Practice English Speaking&Listening with: WHOLE Life Action Hour - Jeffrey Smith - April 4th 2020

Difficulty: 0

- Welcome to this WHOLE Life Action Hour!

I'm thrilled to be with you right now

for a very important conversation.

Right now in the United States,

over 3/4 of soybean corn and cotton are genetically-modified

or genetically-engineered.

And despite labeling requirements

in 64 countries around the world,

most of the food made from these products

in the United States

does not require any meaningful labeling.

And although major biotech companies like Monsanto, Bayer

insist that GMOs are safe,

the World Health Organization has suggested otherwise.

They've labeled glyphosate found in Roundup Ready crops

a probable carcinogen.

It's also known to be an antibiotic

and an endocrine disruptor.

Today, we're gonna talk about

why genetically-engineered foods are a food-safety priority.

We're gonna talk about how you can protect

yourself and your family from hidden dangers,

and about the latest developments

in this critical area of food production

and food safety for all of us.

And we've got the right person to join us

for this conversation

because we're here today with Jeffrey Smith.

He is a world authority

on the dangers of genetically-engineered foods.

He is the founder

of the Institute for Responsible Technology.

In 2017, Jeffrey was named Person of the Year

by Masters of Health magazine

for his more than two decades of work

exposing the health risks of GMOs in 45 countries.

His book, "Seeds of Deception",

is the world's best-selling book ever on GMOs.

And his award-winning documentary

"Secret Ingredients" made with Amy Hart

shares remarkable stories

of people who have regained their health and their lives

after choosing to avoid certain harmful ingredients

in their food.

So, Jeffrey is also a dear friend,

and Jeffrey, I'm so glad to welcome you here.

- Ocean, I love hearing your questions and your introduction

because there's like of all the people

that ever interview me, there's been 1,000,

there's two people that really know

with such just beyond a shadow of doubt,

they know their stuff about GMOs, and it's you and your dad.

I want the people to know who are watching you,

that you really do your homework

and you are following what, and in this area,

I know you're following my stuff because I listen to you

but in each of these areas, you are so precise

so thank you for that.

- Absolutely!

So let's start with a little bit of a basics

for those who may not be,

'cause I'm sure we've got a range of viewers right now

who are different levels of awareness on this,

so what's a GMO?

- Genetically-modified organisms.

Now, it used to be that we would say

you take genes from one species like bacteria or viruses

and force it into the DNA of other species

like soybeans or corn, but there's also gene editing,

which is another form of genetic engineering

where you don't necessarily add genes

from one species to another,

you can change and delete and double genes or reorder them

within the organism that you're looking at.

Now, in both cases,

whether you're transferring genetic material

or just editing or moving them around,

it's not so simple that you could say,

aha, precision and done.

You end up creating massive collateral damage in the DNA,

hundreds, thousands, even 10,000 mutations and alterations

within the genetic structure,

not to mention what could be hundreds or more

changes in what the genes produce:

the proteins and the metabolites.

So it's a genetic roulette when you get involved in it,

and yet the biotech industry claims

that it is safe and predictable

in spite of overwhelming evidence that it's dangerous.

- So there's been an effort to say that gene editing

is somehow a lot more precise and perhaps more controlled

and perhaps a smaller thing.

It's like you're taking a book

and you're editing a little bit,

you're not fundamentally changing it.

So I'm curious, your take on that,

is gene editing, in any way, less of a concerning thing

than full-scale genetic engineering?

And secondly, are there any crops right now

in commercial cultivation that have had edited genes?

- I understand that the Arctic Apple may be gene-edited.

I just read that.

I wasn't actually sure.

I need to double check that which is an important point.

No, gene editing doesn't get a pass.

In some cases, and in some ways, it's more dangerous

than transferring genes between species,

and in some ways, it's not, so it's a mix.

When you take a gene for one species

and you put it into another species,

we don't know how those genes are gonna interact.

But what's interesting is, oftentimes,

when you're talking about plant gene editing,

you will actually transfer genes,

often bacterial genes into the cell structure

to get that gene-editing mechanism in there.

And so, the process of biolistics

or using a gene gun or agrobacterium or bacterial infection

can still occur with gene editing.

And the process of tissue culture or cloning

still occurs in creating the crop,

which can create in itself,

hundreds or thousands of mutations.

But what happens is with plant gene editing,

you stick in a mechanism that produces,

let's say it produces a facial recognition program

that goes up and down, the DNA looking for a match,

and that has an assassin or let's call their scissors,

which cuts and can even destroy a gene.

Now, what's interesting about gene editing

that's different than normal genetic engineering is,

if you create a gene-edited plant,

that mechanism is still in there working.

So a year later, if you decide,

okay, that's the cell culture you're gonna take,

it's very different than it was

when you first genetically-engineered it

because it may opt continued cuts

happening throughout the year.

Also, the way that gene editing works is it cuts the DNA,

and then the DNA reforms out of your control,

and when it reforms,

it can grab genetic material from the Petri dish.

So, hornless cattle that were supposed to be completely safe

ended up with bacterial genes

that produced antibiotic-resistant proteins

which could create super diseases.

Mice ended up with retroviruses inserted into their DNA.

This makes gene editing particularly dangerous.

What's even more dangerous, though,

is the fact that the gene editors

don't even know how dangerous it is

because they go along with assumptions.

They say, according to my manual, according to my book,

according to my computer program which evaluates the risks,

my gene edit should work.

They stop there, they don't actually do a genome sequencing,

but the very few genome sequencings

that are done and published

show that the computer projections are completely wrong

and they're dealing with dynamite.

- Yeah.

So, Jeffrey, we hear often

from proponents of genetic engineering

that there's never been a knowing case of bad outcomes,

let's say, from genetically-engineered things.

Now, we could also counter and say,

well, we're all guinea pigs without anyone monitoring,

a lab experiment because virtually all of us

have consumed some GMOs so how would exactly would you know

if there was a negative outcome

when you unleash something on a population

by the hundreds of millions,

and then say, oh my gosh, no problem!

Nevermind that food allergy rates

have quadrupled in the last generation

since GMOs came into widespread use,

never mind that our microbiomes

are being decimated by who knows what,

lots of factors, right,

but maybe, just maybe, widespread use of glyphosate,

which is an antibiotic could play a part in that.

Nevermind the rates of diabetes and obesity

have been skyrocketing during these same years,

but just functionally, they say, we don't know.

There's lots of other factors

we could attribute those things to.

However, you might point out

that there have been some known impacts from GMOs,

even apart from the glyphosate.

Now, I wanna recognize that a lot of GMO crops

are Roundup Ready.

They're specifically made to be receptacles

for glyphosate and not be harmed.

It's a weed killer, but it's also quite dangerous.

However, apart from that, Jeffrey,

you are asserting, I think,

that there are some known dangers with GMOs,

even if they aren't the Roundup Ready type.

Can you tell us more?

- Well, let's go historically.

I was on the George Noory Coast to Coast radio show

last night and someone called up who was a scientist

thanking me for my work and then telling me

what could have been an absolute devastating story.

Back in the '80s, he took some L-tryptophan supplement

and woke up in the middle of the night,

he said he felt like his body was being tortured.

He gave some to his brother

and the same thing happened to the brother,

and then he found out later

about the L-tryptophan catastrophe.

This particular L-tryptophan was being produced

by genetically-engineered bacteria in Japan

by a company called Showa Denko,

and they were not aware

that the process of genetic engineering

was almost certainly the cause of these tiny contaminants

that ended up killing about 100 Americans

and causing five to 10,000 to fall sick,

some became permanently disabled.

Now, the FDA covered up the genetically-engineered roots

when they spoke to Congress to report on the epidemic.

They ignored the fact that it was only the GMOs,

the versions that created the problem,

they took all L-tryptophan off the market,

blaming it generically on a amino acid

which had been safe for years, the past and years to come,

and it was very much hush hush,

they never did an investigation to verify,

but that is an example of a genetically-engineered product

which did in fact kill people in the 1980s.

Now, more recently,

we have the genetically-engineered crops,

but before that was introduced,

Dr. Arpad Pusztai a leading researcher

in the world in his field

was given $3 million by the UK Government

to figure out how to test for the safety of GMOs,

and he explained very clearly

that the process of genetic engineering, it turns out,

and it wasn't what he was expecting,

is inherently unsafe and within 10 days,

the process of genetic engineering,

irrespective of what gene you put in,

caused potentially precancerous cell growth

in the digestive tract,

smaller brains, livers, and testicles,

partial atrophy of the liver,

damaged immune system in his rats.

This was not Roundup Ready.

It wasn't the particular gene that caused the problem,

it was the generic process.

Well, I remember publishing a picture

of the potentially precancerous cell growth

in the intestines and in the stomach

in my book "Genetic Roulette",

which was being read later

by Dr. Michelle Perro, a pediatrician.

She looked at the pictures and an aha went off in her mind,

said, oh my god, this is what's happening

to the kids in the United States!

She had been a pediatrician for years,

and then starting around 2000,

she started noticing

that very complex diseases were happening,

the kids were not responding to the same treatments,

and she realized that the leaky gut

and the changes that were happening in the lab animals

were happening in the humans,

she started putting her patients on organic diets

and finally, they got better.

Now, if that was the only data point that we had,

it will be very weak.

We have asked audiences at 150 lectures,

what did you notice when you got rid of GMOs?

And they basically defined a whole list of symptoms

that were consistent over 150 lectures,

including about two dozen medical talks

where the audience was talking about thousands

and thousands of their patients.

So then we surveyed 3,256 people,

subscribers to the Institute for Responsible Technology,

and they reported the same symptoms getting better

with digestion at the top and brain fog and fatigue

and weight problems and anxiety and depression,

the exact same relative frequencies

that we saw in these lectures.

And so, I published a peer-reviewed article,

not only about the research but also showing

how GMOs create, how the modes of action

from the genetic engineering process itself,

to the Roundup, to the Bt toxin insecticide

that's produced in corn and cotton

and in South American soybeans,

how their modes of action could predict these problems.

We published the epidemiological charts

showing high correlation between the rise of GMOs

and roundup in these diseases,

and it turns out there's similar anecdotal evidence

among pets and livestock.

The veterinarians that treat both,

again, same thing as Michelle Perro saw in children,

Barbara Royal, Oprah Winfrey's veterinarian

saw it in cats and dogs.

Others, large animal veterinarians saw it in pigs and cows.

So we actually have anecdotal evidence,

animal feeding studies showing

that these same set of diseases,

the precursors of them are created in the lab

and we have so many people and physicians saying

it is absolutely clear and unmistakable

when people take the GMOs out of their diet,

they get better.

- So, that's quite a powerful statement.

And I just wanna be clear,

when you say take the GMOs out of your diet,

are you also referring to going organic generally?

- That's a great question.

- Or is that a distinction there?

Are people getting those results when they go non-GMO

but still eat, for example, non-organic wheat

which might be sprayed with glyphosates, et cetera?

- I love your question.

We're getting both.

So, when I talk to a pig farmer or a cow farmer,

they may take their animals off of GMO soy

or GMO corn or both

and notice a dramatic improvement in the health.

I talked to one farmer who he was blaming new genetics

of pigs that have moved into the area,

probably from Canada,

to, on his, the fact that he went

from having the easiest job on the farm

'cause he was in charge of the nursery of 300 piglets,

or 3,000 piglets,

to having the hardest time on the farm

because all the piglets were getting sick

and he had to inject them with medicines all the time.

And a friend of his said, why don't you go non-GMO?

And he went non-GMO,

and he was shocked because the pigs

started acting like they did 14 years before.

During that 14 years when they were feeding GMO soy,

they were sickly, they were lying down all the time,

they didn't have the energy of piglets.

When they switched them to non-GMO soy,

they act like piglets again.

And this happened and he called his friend

that had made the recommendation in 11 days,

he was stuttering and he was hardly coherent

because the evidence was right there.

We saw that with other pigs and cows and chickens

and all around the world,

just going from GMO to non-GMO.

But when humans switch,

They still may end up with glyphosate or Roundup

sprayed all over the weeds, the oat, et cetera.

And so, when we did the survey of 3,256 people,

we asked them what other things did you do

when you switched to non-GMO

and a large percentage switched to organic at the same time.

We don't recommend doing the experiment in pieces.

We recommend going fully organic

because that's where you're gonna have the biggest impact

because it's the Roundup that's part of the problem

and Roundup is in a lot of non-GMO foods,

particularly the grains and the meats.

- And just to be clear, in case folks aren't aware of this,

it's used as a desiccant to dry out crops before harvest,

sometimes farmers are able to get an extra crop cycle in

or it just makes the harvest process easier

when glyphosate is used.

And that's all very lovely.

I wanna make things easier for our farmers

but not at the expense of our health and our wellbeing.

So what's happened is that right before harvest,

mostly wheat but also some oats, some legumes,

various cereal crops are now being sprayed

with glyphosate or Roundup,

whose primary active ingredient is glyphosate.

And because it's right before a harvest,

researchers are estimating that potentially up to half

of the actual exposure to glyphosate in the American diet

is coming from these crops because there's so much absorbed

by the plant and on the plant

right at that particular vulnerable moments.

And so, this is a heightened reason to go organic

particularly with the cereal crops, if you possibly can.

- And beans because it turns out, if you just have hummus,

that's not organic,

that has been tested

as an enormous amount of glyphosate residue,

same with lentils, mung beans, peas,

'cause it's sprayed on the beans and the grains

but it's also sprayed in orange orchards and in vineyards

so it's in orange juice and wine, so it's pretty pervasive.

We have a report of everyone's testing of glyphosate

at the Institute for Responsible Technology.

It's many, many pages and you can sort it

to see what you need to avoid if you can't buy organic.

- Yeah.

For years, I've been telling folks

that if they wanna avoid GMOs,

the main crops to look out for

are corn, soy, canola, cotton,

which is using making cottonseed oil, and sugar beets,

which, about half our sugar supply

is made from genetically-engineered sugar beets.

The other half is generally from cane sugar.

But now, it's not quite so simple,

because A, as you're saying,

there's a lot of other crops

that are not genetically-engineered

but that are sprayed with Roundup which is a big deal,

and we also have some other crops coming on now

that are maybe not high-volume yet,

but there's the Arctic apple,

there are certain potato varieties

that are genetically-engineered as well,

so what can you tell us about the newer developments,

I guess there's also some zucchini squash,

what are some of the newer developments

that are maybe way more widespread than most people realize

in terms of their exposure?

- I was talking to Professor Emeritus Don Huber

from Purdue University some years ago,

and he said, "The new GMOs that are coming,

"they're gonna be a lot worse

"than the Roundup Ready varieties."

And he was talking about something called RNA interference.

And this is what's used in the potato and in the apple.

What they do is they have DNA

that produces a little strand of RNA,

and let's just animate this RNA,

it goes around and it looks for pieces of the DNA

that look like itself

and then it gloms on and it silences it.

So it silences aspects or genes within the DNA,

and what it's designed to do is silence the genes

that turn the apple or potato brown when it is sliced.

Now, what's interesting is, and this is well-known,

that RNA, these little double-stranded RNA pieces,

can interact between species.

So, if you feed honeybees double-stranded RNA

as they did in one study for one single meal,

it altered the expression of 1,400 genes,

10% of the genome in the honeybees.

If you feed it to mice, it can change their gene expression.

If you feed double-stranded RNA to humans,

it can change our expression.

So scientists at the EPA, scientists at the USDA,

who were actually bullied,

they expressed concern about using this double-stranded RNA

because if we eat the apple,

now the double-stranded RNA can survive digestion,

can get into the bloodstream,

what if it meets with our DNA and silences something?

Is it silencing something that's important?

Is it silencing a regulatory gene

that influences many other genes?

So we say never, ever, ever eat the pre-sliced apples.

They're being sold on Amazon.

Never eat the Innate potato.

Try and get organic potatoes as much as possible

because you may end up reprogramming

your own gene expression.

Now, the potatoes have some additional problems.

The person that made the potato,

he originally worked in Monsanto

and then moved over to J. R. Simplot,

the number one potato maker in the United States,

probably in the world,

and created these Innate Potatoes for them.

After he retired, he started looking at the literature

and then published the book

which was called "Pandora's Potato: The Worst GMO"

and describes in page after page after page

all the reasons why this particular potato that he created

might get you sick.

And one example is that normally,

potatoes get bruised and then they turn brown

and around those brown spots are toxins

and those have to be cut away or the potato is discarded.

These are like Botox potatoes,

they lie about their age, they don't show their bruises,

and it can end up with the same toxins in your stomach

and no one will know along the entire processing chain

because the visual cue

which for centuries has told people don't eat that potato

is being engineered out of the food supply

so you may be eating the toxin

as well as reprogramming your own gene expression.

Now, Monsanto and others, Bayer,

want to create RNA interference sprays

so you can spray on a crop,

it'll change the gene expression of insects, for example,

and what if it gets on the applicator?

What if we eat that RNA interference chemical?

It might change our gene expression,

and this is something that they have no answer to,

they're just trying to push it through,

pretending that it's safe.

- Yes, wow.

So unless you're secretly living with a terror

that you will turn brown in the middle of the night

and get across the air, it may not be for you.

I think that the danger of this is quite considerable

because as you pointed out,

the only thing that lives longer

than genetic change is extinction.

'Cause we're looking at things

that you can't put the genie back in the bottle.

And it may be, let's suppose,

that most or all of these things

turn out to be safer than we thought,

but let's suppose that one genetically-engineered food

or chemical or RNA, what's your term again?

Your RNA-- - Interference.

- Interference, right, okay.

Excuse me.

One RNA interference compound gets out

and changes the gene pool forever,

not just in potatoes or corn or soy,

but in humans or in bacteria.


- Let's pick it up from the bacteria,

'cause you have just landed on something.

Bacteria can be far worse

than genetically-engineered corn or a pig.

There was an experiment done by the EPA

reported by a whistleblower to Dr. Elaine Ingham,

and she said that the EPA disavows this research,

they pretended it was never done,

but she spoke to EPA members who not only swear it was done

but they actually gave her the results.

They released genetically-engineered bacteria

in one location and monitored its movement

and found that it had traveled 11 miles

in the first growing season,

and then it continued to travel and continued to travel,

and within a few years,

it was found everywhere on the planet.

Now, why is this relevant?

Because Elaine Ingham was also involved

in another almost released genetically-engineered bacteria

which may have also gone around the world,

and it was engineered to turn plant matter into alcohol.

Well-meaning scientists thought,

let's send these bacteria to farmers,

they can mix it with the stubble from the crop fields,

instead of having to burn those fields,

that will turn that stubble into alcohol,

they could run their tractors

and then take that nutrient-rich sludge

at the bottom of the barrel,

spread it on the field as a fertilizer.

It passed all the tests that the EPA required.

It was about to be released

for that same type of experiment that the EPA did

to see how far it would spread.

Two weeks before it was gonna be released,

Elaine Ingram's graduate student, she was the advisor,

he was doing research for his PhD,

wanted to get something done on GMOs

so he got permission to use the GMO experiment

that was being done.

He took that nutrient-rich sludge, he mixed it with soil,

he planted weed seeds.

He showed up one Saturday morning at the lab

and he found that the genetically-engineered sludge

had turned the wheat seedlings into mush.

It had turned the plants into alcohol, killing them.

Now, I asked Dr Elaine Ingham,

what would be a worst-case scenario

that's plausible, that's realistic

if they had released this bacteria?

And she said, this particular bacteria,

Klebsiella planticola, is found on every plant

that has been evaluated on the root systems, et cetera.

If the genetically-engineered variety were out competing

because it would turn stuff into alcohol

and it would survive but the natural planticola would not,

she said it could end terrestrial plant life.

End terrestrial plant life.

That's not a catastrophe, that's a cataclysm.

Now, this was in the early '90s,

but it wasn't the first bacteria that was almost released.

In the late '90s, late '80s,

there was a genetically-engineered bacteria

that was designed to protect frost damage

by taking normal bacteria

which facilitates the creation of frost,

and instead, putting an impotent variety

that could, again, out-compete

and so it wouldn't create the frost.

And they created this, but they didn't release it widely.

If they had, it may have altered weather patterns

because now we know that that bacteria is airborne

and it creates clouds and rain from moisture

and it creates snow and frost

and it could have altered the weather patterns

and allowed weeds to survive through the winter

and could have created a catastrophe or a cataclysm.

Now, you look at gene editing, it is so cheap.

You can genetically engineer bacteria

in do-it -yourself kits that you can buy on Amazon today

for 160 bucks.

That price is gonna go down,

the impact of the ability of that do-it-yourself kit

is gonna go up,

the biohacking labs, you can purchase now for $2,000,

will increase in their capacity,

we have major transnationals

with facilities packed with robots

driven by artificial intelligence for massive release,

what happens if we release 100,000 or 500,000

or a million organisms in this generation?

That is a formula for disaster

because if there is a capacity

for a terrestrial plant life being knocked out

or the weather patterns or anything like that,

we're doing this,

we're changing the structure of nature,

corrupting the gene pool irreversibly.

All future generations will be inheriting

not the products of the billions of years of evolution,

but the products of laboratory creations

whose number one most common result

is surprise side effects.

- Right.

So, this is obviously chilling to contemplate,

and I wanna say,

and you and I may have a slightly different take on this,

maybe not, but for myself,

I am not ideologically opposed

to genetic engineering in theory.

In other words, if it can be done safely

and was in the right hands,

and if we knew what we were doing,

and if we could somehow know that we were testing properly,

I'm of the belief that it's a technology

that could conceivably have benefit

for humankind and for our planet.

However, the profit motive distorts this horrendously.

And what we have done is we've given the power

to create life in perpetuity and to create new life forms

and to alter life at its fundamental core

into the hands of companies who are out to make money.

That's what's in their DNA.

And they do not have a conscience built into their DNA.

There's no conscience built into the stock market.

And so, just follow me for a second here.

If theoretically, Bayer, once previously Monsanto,

could undertake a deal where there's a nine in 10 chance

that they'll make $100 billion dollars on something,

and a one in 10 chance that they will annihilate

all life on Earth,

from a business standpoint, all conscience aside,

that would be a smart move

because nine out of 10 chance, they're gonna make a killing.

And what strikes me is that this is too powerful

to leave in the hands of companies who just say trust us

because quite frankly, the stakes are too high.

And we've seen evidence that that trust

has been ill-placed already, lots and lots of it.

Jeffrey, I want to ask you about one more piece here

and then we've got a lot of questions

from our Food Revolution--

- Do you want me to respond to the idol--

- Oh sure, yeah, yeah, go ahead!

Please, yeah. - 'Cause the thing is,

you said we may not be the same,

but then you gave your side, I gotta give mine.

- What is your take here?

Yeah, please.

- I agree.

I have said that genetic engineering, in certain capacities,

may be very helpful specifically for example

correcting a defect in humans in a non-inheritable way.

It might be useful

to create certain products in a laboratory.

Where we draw our line is two areas:

One, absolutely no outdoor release of viable GMOs

that could contaminate the gene pool,

and two, no products of genetic engineering

into the food supply

which exposes it to the entire population.

So that's where we focus.

At the Institute for Responsible Technology,

we pioneered the messaging about the health dangers,

which has driven this tipping point that's underway,

46% of Americans are seeking non-GMO food

and the food companies are scrambling to get rid of it,

it's working like we predicted and like we engineered.

Now, what's interesting is human choice in the supermarket

is not gonna stop the introduction

of genetically-engineered bacteria

which is happening this year

by companies that are doing soil remediation

genetically-engineered bacteria

which could end up in our gut,

which could change who knows what.

We need to institute a global awareness

of what could go wrong so that everyone realizes

we have come to this inevitable time in human history

where we can redirect the streams of evolution for all time,

and we don't have the moral or ethical compass

or even a deep understanding

of the implications of the practice.

So we need to lock it in the lab

and keep it out of the food supply

and that requires policy.

So for the first time in my 25 years doing this,

I'm like, now, completely rewriting our activism,

and we're raising money to create a global movement

through the Institute for Responsible Technology

to bring in the climate change people

for planetary survival, the animal rights people,

the health people, these religious people

so that everyone realizes

we now have to focus as a civilization to stop this

or all future generations

are gonna be suffering from our falling.

- Yes, absolutely.

Thank you.

So let's turn now to glyphosate,

the primary active ingredient in Roundup.

And I'll ask you to be brief here

just because we have a lot of questions

we haven't gotten to yet from our Food Revolutionary--

- Okay, I can do that.

I can do that. - Okay, all right.

So high level, glyphosate is being used widely,

it's being used most of all on Roundup Ready crops,

but it's also being used as a desiccant.

Why should that concern us?

- It's as if this molecule was designed

to damage or destroy the foundations of our health.

It eliminates the ability to access certain minerals

which can run our bodies.

It is an antibiotic and we know that it changes

the gut bacteria in ways that can lead to many diseases.

It can cause leaky gut,

which is linked to inflammation

and many diseases and autoimmune disease.

It can damage the DNA and is linked to cancer.

It's named as a Class 2A carcinogen.

It can possibly reduce the availability

of the neurotransmitter serotonin, melatonin, and dopamine,

causing anxiety, sleeplessness, pain, et cetera.

It can damage the mitochondria,

which is the foundation of lifespan,

prevention of cancer, and so many other diseases,

it can prevent the production of certain digestive enzymes

and damage the linings of the intestines,

and I'm only getting started.

It's also linked to birth defects,

and when injected into pregnant mice,

there was an epigenetic inherited effect

so that the offspring were fine,

the grandchildren were really messed up,

but the generation that got the worst hit

was the great grandchildren

where 90% of that generation of these mice

ended up with serious diseases,

deaths during giving birth,

prostate problems, kidney problems, obesity,

so it is really a dangerous molecule.

- Yeah, sounds like it.

And we already covered how to avoid it,

which is basically going organic.

So certified non-GMO and that helps.

I suppose it's not being used, that we know of,

on a lot of fruits and vegetables right now,

other than maybe zucchini

with the genetically-engineered variety,

is that true?

- Well, the zucchini is not Roundup Ready.

It's viral-resistant.

Because it's used in vineyards

for the lines of the vineyards, it'll end up in grapes.

It is, however, in certain parts of the country in the rain,

so there's tiny amounts of glyphosate residues

and things that you wouldn't think of

so we'll just have to say,

yeah, we're not gonna get rid of it 100%.

And to stop it being sprayed in your area,

a lot of citizens are having a lot of success

getting it stopped,

and if you go to

we have a training program for people

to help them make that happen in their area.

- Okay,

Thank you. - Sure.

- Now let's go to some questions

from our Food Revolutionaries.

Barbara said, "I see a couple

"of different things on the labels indicating non-GMO,

"is one better than another?

"Is it just that one is certified?"

- Yes, I'd go with the Non-GMO Project verification

which is that butterfly.

Some companies will do self-certification.

So Cheerios, for example,

they declare non-GMO on the side

of their normal traditional Cheerios,

not the Honey Nut Cheerios.

I called 'em up and said, "What do you consider non-GMO?"

They said that's proprietary.

I said, "Is it just that you tell your farmers

"not to use it?

"Do you actually do tests?

"Do you do simple strip tests?

"Or do you do the PCR in the laboratory?

"And do you have a rejection threshold?

"Or do you allow things that come in

"that are made from GMOs, but simply don't have the DNA?"

They would not answer the question.

Same thing with Trader Joe's.

They say we're non-GMO with anything that our name on it,

but they don't tell us how.

The Non-GMO Project has published standards

that we think are very strong

so we think that's the way to go.

- Yes.

Okay, thank you.

We heard from Marie who said,

I hope I'm choosing all non-GMO when I buy organic,

table for organic usually starts with a nine.

Produce with a label starting three or four,

are these considered GMO?

What is the difference between the food labels

starting three or four?

How can we know a produce is GMO?

Or are there certain proteins slash foods

to avoid altogether because they're GMOs?

- Great question.

So, there's an inventory control method

used in produce places where the nine to five digit code,

beginning with a nine means that it's organic.

They actually created a system that saying

that if anyone wanted to tell people that it was GMO,

they would have a five-digit that started with eight.

You can ignore that.

No one uses it.

It was never designed for consumers.

It's completely a theoretical thing

that's still circulating on the internet.

Ignore it.

So, organic does not allow the intentional use of GMOs.

Now, it's possible that there's contamination.

Organic is not required testing for levels of contamination.

So, it's possible, depending on what it is,

that there's small levels of GMOs.

The Non-GMO Project does require testing

if you're using anything that might be a GMO.

So you might see organic and Non-GMO Project verified

on the same package.

That, I would say, would be the gold standard

because it avoids the Roundup because it's organic,

it's not supposed to use GMO because it's organic,

and there's been testing to verify

that the system is keeping the level

either low or non-existent.

Now, when you go to the produce section,

there's not a lot of GMOs down there.

Basically, these are the GMOs on the marketplace right now:

soy, corn, cotton, canola, sugar beets, alfalfa,

yellow squash, zucchini, papaya from Hawaii or China,

apples and potatoes, and there's also salmon

that's been sold in Canada not yet in the United States.

Now, that's not a lot of the produce section

so anything that I didn't mention

is not genetically-engineered at this time,

not seedless watermelon, not pluots,

those are not genetically-engineered in the lab

in the ways that we're talking about.

Now, if you're gonna buy a zucchini, make sure it's organic.

If you're gonna buy yellow squash, make sure it's organic.

So, if you really wanna avoid

not every zucchini that's not not organic is GMO,

but it's like Clint Eastwood, feeling lucky,

so you'd have to decide

whether you're willing to take that risk.

- Thank you.

A couple questions really going a little deeper

on the same theme.

Jane said, is there an available list

of all the foods that are genetically-engineered?

And Mark said, I buy a lot of raw food items

in my bulk food store,

however, there are not a lot

of organically-produced items there

so I have no idea what's GMO.

Is there a set of grains or other bulk foods

that I should assume is GMO or non-GMO?

- Well, we answered the question

but we did it very quickly by naming them.

You really wanna have 'em written down

because if you're listening to this and you're on the run,

you're not writing 'em down.

You can go to

which is a free service

from the Institute for Responsible Technology.

We list all the products that have been verified

by the Non-GMO Project.

We list which products are genetically-engineered.

That list is been stable for a while,

but I did not mention this,

that animal products

from animals that are not raised organic or 100% grass-fed

are usually animals that have been fed

genetically-engineered soy, corn, cottonseed meal,

canola meal, sugar beet pulp, or alfalfa,

and some of the dairy products in the United States

are from cows that have been injected

with genetically-engineered bovine growth hormone

which I was talking to a former Monsanto scientist,

he said three of his colleagues at Monsanto

found so much cancer-promoting hormone

in the milk from treated cows,

the three Monsanto scientists

refused to drink milk thereafter,

unless it was organic, one bought his own cow.

Now, there are genetically-engineered cooking agents

and flavorings, et cetera, et cetera.

One example that we wanna avoid at all costs

in my opinion is the Impossible Burger

because that's genetically-engineered yeast

to produce something called heme,

it ends up producing 46 additional proteins,

none of which have been characterized as healthy

in the food supply,

and it also uses Roundup Ready soy

that had been sprayed with Roundup,

a nonprofit group gathering testimonials

of people that got sick after eating the Impossible Burger.

Don't become a casualty.

Friends don't let friends eat the Impossible Burger.

- If you wanna be healthy, then make it Impossible.

(both laughing)

All right.

Thanks, Jeffrey.

So, let's see, we heard from Alvin who asked,

are seedless grapes GMO?

- No, fortunately not.

What happens is the seedless grapes,

the seedless watermelons, they come from crossbreeding.

They're not the genetic engineering things

where you take a gun and you shoot millions of genes

into a plate of millions of cells

and clone the cells into a plant.

You can cross-breed and get things like pluots

and seedless grapes.

So you can relax about those.

And if you get a chance, try heirloom varieties,

because we now have a loss of biodiversity that's so great

because there's been a pushing of certain few varieties

that can ship well or be picked mechanically

that some of the diversity

and some of that richness and flavor and the health benefits

of the variety of what nature has been given us

for thousands of years is being lost.

So not only for your own health,

but also to support the system,

the supply system to grow that diversity and richness,

look for heirloom varieties as well.

- Alrighty, thank you so much for that.

Let's see, I'm seeing lots of other questions here.

So, Janet said we eat organic and beyond organic foods,

are there foods that will support our health

while being bombarded with EMF, cell towers, our devices,

iPhones, iPads, TV, et cetera?

Janet, I could refer you to an article

we actually wrote on this topic.

If you google space detoxifying or detox,

you'll find it.

It's an article about 12 detoxifying foods

that have actually shown to help your body detoxify

and clear away toxins from your environment.

Basically, the quick punchline is

it's cruciferous vegetables and leafy greens,

it's lemons, it's avocados, it's green tea,

apples, garlic, chlorella, turmeric,

beets, blueberries, cilantro, and ginger.

Lots more in the article about

why those specific foods work,

how they work, what they do, what the studies actually show,

what kinds of things they help your body clear away,

but that's the fast list.

And obviously, organic is helpful,

so I mentioned apples for example in that list.

Well, it doesn't do you a whole lot of good

if you're trying to detoxify with apples

but you're eating apples that were sprayed with pesticides

and were genetically-engineered.

The best way to detoxify is to not bring the toxins in

in the first place.

But some of us are gonna get some anyway

and we wanna optimize our body's ability

to clear away the junk

so we can be optimally healthy and do our job well

to get rid of the bad stuff when we're exposed to it.

- In fact, well, there's two major ways

that the body detoxes, well, there's several,

but the liver and the cells themselves,

in both of those cases,

glyphosate helps prevent those type of detoxification,

it prevents the ability for these CYP enzymes

to work in the liver,

and it also reduces the NRF too,

which is the way that the cells will detox.

And so, by taking glyphosate in,

all the other toxins become more elevated

if they were normally released during these pathways,

so being organic is critical,

especially to avoid the Roundup

so that the detoxification pathways

will get rid of these chemicals that are in your system now.

- Thanks, Jeffrey.

Heather asked, what happens when GMO food, Roundup,

and other pesticides, heavy metals,

and environmental toxins are joined by EMFs,

especially becoming 5g, and all impact us at once?

What is the effect on both us and our microbiome?

So obviously, we've been talking about some of these toxins

but I guess she's really talking about

what happens when the cumulative takes place,

and also, do you see 5g as being significant in this?

- So, I interviewed 18 experts

for healing from GMOs and Roundup online conference,

and Dietrich Klinghardt and Lee Cowden,

both doctors who are very well-known

among functional medicine and integrative medicine,

both talked about the fact

that glyphosate damages the gut bacteria

and so does the EMF fields,

whether it be 5g or your WiFi, et cetera.

And they said the two work together.

And so, they recommended, as part of their protocol,

for healing from the impact of GMOs and Roundup,

was to not only switch to organic

but also to limit exposure to these fields.

Now, there may be other ways that they work together,

but I don't have.

There probably are other ways that it works together,

especially with the heavy metals and all that.

Now, heavy metals, it's interesting.

There was a serious outbreak of kidney disease

in Sri Lanka and in Central America

where a huge percentage of farm workers

ended up on dialysis were dying.

And there was a study done

where they postulated that the glyphosate

would bind with arsenic that was found in the area

'cause they were spraying with glyphosate,

there was arsenic in the area,

and then it would bind together

'cause it's a key later and holds on to it,

which would smuggle it into the system,

then into the kidneys.

And in the kidney environment,

you would cause the two to separate,

and the arsenic and the glyphosate

would damage or kill the kidney.

And so, that's the way that glyphosate works

with heavy metals, in this case, arsenic,

to make it much worse.

- Yes, thank you.

These things really do compound.

You can't just look at any one thing in isolation.

But the key thing is we're never gonna be able

to get rid of every toxin

that's ever been invented on this planet,

but we do the best we can.

Minimize the load and to optimize the health

and help our bodies respond effectively

to the stuff that we can't control.

There's what's called the Serenity Prayer,

help me to accept the things I cannot change,

give me the courage to change the things I can,

and give me the wisdom to know the difference.

Interestingly, it's not just about serenity.

You could also call it the Courage Prayer

or the Wisdom Prayer, I suppose,

'cause we're talking about all three of those things.

And in this case, there is a certain amount of serenity.

I don't wanna live in fear of things I can't control

or can't do anything about.

I don't think that helps anybody.

Fear is actually bad for your health,

but effective response,

manifesting courage in response to the violations

that we see is an act of self-love and dignity.

So, let's have wisdom too.

If you're not in a financial position

to afford to go 100% organic right now,

number one, focus on cutting out food waste,

eat out at restaurants less, prepare in bulk,

focus on the basic staples,

eat more of the organic foods that are affordable,

like legumes do not cost an arm and a leg, even organic.

The quinoa, even, cabbage, carrots, mushrooms,

some of these things can be pretty darn affordable

and they're so nutrient-packed.

And of course, go organic as much as you can.

But as we've mentioned,

not everything is on the same playing field there

so if you're not gonna go organic with something,

make sure it's not one of the crops

that's genetically-engineered widely.

And that's gonna be a helpful way

to protect yourself and your family.

We had a question come in from Ruth.

This will be the last one from our participants here.

She said, should we wash organic produce?

What about non-GMO foods that are not labeled organic?

How safe are they?

I think we've addressed the second part.

As far as washing,

first let's clarify is it helpful to wash GMO crops?

- Well, the question was, should we wash organic food,

and I'm gonna start there.

- Going to that too.

- I'll start there because it's really interesting.

I was talking to Dietrich Klinghardt in the interview,

and he was talking about how sometimes,

the microbiome on the crops may be in some cases healthier

than the nutrients in the crops themselves.

He talked about how certain herbs may be efficacious

because of the specific microbiome

that's attracted to those herbal plants.

You talked about green leafy vegetables

where we may be able to only process

and assimilate 5% of the nutrients,

but they're still very, very healthy,

maybe the microbiome on the lettuces, et cetera.

So he said that he does not wash the organic produce.

Since he's said that,

I found out that several of my friends

also do not wash the organic produce.

It depends where it's coming from

and whether there's viruses out there.

But anyway, that's one thing.

So I let people make that decision

but it's an interesting concept.

Now, for non-organic things,

yeah, I think washing is important

but it's not gonna take glyphosate out of the inside

because glyphosate, what happens is,

they combine it with a surfactant

which is extremely dangerous,

it drives the glyphosate poison into the crop,

it gets the positivity into the food portion.

15% goes out through the roots

but the rest hangs out in the crop itself.

When you take that food, you can't wash it off.

But there are basic chemicals that are on the surface

of the chemical-laden industry,

so washing it is not a bad idea,

but you can't guarantee

that you're gonna get rid of all the chemicals.

- Yeah, absolutely.

And we did run an article on this.

If you google Food Revolution wash,

you'll pull up the article.

Again, that's Food Revolution wash

about how to wash vegetables and fruits

to remove pesticides.

So if you're eating crops

that are not genetically-engineered necessarily,

but fruits and vegetables

that may have been sprayed with pesticides,

it turns out if you use baking soda

and mix about a tablespoon into a gallon of water,

you create a solution that has been proven

to remove far more of the pesticides than just water

when you soak it for about 15 minutes,

and that can do a lot of good.

Again, it's all about what you can afford.

Obviously, if you can go organic,

you avoid a lot of the pesticides in the first place.

Not all of them.

There are some insecticides

used even in organic agriculture, not quite the same,

but some others that are not particularly great.

And this comes back to really the question

of what is your source.

I would never wash vegetables

from our organic garden, for example,

because I actually think

that some of the little bits of bacteria that are on there

are actually good for me.

But if I'm getting it from the store, different story.

Unless you know who grew it.

Farmer's market, arguable,

depends how big is the operation?

How are they running things?

Are they using manure from factory farms, for example?

Because if they're doing that,

then there can be some pathogenic bacteria

on your lovely organic kale leaf,

and you might not wanna eat that.

But if it's a natural system that's regenerative,

then that's another story, and good bacteria is good for us.

So it all depends on source and your values,

and obviously, if you have any particular vulnerabilities,

then maybe it becomes more important.

So, Jeffrey, I think we've covered a lot here.

Anything more you wanna say to our participants

as we move towards completion?

- Well, I think that the concept that we have arrived

at this inevitable time in human history

where we have the capacity

to replace nature in this generation

with gene-edited alternatives gives a moment of pause

but it gives a sense now

that we can actually protect all living beings

and all future generations in this generation.

We can take steps that we can actually bless

by protecting all of nature and all future human offspring.

And that's not something that our ancestors

had as an opportunity because there was never a threat

that could actually cause such widespread damage

to time and space.

So, we can, just as before,

we were looking at whether you can afford organic.

I loved your answer.

It sounded like me talking about not worrying

and about being upset that you can't follow everything.

I also wanna say that when you hear about the possibility

of replacing nature,

and if you go to,

we have a three-minute video which describes this threat,

and I'm gonna create a new one about that bacteria

which we just talked about that I'm working on today,

it's an opportunity for us to do something great

for the future, for all living beings,

for future generations,

and it's an opportunity, rather than a burden

if we choose it to be that way.

We can choose whether we're a victim or a victor.

We can decide what we consider food

and what we consider food-shaped objects.

It's our opportunity to take charge.

And what's interesting is,

I was speaking in Hawaii at the end of 2019,

and a Hawaiian elder explained to me what Aloha Aina is.

It's this reciprocity of love of the land.

We love nature and there's a reciprocal love

and reciprocal support.

And this I can relate from my own experience

and maybe you can too.

When we step up as voices speaking on behalf of nature,

protecting nature, it's as if there's wind below our sails,

and it's an advanced technique

that I can not speak more highly about of propelling us

as if we are getting supported by nature.

So rather than taking this as a burden

and taking this as a fear,

take this as an opportunity

and an invitation to participate.

Perhaps you can provide financial support,

perhaps you can get involved as an activist,

perhaps you become

what I call a click-and-send revolutionary

by getting information and posting it.

In any case, what we're doing together

is laying the foundation to protect nature now.

- Yes, absolutely.

You really do vote with every dollar you spend

and every bite you take for the future of food

and how it's growing.

The truth is that as food companies recognize

that there's money to be made in non-GMO foods and crops,

they start prioritizing.

We've already got a two-tiered system

where farmers that are non-GMO with certain crops

can make more money for their harvest than GMO crops can.

And obviously, organic makes even more money.

So, it seems to me that we have an incredible opportunity

to create a marketplace demand for certified non-GMO,

and in that process to shift the course of history,

to help protect life, we obviously protect ourselves,

but I want everyone watching to remember,

this isn't just about you,

this is about how food is grown

and the future of food on this planet.

So, Jeffrey, I thank you so much

for your decades of courageous leadership in this field,

for your dedication, as always,

to not just personal health but mobilizing movements,

and for your wisdom, for your leadership,

for your heartfelt curiosity,

and your dedication to collective wellbeing.

Future generations, I believe, will thank you for it.

- Thank you, Ocean.

I deeply appreciate who you are, what you do,

and the heart that you give to your work in the world.

- Thank you.

This is Ocean Robbins and Jeffrey Smith,

signing off and thanking you so much for joining us today.

When it comes to cancer, Alzheimer's, diabetes,

heart disease and other chronic illness,

what really matters isn't how many books you read,

how many webinars you attend or how much you know.

What really matters at the end of the day

is what you eat and how you live.

The science has given us what we need to know.

Now, it's time for action.

It's time to implement and optimize your healthy lifestyle.

It's time to get results.

It's time to say goodbye to confusion and hello to clarity.

It's time to say goodbye to bad habits

and hello to good ones.

It's time to fall in love with foods that love you back.

It's time to join a community

that will support you in achieving your goals.

It's time for WHOLE Life Club.

Click the link to find out more and to join in now.

(bright music)

The Description of WHOLE Life Action Hour - Jeffrey Smith - April 4th 2020