Why The Blog?

Having had no luck with miracle diet plans and advice from so called experts, I tried to expand my knowledge of diet and nutrition and find my own results. As I gained knowledge I became aware that all is not what it seems.


Recently I've read numerous books and searched many websites, some books date back to the 70's (not much has changed since then). One book in particular "Natural Alternatives To Dieting" by Marilyn Glenville was especially useful. The book was published in 1999, I read the book about 8 years ago, at the time I thought wow ! but did I take the advice and change my lifestyle...No !


"What you do with this knowledge is your choice - one things for sure, you can't say you didn't know".


Please take the time to read the articles...you may be surprised, you may be shocked, but please don't take my word for it...check it out for yourselves, libraries and web browsing won't cost you a penny, just your time.


"If I never questioned what I was told, I wouldn't have been any wiser".


I've gained enough knowledge to bring you this blog site. I don't have all the answers, I'm certainly not an expert but I can signpost you to other online resources that may help.

Thursday 31 May 2012

Genetically Modified Foods


Increasingly, the potatoes, tomatoes, corn, and other vegetable products that we buy in the supermarket are genetically modified. Food inspection authorities and biologists experimenting with the manipulation of DNA structures for large food companies claim that these products have undergone sufficient testing and form no danger to public health. According to the experts featured in 'Scientists under Attack - Science in the Magnetic Field of Money,' however, this is a blatant lie.

Big public companies have commercial interests that result in censored research results and crucial questions that go unanswered. Microbiologist Àrpàd Pusztai found 36 significant differences between rats that had eaten genetically modified potatoes and rats that had eaten "normal" ones.

Among the first group the liver was less well-developed, but when Pusztai announced this in a television interview, he was fired. After publication of negative research data in Nature magazine, his colleague Ignacio Chapela was attacked online in a viral marketing campaign to discredit his results.

The editors of Nature proceeded to write an editorial admitting that they should not have published the data, bringing their prestigious publication's independent reputation into question. The same applies to universities that accept large sums of money from businesses performing food research.

Can scientists still be trusted?

No comments: