Genetically modified crops are extremely hazardous and have serious health and environmental effects.

The Expose News - com

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that genetically modified (GM) crops are extremely hazardous and have serious health and environmental effects has been a topic of intense debate. This article aims to review the scientific evidence surrounding this claim to provide a clearer understanding of the potential risks and benefits of GM crops.</p>
<h2>Understanding Genetically Modified Crops</h2>
<p>Genetically modified crops are plants whose DNA has been altered using genetic engineering techniques. These modifications are typically aimed at improving crop yield, resistance to pests and diseases, or tolerance to herbicides. The most common GM crops include soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola.</p>
<h2>Health Concerns</h2>
<p>One of the primary concerns regarding GM crops is their potential impact on human health. Critics argue that the genetic modifications could introduce new allergens or toxins into the food supply. However, extensive research has shown that GM crops are generally safe for consumption.</p>
<p>A comprehensive review by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) in 2016 concluded that there is no substantial evidence of a difference in risks to human health between currently commercialized GM crops and conventionally bred crops. The review can be found <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23395/genetically-engineered-crops-experiences-and-prospects">here</a>.</p>
<h2>Environmental Impacts</h2>
<p>Another major concern is the environmental impact of GM crops. Critics point to issues such as increased pesticide use, reduced biodiversity, and the potential for gene flow from GM crops to wild plants. However, the scientific consensus is that the environmental risks are manageable and often outweighed by the benefits.</p>
<p>A study published in the journal <em>Nature</em> found that the adoption of GM crops has led to a significant reduction in pesticide use and greenhouse gas emissions. The study can be found <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14865">here</a>.</p>
<h2>Economic and Social Considerations</h2>
<p>The economic and social impacts of GM crops are also important to consider. GM crops have the potential to increase agricultural productivity and reduce the need for chemical inputs, which can benefit farmers and consumers alike. However, there are also concerns about the control of seed ownership by multinational corporations and the potential for GM crops to displace traditional farming practices.</p>
<p>A report by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) highlights the economic benefits of GM crops, including increased yields and reduced production costs. The report can be found <a href="http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/53/default.asp">here</a>.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that genetically modified crops are extremely hazardous and have serious health and environmental effects is not supported by the majority of scientific evidence. While there are legitimate concerns and ongoing debates, the consensus among the scientific community is that GM crops are generally safe for consumption and do not pose significant environmental risks. It is important to continue researching and monitoring the impacts of GM crops to ensure their safe and responsible use.</p>

Claim Review: Genetically Modified Crops and Their Alleged Hazards

<p>The recent article from The People's Voice claims that critics are warning of 'mass casualties' from a Gates-funded plan to vaccinate 86 million girls against HPV. This claim is based on concerns about the potential side effects of the HPV vaccine, which critics argue have not been adequately studied.</p>
<p>The HPV vaccine has been a subject of controversy since its introduction. Critics like James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., have suggested that the vaccine could lead to a high number of serious adverse events. Lyons-Weiler, head of the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge, stated that the adverse events profile of the HPV vaccine is far worse than reported and that mass vaccination could lead to significant harm.</p>
<p>However, numerous studies have shown that the HPV vaccine is generally safe and effective. A systematic review published in the <a href="https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD009069.pub3/full">Cochrane Library</a> found that the vaccine is effective in preventing HPV infections and cervical lesions. The review also noted that the vaccine is associated with a low risk of serious adverse events.</p>
<p>The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) both recommend the HPV vaccine as a safe and effective way to prevent cervical cancer. The WHO's Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety has reviewed the safety data on HPV vaccines and concluded that the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh the risks.</p>
<p>It is important to note that while there have been reports of adverse events following HPV vaccination, these events are rare. The most common side effects are mild and include pain at the injection site, headache, and fever. Serious adverse events, such as autoimmune conditions, are extremely rare and have not been definitively linked to the vaccine.</p>
<p>The claim that the Gates-funded plan to vaccinate 86 million girls against HPV will result in 'mass casualties' is largely unfounded. While there are reported side effects, the benefits of preventing cervical cancer outweigh the risks. The HPV vaccine has been extensively studied and is recommended by leading health organizations around the world.</p>

Claim Review: Gates-Funded HPV Vaccination Plan Will Lead to 'Mass Casualties'

<h1>Examining RFK Jr.'s Claims on 5G Health Risks: A Comprehensive Review</h1>
<p>Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has publicly stated that 5G technology presents serious health risks, including the disruption of the blood-brain barrier and an increase in glioblastomas and other cancers. This claim review aims to scrutinize these assertions by examining the available scientific evidence.</p>
<h2>Understanding 5G Technology</h2>
<p>5G is the fifth generation of wireless technology, designed to increase bandwidth, allowing faster download speeds and more reliable connections. It operates on different frequency bands, including low-band (below 1 GHz), mid-band (1-6 GHz), and high-band (mmWave, above 24 GHz).</p>
<h2>Health Concerns and Scientific Consensus</h2>
<p>Kennedy cites 'thousands of studies' supporting his claims. However, the mainstream scientific community and major health organizations disagree with his interpretation. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) have both concluded that exposure to 5G frequencies within international guidelines does not cause adverse health effects.</p>
<p>A comprehensive review by the <a href='https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/radiation-electromagnetic-fields'>WHO</a> on electromagnetic fields and public health states that 'no adverse health effects have been causally linked with exposure to wireless technologies' within the given limits.</p>
<h2>Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption and Cancer</h2>
<p>Kennedy's claim that 5G radiation disrupts the blood-brain barrier and causes cancer is not supported by the majority of scientific studies. A study by the <a href='https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935118300167'>Swedish Radiation Safety Authority</a> found no consistent evidence that RF fields, including 5G frequencies, cause such effects.</p>
<p>Regarding cancer, the <a href='https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/electromagnetic-fields-fact-sheet'>National Cancer Institute</a> states that 'studies have not shown clear evidence of a association between cell phone use and cancer.' Moreover, the incidence of glioblastomas has not increased in correlation with the rise of wireless technologies, according to the <a href='https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/brain.html'>Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program</a>.</p>
<h2>International Standards and Safety Guidelines</h2>
<p>Kennedy's plan includes aligning U.S. policies with stricter international standards. However, the <a href='https://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPrfg-emf.pdf'>ICNIRP guidelines</a>, which are followed by many countries, are already designed to protect against all established health effects.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>Based on the current scientific consensus and reviews by major health organizations, RFK Jr.'s claims about 5G health risks are largely unfounded. While continuous research is essential to monitor potential long-term effects, the available evidence indicates that 5G technology is safe when within international guidelines.</p>

Examining RFK Jr.'s Claims on 5G Health Risks: A Comprehensive Review

<p>The article from Slay News claims that the UK government's regulator, the Medicines Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), revealed that 13.7% of people who received Covid vaccines suffered adverse events considered to be 'medically serious'. This claim is based on a study published in the medRxiv medical journal. However, a thorough review of the data and context is necessary to assess the accuracy of this claim.</p>
<p>The study analyzed data from the Yellow Card Vaccine Monitor (YCVM), a system established by the UK MHRA to monitor adverse reactions following Covid vaccination. The study found that out of 30,281 vaccinated individuals, 15,764 (52.1%) reported experiencing at least one adverse reaction, with 4,134 (13.7%) reporting an event considered medically serious.</p>
<p>It is important to note that the term 'medically serious' can encompass a wide range of symptoms, from those requiring medical attention to more severe outcomes. The article does not provide a detailed breakdown of the types of adverse events reported, which is crucial for understanding the severity and context of these events.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the claim that 13.7% of vaccinated individuals experienced medically serious adverse events is not supported by other reliable sources. According to the UK government's official data, the rate of serious adverse events following Covid vaccination is significantly lower. For example, the MHRA's weekly report on Covid-19 vaccine adverse reactions shows that the rate of serious adverse events is around 0.1% (<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions">MHRA Weekly Report</a>).</p>
<p>The discrepancy between the study's findings and the official data can be attributed to several factors, including the study's methodology, sample size, and the definition of 'medically serious' events. It is also worth noting that the study was not peer-reviewed, which means it has not been subjected to the rigorous scrutiny of the scientific community.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that 13.7% of Covid-vaccinated individuals experienced medically serious adverse events is misleading and lacks context. While the study does report this figure, it does not align with the official data from the UK government, which shows a significantly lower rate of serious adverse events. It is essential to rely on official and peer-reviewed sources when assessing the safety of Covid vaccines.</p>

Claim Review: 13.7% of Covid-Vaxxed Suffered 'Medically Serious' Side Effects

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "Genetically modified crops are extremely hazardous and have serious health and environmental effects." is Mostly False

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: