Page 6 of 6
Re: glyphosate study
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:45 pm
And I did not get into one of the best benefits of glycans. Detoxification! When those cells communicate and if the man or animals have enough plant based nutrients, any toxin in the body can be illuminated. There are tests even on anthrax. The goal would be catch the problem ahead of time.
I will stand back on anaplasma here due to not understanding yet the parasite that has no cell wall but can enter other cells to rob of nutrients. The only research was with silver and FDA does not allow it in cattle. They too are years behind on detoxification.
One more question. Can you name me one doctor in agriculture who is into the study of glycobiology because if you can I would love to read his papers. Right now I find none and the labs that test products for them say they only study human health.
Re: glyphosate study
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:32 pm
sim.-ang.king wrote:It's called Glyphosate because it's made from Gly, organic compound C3,H8,N,O5, Ethylene glycol monomethyl ether, and phosphate (P).
It has a simple sugar (glycol) so you can bind the hydrocarbon (Ethylene) to the solvent, monomethyl ether, which then is combined with phosphorus.
The name has nothing to do with it's mode of action, and saying that the word "sate" stands for saturation is just a conjuring of your own imagination, and pure ignorance.
I learn so much in these discussions. Now I am not sure you know what you are talking about but it does tie into something else I know. Cells absorb sugars. In fact they know that if you want cancer tumors to take in a substance just feed it sugar. Yes it many times will explode the tumors but without addressing the root cause it will float into other parts of the body thus cancer everywhere. Same goes for natural substances like turmeric or frankincense. Mix them with sugar and research shows it too will explode tumors.
So let's revisit your thoughts here. You say the creators of glyphosate did not create a product that destroys cell surface sugars and you are correct if what you explained above is correct. You are saying they use sugar to saturate the cells by binding to the poison which is taken into the cells. However in my comment I did say sugar saturation but should have said sugar saturation with poison because they know cells absorb sugar.
Also I know there are many environmental problems which cause disease but since we are just focused on GMO foods let's visit about why I do not think they are sustainable. The makers had to splice bacteria into the DNA of the seed in order to spray the plant with glyphosate killing all other plants but leaving the plant with altered DNA. Hope I said this right. It stands to reason they would somehow need to register their product as a potent antibiotic since the seed itself has the bacteria in the DNA. Also their seed creation appears to have the ability to take over other seeds as well organic farmers cannot farm next to fields with those traits or they will loose their seeds. Not sure maybe it is the bacteria itself that overcomes the good seed but I know if enough of those sugars are developed in soils they would detox the bacteria from the GMO seeds.
you certainly have given me some items to research and hope you are saving good seeds.