaccumulation11

Potential drug interactions12

Artificial Sweeteners Linked to Diabetes and CVD

Other recent research13,14 adds to the ever-growing evidence pile showing that artificial sweeteners raise your risk of obesity and Type 2 diabetes to the same or greater degree as sugar. The study in question explored how different sweeteners — including glucose, fructose, aspartame and acesulfame potassium-k — affect energy usage, energy storage and vascular functioning.

According to the authors, both high amounts of sugar and artificial sweeteners caused vascular impairment and other cardiovascular disease (CVD) effects “that may be important during the onset and progression of diabetes and obesity.” The artificial sweeteners, however, accumulated in the blood, thereby harming the blood vessel lining to a greater degree.

Of the two artificial sweeteners included in this study, acesulfame potassium appeared to be the worst. As noted by lead author Brian Hoffmann, Ph.D., assistant professor in the department of biomedical engineering at the Marquette University and Medical College of Wisconsin:15

“Sweeteners kind of trick the body. And then when your body’s not getting the energy it needs — because it does need some sugar to function properly — it potentially finds that source elsewhere,” Hoffman says.16

One alternative sugar source is muscle and, indeed, evidence of protein break down was found in the animals’ blood. Essentially, the rats were burning muscle as a source of energy when given artificial sweeteners. Hoffman also notes that this research is different from previous attempts to conclusively tie artificial sweeteners to health problems:

“Most of these sweeteners were approved well before we had the technology to perform studies like my lab is doing. So they weren’t able to look as in-depth at some of the potential effects being caused.

By knowing what biochemical changes these are causing through these large-scale studies, we can take an unbiased approach and see what’s changing to give us a better direction. What I like to tell people is that most things in moderation are going to be fine …

It’s when people start to chronically consume these [drinks] — say, a person drinks two, three, four … every day — that we should start to be concerned. Because you’re starting to introduce these biochemical changes and the body has no time to recover.”

Artificial Sweeteners Associated With Many Health Problems

Research published over the last three decades has also convincingly shown that artificial sweeteners stimulate appetite, increase cravings for carbs, and produce a variety of metabolic dysfunctions that promote fat storage and weight gain.

As early as 1986, a study17 that examined nearly 78,700 women for one year found women who used artificial sweeteners were significantly more likely to gain weight compared to those who did not use them, regardless of their initial weight.

According to the researchers, the results “were not explicable by differences in food consumption patterns. The data do not support the hypothesis that long-term artificial sweetener use either helps weight loss or prevents weight gain.”

Similarly, the 25-yearslong San Antonio Heart Study,18 published in 2005, found those who drank diet soda were significantly more likely to gain weight compared to those who drank regular soda. On average, for each diet soft drink the participants drank per day, they were 65% more likely to become overweight during the next seven to eight years, and 41% more likely to become obese.

In 2010, an important scientific review19 was published in the Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine. It summarized the epidemiological and experimental evidence available on artificial sweeteners’ effects on weight, and explained those effects in light of the neurobiology of food reward.

More than 11,650 children aged 9 to 14 were included in this study. Each daily serving of diet beverage was associated with a BMI increase of 0.16 kg/m2. It also showed the correlation between increased usage of artificial sweeteners in food and drinks, and the corresponding rise in obesity. According to the authors:

“[F]indings suggest that the calorie contained in natural sweeteners may trigger a response to keep the overall energy consumption constant … Increasing evidence suggests that artificial sweeteners do not activate the food reward pathways in the same fashion as natural sweeteners … [A]rtificial sweeteners, precisely because they are sweet, encourage sugar craving and sugar dependence.”

Three years later, a report20 published in the journal Trends in Endocrinology & Metabolism highlighted the fact that diet soda drinkers suffer the same exact health problems as those who opt for regular soda, including excessive weight gain, Type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and stroke. The researchers proposed that frequent consumption of artificial sweeteners may induce metabolic derangements.

Your Body Is Not Fooled by Zero-Calorie Sweetness

Right around 2013, research started emerging detailing some of the reasons for why zero calorie sweeteners can make you gain weight. A study in the Journal of Physiology21,22 showed that when you eat something sweet, your brain releases dopamine, which activates your brain’s reward center.

The appetite-regulating hormone leptin is also released, which eventually informs your brain that you are “full” once a certain amount of calories has been ingested. When you consume something that tastes sweet but doesn’t contain any calories, your brain’s pleasure pathway still gets activated by the sweet taste, but there’s nothing to deactivate it, since the calories never arrive.

Artificial sweeteners basically trick your body into thinking that it’s going to receive calories, but when the calories fail to arrive, your body continues to signal that it needs more, which results in carb cravings.

The following year, 2014, another important study23 was published in the journal Nature. It was, for the first time, able to clearly show causality, revealing there’s a direct cause and effect relationship between consuming artificial sweeteners and developing elevated blood sugar levels.

People who consumed high amounts of artificial sweeteners were found to have higher levels of HbA1C — a long-term measure of blood sugar — compared to nonusers or occasional users of artificial sweeteners.

Seven volunteers who did not use artificial sweeteners were then recruited, and asked to consume the equivalent of 10 to 12 single-dose packets of artificial sweeteners daily for one week. Four of the seven people developed “significant disturbances in their blood glucose,” according to the researchers.

Some became prediabetic within just a few days! The reason for this dramatic shift was traced back to alterations in gut bacteria. Some bacteria were killed off, while others started proliferating. Which brings us back full circle to the featured study in the journal Molecules, which showed that all artificial sweeteners currently on the U.S. market have the ability to impair and/or kill gut bacteria.

Considering what we now know about the gut microbiome and its influence on health and disease, it’s becoming easier to see how and why artificial sweeteners are able to wreak havoc on your health.

To Improve Your Health, Ditch the Artificial Sweeteners

If you’re overweight and/or have insulin resistance or Type 2 diabetes, it’s really important to understand that artificial sweeteners are not going to help matters. They’re probably only going to make it worse.

If you have to choose between two evils, regularly-sweetened beverages are likely less hazardous in the long run, since your body at least knows how to metabolize fructose, even if it is processed.

That said, I firmly believe ditching soda and other sweetened beverages is one of the most important steps you can take to improve your weight and health. Remember, pure water is a zero-calorie drink. You cannot find a beverage that contains fewer calories.

If you want some flavor, just squeeze a little bit of fresh lemon or lime into mineral water. In instances where your cooking, baking or beverage needs a little sweetener, be mindful of your choice. For more information, see “Sugar Substitutes — What’s Safe and What’s Not.”

Approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 1981, aspartame can now be found in close to 5,000 food and beverage products. Worldwide, 3,000 to 5,000 metric tons of aspartame are produced annually, and it’s widely consumed by adults, including pregnant women, and children.1

When you consume aspartame, it’s broken down into aspartic acid, phenylalanine — a precursor of monoamine neurotransmitters — and methanol, which may have “potent” effects on your central nervous system,2 Florida State University (FSU) College of Medicine researchers noted.

Their study, published in PNAS,3 raises more red flags about this synthetic sweetener. It not only linked aspartame to anxiety but suggests the mental health changes may be passed on to future generations.

Aspartame Induced Anxiety for Generations

The FDA’s recommended maximum daily intake value for aspartame is 50 milligrams per kilogram. The FSU study involved mice drinking water that contained aspartame at a dosage of approximately 15% of the FDA’s maximum daily intake for humans. The dose was equivalent to a human drinking six to eight 8-ounce cans of diet soda daily.4

The mice consumed the aspartame-laced water for 12 weeks, which led to “robust, dose-dependent anxiety.”5 “It was such a robust anxiety-like trait that I don’t think any of us were anticipating we would see,” study author Sara Jones said. “It was completely unexpected. Usually you see subtle changes.”6

The anxiety-like behaviors were evidenced during maze tests, and they persisted across multiple generations — passed down from male mice exposed to aspartame. When the mice were treated with the human anxiety drug diazepam, the anxiety-like behaviors disappeared. According to the study:7

“The anxiety was alleviated by a single administration of diazepam, a positive allosteric modulator of the GABA-A receptor, consistent with the key role of GABA-A receptors in the regulation of anxiety. RNA sequencing demonstrated significant changes in expression of genes associated with glutamatergic and GABA receptor signaling in the amygdala, a brain region associated with regulation of anxiety.

Perhaps even more strikingly, the anxiety phenotype, its response to diazepam, and changes in amygdala gene expression were transmitted from the aspartame-exposed male founders to their descendants.”

Aspartame Disrupts Gene Expression in the Brain

The study shows that exposure to aspartame disrupts gene expression in the amygdala brain region, which plays a role in the regulation of anxiety and fear responses.8 The disruptions persisted for at least two generations.

“What this study is showing is we need to look back at the environmental factors, because what we see today is not only what’s happening today, but what happened two generations ago and maybe even longer,” study co-author Pradeep Bhide, with FSU’s department of biomedical sciences, explained.9

Aspartame’s effects on the brain have been questioned for years. In 2018, researchers with Universiti Sains Malaysia found a connection between neurophysiological symptoms and aspartame, which can elevate levels of phenylalanine and aspartic acid in the brain.10

Elevated levels of these compounds may inhibit the release and synthesis of a number of regulators of neurophysiological activity, including neurotransmitters, dopamine, norepinephrine and serotonin. The researchers explained:11

“Aspartame acts as a chemical stressor by elevating plasma cortisol levels and causing the production of excess free radicals. High cortisol levels and excess free radicals may increase the brains vulnerability to oxidative stress which may have adverse effects on neurobehavioral health.

… We reviewed studies linking neurophysiological symptoms to aspartame usage and conclude that aspartame may be responsible for adverse neurobehavioral health outcomes. Aspartame consumption needs to be approached with caution due to the possible effects on neurobehavioral health.”

Neurophysiological symptoms that may be linked to aspartame consumption include:12

Learning problems
Headache
Seizure

Migraines
Irritable mood
Anxiety

Depression
Insomnia

Aspartic acid, which aspartame is broken down into, is also thought to act as an excitatory neurotransmitter in the central nervous system. Researchers have proposed since at least 2008 that consuming too much aspartame may cause certain mental disorders and result in “compromised learning and emotional functioning.”13

Caution may be especially warranted during pregnancy. In a study on newborn rats, those that consumed aspartame — via their lactating mothers that had been fed aspartame — experienced problems with development (weight loss) and behavioral changes suggestive of anxiety.14

Industry Spreads Myth That Artificial Sweeteners Are Safe

If you listen to industry front group the International Sweeteners Association, you’ll come away believing artificial sweeteners are not only safe but beneficial for weight management, diabetes and oral health.15 Even health officials and government groups have adopted the rhetoric that swapping sugar for artificial sweeteners is a good thing. As The Guardian reported:16

“Public health organizations around the world have largely accepted the sweetener industry’s claims, particularly when it comes to managing diabetes. One article on the NHS website quotes a dietitian who describes sweeteners as “a really useful alternative for people with diabetes who need to watch their blood sugar levels while still enjoying their favorite foods.””

Yet, a systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by the World Health Organization revealed, “there is no clear consensus on whether non-sugar sweeteners are effective for long-term weight loss or maintenance, or if they are linked to other long-term health effects at intakes within the ADI.”17

In fact, their study found, “There is suggestion of negative health effects with long-term use …”18 Cohort/case-control studies included in WHO’s systematic review revealed a range of concerning effects with artificial sweetener consumption, including increased:19

Obesity and body mass index
Type 2 diabetes

High fasting glucose
All-cause mortality

Cardiovascular disease mortality
Cardiovascular events

Stroke
High blood pressure

Bladder cancer
Premature birth

“In a startling turnaround,” The Guardian noted, “the WHO’s draft guidance stated that non-sugar sweeteners should ‘not be used as a means of achieving weight control or reducing risk of non-communicable diseases’ such as diabetes or heart disease. Suddenly, the whole rationale for sweeteners as a ‘healthy’ alternative looked much shakier.”20

Meanwhile, industry group The Calorie Control Council, whose members include Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Cargill, said it was “disappointed” in WHO’s findings and continued to insist that artificial sweeteners are useful for managing body weight and blood sugar levels.21

Heart Disease, Stroke Among the Risks

Along with risks to brain health, consuming aspartame (Equal), acesulfame potassium and sucralose (Splenda) puts your heart health at risk as well. In a nine-year study involving 103,388 people, researchers linked the products to cardiovascular disease and stroke.22

Researchers from France studied the detailed dietary records of adults with an average age of 42.23 Specifically, three non-consecutive days (two weekdays and one weekend day) of 24-hour dietary records were assigned at the study’s start and again every six months thereafter. Participants detailed all foods and beverages they consumed during that time, including quantities, brand names and even photographs to validate the recordings.24

The dietary records were further validated using blood and urinary biomarkers. Then, the researchers looked for any associations with cardiovascular diseases, including coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease, which refers to disorders that affect blood flow in the brain, such as stroke, aneurysms and vascular malformations.

Total artificial sweetener intake was associated with increased risk of overall cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cerebrovascular disease, the study found. Among the specific artificial sweeteners, aspartame was associated with an increased risk of stroke (defined in the study as cerebrovascular events), while acesulfame potassium and sucralose were associated with increased coronary heart disease risk.25

“Our results suggest no benefit from substituting artificial sweeteners for added sugar on CVD outcomes,” the study found.26 “The findings from this large-scale prospective cohort study suggest a potential direct association between higher artificial sweetener consumption (especially aspartame, acesulfame potassium, and sucralose) and increased cardiovascular disease risk.”27

Liver Damage, Disturbances to Gut Microbes and More

It’s time to reexamine the widely parroted myth that artificial sweeteners can be part of a “healthy” diet. Their consumption can cause disturbances throughout your body. In research presented at the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 2022 annual meeting it was revealed that artificial sweeteners — specifically acesulfame potassium and sucralose — may interfere with your liver’s delicate detoxification process.

The study found that acesulfame potassium and sucralose inhibited the activity of P-glycoprotein, a “defense protein” that’s important for protecting organisms against environmental toxins.28 For comparison, the toxin DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) has also been found to inhibit P-glycoprotein (PGP), which is one reason why researchers have stated, “Even in small amounts, these contaminants could interfere with the human body’s natural ability to defend itself.”29

Artificial sweeteners including saccharine, sucralose, aspartame and acesulfame potassium may also lead to shifts in gut microbiota similar to those caused by antibiotics.30 Artificial sweeteners have also been shown to induce glucose intolerance by altering gut microbiota.31 Disruption of gut microbiota, in turn, has been linked to nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and artificial sweeteners may also have a role to play in this condition.32

Make the Choice to Avoid Artificial Sweeteners

Video Link

To protect your health, avoiding artificial sweeteners is important. In addition to diet beverages, they’re found in thousands of other ultraprocessed products, including flavored yogurts, desserts, snacks and tabletop sweeteners. Even ketchup, salad dressing and medications often contain them.

Once you’ve decided to eliminate artificial sweeteners from your diet, read labels of any processed foods you buy to be sure they’re not hidden inside. If you’re tempted by a sweet craving, try eating something sour, like water with lemon juice or fermented vegetables. Sour taste may help diminish your desire for sweets.

I also recommend learning to use the psychological acupressure technique called the Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT). When you feel a craving coming on, use EFT to release the unhealthy urge. It’s an excellent tool to overcome the emotional component of food cravings, helping you say goodbye to artificial sweeteners for good.

By Dr. Mercola
Over the years, I’ve written a number of articles outing industry front groups1 such as the Genetic Literacy Project, the American Council for Science and Health (ACSH),2 Science 2.0, GMO Answers, Independent Women’s Forum, Science Codex, Center for Consumer Freedom and the Center for Inquiry.
Once you start to investigate these front groups, you’ll find the same names appearing again and again, cowriting articles, interviewing each other and referring to each other’s work in a closed loop.
I’ve also written about academics and journalists who, while presenting themselves as independent experts, are actually shills for industry. This is a fairly close-knit group of individuals, so the worst actors are not hard to identify based on their associations.
Well-established actors include Forbes contributor Kavin Senapathy,3 Henry Miller, Steven Salzberg,4 Bruce Chassy, Jon Entine,5,6 Kevin Folta, Keith Kloor7 and Mark Lynas.
Learn to Recognize Astroturfing When You See It

In the TED Talk above, award-winning investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson discusses strategies used by industry to manipulate public opinion and steer online discussion.
A strategy that has become phenomenally popular with the advent of social media is astroturfing, which is when a special interests group creates a fake grassroots campaign for or against a particular agenda. You might think it’s a group of moms devoted to children’s health that is touting the benefits of GMOs or vaccines, for example, when in fact the campaign is run by industry.
Increasingly over the past year or so you may have seen a number of articles simultaneously criticizing both the “anti-vaxxers” and “anti-GMO movement,” making contemptuous and sometimes wildly insulting comments about people who question the safety of either of these industries and their wares.
While GMOs and vaccines may seem like strange bedfellows, the cross-linking of these two industries in propaganda material is neither accidental nor haphazard.
Industry Messaging Example

In a May 18, 2017 Forbes article,8 Senapathy (one well-known mouthpiece for the GMO industry) took aim at the “anti-vaccine and anti-GMO movements,” saying they’re “inextricably linked and cause preventable suffering.”

“The thoroughly answered question of whether vaccines cause autism isn’t really a question outside of conspiracy-theorist circles,” Senapathy writes.

“The body of evidence shows that vaccination has … vastly reduced suffering and death … and that vaccines don’t cause autism, cancer, dementia or long term health problems, and that any minute risk is vastly outweighed by benefits to individuals and society.

Yet with the backing of prominent leaders like Robert DeNiro and Robert Kennedy Jr., anti-vaccine groups fuel common narratives that keep herd immunity down, directly leading to suffering and death.

Now with Donald Trump embracing vaccine skeptics, the anti-vaccine movement has earned a hallowed place on the shelf next to other tinfoil hat clad schools of thought.

The question of the safety of genetically engineered crops (GMOs) has been answered just as thoroughly, and the anti-GMO movement deserves its own place on the same shelf, not just for being wrong but for its role in unconscionable suffering …

She goes on to point out how similar the communication tactics are between vaccine and GMO detractors. Ironically, her article reveals just as much if not more about the biotech and vaccine industries’ messaging tactics. You can go through her article and check off numerous boxes for how to spot a piece of industry propaganda.
That includes the claim that the science is settled (which automatically precludes the need for further discussion), citing a fellow industry shill (in this case Kloor), using strong, derogatory language when describing those who disagree with industry talking points, making ample references to “conspiracy theories” and “other tinfoil hat clad schools of thought.”
Seven Classic Propaganda Techniques

Whenever you hear or read that someone is a “quack,” and that “the science has been settled,” or that something is “science-based,” it’s probably a smear campaign created by an astroturf group, industry front group or paid shill. In fact, the seven techniques of propaganda have been clearly delineated and are used without exception by most industries. As noted by writer Morgan Crouch in his article, “What Are the Seven Techniques of Propaganda?” these include:9

Name calling — Derogatory terms or discriminatory words used to arouse suspicion and prejudice
Glittering generalities — Slogans, catchphrases and highly generalized statements that sound good but mean little and prove nothing (such as “the science is settled”)
Transfer — The linking of a company/industry idea with a revered symbol
Testimonial — Testimony by a respected authority, similar to celebrity endorsement
Plain folks — Corporate material presented by someone who appears to be “just like you” — someone who shares your concerns and ideals
Bandwagon — Creating the illusion that there’s a consensus, which capitalizes on people’s inherent desire to be on the “right” side
Card stacking — Using only those facts that support the company’s/industry’s ideas, with the aim of making you assume these facts are conclusive. As noted by Crouch, “By ‘stacking cards against the truth,’ propagandists can control the beliefs of their audience”

Pesticide and Vaccine Partnerships Revealed
While Senapathy tries to show how those who question the safety of either GMOs or vaccines are all alike — that is, tinfoil hat-wearing lunatics who follow flat earth theories in their spare time — what she ultimately achieves is a perfect example of industry PR.
This systematic messaging strategy has been carefully developed, and is known to have a penetrating psychological effect. Both the vaccine and biotechnology industries use the same terminology and the same psychological assault strategies to make you feel like you’re in the wrong — or worse.

In her article, Senapathy basically accuses all vaccine and GMO safety advocates of being killers, merely for asking questions and not settling for non-answers, and doing what they think is right for their own health and that of their children.
Another article10 that connects the vaccine and chemical technology industries was recently published by The Feed.
In it, Ashleigh Morse, Ph.D., whose training centers on psychology and the influence of environmental cues on decision-making, and who says she works as a consultant to “a range of clients” in the field of science communication and public health,11 argues that juries are incapable of assessing the validity of scientific evidence presented in court, or the validity of the scientific methods used.
Specifically, Morse — whose professional credits include a single published research paper listed on her LinkedIN bio on the role of opioid processes in reward and decision-making — is referring to the recent jury verdict against Monsanto, but she goes on to link that to vaccine science. “When juries decide on the science, we get autism linked to vaccines and the Monsanto verdict,” she writes.
When In Doubt, Blame the Russians

Then there’s the curious claim that the Russians are to blame for Americans’ lack of faith in vaccine safety.12 According to a recent paper13 published in the American Journal of Public Health, Russian trolls and Soviet-directed Twitter bots promoted anti-vaccine information on social media to “amplify the vaccine debate” and create dissent in the U.S.
According to the authors, “Accounts masquerading as legitimate users create false equivalency, eroding public consensus on vaccination,” and “Directly confronting vaccine skeptics enables bots to legitimize the vaccine debate.” Those two sentences are interesting and revealing indeed.
In a nutshell, they’re saying that by providing anti-vaccine content, these bots made it seem as though there was actually something to discuss when, in the opinion of the authors, no discussion about vaccine safety should occur at all.
Apparently, it is their view that the vaccine debate is “illegitimate,” since there’s “public consensus” on vaccines (refer back to the bandwagon strategy, No. 6 in the propaganda list above).
In other words, everyone knows vaccines are safe; the science is settled, so there’s no valid reason to question it. Summing up the alleged Russian bots’ efforts to sway public opinion against vaccination, the authors referred to it as “weaponized health communication.”
The Russians Did It Again

Coincidentally, the vaccine paper above was submitted for publication shortly after news stories began circulating claiming the Russians were behind anti-GMO rhetoric.14 Minnesota Farm Living writes:15

“Researchers from Iowa State University (Shawn Dorius and Carolyn Lawrence-Dill) wanted to better understand the controversy around genetically engineered food.16 The issue is with the overwhelming belief in the science community is that GMOs are safe, consumers still question their safety. Dorius and Lawrence-Dill wanted to find out why.

What they found was surprising. The ISU researchers looked at not only how U.S. publications portrayed GMOs but also looked at the American versions of RT and Sputknik, two Russian publications. They counted how many times the term ‘GMO’ was used in different publications …

They went a step further and analyzed the tone of each article. What they found is the Russian publications were overwhelming anti-GMO. The articles talked negatively about environmental risks, nutrition concerns, and health risks of GMOs.”

Here, the author links to the “Are GMOs Safe?” page on the Genetic Literacy Project’s website as evidence to support GMO safety. But, the Genetic Literacy Project is a well-known front group for the GMO industry and hardly a reliable source of impartial information.
As for why the Russians would want to spread anti-GMO rhetoric in the U.S., the study authors note Russia has an interest in creating division among the American people to weaken the country as a whole, and to promote their own agricultural exports, as Russia banned GMOs in 2016 and is trying to increase its exports of organic food.
Claim of Scientific Consensus on GMO Safety Is Patently False
In the Minnesota Farm Living article cited above, you can see the telltale industry rhetoric in the sentence, “the overwhelming belief in the science community is that GMOs are safe, [yet] consumers still question their safety.” The reality is there is no scientific consensus on the safety of GMOs.
That is in fact the title of a scientific statement17 published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Sciences Europe, January 24, 2015. The statement, aptly titled “No Scientific Consensus on GMO Safety,” was signed by 300 scientists, researchers, physicians and scholars.
What’s more, the paper states that the claim of scientific consensus on GMO safety is in actuality “an artificial construct that has been falsely perpetuated,” and that such a claim “is misleading and misrepresents or outright ignores the currently available scientific evidence and the broad diversity of scientific opinions among scientists on this issue.”
In addition, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration still does not possess any evidence demonstrating safety because they do not do scientific reviews. And even if they did, hundreds of scientists say there’s no evidence demonstrating that genetically engineered foods are safe, and a number of independent studies have raised serious health concerns.
To learn more about how GMOs were introduced into the food supply without safety testing, see my two-part interview with attorney Steven Druker, author of “Altered Genes, Twisted Truth.” (Part 1, Part 2.)
GMO-Vaccine Convergence
The reason for the joining of PR forces between the vaccine and biotech industries becomes clearer when you take into account the fact that GMOs are moving into the vaccine industry. The 2016 article,18 “GMOs Lead the Fight Against Zika, Ebola and the Next Unknown Pandemic,” published in The Conversation, asserts that GMOs play a “vital role” in medicine, adding:

“Most modern biomedical advances, especially the vaccines used to eradicate disease and protect against pandemics … rely on the same molecular biology tools that are used to create genetically modified organisms.

To protect the public, scientists have embraced GMO technology to quickly study new health threats, manufacture enough protective vaccines, and monitor and even predict new outbreaks.”

Additionally, scientists are also exploring the possibility of vaccinating plants against pests as an alternative to using pesticides.19 In other words, it’s really quite crucial for these two bedfellows, strange as their joining may seem at first, to get people to embrace both genetic engineering and vaccines.
That’s why we’re now seeing more and more articles deriding both vaccine and GMO safety advocates in the same piece, whether it necessarily makes sense to do so or not.
Both of these industries are using the exact same messaging strategies — because so far they have worked — to achieve the same aim: Shame those who dare question the safety of either, and make them feel like ignorant outcasts and social misfits, thereby shutting down the conversation.
Preempting Your Rights
In my five-part “Ghost in the Machine” series, I discuss the many ways in which big industries manipulate science, and how they’ve captured our regulatory agencies and manipulate our political system. Here’s a listing of the series, in case you missed any of them:

“Introduction to Ghost in the Machine — A New Article Series That Exposes How Puppet Masters Control the Planet for Their Benefit”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 1 — Drug Safety and Media Shaped by Big Pharma”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 2 — Success Breeds Greed That Gets in the Way of Ethics, Common Sense and Caution”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 3 — Pride and the Politics of Vaccines”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 4 — The War on Supplements, Essential Oils and Homeopathy”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 5 — Lies, Denial, Deceit and Manipulative ‘Research'”

A feature common to both the vaccine industry and the biotech industry is the use of legislation to preempt your rights and force you to use their products whether you want to or not, and without regard for the health consequences.
In recent years, I’ve written extensively about the vaccine industry’s attempts to mandate vaccines and eliminate personal belief exemptions across the U.S. In some cases, they’ve succeeded. In others, they’ve lost, but efforts to strip every American of their right to informed consent and medical freedom is ongoing.
The chemical technology industry is following the same agenda. One of the latest infringements on your rights is a provision in the Farm Bill that would block local governments from regulating pesticide use. The U.S. House committee approved the draft back in April. As noted by Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides:20

“This is really a backdoor attempt to interfere with state governments and local governments. I think the trend is for local governments to engage on this issue. This would undermine that.”

Monsanto Ghostwriting Shill Attempts to Tie USRTK to Russian Troll Efforts
A common corporate tactic is to use “third-party experts” to bring the industry’s message to the public under the cloak of independent opinion or expertise (No. 4, “Testimonial”). The idea is that academic types are far more credible than industry employees when it comes to defending the industry’s position.
A well-known spokesperson for the GMO industry is Henry Miller, who was thoroughly outed as a Monsanto shill during the 2012 Proposition 37 GMO labeling campaign in California. A “No on 37” advertisement had to be pulled off the air because Miller was fraudulently identified as being part of the Stanford University faculty.
Last year, Miller was outed yet again — this time as a ghostwriter for Monsanto. Forbes fired Miller when it became clear he had submitted ghostwritten material. On a relevant side note, Senapathy has cowritten articles with Miller, which is why some of her Forbes articles ended up being deleted as well,21 and the foreword for her book “Fear Babe” was written by Folta, a University of Florida professor who hid his financial ties to Monsanto.
The Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) discovery against Monsanto was led by U.S. Right to Know (USRTK). Proving he’s still working on Monsanto’s behalf, Miller penned a two-part article22,23 for Investor’s Business Daily this past summer, in which he tries — quite unsuccessfully — to tie USRTK to the alleged Russian GMO disinformation campaign.
The fact that they’re still turning to Miller is probably a sign of just how desperate Monsanto (now Bayer) has become. Other discovery documents obtained by USRTK included email correspondence revealing Monsanto has been quite desperate for a number of years already.
In an email dated February 26, 2015, Daniel Goldstein, senior science lead of medical sciences and outreach for Monsanto, tells Monsanto’s food safety scientific affairs lead, John Vicini, Ph.D.:24

In this email, Goldstein admits two pearls: First, the list of supporters willing to do their dirty work is short — which is why we keep seeing the same names pop up in pro-GMO propaganda pieces — and ACSH is a most valuable front group for the biotech industry.
Another Undercover Ambassador for GMO Industry Wants You to Think the Russians Are Responsible for ‘Anti-Vaccine Myths’

So, who else wants you to think that “the Russians did it”? Mark Lynas, a long-term shill for the GMO industry, just published: “Opinion: Russian Campaign to Spread Anti-Vaccine Myths Part of a Wider War on Science and Truth”25 on the Alliance for Science website.
As the other examples cited above, Lynas — normally a pro-GMO advocate — is now cross-linking GMOs and vaccines, closely mimicking the core message of Senapathy’s article, which is that “Many anti-GMO groups and anti-vaxxers are closely linked.”
Again, what we’re seeing is a crossover or merging of the GMO and vaccine industries in terms of messaging and propaganda angles. Rather than fighting public doubt separately, the shills for these industries are now putting out a single joint message that anyone who doubts the science presented by either of them is an anti-science nut job.
The take-home message here is that these tactics are nothing but a PR ploy. Yes, they’re trying to make you feel like an outsider, an outcast. They’re trying to make you feel ashamed of your “ignorance,” or worse, as if you’ve fallen for false propaganda propagated by evil Russians in an effort to divide and conquer.
But all you really need to do is look for the hallmarks of astroturfing, and you’ll quickly see through their ruse. You are not wrong for questioning flawed and biased science. You are not ignorant for questioning whether vaccines and GMOs might be unsafe when there’s a clear lack of evidence to support safety claims.
You are not a danger to the public for looking at the evidence and making your own decisions about whether or not you want your family to receive a particular vaccine or eat a certain food. Your inquiries and thought processes are only dangerous to the industries in question which, by the way, are willing to go to just about any lengths to hide the dangers of their products in order to maintain their profits. Stand your ground. It’s solid.

By Dr. Mercola
Food is certainly a cornerstone of living a healthy lifestyle, and it’s one of my true passions. My interest began during my 30 years of practice and experience, when I personally witnessed the healing powers of healthy whole foods.

Many chronic diseases can be prevented and in some cases reversed via the many health-giving properties of whole foods. Eating right is truly one of the most powerful tools available to help you take control of your health.

Aside from its therapeutic potential, food is delicious, and it’s arguably in the kitchen and around the dinner table that many of life’s most memorable moments take place. With that in mind, food should be about enjoyment, culture and family just as much as it is about health and nutrition.

This is why Mercola Healthy Recipes was created — to provide a resource where you can find recipes that are both delicious and truly good for you. Even better, the recipes are based on my optimized nutrition plan, making it even easier to follow the plan and eat right.

Whether you’re looking for a tangy salad to enjoy on a hot summer’s day or a hearty bowl of soup or stew to get you through the winter, Mercola Healthy Recipes has meals for every palate and occasion.
From busy weeknights to company-worthy fare, vegetable dishes and meats, the recipes we’ve included will bring out your inner chef while helping you reach optimal health.

The Three Recipes I Eat Almost Daily

Many people ask what I personally eat. The recipes that follow provide examples of my typical breakfast, lunch and snack.
My Chocolate Fat Bomb recipe provides you with the energy you need to perform your tasks in your daily life whether at home, school or at work, and it’s full of healthy ingredients like avocados to give you a surge in energy.

Click Here

My delicious keto salad is a recipe that I’ve tinkered with over the last few months. It’s also rich in “good” fats that help lower your risk of heart disease and manage cholesterol levels.

Click Here

My Macadamia Nut Fudge is a mouth watering recipe that is loaded with all-natural ingredients. It’s the combination of healthy fats and nutrients that make it so tasty and a great complement to the other foods I eat throughout the day.

Click Here

Bone Broth: One of Our Most Popular Recipes of 2016
Bone broth contains a variety of valuable nutrients, including calcium, collagen, and bone marrow, in a form your body can easily absorb and use.

Bone broth’s popularity as a superfood is growing, and it’s become quite trendy over the last couple of years, even though bone broth may quite possibly be one of the oldest meals on record.

Homemade bone broth may help reduce joint pain and inflammation, promote strong bones and boost hair and nail growth — no wonder it’s been one of our most popular articles of 2016!

The recipe that follows calls for beef bones, but you can also make bone broth using whole organic chicken, whole fish (including the head) or fish bones, or pork. Each will render a different flavor.
If you’re using chicken, simply place the entire chicken, raw, into the pot in place of the beef bones and proceed with the recipe as follows. One note, if cooking a whole chicken, the meat should start separating from the bone after about two hours.

Simply remove the chicken from the pot and separate the meat from the bones. Then place the bones back in and continue to simmer.
You can even use bones from a roasted chicken or turkey carcass to make bone broth, which is incredibly cost effective since you would otherwise throw them away. Click below to see the recipe details.

Click Here

A New Recipe Series to Try — Three Homemade Condiments
You may not realize how many unsavory ingredients, from high-fructose corn syrup to soybean oil to genetically modified ingredients (GMOs), are found in common store-bought condiments.
You can make far healthier versions, quickly, at home — and they taste better too. Click on the button below for more information and ingredients.

Click Here

Expand Your Culinary Horizons With Mercola Healthy Recipes
At Mercola Healthy Recipes, we’ve created healthy, balanced recipes that your body was designed to eat. This way, you can satisfy your taste buds, expand your culinary horizons and support your health, all with no fuss. You can use the buttons below to browse through all Mercola Healthy Recipes or search for a recipe of your choice.
See All Mercola Recipes
 

New and Improved Search Engine
Enter Your Search Below

Search

Using technology from

By Dr. Mercola

Another Thanksgiving has come and gone, which means today you may have a refrigerator that’s overflowing with leftovers. Ironically, the holiday season from Thanksgiving to New Year – a time centered on gratitude and giving – is actually one of the most wasteful times of year.
Household waste, including trash from packages and wrapping paper along with food waste, increases by more than 25 percent during the holidays, adding an additional 1 million tons a week to US landfills.1
As for turkey, Americans buy about 581 million pounds for Thanksgiving, and throw away 200 million of them – that’s more than one-third of it, wasted. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council:2

“Along with trashing uneaten turkeys… [Americans will] be wasting the resources necessary for its production…
…meaning 105 billion gallons of water (enough to supply New York City for over 100 days) and greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to 800,000 car trips from New York to San Francisco. That’s enough turkey to provide each American household that is food insecure with more than 11 additional servings.”

If you’ve got turkey leftover, don’t throw it in the trash. Repurpose it into another meal. Even the bones and carcass can be used to make an incredibly delicious and healthy roast turkey vegetable soup.

Roast Turkey Vegetable Soup

This recipe for Roast Turkey Vegetable Soup, from Earthbound Farm Organic,3 is perfect after Thanksgiving, but you can make it year-round (and substitute organic pastured chicken, if you like).
It makes use of your leftover turkey meat and, even better, the bones and carcass. The latter, which many people throw away as “waste,” are actually what make this soup so good for you – it creates nourishing bone broth.

Roast Turkey Vegetable Soup4

Ingredients

1 organic turkey carcass (with most meat removed)

2 yellow onions (cut into 8 pieces each)

2 large carrots (cut into 1-inch lengths)

2 stalks celery (cut into 1-inch lengths)

1 bay leaf

3 sprigs fresh thyme

12 fresh parsley stems

1 tsp whole black peppercorns

1 large carrot (cut in half lengthwise, then crosswise into 1/4-inch slices)

2 stalks celery (sliced 1/4 inch thick)

1 small fennel bulb (cored, cut in half, and sliced 1/4 inch thick)

1 leek (cut in half lengthwise, then crosswise into 1/4-inch slices)

1 cup green beans (cut into 1-inch lengths)

2 small zucchini (cut in half lengthwise, then crosswise into 1/4-inch slices)

3 cups cubed cooked turkey meat (optional)

Salt (to taste)

Freshly ground pepper (to taste)

Directions

Preheat the oven to 400°F. Place the turkey carcass and bones in a roasting pan and place in the oven. Roast for 45 minutes, then add the onions, carrots, and celery to the pan. Cook until the vegetables and bones begin to brown, 30 to 45 minutes.

Transfer the contents of the roasting pan to a large stock pot. Add cold water to completely cover the bones and bring to a simmer over high heat.

Add the bay leaf, thyme sprigs, parsley, and peppercorns; reduce the heat to a setting that will maintain a slow simmer.

Cook the stock for 4 hours, adding more water if the level drops below the bones and vegetables.

Let cool for 30 minutes, then strain the stock through a colander or sieve, pressing on the solids to extract all the liquid. Discard the contents of the colander. At this point, you can continue with the soup recipe, or cool the stock and refrigerate it, covered, for up to 5 days, or freeze it.

Return the stock to a large Dutch oven or 4-quart pot. Add the carrots and cook the soup over medium heat for 10 minutes.

Add the celery, fennel, and leeks, and cook for 5 minutes. Add the green beans and raise the heat to medium-high. Cook for 5 minutes, then add the cubed turkey and the zucchini. Continue cooking until the zucchini are tender, about 5 minutes.

Season to taste with salt and pepper, and serve hot.

Bone Broth Is Healing to Your Gut

Bone broth is a staple of the GAPS Diet, which is based on the Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS) principles developed by Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride. It is an excellent food to improve your gut, bone, and joint health.

The GAPS diet is often used to treat children with autism and other disorders rooted in gut dysfunction, but just about anyone with allergies or less than optimal gut health can benefit from it, as it is designed to heal leaky gut.

If your gut is leaky or permeable, partially undigested proteins have the opportunity to pass through your intestine and access your bloodstream and contribute to allergic reactions. This is known as leaky gut syndrome, or LGS.

When your intestinal lining is repeatedly damaged due to reoccurring leaky gut syndrome, damaged cells called microvilli become unable to do their job properly. They become unable to process and utilize the nutrients and enzymes that are vital to proper digestion.

Eventually, digestion is impaired and absorption of nutrients is negatively affected. As more exposure occurs, your body initiates an attack on these foreign invaders. It responds with inflammation, allergic reactions, and other symptoms we relate to a variety of diseases.

The primary food that you focus on eating if you start out on the GAPS diet is bone broth, because not only is it very easily digested, it also contains profound immune-optimizing components. This is why, even if you don’t have gut issues, bone broth is still a wonderful staple food to include in your diet.

6 Top Benefits of Bone Broth

There are many reasons for incorporating good-old-fashioned bone broth into your diet. The following health benefits attest to its status as “good medicine.”

Helps heal and seal your gut, and promotes healthy digestion: The gelatin found in bone broth is a hydrophilic colloid. It attracts and holds liquids, including digestive juices, thereby supporting proper digestion Inhibits infection caused by cold and flu viruses, etc.: A study published over a decade ago found that chicken soup indeed has medicinal qualities, significantly mitigating infection5

Reduces joint pain and inflammation, courtesy of chondroitin sulphates, glucosamine, and other compounds extracted from the boiled down cartilage Fights inflammation: Amino acids such as glycine, proline, and arginine all have anti-inflammatory effects.

Arginine, for example, has been found to be particularly beneficial for the treatment of sepsis6 (whole-body inflammation). Glycine also has calming effects, which may help you sleep better

Promotes strong, healthy bones: Bone broth contains high amounts of calcium, magnesium, and other nutrients that play an important role in healthy bone formation Promotes healthy hair and nail growth, thanks to the gelatin in the broth

You Can Make Bone Broth from Beef, Pork, or Fish, Too

If you’re not a fan of turkey, don’t worry. You can also make bone broth using whole organic chicken, whole fish (including the head) or fish bones, beef marrow bones, or pork. Each will render a different flavor, with chicken being the mildest. Perhaps the most important caveat when making broth, whether you’re using turkey, chicken, or beef, is to make sure the bones are from organically raised, pastured or grass-fed animals. As noted by Sally Fallon, chickens raised in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) tend to produce stock that doesn’t gel, and this gelatin has long been valued for its therapeutic properties.7 As noted by Hilary Boynton, co-author of The Heal Your Gut Cookbook: Nutrient-Dense Recipes for Intestinal Health Using the GAPS Diet:

“You definitely want to get the best bones you can get—bones from pastured animals. If you can’t find a farmer in your area, reach out to your local Weston A. Price chapter leader… There are also resources to get homemade bone broth if you can’t make it yourself. …If you can only get CAFO bones, I guess you go with that. You can still get some healing benefits. But it would be better to go with bones from pastured animals.”

If you’re wondering when you’ll have time to simmer bone broth for hours on the stove, try preparing homemade bone broth by using a slow cooker or crockpot. A slow cooker is actually an excellent way to go, as it is safer than leaving a burner on for extended periods. To use a slow cooker, you will need to first bring the broth to a boil in a pot on your stove (since a slow cooker won’t boil), then skim the scum off the top. Pay careful attention to this stage, as once the broth begins to boil the scum is rolled right back into the broth. The scum are the impurities that you want to remove. You can then transfer the broth to your slow cooker and turn it on to low heat for 24 to 72 hours.

What Else Can You Do to Reduce Food Waste During the Holidays?

You’ve now got a way to use up all that leftover turkey, including the bones and carcass. But what about your other leftovers? First, reduce the amount of excess at future holiday meals by cooking only as much as you need. There are many free calculators online to help you make an accurate estimate. One to try is the Perfect Portion Tool from Love Food Hate Waste.8 While shopping, look for locally produced foods, which are fresher and keep longer, as well as have a smaller ecological footprint.
You can also make a point to buy the “ugly ducklings” in the produce section, which makes use of food that might otherwise be thrown away. When you store your food, such as produce, create a “vacuum pack” to help protect it from oxygen and airborne microbes that will accelerate its decay. Leave the produce in the bag it came in from the grocery store, place it against your chest, and use your arm to squeeze the excess air out of the bag. Then seal it with a twist tie (or use an automatic vacuum sealer like the FoodSaver).
Next, turn your food scraps into valuable fertilizer by composting. This benefits soil, plants, and the greater environment, while keeping more food waste out of landfills. Finally, donate excess food and garden produce to food banks, soup kitchens, pantries, shelters—and your friends and neighbors. If you’re adventurous, there are even apps available, such as LeftoverSwap, that allow you to swap leftovers with others in your community.

By Dr. Mercola

If you’ve ever had qualms about eating genetically modified (GM) foods, you’d likely be deeply concerned about receiving a GM vaccine as well.
Such vaccines are already being produced – some are even on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recommended vaccine schedule – even though, as is the case with GM foods, we know very little about their long-term effects.
In the interview above, Vicky Debold, PhD, RN, director of research and patient safety with the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), spoke with me about the many reasons to be very wary of this new technology, which is far more intertwined with other biotech “innovations,” like GM food, than you might think.

Nobody Knows What Happens When You Inject People with GM Vaccines

There have been some fair warnings, though. In 2006, researchers wrote in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health:1

“Genetically modified (GM) viruses and genetically engineered virus-vector vaccines possess significant unpredictability and a number of inherent harmful potential hazards… Horizontal transfer of genes… is well established. New hybrid virus progenies resulting from genetic recombination between genetically engineered vaccine viruses and their naturally occurring relatives may possess totally unpredictable characteristics with regard to host preferences and disease-causing potentials.
…There is inadequate knowledge to define either the probability of unintended events or the consequences of genetic modifications.”

Though this was six years ago, little has changed even as the technology has advanced. Today we have several different types of GM vaccines in production, development or research phases, such as:

DNA vaccines: DNA for a microbe’s antigens are introduced into the body, with the expectation that your cells will take up that DNA, which then instructs your cells to make antigen molecules. As the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (a division of the National Institutes of Health) put it, “In other words, the body’s own cells become vaccine-making factories.”2
Naked DNA vaccines: A type of DNA vaccine in which microscopic particles coated with DNA are administered directly into your cells.
Recombinant Vector vaccines: Similar to DNA vaccines, but they use a virus or bacteria to act as a vector (or “carrier) to introduce microbial DNA into your cells.

There are experimental GM vaccines being developed that use tumorigenic cancer cells and cells from humans, dogs, monkeys, cows, pigs, rodents, birds and insects. What happens when foreign DNA is inserted into the human body is a mystery. Will it trigger undesirable changes in human cells or tissues? Will it combine or exchange genetic material with human DNA? Will it transfer to future generations? No one knows…

“We don’t know what portion of the [GM] DNA can be incorporated into our own genome, we don’t know what portion could be inheritable to our children, we also don’t know what happens when the immune system is exposed to DNA that has been recombined in lots of ways that the human body, through the course of time, has never had any exposure to… what diseases of the immune system may occur because of these exposures,” Debold said.
“Use of foreign DNA in various forms has the potential to cause a great deal of trouble, not only because there is the potential for it to recombine with our own DNA, there is the potential for it to turn the DNA ‘switches,’ the epigenetic parts of the DNA, on and off.”

Vaccine Adjuvants Used in GM Vaccines May be Even More Toxic Than Usual

An adjuvant is added to a vaccine in order to boost the body’s immune reaction to the viral or bacterial antigen contained in a vaccine. Under ideal circumstances, the antigen is what your body responds to and makes antibodies against (e.g. the lab altered viral or bacterial organisms being injected). By boosting your body’s immune response in this artificial way, the vaccine manufacturer can use a smaller amount of antigen, which makes production less expensive and the product more profitable (although definitely not safer, as adjuvants are usually foreign substances, metals or chemicals which can cause the immune system to overreact and attack the host body.)
Aluminum is a common vaccine adjuvant and also a well-known neurotoxin that can cause chronic inflammation in the body, including the brain. Although aluminum adjuvants have been added to inactivated vaccines used for decades in the U.S., aluminum-based adjuvants are not strong enough for GM vaccines, according to Debold, so drug companies are primarily interested in using oil-based adjuvants, like squalene, and other substances that can hyper-stimulate the body’s immune response.
While oil-based vaccine adjuvants like squalene have been proven to generate powerful acute inflammatory immune responses that stimulate increased production of antibodies, they have also been associated with unresolved, chronic inflammation in the body that can cause brain and immune system dysfunction, including autoimmune diseases.3 While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has so far not licensed any vaccines distributed in the U.S. that contain squalene as an adjuvant, squalene adjuvants are used in some vaccines sold in Europe and other countries.

GM Vaccines You May Have Given to Your Kids…

Many are unaware that, despite the completely unknown long-term health consequences, GM vaccines are already in use and have been administered to American infants, children and adults for many years. Among them:

Hepatitis B vaccine: An inactivated recombinant DNA vaccine licensed for newborn infants and children in 1991, in which parts of the hepatitis B virus gene are cloned into yeast
Rotavirus vaccine: Live attenuated vaccines first licensed for infants and children licensed in 2006, which either contain genetically engineered human rotavirus strains or human-bovine hybridized reassortment rotavirus strains4
HPV vaccine (Gardasil or Cervarix): A recombinant vaccine licensed in 2006, which is prepared from virus-like particles (VLP’s) and may also include use of an insect-cell Baculovirus expression vector system for production

Then there are those “hybrid” vaccines that cross the (very narrow) threshold into the GM food realm… for instance, goats are being genetically engineered to become “pharm animals” that carry vaccines in their milk. If the experiments being conducted by researchers from Texas A&M are successful, they will produce an “edible” malaria vaccine, with the ultimate goal being that children drinking the milk will become vaccinated in the process. If vaccines in your milk sounds a bit to “out there,” it shouldn’t, as there are many connections between the companies that make GM food and those that make GM vaccines.

The Close Ties Between GM Foods and GM Vaccines

The companies that make vaccines and GMOs (genetically modified organisms) are deeply intertwined, only recently spinning off or merging to specialize in one or the other. Most vaccine revenues are earned by five companies that together held nearly 80 percent of the market in 2010:5

Sanofi Pasteur
GlaxoSmithKline
Merck & Co.
Pfizer
Novartis

These companies, which use genetic engineering to produce vaccines, are also primarily responsible for the introduction of genetic engineering into the food supply. For instance:

Genetic engineering giant Syngenta (third in total sales in the commercial agricultural seeds market) is the progeny of parent companies Novartis and AstraZeneca.
In 2001, Bayer CropScience became a leading genetically engineered crop producer with its purchase of Aventis’ agribusiness division.6
In 2004, Aventis merged with and into Sanofi. The new Sanofi-Aventis Group became the world’s 3rd largest pharmaceutical company. Aventis Pasteur, the vaccine division of Sanofi-Aventis Group, changed its name to Sanofi Pasteur. Sanofi Pasteur is the vaccines division of Sanofi Group. It is the largest company in the world devoted entirely to vaccines.
Prior to splitting its genetically engineered crop business from its vaccine business, Aventis was known primarily for the StarLink corn debacle (a type of GM corn grown for use in animal feed that contaminated the U.S. food supply in 2000). Bayer now sells Aventis’s Liberty Link crops, engineered to tolerate high doses of the company’s toxic herbicide called Liberty (glufosinate).7
Stauffer Seeds was a spin-off of Stauffer Chemical, formerly a division of Novartis.8 Stauffer Seeds and Prodigene conducted clinical trials on pigs using an edible vaccine for transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) expressed in corn.9
Prodigene was caught contaminating the food supply with its edible vaccine and the company went out of business, but not before it received a $6-million investment from the Governors Biotechnology Partnership, chaired by Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack. Vilsack, now the Obama Administration’s USDA Secretary, didn’t want any restrictions placed on experimental pharma crops. In reaction to suggestions that pharma crops should be kept away from food crops, Vilsack argued that ‘we should not overreact and hamstring this industry.’10
Prior to 1997, Monsanto (the world leader in GM crops) operated under three parts, the Ag Business (for agricultural products), the Chemicals Business, and the Pharmaceuticals Business, which is now Pharmacia, a subsidiary of Pfizer, the biggest pharmaceutical company in the world and the largest manufacturer of vaccines for food animals.11, 12
GlaxoSmithKline, while producing few products for food or agriculture, has been genetically engineering plants, animals and microorganisms for use in vaccines, pharmaceuticals and medical research.13

Bill Gates, Warren Buffet Supporting Propagation of Both Vaccines and GMOs

The most influential, and, of course, richest advocates for genetic engineering and vaccines are Bill Gates and Warren Buffet. They have business as well as philanthropic interests in these technologies and their Gates Foundation (Buffet has donated over $1.5 billion to the Foundation) allows them to mix business with philanthropy.
They – and the corporations they invite to join them – use the tax shelter of a non-profit organization to invest in for-profit enterprises. Gates & Buffet get tax write-offs for putting money in their foundation, but their foundation can give money (both as grants & investments) directly to for-profit corporations creating for-profit products.
This, obviously, creates huge conflict of interests.
For instance, Monsanto and other biotech companies have collaborated with the Gates Foundation via the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) to promote the use of genetically modified (GM) crops in Africa. The Gates Foundation has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to AGRA, and in 2006 Robert Horsch was hired for the AGRA project. Horsch was a Monsanto executive for 25 years. In a nutshell, the project may be sold under the banner of altruism and ‘sustainability,’ but in reality it’s anything but. It’s just a multi-billion dollar enterprise to transform Africa into a GM-crop-friendly continent. The Foundation has also invested heavily in Monsanto stock, purchasing over $23 million worth in 2010.14
The Gates Foundation is also closely partnered with Big Pharma, to whom Bill Gates pledged $10 billion to distribute and administer multiple vaccines to children around the world. This, too, is billed as a humanitarian effort to save lives, but what children living in poverty in developing countries need most is healthy, plentiful food, clean water, better sanitation and improved living conditions. These are the keys to preventing the spread of infectious disease, and they appear to be wholly ignored by Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and non-profit organizations with financial ties to Big Pharma – at the children’s expense.
The Gates Foundation is even funding surveillance of anti-vaccine groups, and the following vaccine companies are supported by the Foundation through both investments and philanthropic projects:

Sanofi
GlaxoSmithKline
Merck
Pfizer
Novartis

Important Movements on the Horizon for Both GM Foods and Vaccines

It’s important to get all the facts before making your decision about vaccination; and to understand that in many state public health laws you still have the legal right to opt out of using a vaccine that you or your child do not want to receive. At present, all 50 states allow a medical exemption to vaccination (medical exemptions must be approved by an M.D. or D.O.); 48 states allow a religious exemption to vaccination; and 17 states allow a personal, philosophical or conscientious belief exemption to vaccination.
However, Washington state now requires parents to obtain the signature of a medical doctor or state-designated medical worker to obtain a philosophical exemption to vaccination. That is because non-medical vaccine exemptions have been restricted in Washington and Vermont and are under attack in California and New Jersey, while there is evidence that medical trade association lobbyists will be working to eliminate or severely restrict vaccine exemptions in Arizona, Connecticut, New York, Colorado and many other states.
Health liberty in America is being threatened by forced vaccination proponents employed by federal and state health departments, who are working with pharmaceutical companies and with Pharma-funded non-profit organizations to encourage government-enforced implementation of “no exceptions” one-size-fits-all vaccine laws. If you want to protect YOUR freedom to make informed, voluntary vaccination decisions in America, you need to take action today. (National vaccination policies are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level, and it is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights will have the greatest impact).
Signing up to be a user of NVIC’s free online Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you access to practical, useful information to help you communicate with your elected state legislators and become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. You will get real-time Action Alerts about what you can do if there are threats to vaccine exemptions in your state. With the click of a mouse or one touch on a Smartphone screen, you will be put in contact with YOUR elected representatives so you can let them know how you feel and what you want them to do. Plus, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have all the information you need to make sure your voice is heard.
I also recommend that you join NVIC on facebook, and if you can contribute monetarily, doing so at NVIC.org.
As for GM foods, you can help to pass the United States’ first GMO labeling law – Proposition 37 – that will require labeling of genetically modified (GM) foods and food ingredients – and ban the routine industry practice of labeling and marketing such foods as “natural.” Prop 37 is the best chance we have of defeating the corporate agri-giants, and of forcing food manufacturers to stop hiding dangerous ingredients in our food, without our knowledge.