Redesigning Nature

 By M.K. Styllinski

“Cows are now ‘automated Consumption units’ “

Technocracy III: Tagged (and Bagged?)

As we continue looking at the expressions of our “Official Culture” the subject of food looms large, as the way we feel and think is influenced in large part by what we put into our bodies – the simple maxim of “you are what you eat” may have more layers of meaning than we suppose.

The mass production of food is intimately linked to our environment and the sensitive ecosystems of flora and fauna which are presently being vacuumed up into the vast processing plant known as trans-national economics. Our extraordinarily unhealthy diets are tied to an agriculture system that is designed to generate profit at any cost, despite what those “green” corporations will tell you. Chemical intensive and mechanized production, migrant labourers paid subsistence wages; massive wastage; long distance shipping and producers caught in “hostage” contracts from which it becomes extremely difficult to escape without expensive litigation. Large government subsidies allow corporations to do as they please and to stay above the law. An important part of this preferential treatment is the de facto support of modern debt slavery. Now that fresh, natural foods have been pushed to the periphery, we are forced to eat an unnatural diet. Most of us who cannot afford organic goods ingest daily quantities of foods that have been produced with insecticides, synthetic hormones and wasteful packaging. With the new innovation of bio-engineering, Nature herself can be patented and sold to the highest bidder – all in the name of eradicating poverty and feeding the world.

rose© infrakshun

Knowledge is also being redefined towards strict protocols of consumption. Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) is recognised only when knowledge and “creativity” generate profits – usually for a tiny percentage of the planet’s population. The shift from common rights to private rights is one of the primary tenets of “globalism” and is perfectly aligned to the new colonialism of multinationals. [1] The patents so enamoured of agrichemical and bio-tech companies are now being used not only define which direction the market should go but to block other firms’ entry. Rather than being essential components in the monopoly of the seed business to extend invention and creativity, they are only required to increase market leverage and control, acting as an enforcer of IPR protection. Patents are deeply connected to universities and all manner of institutions with bribes and pay packets fixed accordingly.

Science too is working for government and corporations where true discovery, research and innovation is sucked into profit at any cost where knowledge is exploited for the fastest buck and where specialisations and studies that could benefit humankind are slowly forgotten in favour of commercial spin. One example of this is genetic engineering.

Agribusiness is gradually realising that if one creates herbicides to tackle the problem of weeds then this will pave the way for “super weeds” that adapt in such a way that stronger and stronger chemicals are needed. The agri-chemical and biotech giant Monsanto has genetically engineered its patented soya-bean to increase its herbicide sale while charging farmers a technology fee for buying more chemicals to fend off the adaptive capacity of diseases that the chemicals themselves produce. With increasing problems arising from enormous fields with depleted top soils; synthetic copies of crops that cannot sustain themselves long-term, serious questions regarding the long-term health and economic viability of such farming has yet to rise above the push for profits.

The economic fantasy that Monsanto so often relies upon before hot-footing its way towards easy gains from customary exploitation is beginning to be resisted by many farmers around the world. [2] While Monsanto pushes its hybrid “Round-Up” soya bean on unsuspecting countries such as Argentina, the “miracle” is already disappearing from several studies suggesting serious health concerns. What is especially worrying are the repeating patterns of research suggesting growth reduction and atrophying across a broad range of bodily functions.

One study found that:

… 55.6 percent of the offspring of female rats fed genetically engineered soy flour died within three weeks. The female rats had received 5-7 grams of the Roundup Ready variety of soybeans, beginning two weeks before conception and continuing through nursing. By comparison, only 9 percent of the offspring of rats fed non-GM soy died. Furthermore, offspring from the GM-fed group were significantly stunted—36 percent weighed less than 20 grams after 2 weeks, compared to only 6.7 percent from the non-GM soy control group.[3]

After only 10 days the rats showed significant health problems including “smaller brains, livers, and testicles, damaged immune systems and digestive function, partial atrophy of the liver and potentially pre-cancerous cell growth in the intestines.” [4] The understandable concern is more than justified when we know that children are more likely to be at risk from the potential dangers of GM foods. This is due to their fast-developing bodies which are more susceptible to allergies, nutritional problems and the danger from antibiotic resistant diseases.[5] As one author states: “Mice avoid eating GM foods when they have the chance, as do rats, cows, pigs, geese, elk, squirrels, and others. What do these animals know that we don’t?” [6]

By 2012, the news for Monsanto and its groupies hadn’t got any better. In a large two-year feeding study, the Committee for Research & Independent Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN) reported on rats that were given either NK603 Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize, cultivated with or without Roundup, and Roundup alone, at levels permitted in drinking water and GM crops in the United States. The study highlighted the fact that no regulatory authority requires mandatory feeding studies to be carried out for edible GMOs and pesticides. The only significant feeding trials have been performed by the biotech industry. With this in mind the results were an overwhelming confirmation that genetically engineered food and pesticide use were cancer forming. Some of the results from the study were as follows:

In females, all treated groups died 2–3 times more than controls, and more rapidly. This difference was visible in 3 male groups fed GMOs. All results were hormone and sex dependent, and the pathological profiles were comparable. Females developed large mammary tumors almost always more often than and before controls, the pituitary was the second most disabled organ; the sex hormonal balance was modified by GMO and Roundup treatments. In treated males, liver congestions and necrosis were 2.5–5.5 times higher. This pathology was confirmed by optic and transmission electron microscopy. Marked and severe kidney nephropathies were also generally 1.3–2.3 greater. Males presented 4 times more large palpable tumors than controls which occurred up to 600 days earlier. Biochemistry data confirmed very significant kidney chronic deficiencies; for all treatments and both sexes, 76percent of the altered parameters were kidney related. These results can be explained by the non-linear endocrine-disrupting effects of Roundup, but also by the overexpression of the transgene in the GMO and its metabolic consequences. [7]

Tumour growth, accelerated mortality and cancer have proven to be the effects caused by both GM foods and now the herbicide Roundup. You don’t need to be a scientist to know that herbicide residues would naturally be incorporated into transgenic organisms. But Monsanto has made its profits from marketing its products as safe for consumption knowing full well that in all probability this was not the case. (See Figure 1. below) It has even employed PR companies to makes sure the public is denied access to the evidence that Roundup is a very harmful genotoxic and endocrine disrupting carcinogen.

Genetic engineering primarily involves the introduction of genes containing DNA (dioxyribonucleic acid) procured from humans or animals into the cells of plants, bacteria, yeast or other animals. One of the outcomes is termed a “transgenic” animal. Experiments include chicken or toad genes introduced into potatoes for disease resistance and to increase shelf-life and size,[8] or inserting mouse genes into tobacco plants or genes from fire-flies which make the leaves glow at night.[9] Then there are the cancer research scientists in the US who bred a creature called the “oncomouse”, which has been genetically engineered to develop cancer yet since its introduction in 1981 and copious amounts of money, the cure for cancer remains elusive. There is always the potentially lucrative market of animal organ transplants. Mice have been specially created to lack an immune system so that they can grow human organs, such as ears, externally and even internally.

Through this ecological roulette we have already been exposed directly to large amounts of genetically engineered organisms (plants, microorganisms, viruses) and are thus subject to an extremely high level of risk. The particular quality of risk inherent in genetic engineering is due to the fact that the source of the risk is creatively alive; it can reproduce and cannot be retrieved in case of damage. What is more, horizontal transfer of genes can and does take place, where spontaneous hybridization occurs much more often than expected after genetic manipulation. The use of herbicides is effectively useless after a few years along with a soil that has lost its health but gained a trenchant toxicity.

When the transfer of transgenic plants to other plants takes place from pollen, even from a range of a few kilometres, it is inevitable that the advantages of such a science – aside from the ethical issues – are founded on a perception that nature is there to control and manipulate rather than to work with cooperatively. This arrogant disregard for nature’s limits and rules will result in terminal harm to the ecosystem through plants foreign to the natural environment. Indeed, the repercussions of an intricate web of health risks inherent in factory farming are only just beginning to be understood. Rather than the free-roaming chicken farms of Asia it was factory farming operations that were the source of viruses like H5N1 providing easy transmission pathways to the human population. For example, the industrial poultry industry Thailand, China and Vietnam is highly developed raising, slaughtering and exporting millions of live birds and eggs annually. The genetically modified feed often includes “litter” (i.e., manure) in the ingredients that may contain live virus which is: “… on surrounding farmland, or exported as fertilizer, and through run-off may end up in surface waters where wild birds feed and rest. Chicken manure is even found in fish farm feed formulations where it is introduced directly into the aquatic environment. Wild birds and poultry that have fallen victim to HPA1 in Asia, Turkey and Nigeria appear to have been directly exposed to HPA1 virus originating in the factory farm industry.” [10]

Corporatism is encouraging experimentation that prevents any kind of long-term sustainability while reaping enormous short-term profits for the few at the probable expense of our bodies and minds. In other words, genetic engineering has long since been proven not to work and indeed acts as a highly dangerous genetic pollution into the food chain with significant health risks. [11]

If we are to believe that the earth’s ecology of which we are a part, is a complex expression of self-organizing systems that grow from within and are geared towards self-renewal, then man-made mechanistic, and exclusively reductionist applications defined by their lack of creative adaptation pose a threat to this finely tuned and delicately balanced equilibrium. We can see that we are indeed intimately connected to the environment which will mirror our perceptions accordingly.

Those pushing the genetic engineering business view nature as a vast machine from which more dollars can be extracted while herbicides, insecticides and false promises to alleviate world poverty gradually reduce the natural equilibrium dependent on the natural functioning and growth of crops. To be in favour of quantity will always equal a decrease in quality.

Those that think and act like machines are in the frontline of the continuing push to colonise nature. Genetic engineering could be playing a large part in the bid to control of the world’s food supply and the pseudo-science of population reduction, both of which derive from the belief in a New Feudalism prevalent within Establishment families.


What’s a Cow Mum?

Animals are also still in the firing line when it comes to genetic modification, standard factory food production, vivisection and a whole set of contradictory values about their place in man’s self-imposed pyramid of consumption.

Regardless of our opinions on vegetarianism or the perfect diet to suit each of our body types and regimens, everyone would probably agree that the treatment of animals in each country around the world is usually a reasonably good indication of how well we treat the human population. This is not saying much of course, for if our human rights are rock bottom then the ethical treatment of animals is not going to be on the table for discussion (so to speak) anytime soon. As such, it remains a problem of education that cannot be separated from our social and cultural beliefs. These  are now just as entrenched as the factory farming process that spans the globe – an interesting mirror that’s still largely hidden behind the convenience of market processes.

Animals are clinically processed to be deposited in  vast freezers amid canned muzak and the latest vacuum-packed special offers. “Consumers” as we are now called, need not even know that it was ever a living being at all. Cows, sheep, pigs, ducks and all kinds of “grain consuming animal-units” can now be safely deconstructed and commoditised for our dinner table. [12] Indeed, the processing of beef from the bovine is a direct historical path of psychopathology normalised for the dinner table.

It is not a question of “is meat murder?” Nor if animals should be eaten but the intensity of suffering this system inflicts on beings that are denied their sentiency. Animals now reflect the reality of seeing anything that isn’t human as objects for consumption regardless of the recognised ability that animals have to think, feel and suffer pain. The beef culture we have created brutalizes animals on the one hand while at the same time, we choose to anthropomorphize them into saccharin teaching aids for early schooling and entertainment. It is a dichotomy so severe that it can only have been sourced and cultivated from psychopathic view of the role of the animal kingdom in the modern world.

Let’s take the life of a pack of cheap, supermarket beef (i.e. a calf) from the USA, that bastion of fast-food culture.

It begins its life from the “teaser bulls” or “sidewinders,” so called, because they have had the penis surgically re-routed so that it comes out through the side. [13] Unable to penetrate the cow’s vagina it does however leave a mark on the female from a coloured dye marker hung around his neck. The cows are then identified and artificially inseminated. Once born the males are castrated for docility and to improve the quality of the beef. This can be done with an emasculator which crushes the testicle cord or it can be done with a knife stuck through the scrotum and the testicles pulled out. Then comes the de-horning achieved through a chemical paste that burns out the roots of their horns. Electric dehorners are used on older steers or even saws, all without the use of anaesthetics. [14]

