text:
Unverified Voracity Has Alligator Stadium
I wonder where fightin' bird guy is today. North Dakota may want to stop playing Frozen Four semifinals. First you've got the Life As A Vole Hunwick game…
…and then last night a Minnesota defenseman with zero goals on the season scored a shorthander with 0.6 seconds left to knock them out. Seriously.
North Dakota won their consolation game in the league playoffs to push Michigan out of the tournament, which I was mad about but maybe I should thank them because I would be waking up in a dumpster today if that had happened to Michigan. I would not feel well.
Minnesota plays Union for the title tomorrow at 7:30. Go Union, if only to see Mark Emmert's head explode. THE CALL IS COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE, MARK.
I mean why would you want to do that. An excellent article on Fox Sports about Derek Mason, former Stanford DC and new guy at Vanderbilt discusses how Mason came to prominence thanks to his ability to adapt to the hurry-up spread offenses that are kind of a big deal when you're in the same division as Oregon. Mason lays out the four things that up tempo does for your offense, and while they're really only three things if you can divide it's a good framework for understand why the spread keeps spreading, Danielson be damned:
1) Defenses get stuck in one call
While defensive coordinators enter a game with a long list of plays, the defenders on the field are often forced to play the same call repeatedly when the ball is being snapped every 14-18 seconds. The middle linebacker often looks to the sideline only to see the defensive signal-caller frantically gesturing to repeat the last call.
2) Defenses don't get ready in time
Even when defensive players get their play call on time – some defenses will often call two or three plays in advance when facing an up-tempo team – you will often see the defenders unsuccessfully scurrying to get into their proper alignment before the ball is snapped.
3) One-on-one matchups
Tackling a skill player one-on-one in space is one of the most difficult tasks in football. Up-tempo offenses often operate out of a spread scheme that forces defenses to cover the entire width and length of the field, as Mason noted.
4) More snaps per game
I'm not clear on why more snaps are necessarily better, at least insofar as you get more snaps because you're moving faster. More snaps are obviously good because that means you didn't punt; outside of that the only thing I can think of there is that defenders tend to get tired more quickly than offensive players. Substitution patterns certainly indicate that's the case.
I would also add that a high tempo team is more flexible in its approach to the clock: for them slowing it down is a matter of hanging out at the line of scrimmage longer than they usually do. For a team that does not operate in a hurry-up environment, accelerating is considerably more difficult.
Mason's reacted to the above issues by having hybrid players who may not be the best at any one thing but can straddle the line between run support and pass coverage, having simple, quick playcalls, and training their defenders the way Oregon trains offense: relentless pace.
Anyway: Hoke talk about toughness is grating these days because he's content with an offense that doesn't try to make it tough on other people. Toughness is something Michigan has to have because things are being done to them. (It is also grating because Michigan finished dead last in tackles for loss allowed in year three of being a Tough Team that Runs Power.)
Excellent timing. You may find yourself suddenly more interested in this profile of Mark Donnal the Daily published five days ago. He's getting hype; let's hope it pans out.
Donnal's not sure when exactly it was, just that it came around the middle of the regular season, but he turned a corner. He'd found success against Morgan and Horford enough in practice that he knew he belonged.
"I started to pick up everything, and my game started to come back to me, and I'm getting in the flow of the college game," Donnal said.
If it wasn't for the redshirt, Morgan and Horford might have had to worry about their job security.
"He's becoming a force," Morgan said. "He's hard to guard down there in the post, and he's definitely come a long way.
"Over the past couple months, he's just become really good. Really dominates, shoots the ball well."
Donnal is still just 18—he's young, like Caris—and has upside yet to tap.
Brace yourself! Someone at Penn State has been in the photoshop doin' the shrooms.
ANIMORPHS RT @coachjfranklin: The LION has always been a part of me,waiting for the right time 2 show his face.. pic.twitter.com/YVz3wb9TKh"
— Matt Brown (@MattSBN) April 11, 2014
James Franklin being a great recruiter is a kids these days kind of thing.
At least we're not alone. On the one hand, Ohio State has a real spring game with a player draft and opens practices to students, and this makes me sad because it's clear their athletic department doesn't have quite the contempt for their fans that Michigan's does. On the other, they're not immune from Creating The Future either.
Didn't know Ohio State was charging $20 for a scrimmage. Guessing the same dipshit there who tries to seize blog assets came up with that.
— Ramzy Nasrallah (@ramzy) April 11, 2014
On a third, mutant hand, imagine a version of the Michigan spring game that anyone, dipshit or not, could believe was worth 20 dollars. OSU knocked the price down to 5, apparently. I wonder if there are punting drills.
Okay bro. I'll take this shot from a fan of any program but two:
Here's a hard and round number for you: 10 years. That's how long its been since Michigan has won a Big Ten championship. To locate a gap that pronounced in Michigan's storied and (schadenfreude alert) oppressively self-congratulatory history, you have to hearken back to the pre-Schembechler era.
Those programs are Notre Dame and especially—especially—Penn State, which author Michael Weinreb is a fan of. Until Sandusky blew everything all to hell, Penn State was recruiting kids by noting that they'd never been on probation.
Their mantra of "Success With Honor" implies that most places having success don't have honor. Michigan's is just about winning football games. Penn State was stuck so far up its own butt smelling roses that they allowed the worst thing in the history of college football to happen. You might not want to claim Michigan's history is "oppressively self-congratulatory" in that context.
Ok, bro. Get The Picture finds this assertion in Northwestern's appeal to the national NLRB:
Contrary to the Regional Director's findings, Northwestern scholarship football student-athletes are not "initially sought out, recruited and ultimately granted scholarships because of their athletic prowess on the football field."
I would have believed this in the 1980s. Nowadays the only school that can claim that with a straight face is Purdue.
Wow. Bursaspor's new stadium is… it's this.
Orson says he'd trade the Swamp for this as long as the interior was searing orange, and… yeah, you'd have to do it. I await Spencer's longform piece on Turkish soccer with bated breath, and not just because I once pretend-managed a Turkish third-division team to the Champions League title despite Turkey's restrictive rules on foreign soccer players. Also because in Turkey things like this happen:
The club switched names with crosstown club Kayseri Erciyesspor in 2004.
YANKEES: "We're sick of being the Yankees. Would you like to be the Yankees?"
METS: "Jolly good. Here's Mr. Met and a legacy of crippling failure."
Also they have doner kebab. They are probably the origin of doner kebab. Go Turkey.
The usual. Kam Chatman is up to #38 on ESPN's final recruit rankings and draws mention as one of their top risers:
Kameron Chatman, Michigan: He's a classic late bloomer who has continued to improve at a rapid rate and yet very clearly still has his best basketball in front of him. A highly skilled southpaw with excellent size on the wing, Chatman's frame has now started to fill out at a much more rapid rate, giving him the versatility not just to splash 3s over contesting defenders but also to diversify his offensive game around the rim. He's also a deceptively good ball handler and very good passer, all of which will be utilized in Michigan's offensive system. The bottom line is that it was clear he was still trending up, so he jumped 13 spots.
A palpable fit.
Etc.: I'm here for the sex… ual misconduct investigation. Breaking down the best offenses of the Kenpom era. The 1995 Virginia game on the tubes. Basketball would like to add another quality home game to next year's schedule. Magnus on the spring game. Stapleton on Michigan's sophomores-to-be. The state of Michigan basketball.
In Soviet Dear Diary Players Pay Calipari
Just so we're all on the same page, this llama (via) is dressed as Batman, because Horford is transferring from a team that graduates Jordan Morgan for reasons of playing time. Farewell, and good luck, Al Llama Batman Sartre Horford; our time together was too short to understand each other, but I shall ne'er forget the awesome.
Let's start with that because things are about to get even weirder and less relevant (e.g. Michigan's spring game). But first: VICTORS:
|Day 3 Points
|Design an MGoShirt
|ANOTHER MGoShirt
|a shirt
|a shirt
|a shirt
If you're like "what?" that was the final standings among MGoBloggers in the Draftstreet 40k TourneyDraftstreet 40k Tourney a few weeks ago. Thank to our fantasy partners again for sponsoring the Day 1 and Sweet 16 liveblogs and everything; if anybody else wants to see how much fun it can be to give me money, jump in on the 100k MLB tourney for $22, or place in the top 5 of one of the $1 satellite leagues to win an entry.
It's a bit early for early returns, no? The Diarist of the Week™ (sorry I've been lapsing on that) is alum96 for his double feature (offense, defense) that looked at the various Übermenschen from Hoke's first uber-class as they enter their junior and redshirt sophomore season. I chart:
|5*, Hutchinson 2.0
|Not that
|5* Hoke impersonator
On tra..
|4* Schofield 2.0
|On track
|3* Afterthought
|A gem
|High 3*, Wisc OT
|On track
|High 3* DL
|On track
|High 3* project
|Too soon
|Low 4* lolOSU
|Too soon
|3* receivy TE
|Great WR
|3* local DL
|High 3* skinny
|On track
|High 4* prodigy
|On track?
|Low 4* possWR
|On track
|4* hitter
|On track
|3* blocky TE
|High 4* natural
|On track?
|3* runnyblocky
|On track
|3* might be Foote
|D. Johnson
|Low 3* local
|3* S/LB tweener
|Too soon
|4* god of Smurfs
|4* Jamar Adams 2.0
|On track
|[No Quarterback]
|4* Cass mite
|3* Shazorite
|On track
That's actually way better than I thought. Injuries set back some of them, and half of those who don't look like they'll turn out to be Big Ten-caliber players have been getting a lot of playing time regardlesss. More amazing, only Kaleb Ringer is gone.
Speaking of Morgan:
David Merritt is doing a signing event with J-Mo this afternoon at his store on South U.
Basketball diaries/etc.: Padog is now into the better-than-Indiana part of his worst-to-first conference preview of next year's Big Ten basketball teams, with Penn State, and Minnesota. Final stats on the shooty 2013-'14 season by LSA.
[Jump for a board of great relevance]
Jon Horford To Transfer
underneath the Banyan tree, wherever he goes
University of Michigan men's basketball head coach John Beileinannounced today (Thursday, April 10) that senior forward Jon Horford (Grand Ledge, Mich./Grand Ledge HS) will not return to the Wolverine program in 2014-15, planning to transfer for his final season of eligibility.
That is not good. With Jordan Morgan graduating, Michigan's only other post is Mitch McGary. Even if he comes back next year, Horford figured to get a significant amount of playing time when McGary was tired or in foul trouble.
While Horford struggled badly down the stretch, you could say the same for Jordan Morgan last year and that worked out okay. Fifth-year senior bigs tend to be better than you'd expect. Horford's departure opens up time for Mark Donnal and likely means a redshirt for Ricky Doyle is no longer an option. That latter is unfortunate; again, see Jordan Morgan.
The one possible silver lining here is that the reason Horford is moving on is that he feels he'll get more playing time elsewhere, a decision that implies McGary's return and maybe even Robinson's since that would increase competition for minutes everywhere. It's hard to believe he would skip town with 30 minutes a night staring him in the face. But Horford was always a bit of a different guy.
Let Them Eat Bag
They probably didn't mean for his hat to look like a butt
A slow April day in the middle of the college football wasteland had a bomb detonated on it when Stephen Godfrey and SBNation published an in-depth article on the shadow economy of the SEC, wherein people get paid by other people to play football for school X.
"I had this one kid, great player, good guy. Never got in trouble, but never did much on the field. But he's calling me all the time. 'Hey, the sunroof in my car is leaking,' he says, so I tell him to come meet me. $150. Two days later it's: 'Hey, I'm going out this weekend with a girl, can you help me?' $200. Next week after that he's got $300 in parking tickets. So one day I go to meet him to give him money and I ask, "Hey man, aren't you a business major? Have y'all learned what ROI means yet? It means return on investment, and at this rate I'm going to need to start seeing some touchdowns.'"
The article is fascinating and you should go read it now. I'll wait.
Now, let's talk about how much we care about this. I do. I've got a sneer or two in me left when I see kids at Clemson and Ole Miss whose recruitments did 180s away from Ann Arbor. There was a recruit in the last five years who Michigan led for; his sudden decision to go somewhere else was financially motivated and that was an open secret amongst that recruiting class. As a guy who wants to see his football team win games, that kind of thing still grates my gears.
But that's all at this point. It's just partisan crybaby stuff. I regard it as a character flaw. (The tatgate thing was different since Tressel lied to the NCAA multiple times. You can't do that and expect to keep your job, even if you lied about stupid rules that make no sense.)
So I don't care, you know, morally. The NCAA's prohibition on kids taking money is not only asinine but (obviously) unenforceable. It also serves no purpose other than to concentrate wealth in the hands of administrators. Whenever I get in discussions about these sorts of things with the dwindling number of people on the side of amateurism, the conversation usually boils down to this:
ME: I guess I just don't see why rich guys giving some of their money to poor people is such a problem.
THEM: But then they'll have money.
ME: I'm unclear on why that's an issue.
THEM: But then they'll be influenced.
Around here we like to say things like "I'm so glad Michigan doesn't do that." I think it's time to stop that. The rule is arbitrary, the system inherently corrupt, and if Michigan has a shadow network of boosters my main problem with them is that they're not good enough at being shadowy and boostery. The basketball recruits other schools have swooped in on aren't picking these other schools because of the coaching, man.
I'm over it. And you should be too, because the attitude about I'm So Glad We Don't Do That that's so pervasive around these parts is almost certainly false. I'm So Glad We Don't Do That As Much doesn't have the same horse height. Very averaged-sized horse, that. That's a horse that you can see your lunch getting eaten from only.
And in the service of what?
"Last week I got a call. We've got this JUCO transfer that had just got here. And he's country poor. The [graduate assistant] calls me and tells me he's watching the AFC Championship Game alone in the lobby of the Union because he doesn't have a TV. Says he never owned one. Now, you can buy a Walmart TV for $50. What kid in college doesn't have a TV? So I don't give him any money. I just go dig out in my garage and find one of those old Vizios from five years back and leave it for him at the desk. I don't view what I do as a crime, and I don't give a shit if someone else does, honestly."
Everywhere else in society, an 18 year old who works really hard at something is financially compensated for it and most of them do not… I mean… why am I even arguing about this? If you're the kind of person who thinks that young people doing dumb things with money is a threat instead of, you know, life, you probably start arguments with "Speaking as a parent." Anyone who starts arguments with "Speaking as a parent" wants you to turn off your brain so they can feelingsball you. They are my mortal enemies, speaking as a person who can formulate an argument.
The aura of paternalism that hangs over objections to letting players get theirs is suffocating. "But if they get money they'll…" They'll what? They'll still be under the thumb of a drill sergeant of a football coach desperate to remain in his good graces lest the faucet turn off. They will be the same, just with fewer things to stress about.
They might waste it. They might not. I just don't care anymore. Let them have their five hundred dollars.
Thursday Recruitin' Isn't Ready To Say Goodbye
A Rumor, Dispatched
Track Meet 1, Touchdown Jesus 0
On Tuesday, a tweet appeared in my mentions, seemingly out of the blue, asking how long it would be until I wrote the "Goodbye" post for Shaun Crawford. This caused a great deal of confusion until I noticed the thread on The Wolverine's message board that discussed "slight rumblings" from Notre Dame posters that Crawford would visit for the Irish's spring game this weekend ($). That, of course, would be a bit of an issue with the Michigan coaches regarding his status as a commit.
While Tim Sullivan rightfully attached a healthy amount of skepticism to the rumor, noting Crawford is scheduled to run in a track meet in the Cleveland area on the day of ND's spring game, it wasn't debunked entirely. The internets, as they are wont to do, took it and ran. Well, for a bit.
247's Steve Lorenz left no room for speculation ($):
Shaun Crawford: Shaun has a track meet this weekend. He is not visiting Notre Dame.
Sam Webb also posted a thread on the GBW premium board stating Crawford's camp touched base with the coaches and said he isn't visiting South Bend ($).
In the interest of objectivity, I'll note that Crawford showed a great deal of interest in Notre Dame before his Michigan commitment, and back in December he considered visiting Ohio State before discussing the matter with U-M's coaching staff. Until he says so himself, the possibility that he wants to look around can't be eliminated; by that same token, I'll believe he's willing to risk his spot in the class to visit another school when a trip actually materializes.
[Hit THE JUMP for the latest on Jake Fruhmorgen, a big-time weekend visitor, 2015 quarterback targets, spring game visit reactions, and more.]
Nik Stauskas May Or May Not Enter Draft
this person is eligible to be drafted we know nothing else [Bryan Fuller]
Michigan sophomore Nik Stauskas is headed to the NBA, a source close to the situation told ESPN.com on Thursday.
Well dangit
Mississauga, ON's Nik Stauskas will enter the 2014 NBA draft and choose Mark Bartelstein of Priority Sports to represent him reliable sources have told Hoops Hype Canada.
Dangit again
Just wanted to reiterate that any reports about my future intenions are FALSE! I have NOT made ANY decisions on my future yet!
— Nik Stauskas (@NStauskas11) April 10, 2014
U-M hoops fans getting their hopes up … I wouldn't. That's not inside info. Just everyone thinks Nik will go. Nothing has really changed.
— Michael Spath (@Spath_Wolverine) April 10, 2014
Actually that seems like a bad idea
Well this was pointless
Can we at least get some recriminations
For whatever reason, BS sourcing standards that would never fly for regular stories are commonplace for sports. "Sources say?" Come on.
— Zach Helfand (@zhelfand) April 10, 2014
allllllll right


text:
Apps & Entertainment
Tetris Revolution
Enjoy the famous Marathon Mode or explore the ALL NEW Rush Mode and dig down to reach the bottom of planets in cosmic settings! Blast off with power-ups to boost your score and shoot for "Planet 60." Think you have really serious Tetris? skills? Push yourself to the limit in Endless Mode or clear Tetriminos against the clock in Sprint Mode. With so many different ways to play, you'll see why the Tetris game is one of the best-selling mobile games of all time!
|$6.99 / Unlimited
|$2.49 / Monthly Subscription
|$6.99 / Unlimited
Data charges do not apply after initial download.
Publisher: Electronic Arts, Inc.
This application may be used on the following phones
Tetris ? & ? 1985~2011 Tetris Holding. Tetris logo, Tetris theme song and Tetriminos are trademarks of Tetris Holding. The Tetris trade dress is owned by Tetris Holding. Licensed to The Tetris Company. Game Design by Alexey Pajitnov. Logo Design by Roger Dean. All Rights Reserved. Sub-licensed to Electronic Arts Inc. Game code ? 2011 Electronic Arts Inc. EA and the EA logo are trademarks of Electronic Arts Inc. All Rights Reserved. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
fall over
Meaning: If someone falls over, they fall to the ground.
For example:
- fall over My little girl was running along when she fell over, so I picked her up and gave her a hug.
- fall over Be careful when you're walking in the forest. You can get seriously hurt if you fall over.
Quick Quiz:
If you fall over in the bathroom, you could


text:
- Mobile site
- E-Newsletters
- News feed
- Find us on Twitter
Follow us
- Find us on Facebook
Like us on Facebook
Car parking problems continue at Festival Way (From Echo)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting ECHONEWS to 80360, or email us »
Car parking problems continue at Festival Way
5:00pm Tuesday 26th February 2013 in Local News By Luke Lambert
A DOUBLE parking problem has just moved to another road after restrictions were put in.
Vehicles are parking the length of Festival Way in Basildon after they had to move on from Endeavour Drive which has been painted with yellow lines by Essex County Council. It is thought the cars belong to employees of First Data which moved into Endeavour Drive in 2010 after its former headquarters in Christopher Martin Road were demolished.
Ralph Morgan, spokesman for the Basildon Hackney Carriage Association, first highlighted the issue in Endeavour Drive and now says it is just as bad in Festival Way.
He said: "These drivers need to be more responsible. They come here to work but they are parking in such an irresponsible way that it is not fair on anyone. I don't think it is too much to ask to think of other drivers when you are parking. They didn't think about this when they were parking on Endeavour Drive and here we are again.
"First Data need to speak with their staff because this is getting worse and worse. I feel strongly about this and it needs to be addressed."
An Essex County Council spokesman said: "The use of waiting restrictions on Endeavour Drive are to prevent highways road users from parking in an inconsiderate or obstructive manner.
"Areas on Endeavour Drive where the parking restrictions will be placed have been coned-off to prevent highways users from parking in preparation for the installation of the double yellow lines."
First Data failed to reply by the time the Echo went to press.
Comments (10)
Please log in to enable comment sorting
6:44pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Ian P says...
6:56pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Cosmo Spring says...
7:03pm Tue 26 Feb 13
I See It All says...
As in 'this'll do'
7:06pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Cosmo Spring says...
Ian P wrote:they do run a contract bus between that site and another but there's rarely anyone in it whenever I've seen the filthy thing
Responsibility for this issue lays squarely with the planners of the estate. When what is now the First Data building was constructed it was intentionally built with fewer parking spaces than employees. This was done to 'encourage' green travel. However, as we can all see it failed miserably.
7:16pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Thecountrysgonetopot! says...
8:01pm Tue 26 Feb 13
DogsMessInLeigh says...
8:10am Wed 27 Feb 13
Russ13 says...
First Data isn't the only company in the area and a number of employees from other businesses in the area also use(d) Endeavour Drive to park as their employers don't provide enough on-site parking for them.
However I guess as this has been reported by a cab driver it must be gospel, let's face it, they are the all knowing authority on everything aren't they?
I'm not even sure why cars being double parked is an issue on that small section of road anyway, it's not exactly a bustling thoroughfare is it!
9:07am Wed 27 Feb 13
DogsMessInLeigh says...
3:14pm Wed 27 Feb 13
angryofessex says...
DogsMessInLeigh wrote:It is the policy of Basildon council not to prosecute motorists who park on pavements of communal grass verges. Tickets will only be issued if there is a double yellow line.
if the wheels are on verges/pavements then they should get a ticket, but Taxi's have always done as they please so the Taxi leader is a fine one to talk.
10:21pm Wed 27 Feb 13
DogsMessInLeigh says...
Comments are closed on this article.


text:
Claiming your business listing on Patch won't get you a real Olympic gold or silver medal, but it will make you feel like a winner in your community. Because once you claim it, you can have your clients and friends review and rate your business. You can also add photos and let the community know of special deals, rates, events and other business news.
If you are the owner of a business in Limerick, Royersford or Spring City, your company should be listed on our directory and you'll want to claim it.
Watch this quick video of a business owner claiming his listing on Patch. If he can do it (wait till you see his office) so can you! It's a few easy steps.
Because we have always envisioned Patch as the go-to place for everything you need to know about your community, we've built an amazing database of information about every business in town.
We made it so business owners can be active participants in Patch - to do so means you just have to claim your listing. Watch this video to see how easy it is - and then claim it!
If you have any questions, email me, Limerick Patch editor David Powell at email@example.com or catch up with me when you see me in town. If your business is not listed on Limerick Patch, be sure to let me know and we'll get it on there, pronto. Thanks!


text:
Who does not need residence permit
Types of residence permit
Processing fee
Application processing time
Who does not need a visa to enter Iceland
Who needs a visa to enter Iceland
Where can you apply for a visa
As of July 1, 2014, requirements for supporting documents for applications for residence permits or citizenship will change. Applicants will then have to submit certified copies of birth certificates, marriage certificates, death certificates, custody documents and divorce decrees, as applicable. Originals of those documents will no longer be required. Copies shall be certified by authorities in the applicant's home country or by District Commissioners in Iceland. Please note that originals will not be copied at the Directorate's office. Other documentation, such as bank statements or other financial documents, school documents and criminal records still need to be submitted as originals.
On Monday the 12th of May, case-handler's, scheduled telephone hours will be cancelled due to staff training.
Inquiries may be submitted through our e-mail
The Directorate has been informed of a website promising foreigners Icelandic citizenship, residence permit, visa or Icelandic passport for a fee. The website is not operated by Icelandic authorities, the information is incorrect and it is not known who is behind the site. Foreigners cannot obtain any rights through this website. It is hoped that a police investigation will lead to the closure of this site.
Information on rights of foreigners in Iceland is only to be found on websites referred to on the Directorate's website.
Please note that, for the moment we are experiencing a slight malfunction in our telephone system. We apologize for any inconvenience customers may experience due to this but the system is being repaired. Inquiries may be submitted through our e-mail
UNHCR wants to hire, on a temporary basis, a National Consultant to assist in undtertaking an audit of first instant asylum decisions in Iceland. Further information can be found here > Open attachment <


text:
Cal Men's Basketball vs. Colorado Buffaloes Pac-12 Tourney Semis Live Thread
Cal Men's Basketball vs. Stanford Cardinal Pac-12 Tournament Live Thread
Cal Men's Basketball vs. Arizona Wildcats Live Thread
Watch Cal Men's Basketball at UNLV Runnin' Rebels Preview and Live Thread. Is Vegas Upset City? #gobears
Cal Men's Basketball vs. Weber State Wildcats Preview and Live Thread. Jorge vs the #1 scorer in the nation!
Check out @CalMensBball vs. Jackson State Tigers Preview and Live Thread. Can we sit our starters early?
Tune in for @CalMensBball vs. SDSU Aztecs Preview and Live Thread. Can Cal knock off a Sweet 16 team?
Come join us online and follow the action as Cal Men's Basketball takes on the visiting Denver Pioneers!
We'll email you a reset link.
If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.
You must be a member of California Golden Blogs to participate.
We have our own Community Guidelines at California Golden Blogs. You should read them.
You must be a member of California Golden Blogs to participate.
We have our own Community Guidelines at California Golden Blogs. You should read them.
Choose an available username to complete sign up.
In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.


text:
Steven Salzberg, Contributor
Last week a scientific paper appeared that reported that eating genetically modified (GM) corn causes cancer in rats. Specifically, the scientists fed Roundup Ready® corn, or maize, to rats for two years, and reported that both females and males developed cancer and died at higher rates than controls.
This is very surprising. If GM corn causes cancer, why aren't Americans "dropping like flies," as one scientist asked? We've been eating Monsanto's Roundup Ready® corn for over a decade, even if most of us aren't aware of it. But our rates of cancer haven't increased more than Europeans, who eat far less GM corn. Maybe the effect is limited to rats – in which case we should also have seen dramatic increases in cancer in lab rats. But we haven't seen that either.
So what's wrong? The best way to find out is to read the paper, which I did. It turns out to be a very badly designed study, and the report itself omits many crucial details that may (and probably do) completely invalidate the findings. The scientists leading the study have a strongly biased agenda and a conflict of interest, which they failed to reveal. I'll explain below, but meanwhile this study has already been taken up by politicians as proof (proof!) that GMO crops are harmful. As Forbes blogger Tim Worstall explained, this paper is more politics than science.
Let's look at the study itself, which was led by Gilles-Eric Seralini (more on him below) and published last week in Food and Chemical Toxicology. (A copy of the full paper is here.) The authors studied 200 rats for 2 years, dividing them into 20 group of 10 rats each. The test rats were fed a variety of diets:
So what happened? Well, in some groups, the rats got more cancer than controls. But not always. In fact, the authors had to cherry-pick their own data to support their conclusions.
One major problem is that only 10% of the rats were controls – 10 male, 10 female. The study's main claim is that rates of cancer were significantly higher in the rats fed GM corn. Martina Newell-McGloughlin from UC Davis, in an interview with Discovery News, said
"The type of statistical analysis they used is really a type of fishing expedition. One individual referred to it as 'fantasy statistics.' "
Another major problem is that there's no dosage effect. In other words, if Seralini is right and GM food is bad for you, then more of it should be worse. But the study's results actually contradict this hypothesis: rats fed the highest levels of GM corn lived longer than rats fed the lowest level.
A third problem, as Discovery News and other sources reported, is that the rats used in this study are a special laboratory strain that is highly prone to cancer.
Perhaps most damning, though, is the fact that rats fed Roundup directly had the longest survival times. As Seralini's own Figure 1 shows, the longest-living rats in the entire study, out of all the conditions, where those that drank Roundup in their water. These rats outlived the control rats.
Yum! Maybe Perrier should start selling Roundup-enhanced spring water?
Seralini and colleagues struggle to explain the internal contradictions in their study. They write,
"Interestingly, in the groups of animals fed with the NK603 [Roundup Ready corn] without R[oundup] application, similar effects with respect to enhanced tumor incidence and mortality rates were observed."
This tortured English is their way of admitting that rats did worse ("similar effects") when fed GM corn that was grown without Roundup. They don't want to admit that this result contradicts their central hypothesis.
The study was designed to fail: the sample sizes (10 rats in each group) are so small that all the results are likely just due to chance, and none of the differences are meaningful. It's exceedingly unlikely that the Roundup in the rats' water made them live longer, just as it's unlikely that Roundup Ready corn had any effect on the incidence of cancer.
It's not so much the study that's flawed but this analysis of it. Please see the comments from scientists and other experts on these arguments on this news thread:
Something called "gmwatch" is a "news" thread? Yeah right.
From reading these comments I've decided that the big problem with people these days is an utter inability to parse masses of information and distinguish between experts and their peer-reviewed data from some blog with a pre-set opinion. Ultimately the health pros and cons of GMO are not the issue. The issue is that everybody is rallying around what is clearly bad science and then citing stuff like "gmwatch" that are clearly fear mongering pseudoscience. Follow the science and I'll listen to whatever you have to say. Until then I'm going to roundly dismiss your opinions.
Can you dismiss that the Monsanto studies provided to the FDA to receive approval for GMO's were 3 month studies.
The huge tumors in the Seralini study started in the 4th through 7th month
Any industry induced retraction can't take away these facts and anyone with an ounce of common sense views such information as a need to re verify those original superficial test provided by Monsanto.
Your analysis fails to consider the different aspects of study, particularly when you mentioned "that rats fed Roundup directly had the longest survival times." If the groups fed GM corn without Roundup and the groups fed GM corn with Roundup applied had higher rates of tumors/death than the control group (i.e. not fed GM corn) and the group with Roundup only, it draws attention to the effects of GM corn (and less so on Roundup). Your quick dismissal of the study in its entirety and label of it as politically charged is suspect.
Epic pressitute is epic. I guess this is now what lamestream media Forbes does. Control group develops no tumor while all other groups did, and the study specifically mentioned the possibility that the threshold is actually so low that you don't see a dosage effect. Which should be a big red flag to pay attention to. Oh, and you didn't mention this in the article of course, because you are part of the presstitute media.
I do agree the study is not perfect. I particularly dislike the fact that the control group is too small when they only control 10 out of 200. This study should raise an alarm though for further studies, and people should now make their own decisions on the safety of GMO.
and you put, "Celebrating good science by fighting pseudoscience and bad medicine". Sometimes I wonder how pressitutes like you sleep at night. Think a little bit and remember your children are also part of this society. Playing as a presstitute does not make you immune to the attack.
To the readers here, read the paper yourself and make your own decision. Don't expect to get real info from the lamestream media. These media have long been bought and paid for and lost all of their dignity.
Your focus on the groups of 10 used is of less merit than the fact that control group develop no tumors while all other groups did and the incidence was most apparent in the mammary gland.
I get the need for better statistical significance, but considering the only previous studies extended out to a 90day mark these full term results are noteworthy in their own right.
Salzberg, how about you apply some scrutiny to the studies that say GMOs are safe? All are flawed in that they don't look at the long-term effects of GMOs in rats, just a short-term study that's a form of pseudo-science. Never mind that they're funded by Monsanto, pay no attention to that.
Right, Salzberg, pay no attention to the fact that Monsanto's own scientists demanded that the company BAN GMO FOODS in its OWN CAFETERIA.
And contrary to your statement that "our rates of cancer haven't increased" they are exploding everywhere.
Certainly, Salzberg, you wouldn't object to a labeling of GMO-laden foods on the shelf to let the consumer choose, would you? If so, then tell us who is paying you to write this article.
The presstitutes will just ignore you. I myself nowadays expect intellectual entertainment from the lamestream media. Kind of like you go into a comedy and laugh at some extremely stupid things the performer on stage says.
No, they will never try to find out why Monsanto bans their own products at their own cafeteria. Period.
Actually it is easy to look at Google to determine that the Monsanto cafeteria claim is a myth.
I find it quite telling that this study is being roundly dismissed only by media outlets. The food buying public is taking notice. Remember that over 90 percent in the US want GMO-containing foods to be labeled as such, affording us the same rights already enjoyed in Europe. Monsanto and their brethren routinely trout of experts to talk about GMO safety anytime someone has the gall to question them: http://organicconnectmag.com/wp/meet-the-scientific-experts-who-are-saying-gmo-foods-are-safe/
The food buying public isn't generally composed of scientists, so I'm not honestly concerned with what they think. It's telling that all corn is by definition genetically modified but nobody seems to realize that.
And if the public were asked what they thought about the fact they would all pay for these labels, you would see a very different poll result.
The bottom line is there has never been a valid scientific study showing a health problem of eating GMO food. Non-GMO foods are already labeled voluntarily and I don't want to pay to label everything else because the general public is incapable of looking for the "non-GMO" label.
Are you concerned to produce and consume healthy food or to sell cheap food with a good profit?
There has never been a valid scientific study showing health problems of eating GMO food because Monsanto suppressed all independent and faked its own studies. There have been some research results suggesting that GMO food alters organs. That would be enough of a warning for me to ask for more studies, not to call for wide undeclared sale of the produce in question.
Here are 126 independent studies.
There has NEVER been a credible published study that shows a single reason for us to assume that GMOs are harmful.
forgot my link:
Heres a few more for good measure:
It's pretty convenient when you can dismiss anybody who disagrees with you as funded by Monsanto. It's not a valid argument though. Monsanto does not fund every GMO study and there is no evidence that they have faked the ones they have. I question why we even got to this point in the first place. There really is no a priori reason to think that genetic modification has health impacts. All corn is genetically modified anyway, but it never raised any red flags.
Be careful what you state, you need to know the whole story behind the Biotech industry. If you think there are "credible published", independent studies you would be wrong. If you followed any of those studies you can find a connection to the Biotech industry.
Actually, the french study was the only one that I know of that has had the funding to do it and they had to do it without the biotech industry knowing. Why you ask? Because the Biotech industry files a patent on their GM products, and in that patent you have to request permission to do such a test and that has never been granted. Keep in mind, the farmers that buy these seeds sign a contract that they will not use, give away nor sell those seeds for testing. Also keep in mind that any testing is not a requirement for GM products to be sold, there is a voluntary program through the FDA but the test can be done by the Biotech company itself and the results (Manipulated or not) can be reviewed by the FDA.
Back to the historical aspect of why, the Biotech industry created their own laws and regulations through political bartering back when Bush was in office. I am a republican, so this is not a left or right issue. This is an issue as to whether there has been significant testing for long term affects with regards to humans and side affects with plants and the environment around these products.
To the author of this article, can you please cover the distinct differences between the baseline and process created and used on this study and the ones used by the biotech industry everyday? I see you try to discredit their numbers and process but they tried to follow the biotech's own tests to prove a point…..
The Video Monsanto Does NOT Want You to See!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lni6OAJz3sk&list=UUuoiFH5n-sjjr1D1Zw9Ef1g via @youtube
Well, it's true that with such a small sample, you can apply any distribution rule you like with a reasonnable likelihood (in the statistical sense of the word).
Still, the study has one merit: it is the only one that has been done over a lenghty time period.
And to feed a whole planet without ever having done a lenghty test is pure madeness. To paraphrase the article, I would say that GMO fed americans didn't fall like flies… this time.
Give people a real choice, make ' GMO inside' sticker mandatory on any food containing them and start serious testing.
And by the way, sack the idiots that said 'only the dna has been changed, that's 0.002% (or something like that) of the mass so it is harmless'.
You got it. Isn't it really scary and real pseudo-science that there is no long-term study done with the same small sample size and the GMO product is pushed to the market?
And this presstitute crook put "Celebrating good science by fighting pseudoscience and bad medicine". Shame on him and his lamestream media bullcrap.
You know… You can't get much publicity or even publish null data. There have been plenty of studies showing no harm of GMO. In fact, generally the conclusion is a net gain due to less pesticide use.
A report by an NGO is not quite the same as a peer-reviewed study. I think we should be funding such studies with government dollars and I don't doubt that there are good and bad aspects of GMO. But this article doesn't really give me any unbiased evidence. Also considering that all corn ever consumed has been genetically modified, I'm not sure what we are supposed to do with blanket claims that "GMO is bad."
Wow, so is someone here actually going to try and defend the idea that humans consuming a pesticide as "good health". I can't see how you can justify this as being healthy. No matter what the delivery method is of the round-up. All the studies before this seemed to only last 90 days, and then end the study. Most of the studies up until this point have been funded by Monsanto. That along with all the push back against labeling. With this much of a PR and disinformation campaign, you can only begin to wonder, why are they spending so much money to push a 'truth'. This truth is a mighty expensive truth. When is the last time the "Truth" costed this much? Well it only takes a short stroll down history to see this type of behavior in corporate America before you start to see a pattern. Anyone with half a brain on their heads will come to the conclusion that eating pesticide isn't good for humans no matter what the corporations try to convince you otherwise with their big PR budgets. These people are paid to lie. If they were not, then why would they need to spend such large amounts of money convincing us that "Everything is okay!"
Although larger studies would be better, this study is important because it covered the entire life of the rats. Monsanto's studies only lasted 3 months.
The study should be a wake up call, but then there have been many other studies that people have slept through. Read and learn…
19 Studies Link GMOs to Organ Disruption —
Monsanto's herbicide causing Sudden Death Syndrome in plants
Doctors Warn – Avoid Genetically Modified Food
GM Crops Decimating Monarch Butterflies Habitats
Monsanto tried to block Austrian government research linking GMOs & Infertility
Syngenta corporation faces criminal charges for covering up livestock deaths from GM corn
GMOs failing across America – Farmer to Farmer film reveals disastrous failure
I am curious why they would use rats or mice for this experiment. If there is already a theory that a large amount of corn causes tumors and liver issues in pet rats and mice… doesn't this study just prove that a high corn diet is bad for them (modified or not)? Many pet sites I read stated: "Corn contains high levels of both nitrates and amines, which can combine in the stomach to form nitrosamines which are carcinogenic (cancerous)." And they recommend that you should feed them corn with care. Bad mammal pick, don't you think?
Are you serious? Do you homework and due diligence and find out the truth for yourself regarding GMO and foods. This is an interesting point:
How about this:
Home / Other / MONSANTO CAFETERIA BANS GMO FOODS
In what has to be close to the ultimate in corporate hypocrisy, employees at a Monsanto company cafeteria have won the right to have their employee cafeteria serve non-GMO food:
GM foods not served in Monsanto cafeteria
Read more: MONSANTO CAFETERIA BANS GMO FOODS
- Giza Death Star Community
The Monsanto cafeteria claims are easily debunked with Google.
I don't know that the study is worthless or not. If it is worthless, so are the paltry safety studies, because the number of animals used is based on OECD regulatory guidelines.
I do have a question for you Steven. If one were to hypothesize that the EPSPS transgene lead to genesis of novel microRNAs which were suited to a down-regulation of tumor suppressor genes or up-regulation of oncogenes (breast)–can you venture a guess, or perhaps point me to research to help me understand– if such novel microRNA would act based on kinetics of a drug (where there would be a dose response to initiation of neoplasia; or would the process be more analogous to a light switch, where once a certain number of the hypothetical microRNA up/downregulated the rat DNA, leading to breast cancer and any amounts in excess of this threshold would not matter…. meaning you would not see a dose response.
Thanks very much
This article misunderstands the science:
1. A special tumor prone type of rat was used because they more easily reveal problems with feed or other substances they are exposed to. When tumors generate more in the experimental vs control group, that validates a difference between the groups. That does not mean all humans will develop cancer from GM foods.
2. You miss the point that there is something different about the GM corn vs pure roundup. Our body may be able to tolerate the roundup much better than the GM corn. One of the weaknesses of GM research has been their overlook of the difference between feeding animals a gene, a chemical, or the food with the active chemical-resistant gene. Researchers have wrongly assumed they would have the same effect.
3. While it would be nice to see larger study groups, this study appears to be of better quality than most feeding studies performed to date. Most pro-GM studies are surprisingly short in duration, while this one studied the rats over their lifetime.
4. When GM foods are unlabeled in the US, and therefor cannot be tracked, how can anyone determine if they are increasing cancer risk or causing any health problems? It can't be done reliably until they are labeled. A good reason for labeling these foods.
How in the hell am I supposed to take this criticism of the GMO/Cancer link study, when there's an advertisement for Dow on the article itself on your mobile site!?
I'm sorry Forbes, but that just makes this look like an unresponsible piece of journalism. It's a textbook definition of vested & conflicting interests.
Is it me, or am I the only one here that believes that the answer is a simple, "Yes".
All a sensiblel person need do is look through the links that the anti-GM crowd posts to realize the hilarious absence of any real data to support any of their claims.
I find it sad how easily people can be misled by the idiotweb.org section of the internet. Rely on facts and science, learn to discern credible information from bogus, and stop allowing your emotions to trump rational thought.
What did cause the tumors?
Lawson Gary: what's good for the goose is good for the gander, bud.
Can I see a 2yr safety study?
Oh, I forgot– Monsanto doesn't do those It only does studies for 90 days on 400 rats, of which the findings are published for 10.
The biotech cabal has NO DATA, NO EVIDENCE and NO SCIENCE…. the only thing they have are assumptions and PR…… Gary take your "science" to a church or a field full of dumb sheep.
So… what did cause the tumors?
As for the comment pertaining to the "conflict of interest" with regard to the researchers, need I remind you that Monsanto has performed it's own research (for a mere 90 days, I might add, funny how it magically falls just under the time when the alarming results begin to happen), also has a "conflict of interest" by testing their own products ("fox guarding the henhouse", come to mind?) Furthermore, this is not the only test to show that there is a link between health risks and GE plants. As for the ridiculous comment about "why aren't we dropping like flies"… in case you were sleeping, cancer is beginning to surpass heart disease as the number one killer in this country and in 18 states, cancer is the number one killer. And from January 2012 until now, over 400,000 people have died from cancer in this country just this year. Is that enough "dying like flies" for you? OOOOPS!
So my question to you is, how much Monsanto stock do you own?
Forbes ! I'm appalled & must object that you support such deceptive journalism to sway American to keep eating GMOs, when many studies finding harm worldwide & hundreds of scientists now supporting a boycott GMOs until long term scientific studies are conducted. At the very least American consumers have the right to know if GMO ingredients are in a product. This article is bows to the Monsanto party line of pseudoscience rhetoric protecting it's investments at all costs! How can we trust with our lives, a chemical company turned food Goliath that lies about it past products as safe, like agent orange? Please offer an equal position rebuttal by the OCA & I will remove my objection & continue my respect for giving your readers an honest perspective. Respectfully, JK Kunesh
I find it interesting that you had nothing good to say about the study down to your headline. Sure there were weaknesses, but there were also some strengths and interesting data.
The following points should not be so easily discounted as you have done:
1 Significance was reached in the estrogen analysis. I also find it suspect that the researchers did not appear to indicate whether a result was statistically significant, but the irony of your diatribe–when we view the opposite side of the same coin–if you conducted a pre-clinical animal study for a new cancer treatment drug and got data showing less tumors you would have gladly accepted the study and moved forward to more animal trials or human trials. Yet here you simply reject results.
2 You mention issues with apparent lack of dose response at higher doses but ignore the fact that there was a noticeable threshold effect and the researches did comment on this threshold, stating that it is "often the case for hormonal diseases" (estrogen…cancer…) and some of the biochemical data was inherently messed up due to severe kidney issues in the animals. Why don't you comment on the threshold instead of sensationalize?
3 You beat up the researchers because they used albino Sprague-Dawley rats 'prone to cancer'. Suspect comment on your part. You failed to mention that is the exact reason studies use a placebo group – so that one can determine what was caused by the treatment and what was just bound to happen due to inherent genetics of the animal. And if no statistical significance, then apparent trends to call for more research.
4. I'm surprised you did not comment on one particular point made in the study – the first detectable tumors occurring at 4 months, which is 30 days after the typical 90-day study time required for GMOs under scrutiny? This study may be the one that causes a shift toward longer study lengths (>90 days) in regulatory required GMO studies.
5. You did not mention anything about the biochemical composition of the GMO vs the non-GMO corn. Two hydroxycinnamic acids (ferulic acid and caffeic acid) were found in 16-53% reduced amounts in GMO corn, as reported by this study (section 3.3). As you may know, both of these acids are antioxidants as tested in-vitro, and both have shown anti-cancer, protective effects in animal studies.
You seem to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater here. Next time maybe you shouldn't be so obviously biased or else Monsanto may approach you for consulting work.
Your analysis is flawed on several counts:
"Well, in some groups, the rats got more cancer than controls. But not always. In fact, the authors had to cherry-pick their own data to support their conclusions."
So? It's been well know for quite some time that animals all respond with different rates of disesae reponse on all kinds of things. That's why you can have a family of 6 living in the same environment for years with only one person, or maybe two developing cancer. You assume that all of the animals will respond with an equal reaction. This is just wrong headed thinking. The authors note this in their study.
"Perhaps most damning, though, is the fact that rats fed Roundup directly had the longest survival times. As Seralini's own Figure 1 shows, the longest-living rats in the entire study, out of all the conditions, where those that drank Roundup in their water. These rats outlived the control rats."
So, you can live longer, but with a 4 pould tumor hanging off your belly. What? Sometimes livining longer isn't better. Besides, the study didn't look for a specific benefit or detremint from eating the corn. It just tracked reaction. Your assumption is biased.
"A third problem, as Discovery News and other sources reported, is that the rats used in this study are a special laboratory strain that is highly prone to cancer."
That's just plain stupid. Besides, all of the rats (from what I can see) are on equal footing, meaning that the controls and the test subjects have the same chance of getting the cancer, even if they are "highl prone" to getting it.
Your article is at least, if not more biased against the study, than study is biased.
I was trying to figure out why this was such a 'pro-monsanto' article, maybe you should make a little disclaimer in your article saying "btw….Forbes named Monsanto company of the year two years ago". Interesting that you call out these scientists as being 'anti-GMO' suggesting it as a conflict of interest as part of your article.
Monsanto ran their study for 90 days. When people eat a maize product for years and decades whats the point of of only running the study for 90 days. Its meaningless in the larger scheme of the effect the product has.
Monsanto used the exact same breed of rat in their study. Now that this new study has used the exact same species(Sprague Dawley rat) and people are trying to invalidate it (the Salini study)with poor reasons like this one, which gets me really worried about GM products, because it means that the pro Monsanto crowd are scraping the barrel for excuses.
As for the sample size from the information which I have, this was according to OECD Protocol 453, which requires 10 rats of each sex. In Monsanto's study they only selected 10 of each sex.
"This week, as Californians get ambushed by our opposition's truth-deprived TV and radio ads, a new study exposes Monsanto and DuPont's dirty little secret: GMO crops mean more pesticides, superweeds, and superbugs.
Genetically engineered crops, the peer-reviewed study revealed, led to a 404 million pound increase in pesticides between 1996 and 2011.
Indeed, it appears that the only improved yield attributable to GMO crops is the pesticide yield.
Dear Mr. Salzberg, you make a lot of claims in your article. You limit the study to the test whether Roundup Ready maize causes tumours in lab rats in a manner that non-GM maize does not. This is not what the paper concludes.
You also assume: "In other words, if Seralini is right and GM food is bad for you, then more of it should be worse." You certainly know that this is not necessarily the case with toxins.
You claim the authors had a conflict of interest. But you fail to mention your own conflict of interest of being from the country which is the single largest producer of GMO seeds and produce, that Europe happens not to be wanting to eat, and you are a genetic scientist. Can you kindly confirm that you have no link to Monsanto or any other company involved in GMOs.
You write in your article: 'If GM corn causes cancer, why aren't Americans "dropping like flies," as one scientist asked?' You are certainly aware that this is an unqualified, a very populist statement, which is no acceptable argument in a scientific discussion. Such unsupported claims are a disservice to your allegation that the paper you discuss is poor science – which you call "bad study", whatever that really means. It could mean poor science as well as a bad result for your interests.
"Genetic modification of foods is a powerful technology that can be incredibly beneficial." you claim, even though this has yet to be proven. So far GMOs in agriculture have not been able to achieve any of the initially claimed advantages, i.e. higher yields, less toxins, higher quality. You give a recent example of GMO in fish production. It has yet to be seen what happens if that "faster growing salmon", as you claim" escapes into the wild, which it will inevitably do. Salmon farming is highly inefficient, the rate of transformation of food into meat being particularly low with salmon. This is alarming as it is a waste of feed. You fail to mention how much this rate has been increased with the GM salmon? Is your example just another unsubstantiated claim of the advantages of GMOs?
While stating that you dislike ad hominem attacks you sloppily disqualify one of the authors: "Joel de Vendomois, is a homoeopath, with a "Homoeopathy and Acupuncture Diploma", a double dose of quackery in a single degree". Isn't that a daring statement concerning two domains you don't seem to have any expertise?
The authors clearly say that theirs is a very limited study. However, they did not only observe fatalities, which you limit your critique to, but checked a number of other factors, e.g. the occurrence and time of occurrence of cancers, the size of cancers, the alteration of organs. Their key conclusion is "that agricultural edible GMOs and formulated pesticides must be evaluated very carefully by long term studies to measure their potential toxic effects." They say that studies of effects of GMOs on rats so far have been stopped after 3 months, which according to their results seems too short to detect any effects.
You fail to mention in your own article that studies on Monsanto GMOs so far were only carried out by Monsanto and Monsanto related labs and that they were kept from public scrutiny. How much can we trust in a corporation testing itself? And how much can we trust in somebody who fails to even mention this particular issue?
I am not surprised that Monsanto corn does create cancer alone. It was altered very unusually using a protein so that the plant can survive roundup products.
However, what I am more concerned with is not a food fight. I am concerned with the super insects that disease resistant plants will do to germs. Germs can become disease resistant this way also in their surrounding soils, air and water where these plants are.
If you understand how super germs are created this is what is done.
Something that perhaps the Chem Co's may not be prepared for either.
That's empirically not always true. For example u-shaped responses.
When you look at homeopathy I wouldn't fault anyone from saying it's sugar water or maybe even just water. The ingredients are so diluted that they are almost undetectable. On the other hand I have heard stories from people who used homeopathics on their dogs and had such dramatic results that the only explanation is that homeopathics work. Why? Because dogs are excellent test subjects because they don't know they are being given a remedy. One I quote a lot is about a dog who was very afraid of thunderstorms. Got very frantic. When given a homeopathic remedy the dog calmed down and went to sleep during a thunderstorm.
The burden of proof should be on companies like Monsanto to show that GMO products are safe for human consumption over the long term – not on independent researchers to prove that these products are hazardous to our health. Monsanto is very clear on where they stand on the matter. From their own website: "There is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans. "
Should every company need to run years of studies to determine that a product is safe? I suspect we would all be living in tents with no technology at all if this were the case. There never has been a valid reason to suspect that GMO has health impacts. I'm not saying we shouldn't study it but yes the burden is on you, the one raising the out-of-left-field claims, that has the burden.
"It's unfortunate that Monsanto's behavior has been used as an excuse to give all GMOs a bad name." Great point- Monsanto is a scourge that spoils the concept of GMO.
At the same time you imply that because the FDA sanctioned Monsanto to do their own tests (not surprising when you look at who runs the FDA)- and ended up doing 90 day studies, it proves it is safe?! How dare this small independent group not perform a test with higher interval but far less scale then a immensely large corporation.
Another major problem is that there's no dosage effect. In other words, if Seralini is right and GM food is bad for you, then more of it should be worse. I presume this is intellectual dishonesty or your part? As you are very astute and educated, and now far more about medicine than me. Bt fortunately as you say, any person can go on line and research. Now it appears that high levels of toxidity can get turned off by the immune system….I am not suggesting this is the case here…but you are blatantly lying to say that The law of toxicity is a simple more = more Illness. You know that is not always the case. Alos the report doesnt highlight round up ready…it highlights GM food… you slated the round up ready based results and then dammed the whole paper on this…Then to add more sloppy reporting, you state the truth that this is not a big enough study group to be a taken as useful scientifically. So which is it? you can't fight both sides of the argument? On personal note I agree with highlighting stupid Pseudo science and discrediting it.
My God Forbes is biased.
I wish I had time to enumerate all the clumsy attempts to obfuscate in this forbes article but Ill just point out one:
"the groups of animals fed with the NK603 [Roundup Ready corn] without R[oundup] application, similar effects with respect to enhanced tumor incidence and mortality rates were observed."
Blog implies they disproved themselves by finding that GMO-only rats had similar mortality to Roundup-only rats.
This would mean that GMOs caused the same enhanced tumor incidence as ingesting herbicide.
This supports their hypothesis.
Did you really think you could inveigle a little "switcheroo" and forbes readers would be too stupid to notice?
I'm disgusted. This is "bad science".
Cancer is less a disease than a condition existing in the whole human body. Cancer would be almost unheard of if no devitalized food or meats were eaten since cancer cannot exist where there is a pure bloodstream. Avoid meat in all forms including dairy. Meat is a dead matter, low in minerals, and produces uric acid in excess which is a waste product. The incidence of cancer is in direct proportion to the amount of meat and meat products in the diet. Regular meat eaters (especially red meat) have a higher probability of getting cancers, such as colon cancer and prostate cancer. Digestion of meat uses trypsin and chymotrypsin, which are two critical enzymes in the human body to allow the immune system to kill cancer cells. Vegetable proteins do not use up those enzymes. Cancer patient should not eat anything that is not building the immunity system or killing cancer cells. Meat does not contribute to curing the cancer, so meat is should be avoided by cancer patients. There are plenty of foods that help cure cancer, so there is no need to eat meat. Pancreatin enzymes can be destroyed by contact with acids. Diet comprised mostly of processed refined foods and meats may result in lower pH that depletes these enzymes in the human body. Cancer cells metabolize foods very inefficiently and produce acidic wastes. This extra acidity can further lower the pH levels in an already acidic environment for pancreatin enzymes. The lower pH level also enables the cancer to spread by using acid dissolved normal cells as its food source. This strongly acidic lower pH environment, especially local to the cancer is the primary reason that cancer does not normally heal on its own. The colon should be relatively clear during a cancer treatment so that the body can absorb as many nutrients as possible. All foods like meat which ferment in the bowel should be avoided to prevent the accumulation of fecal matter in the colon. The hormones in meat like artificial sex hormone widely used in cattle – Diethylstilbestrol cause cancer of the uterus, breast and other reproductive organs. Dangerous residues of stilbestrol are in 85% of all the meat sold in North America. This is the main reason why fifteen countries around the world now refuse to import meat produced in the US; and twenty one countries have a total ban on the use of stilbestrol in food production or processing. When chemical preservatives and color enhancers are ingested, they cause the body to produce nitrosamines which cause cancer of the liver, stomach, brain, bladder, kidneys and several other organs. Nitrates and nitrites are heavily added to meat during processing. Runoff of nitrates and nitrites from fields sprayed with chemical fertilizers get into drinking water and cause cancer. can lead to cancer. If the digestive system is weak, digestion of meat could produce toxins in blood.
Though devitalized, processed, and sugared food can also cause cancer even in vegetarians. People, communities and groups who consume less meat have less cancer. Seventh-day Adventists, who eat little or no meat, suffer far less from cancer than the average meat-eating American. High protein diet of Americans is linked to the high incidence of cancer in the US. Anyone who does not eat meat, eats only good food, and does all he can to protect his liver, may never get cancer.
The second solution is to introduce the appropriate calciums into the body since the body uses calcium as the chief alkalinizer of all body fluids including the intra-cellular fluids. Cancers and tumors can only exist in a predominantly lower pH (acidic) environment caused by a diet rich in dairy foods, meats, grain products, sweets and strong condiments such as black pepper. This is always accompanied by an acute lack of living fruits and vegetables. High acidity destroys bones, because the body has to use alkalizing minerals from bones to keep the blood pH from dropping into the acid range.
Lactobacillus acidophilus is a friendly organism which helps the body fight disease and restores health. Acidophilus kills the harmful bacteria strain of E. coli in the intestinal tract. Acidophilus breaks milk sugar down into lactic acid. Bacteria which produce putrefaction and gas in the intestines cannot live in lactic acid. Acidophilus also has the unique ability to help the body synthesize, or manufacture all of the 'B' vitamins in the system. This makes it especially valuable since there is literally a host of agents which destroy B vitamins. A few are antibiotics, birth control pills, eating sugar and refined foods and drinking coffee. A diet high in red meat will destroy the beneficial bacteria, due to the concentration of antibiotics and steroids given to the animals before they are slaughtered.
Cancer is fundamentally involved with mal-utilization of protein. Oncologists generally agree that the actual cause of death in cancer patients is cachexia, a condition of severe weight loss and wasting associated with protein mal-absorption. In fact cancer cells are able to grow by making the amino acids of protein available for their growth at the expense of the body as a whole. Meat, especially red meat, being the most readily assimilable protein, becomes a banquet for cancer cells. Emphasizing the use of plant sources of vegetable protein such as legumes and beans that contain cancer-fighting compounds should be a prominent part of an anti-cancer diet.
The most damaging evidence that meat is a major cause of cancer are studies of people who went into spontaneous remission solely because of a change in their diet. These people almost universally went from a cooked food, meat-centered diet and gave up their meat, their dairy products and their refined sugar and switched to a raw food vegetarian diet, and by simply changing diets their bodies were able to cure their cancer.
-Nalliah Thayabharan
If all the GMO issues are so good then why will Monsanto and other manufacturers not allow a clean and clear study by any third parties Globally? That is the rub! Anything short of that we should remain suspect.
It's time for a public forum with total transparency by allowing third party scientific studies. The manufacturers of any food or food based products should have to be mandated to have every study before it enters our food stream and blood stream, because having worked directly with some of these groups who are controlling our world I know first hand they do have agenda's that may not be in our best interest.
U.S.Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) own research shows that the cancer causing arsenic added to the chicken feed ends up in the chicken meat where it is consumed by humans. California added to its list of cancer-causing chemicals an additive commonly used in processed beverages like Coca Cola, Pepsi etc – 4-methylimidazole (4-MI) – a byproduct formed during the production of caramel color.
Sodium Nitrate (aka Sodium Nitrite) – a preservative, coloring, and flavoring commonly added to bacon, ham, hot dogs, luncheon meats, smoked fish, and corned beef – causes various types of cancer.
Butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) and butylated hydrozyttoluene (BHT) are used to preserve common household foods including cereals, chewing gum, potato chips, vegetable oils and canned foods – form cancer-causing reactive compounds in human body.
Propyl Gallate – preservative, often used in conjunction with BHA and BHT in meat products, chicken soup base, and chewing gum causes cancer
Acesulfame-K is a new artificial sweetener used in baked goods, chewing gum, and gelatin desserts causes cancer
Food Colorings like Blue 1, 2 is used in beverages, candy, baked goods; Red 3 used to dye cherries, fruit cocktail, candy, and baked goods; Green 3 used in candy and beverages; Yellow 6 is added to beverages, sausage, gelatin, baked goods, and candy; cause various type of cancer.
Potassium Bromate used as an additive to increase volume in some white flour, breads, and rolls causes cancer.
- Nalliah Thayabharan
I for one am not surprised that GM corn alone could create more cancer in rats
The corn itself was given a protein that inhibits it's own life span without the roundup product.
However despite all of the food fights going on lately I am more concerned with super germs.
The GM foods using the protein above will create disease resistant plants that have been with us for millions of years. So what if we change the climate in which they grow? Because to create super disease resistant plants is to create super insects and super germs. If you look at this this is how you create a super germ ok? So? For me? I am afraid of the near future and super diseases that even Monsanto doesn't count on.
Sign this petition to ban GMOs: http://wh.gov/R5J7
I this study is so flawed then why aren`t more studies being planned to rebuff it? And what about the studies with rats conducted by Monsanto that were never considered flawed even though they were conducted for only 90 days?
So why don`t you criticize Monsanto as well? This is heavily biased reporting!
Cancer? Other diseases? Humbug! I simply do not trust a system that is so secretive and so defensive. I do NOT want to imagine that the DNA of food plants has been tampered with. I do not trust a system that has fought for the absence of labelling requirements to give consumers a chance to make informed choices. I do NOT trust a system that develops plants that will kill competitive (non-GMO) crops simply by the exchange of pollen. Cancer and other diseases? easiliy covered up when you have the clout that some of the huge and very secretive agribusiness companies have.
The baffling thing is… MICE ARE CHEAP!! In this study, the most expensive thing was just the labor of caring for the mice and having laboratory personnel to take the data. He should have had at least 100 mice per group if he was planning on publishing a paper without expecting significant scrutiny. I think he just published too soon.
You can pick out 10 random people from the United States populace and find no incidence of cancer. Does that mean there's no cancer in anyone? Of course not.
"If GM corn causes cancer, why aren't Americans "dropping like flies," as one scientist asked?" apparently they aren't paying attention – they are. Cancer has become a huge epidemic that is affecting just about everybody I know in recent years. I'm sure the big cancer industries are just eating the false propaganda like this up to push their deadlier than the disease 'cures'. I was a CNA for over 12 years and took care of lots of cancer patients – stop promoting the lies, it's killing people.
Simple comment: instead of asking about the verity of this specific test, the glaring question is why more of these tests aren't being done. In other words, Monsanto is happy to do the "tests" on millions of Americans and others in poor countries. The pharmaceutical companies go through rigorous testing for years before they are able to put something on the market. Why not Monsanto?
I remember all those flawed studies from the 60′s that failed to show that smoking causes cancer.
When companies like Monsanto, are allowed to submit their own "studies"
to an FDA filled with ex Monsanto executives for approval
That's not Science………That's Business
Update October 2013: Lots of GMO industry PR types and industry-funded academics made concerted efforts to discredit the 2012 Seralini GM corn feeding study and Seralini himself. Originally the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) joined in the criticism of the Seralini study. More recently, however, EFSA has actually validated the design and protocols used in the Seralini study with some minor modifications as the STANDARD for two year feeding studies to assess the toxicity of GMO food:
The overzealous effort to discredit the Seralini study apparently ignored the fact that he was attempting to replicate Monsanto's ORIGINAL feeding study on Roundup Ready NK603 corn and Roundup but extend the term of the study from 90 days to two years. That's why he used the same strain of rats, kept the small cell sizes the same and followed other aspects of the original Monsanto experimental design and other protocols as well. Critics of the Seralini study attacked these features, not realizing they were criticizing the original Monsanto feeding study as well. After the dust settled, EFSA finally came to its senses…
In other news, Forbes properly lobbies for the corporations that its revenue depends on – by unsuccessfully criticizing the longest-running, most credible GMO research.
Try to surprise us next time.
are there any citations for your claim that European's eat less GM corn/maize than Americans? as a European myself, i can assure you, from livestock feed, cereal to baked beans, GM grain is rife in European food.
Great article, the only part I take issue with is the vague economics of,
"On the other hand, GM technology can be used, as Monsanto has done, simply to allow farmers to use more pesticides, which doesn't seem to benefit anyone other than the pesticide producers."
Why would monsanto use more pesticides that they have to pay pesticide producers for if it doesn't increase demand for their product?
But you know, you just attach Monsanto to a good/evil story and people will eat it up.
Really, 126 independent studies????
According to a scathing opinion piece in an August 2009 "Scientific American", "Agritech companies have given themselves veto power over the work of independent researchers. . . . Only studies that the seed companies have approved ever see the light of a peer-reviewed journal."
If you think this is far-fetched, you only need to look at how scientists were treated every time they discovered adverse findings about GMO.
Eg. 1) Dr. Arpad Pusztai's landmark study in the early 90s funded by the UK Govt. by a grand of $3 million to design the safety testing for GMOs which were supposed to become the required testing protocols for all of Europe. But when he fed supposedly harmless GM potatoes to rats, the animals developed potentially pre-cancerous cell growth, smaller brains, livers and testicles, partially atrophied livers, and damaged immune systems. The cause was almost certainly side effects from the process of genetic engineering itself. He was a hero for 2 days, after which he was fired; his career ruined by a pro-GMO big Govt and big-agribusiness. Eventually, an invitation to speak before Parliament lifted his gag order and his research was published in the prestigious "Lancet".
Same was the response to Dr. Ignacio Chapela. Dr. Chapela himself was attacked after publishing his discovery that GM corn contaminated crops in Mexico. It was later revealed that his chief denigrators were two fictitious characters fabricated by Monsanto's PR firm (Bivings Group), who had posted inflammatory remarks on a listserve of scientists. Read "The fake persuaders" published by "The Guardian" in 2002.
There are several other examples like Dr. Judy Carman, Dr. Terje Traavik, Dr. Andrés Carrasco and lately Seralini.
If the GM industries' claims were backed-up by science, why do they attack the scientists? They should have corrected or proven their claims through science itself rather than resorting to threat, and character assassination and all.. So there's no good reason to believe this article no matter what the credentials of the author be. There are too many hirelings in this field.


text:
Shane Mosley has signed his next fight, which will be against former titlist Sergio Mora at 154 pounds. The fight will be on September 18, at the Staples Center in Los Angeles, and will be aired on pay per view. Also to be featured on the undercard are Victor Ortiz, likely against Vivian Harris, and Saul Alvarez.
Televisa came through with a last-minute partnership with Suljos.tv, allowing the fights to be streamed over the internet. It's a very solid card (rivaling Azteca's Arce card), with Edgar Sosa facing Omar Soto, plus undefeated prospect Saul Alvarez facing 21-1 Carlos Herrera and Carlos Zarate Jr. making his pro debut.
We'll email you a reset link.
If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.
You must be a member of Bad Left Hook to participate.
We have our own Community Guidelines at Bad Left Hook. You should read them.
You must be a member of Bad Left Hook to participate.
We have our own Community Guidelines at Bad Left Hook. You should read them.
Choose an available username to complete sign up.
In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.


text:
Gender: Male
Years in Practice: 36 Years
Languages Spoken: English, Spanish
Medical School: Emory University School of Medicine
Graduation Date: 1978
Hospital Affiliations: Florida Hospital Altamonte, Florida Hospital Carrollwood, Florida Hospital Orlando, Winter Park Memorial Hospital
Specialties: Cardiovascular Disease, Interventional Cardiology
*This physician has multiple office locations. See Appointments for details.
©2005-2014 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.
WebMD does not provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See additional information.


text:
Matt DeWalt
When Kapron Lewis-Moore returned from his recent trip to South Bend, Ind., he was still committed to becoming a member of the Texas A&M; University football team, but the Notre Dame Fighting Irish had given him plenty to think about in the days leading up to National Signing Day.
After contemplating his decision and considering his options with his family and coaches, the Weatherford Kangaroos defensive end announced his decision to take his talents out of state to continue his academic and athletic careers at Notre Dame Wednesday.
"Basically, what changed my mind was I talked to my mom about the possibilities after college, and I'm not saying A&M; is a bad college, but I feel like at Notre Dame, I can succeed a little more, that's no disrespect to A&M; at all," Lewis-Moore said. "Deep down, I'll still be an A&M; fan, especially when they play Texas."
Weatherford head football coach Kenny Wheaton said Lewis-Moore was in a very unique position when it came to deciding where he wanted to go to college and added that he is looking forward to watching him grow as a person and a player at the next level.
"It's a pretty prestigious university," Wheaton said of Notre Dame. "Just to get in academically is quite an accomplishment and then to be recruited so highly by everybody and then for it to come down to him choosing that university, what a great place to go. Like I said, it's pretty prestigious, academically, athletically, the tradition, the global connections that Notre Dame has, it will be pretty fun to watch him go through his career there."
Lewis-Moore, who was recruited by numerous Division-I schools and was considered one of the top recruits in the state, said he thoroughly enjoyed his visit to the Notre Dame campus, which ultimately had an impact on his decision.
"The campus is beautiful," he said. "The population of the campus is less than 10,000 [students], so it's a small campus. You'll get to know your professors and you'll get to know the student body and the student body knows you, and the coaching staff.
"The tradition up there is amazing. You feel like you're walking through a history book when you're up there."
Up there, as Lewis-Moore put it, is a long way from Texas, which was another aspect the standout student-athlete considered when making his decision. However, Lewis-Moore knows where home is and he is expecting to return often to make sure to get his Weatherford fix.
"It's going to be hard being away from the family, being away from the friends, but I think it will be all right," he said. "I'll be coming home, not as much as I would like to, but I will still be coming home. It won't be too bad."
Because of the type of person Lewis-Moore more has become, Wheaton said many fans and friends in the community will follow his career closely and be anxious for his return to talk about his experiences.
"I've been doing this a long time and we have had some guys go onto really big colleges before, but I think the thing that's neat about Kapron is that everybody in this school and community is excited for him and they want to see him succeed, which is unusual," Wheaton said. "He's such a great young man and he's humble. Everybody wants to see him do well and that is a unique thing in itself. Most times, people would be jealous of a guy getting to go on do the things he's going to get to do. He's handled it so well and we're just real excited for him. He'll represent us very well."
Lewis-Moore, who played defensive end throughout his career in Weatherford, is expecting to see some time at his old position, but added the Notre Dame coaching staff has some other positions they would like to see him play.
"Since they run the 3-4 defense, they see me as an outside linebacker, defensive end hybrid, kind of coming off the edge a little bit," he said. "It will be tough to learn the first year, but I think I can handle it.
"They kind of challenged me to learn something new, to step out of the comfort zone a little bit, so I think it's the best choice for me."
Notre Dame opens the 2008 football season at home against San Diego State University Sept. 6, followed by a meeting at home against the University of Michigan Sept. 13.


text:
New Pacific Ocean 2020 Coordinator
Mr Sakiusa Tuisolia (Saki) is the newly appointed Pacific Ocean 2020 Coordinator. …
04 May 2009 | News story
0 Comments | Write a comment
Oceania Regional Office Welcomes New Interim Roundtable Coordinator
Etika Rupeni has joined the office as the new Interim Roundtable coordinator. …
04 May 2009 | News story
0 Comments | Write a comment
IUCN features in Pacific Minister's Meeting
The second Regional Energy Officials meeting and the Pacific Energy Ministers meeting was held in Nukualofa, Tonga from the 20th – 24th of April. These biennial meetings, focussed on the theme, "Strengthening the Fragile Pacific Islands Energy Sector – Addressing energy, economy and environment in a period of rapid change". It was a critical discussion for Pacific Island countries currently undergoing considerable pressure to sustain their fragile economies with the current global recession and uncertainties in oil prices. This has raised alternative energy options to the top of the agenda including renewable energies. …
30 Apr 2009 | News story
Marine Protected Areas: Legislative and Policy Gap Analysis for Fiji Islands
IUCN is pleased to announce the release of a policy and legislation gap analysis for marine protected areas in the Fiji Islands. The paper was prepared on behalf of the IUCN Regional Office for Oceania, at the request of the WWF South Pacific Programme, and was co-authored by IUCN Commission on Environmental Law (CEL) member, Ms Erika Techera, and IUCN Legal Research Intern, Ms Shauna Troniak. …
30 Apr 2009 | News story
0 Comments | Write a comment
Troubles in coconut grove
Could rising sea levels undermine the potential for islands to produce biofuels from coconut oil? Tonga's sea level monitoring programme has registered a 10 mm rise in recent years, and the trend is likely to continue. …
20 Apr 2009 | News story
WCPA Regional Deputy Vice Chair for Oceania
Elizabeth Erasito is the new Regional Deputy Vice Chair for Oceania for IUCN's World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA). Elizabeth will lead the WCPA network in the region, particularly for the Pacific Islands. …
14 Apr 2009 | News story
3 Comments | Write a comment
Australian Council of Environmental Deans and Directors established
The Australian Council of Environmental Deans and Directors (ACEDD) has been established. This is an initiative of the IUCN Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) and Macquarie University, Sydney. This is part of CEC's program to catalyse networks of universities in Meso America, Southern Africa and amongst Arabic speaking nations as part of its endeavours for the IUCN World Conservation Learning Network. …
26 Mar 2009 | News story
Estimated carbon emissions from the IUCN World Conservation Congress fully offset
The IUCN World Conservation Congress is a truly unique event in its capacity to unite so many members of the global environmental community. To the delegates, this unmatched opportunity for learning, exchanging ideas, and meeting new people is priceless. … | French | Spanish
12 Feb 2009 | News story
IUCN Joins Forces with Regional University for Conservation Action
Suva, Fiji, 28 January 2009 (IUCN) – An agreement signed today between two leading actors in scientific research and action for environment and nature conservation marks a new chapter for conservation and sustainable development in the Pacific islands region. The agreement formalises a long-standing partnership between IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) and the University of the South Pacific (USP) and promises to strengthen collaborative initiatives for conservation and sustainable development through research, training and teaching.
29 Jan 2009 | News story
0 Comments | Write a comment
Buy, Sell and Trade! Free Game on Ecosystem Services.
IUCN and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), along with input from key stakeholders (Earthwatch Institute, World Resources Institute, Katoomba Group/Forest Trends, the US Business Council for Sustainable Development and Fundacion Entorno) have developed a free, interactive and fun game about how ecosystem markets work. …
20 Jan 2009 | News story


text:
Prep30 m
Cook2 h
Ready In2 h 40 m
"Your mouth will water as this easy, flavorful turkey roasts in your oven all afternoon!"
New! Find ingredients on sale
Tap On Sale, then swipe through different local stores.
Look through the ingredients list for store discounts!
This feature is in beta testing. Thanks for your patience as we improve it!
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Add to Shopping List
Adjust Servings
Original recipe yields 1 - 12 pound turkey
- Preheat an oven to 350 degrees F (175 degrees C). Mix the marjoram, rosemary, thyme, basil, garlic, and black pepper in a small dish; set aside.
- Gently lift the skin of the turkey away from the meat, and lightly brush the meat with olive oil. Sprinkle the meat evenly with lemon juice, then sprinkle the meat with 2/3 of the mixed herbs. Pat the turkey skin onto the meat; sprinkle the remaining herbs into the turkey cavity, and add the squeezed lemon halves. Place the flour into the turkey roasting bag, and shake to evenly coat. Place the turkey into the bag, close the end with a nylon tie, and place into a deep roasting pan. Cut 6 half-inch slits in the top of the bag.
- Bake the turkey in the preheated oven until no longer pink at the bone and the juices run clear, 2 to 2 1/2 hours. An instant-read thermometer inserted into the thickest part of the thigh, near the bone should read 180 degrees F (82 degrees C). Remove the turkey from the oven, cover with a doubled sheet of aluminum foil, and allow to rest in a warm area 10 to 15 minutes before slicing.
Share It
Reviews (5)Rate This Recipe
Note from Author: For added moistness, bake the turkey in a turkey bag, and place it upside down in the pan. Turn over during the last 30 minutes to get that nice brown look!
Super easy and really great flavor! The turkey stayed moist and had wonderful flavor! I substituted fresh oregano for the marjoram and mixed the herbs in the olive oil then spread that mixture over the meat under the skin. I also only used the roasting bag to keep the turkey in (I preped it the day before and stored it in the refrigerator), I covered the turkey with foil for roasting and uncovered it for the last 30 minutes to allow the skin to crisp up. Awesome, will make again!
Janine Brooks
Was worried it would be dry with the little amount of lemon juice, but this proved to be a great success. Left the meat with a light, lemony flavor. As I was unsure of how to lift the skin on the turkey, we just put the spices on the skin. Still worked great!
Similar Recipes
Sherry's German Turkey
Herb-Glazed Roasted Turkey
Orange and Maple Glazed Turkey
McCormick(R) Savory Herb Rub Roasted Turkey
Holiday Turkey With Honey Orange Glaze
How to Cook a Turkey
Amount Per Serving (12 total)
- Calories
- 722 cal
- 36%
- Fat
- 36 g
- 55%
- Carbs
- 3.6 g
- 1%
- Protein
- 91.2 g
- 182%
- Cholesterol
- 264 mg
- 88%
- Sodium
- 221 mg
- 9%
Based on a 2,000 calorie diet
previous recipe:
Herb-Glazed Roasted Turkey
next recipe:
Tiffany's Herb Roasted Turkey


text:
Sweat is made by sweat glands in the skin and carried to the skin's surface by ducts.
Sweating helps keep the body cool. Thus, people sweat more when it is warm. They also sweat when they are nervous or under stress.
Sweat is composed mostly of water, but it also contains salt (mostly sodium chloride) and other chemicals. When a person sweats a lot, the lost salt and water must be replaced.
Last full review/revision June 2013 by David M. Pariser, MD
Buy the Book
Mobile Versions
Pressure Sores
Prickly Heat


text:
Muslims must learn from the West - Today's Christian Videos
Press the button below if you liked this video! Thank you! =D
3,537 views
Posted By memritvvideos 2008-03-17T00:00:00
Muslim woman calling for tolerance
More videos from this user
- An Alarming video every Westerne...2,075,654 views
- Hamas, in their own words58,805 views
- Women Should not appear on Saudi...3,711 views
- The Truth about Islam-Saudi Wome...5,378 views
No playlists found for this account.
Recommended for you
- The Truth about Islam-Saudi Women Rightsmemritvvideos00:04:245,378 views
- Pioneers of Tomorrow-Children show on Hamas TVmemritvvideos00:04:0810,457 views
- Islamic Wife Beatingmemritvvideos00:02:155,762 views
- Muslims Should Love Jews and Vice Versamemritvvideos00:07:123,891 views
- Why Women Shouldn't Drivememritvvideos00:02:084,734 views
- Islamic Wife Beating v2memritvvideos00:02:084,745 views
- Sharia Law 101memritvvideos00:07:184,182 views
- Islamic Anti-Semitismmemritvvideos00:04:573,498 views
- No rights to Women in Saudi Arabiamemritvvideos00:07:095,136 views
- Would you Shake hands with a Jew?memritvvideos00:16:006,519 views
- Hamas - From the Sea to the Rivermemritvvideos00:04:354,567 views
- Iraqi Terrorist Talks of Beheadingmemritvvideos00:02:435,512 views
- Arab and Iranian Reaction to 9/11 - 5 Years Later - Tease...memritvvideos00:03:264,344 views
- Sheik "Explains" the Differences Between Men & Womenmemritvvideos00:02:344,857 views
- Egyptian Terrorist Talks of His Trainingmemritvvideos00:03:152,930 views
- Iraqi researcher calls Nobel Prize racistmemritvvideos00:03:362,849 views
- Syrian Terrorist Explains Why She Did It.memritvvideos00:02:262,891 views
- Egyptian Cleric tells Children of Martyrdommemritvvideos00:05:153,461 views
- Allah Will Judge World Cup Fansmemritvvideos00:01:523,297 views
- An Islamic Dr. in London Justifies Slaughteringmemritvvideos00:05:293,324 views