After having a few months to be with their mothers they are transported to huge mechanized feeding lots for fattening up and slaughtering. The drugs are a major source of income for the pharmaceutical companies. Growth stimulating hormones, feed additives, including antibiotics, anabolic steroids implanted in the animals’ ears for slow release; estradiol, testosterone, progesterone are also given, artificially adding muscle and fat in order to obtain the optimum weight gain in the minimum time. [15] Most of the American beef market consistently uses growth hormones in meat and milk.[16]

Diseases are a persistent problem in conditions where production and profit is of primary concern. Therefore, more drugs are needed which the pharmaceuticals are overjoyed to research and produce for their feedlot managers. While the drugged cows stand for hours on end packed side by side at the trough they consume corn, soya and grains which are full of herbicides. With over 80 percent of these chemicals being sprayed on corn and soya, it becomes a potent cocktail.[17]

If this is not enough, factory farms are busy using manure from chicken houses and pig pens in their feed. Some factory farms and slaughter houses are mixing in cement dust, industrial sewage and oils in order to reduce costs and fatten cattle more rapidly.[18] Antibiotics, hormones and herbicides as well as the possibility of new strains of disease-causing bacteria produced from a number of unnatural practices in feeding and husbandry are posing a serious health risk to the human population. [19] We don’t need to do the math to see that all these toxins are very probably ending up in our own bodies with unknown effects on health and behaviour.

Let’s get back to that terrified calf.

After the steers have reached the required weight they are packed into trucks and transported across often unbearably hot US states where many die from being trampled to death or through lack of water. Those that are incapacitated by broken legs or pelvises are dragged out at the end of the journey (no anaesthetic of course) and left for slaughter. The rest are lined up at the processing plant, stunned with a pneumatic gun, frequently still alive and quickly hoisted by a rear hoof over the slaughter house floor while their throats are cut. The animal is then only a few hours away from being transformed into plastic and polystyrene packing, seemingly clean as a whistle and ready for the family table, while the cheapest off-cuts are mixed in with faeces, sawdust and various other everyday detritus and served up as beef burgers to millions of rapacious stomachs. Since 4,000 McDonald’s hamburgers (as many as you could get from one cow) are eaten every minute and with the largest cattle station bigger than the State of Israel, then this is one conveyer-belt of the human carnivore which vegetarianism isn’t going to impact in the foreseeable future. [20]

Nor is adopting a vegetarian diet the answer.  it goes much deeper than that. it requires a wholesale change in perception .leading to a rejection of a monoculture mentality that produces an social and economic infrastructure which can only manifest cruelty and pathology, by default. By now, our toxic food now represents a vast experiment on the human population, the results of which are unknown. The man-made chemicals released into the environment combined with the toxicity of our food are disrupting endocrine systems and sexual development of both humans and animals which countless laboratory studies have already confirmed. [21] If our interaction with animals is solely based upon destructive dynamics of unnecessary consumption and cruelty, then we cannot be surprised when those same habits are repeated and projected towards ourselves and others. By the same token, if you mess with nature and disrupt her natural, ecological pathways she will let you know in no uncertain terms.



[1] TRIPS – [trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights] Instigated as part of the GATT agreement of 1994. [GATT is now the World Trade Organisation (WTO)] This is no more than a blueprint for control of intellectual creativity as part of the US patenting of knowledge where strict adherence to monopolistic control can continue to function as part of the global Union drives to enforce US economic and trade policies abroad.
[2] ‘GM soya ‘miracle’ turns sour in Argentina’ by Paul Brown, The Guardian, April 16, 2004.
[3] Seeds of Deception – Is Your Food Safe? What the biotech industry doesn’t want you to know by Jeffrey Smith, Chapter 2: What Could Go Wrong-A Partial List. p.47: “The study was conducted by Dr. Irina Ermakova, a leading scientist at the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS). It was originally presented on October 10, 2005 to the symposium on genetic modification in Russia, organized by the National Association for Genetic Security (NAGS).” of Responsible Technology.
[4] Ibid.
[5] ‘Genetically Engineered Foods Pose Higher Risk for Children’ by Jeffrey M. Smith
[6] ‘Between the Chapters: The Wisdom of Animals’ p.289.
[7] Food and Chemical Toxicology Volume 50, Issue 11, November 2012, Pages 4221–4231 | ‘Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize’ by Gilles-Eric,Séralinia,     Emilie Claira, Robin Mesnagea, Steeve Gressa, Nicolas Defargea,  Manuela Malatestab, Didier Hennequinc, Joël Spiroux de Vendômoisa |
[8] Report on horizontal gene transfer – Department of Public Prosecution versus Gavin Harte and others, New Ross, Ireland Mae-Wan Ho, March 22, 1999, Institute of Science in Society. Paragraph 2.13.
[9] Gene Trapping with Firefly Luciferase in Arabidopsis. Tagging of Stress-Responsive Genes1, Martha C. Alvarado, Laura M. Zsigmond, Izabella Kovács, Ágnes Cséplö, Csaba Koncz and László M. Szabados Institute of Plant Biology, Biological Research Center, Temesvári krt. 62, 6726-Szeged, Hungary.
[10] p.287-288; Seeds of Destruction The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation by F. William Engdahl, Published by Global Research  2007.
[11] One example from a plethora of cases includes this article: ‘Experiment fuels modified food concern’ BBC News, August 10, 1998.
[12] ‘Double-speak Awards Don’t Mince Words’ Dallas Morning News, November 20, 1988.
[13] p.78; Modern Meat by Orville Schell published by Vintage Books USA. 1985| ISBN: 0394729196.
[14] Although there are animal welfare “painful husbandry” procedures in most European countries that advocate a minimum age before de-horning and castration) can take place with the presence of a vet. In the commercial meat industry these guidelines are seldom observed.  In America, “farm animals used for food and fiber or for food and fiber research are not regulated under the Animal Welfare Act.” The Animal Welfare Information Center (AWIC) which is part of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Agricultural Library (NAL) in Beltsville, Maryland.
[15] Most of the American beef market consistently use growth hormones in meat and milk with the US Food and Drug Administration happily ignoring European data that suggest Growth promoting hormones pose health risk to consumers: See: ‘Growth promoting hormones pose health risk to consumers, confirms EU Scientific Committee’ – “The EU Scientific Committee on Veterinary Measures relating to Public Health (SCVPH) confirmed today that the use of hormones as growth promoters for cattle poses a potential health risk to consumers, following a review of 17 studies and other recent scientific data. Publishing its third opinion on the risks to human health from hormone residues in beef products, the SCVPH found no reason to change its previous opinions of 1999 and 2000.” April 23 2002, “In 1988, the EU prohibited of the use of oestradiol 17, testosterone, progesterone, zeranol, trenbolone acetate and melengestrol acetate (MGA) for growth promotion in farm animals. This prohibition applies to Member States and imports from third countries alike. […] The United States and Canada contested the prohibition in 1997 under a World Trade organization panel.” Contestation was reversed but the US still rejected the human health concerns.  EUROPA– Gateway to the European Union,
[16] ‘Monsanto Cranks Up Production of Controversial Bovine Growth Hormone’ – Monsanto takes over production of milk hormone By Rachel Melcer St.Louis Post-Dispatch April 20, 2006. “Monsanto Co. said Monday it is beginning in-house production of Posilac, which should ease a two-year-old shortage of the hormone used to boost milk production in cows. The Creve Coeur company received approval from the US Food and Drug Administration to begin formulating and packaging Posilac bovine somatotropin at its plant in Augusta, Ga.”
[17] The National Research Council of the Academy of Sciences, board on Agriculture, Alternative Agriculture, 49.
[18] p.13; Beyond Beef – The Rise and Fall of the Cattle Culture by Jeremy Rifkin, published by Viking/ Penguin Books, 1992.
[19] Mad cow disease is one of several fatal brain diseases called transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, or TSEs. The variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease has also had cases in Europe. The awkward name reflects the similarity to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), a deadly brain illness that strikes about one person per million per year, due to genetic or unknown causes.
[20] ‘How many cows are slaughtered each year to make McDonald’s hamburgers?’ September 16, 1977 | | ‘Drought Closes the World’s biggest cattle ranch in Australia’ By Nick Squires The Telegraph, June 10, 2008.
[21] Our Stolen FutureAre we threatening our Fertility, Intelligence and Survival? By Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski & John Petersen Myers. Published by Abacus, 1996 | ISBN 0-349-10878-1.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s