(Healingtalks) If the indefinite detention provisions for US citizens of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) weren’t bad enough, guess what else Congress has in mind to ultra-speed us to a police state? It’s called NDAA’s evil twin, the Enemy Expatriation Act, or H.R. 3166, which would take away your citizenship as well.
The act would amend “the Immigration and Nationality Act to include engaging in or purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which U.S. nationals would lose their nationality. Further, the bill defines hostilities as any conflict subject to the laws of war.”
Taking away the right to life and citizenship
Like the language of the NDAA, this sounds innocuous, but essentially the two legislation take away your right to liberty and protection under the US Constitution, an without any due process as required by the Constitution.
Essenital constitutional amendments for our liberty
The Fourth Amendment clearly says “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” The Fifth Amendment, meanwhile, goes further, saying “no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
Does taking away our rights to due process sound like the America our founder fathers and millions of brave soldiers have since fought and died for?
“Never before in our lifetime has the government come so close to fully transforming into a dictatorship as it has now. The new defense bill, if coupled with this expatriation bill, makes me shudder at the thought of what else is hiding beneath our soon-to-be king’s well-guarded sleeves,” writes Rebecca DiFede, a contributing editor to Americans for Limited Government.
Supposedly war (and the war on terror is being proclaimed as an endless one) negates the Constitution for all American citizens, what exactly is it we are fighting to preserve? A democracy turned into a police state?
Enemy Expatriation Act, right to life, bill of rights, rights to liberty, rights to due process, right of citizenship, fundamental rights, rights to liberty, liberty civil rights, civil liberties civil rights, right to life and liberty
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) In September of 2010 the FDA approved the first genetically animal safe for eating. The “product” is a genetically modified Atlantic salmon developed by AquaBounty Technologies named AquaAdvantage Salmon (AAS).
“Improved” salmon
AAS can incredibly grow twice as fast, which is an economic boom. More $$ are to be made, which blinds consciousness not to look at the likely negative impacts.
How this was accomplished
This growth rate was gained by modifying the salmon’s genome, the addition of a growth hormone gene, and an antifreeze gene. AquaBounty claims its salmon is an environmentally sustainable alternative . With AAS, the unnatural modification occurs in that two proteins are being introduced into the salmon’s genetic makeup are from other fish.
Supposed benefits of huge and hugely profitable frankensalmon
Presumed benefits include:
Enviro impact – AAS will be raised in land-based facilities to reduce the environmental impact on coastal areas
Diseases – May eliminate the threat of disease transfers.
Transport – Will allow the harvesters to live near these landbased food facilities, reducing some of the costs of fish transport and the use of fossil fuels, again helping the environment.
Ploy to sell harmful frankensalmon
The above ignores the following:
Health impacts – First there is the issue of safety in eating genetically modified salmon is “are they safe to eat?” There is amply evidence that other genetically modified foods have ill health effects – including causing allergic reactions, digestive disturbances, infertility, and an overall weakening of the immune system. There have been no long term studies, as usual.
Environmental impacts – Then there is the issue of an ultimate environmental impact, especially if the AAS salmon are accidently introduced into the wild. While AAS are designed for land facilities, precautions can never be fool-proof. This is why he Fish and Wildlife Service opposes frankenfish.
AAS salmon are all triploid females, which means that they are not only all female, but sterilized. Sometimes this sterilization doesn’t work. There is a failure of sterilization in .1 to 1% of fish, which is a pretty small number, except fish farms usually contain up to a 1 million fish – and many of these farms are to be established.
Given the size of Frankensalmon
How this could impact wild fish populations is unknown. But given their size, they may be more attractive for mating then a natural Atlantic salmon, which could negatively impact wild salmon populations.
Ultimately these farms should be outlawed. But is established, knowing the industry’s history and arrogance, it is unlikely there will be adequate monitoring to make sure these salmon mutants none escape to the wild. Also the US government has had a nonchalant attitude toward such environmental threats, as evidence by the growing of GMO crops in wildlife preserves. This is especially important in areas where a salmon population is now already present. As the video below shows, there is a real potential for destroying the natural salmon population.
Report by Food and Water Watch report. By the way, I was the original organizer of Food And Water, Inc. many years ago which first was used to oppose food radiation
(Healingtalks) Mass-commercalized GMO baby foods are a reminder that consumers need to be most diligently aware when shopping. The one company most behind this thrust has already been pouring vastly misleading information out to the public – even with false claims to have an organic status with great health benefits! These products will actually produce sick babies and sick children – and ultimately sick adults to feed the future patient rosters of Big Pharma.
Who is polluting our baby foods?
The company behind this most deceptive and malevolent practice is Martek. They produce Martek’s Life’sDHA and Life’sARA. They even have the nerve to claim these are organic ingredients and the fact is that their lab-creations can now be found in hundreds of commercial products, including baby foods. See the list of products below.
Consumers, especially mothers, thus need to become super-aware of what is out there. Pass it on.
Genetically modified DHA
So let’s start with DHA. It’s an omega-3 fatty acid normally and naturally found in breast milk. It is a major component of the brain and eyes of every human being, representing about 97% of all omega-3 fats found in the brain and 93% of all omega-3 fats located in the retina (Life’s DHA).
However, and like all genetically altered foods with GMOs, the Martek products are really incompatible with our nature and ourl bodies. They are especially harmful when consumed by babies.
Another example of the GMO industry’s history of vast deceptions
As far back as 2002, food manufacturers began supplementing infant formula and baby food with synthetic forms of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (ARA). They claimed this helped with brain development despite the fact that their forms of DHA/ARA, as used in infant formulas, are really incompatible and substantially different than the form found in human milk.
Synthetic DHA/ARA is from laboratory-grown fermented algae and fungus. It is produced through the use of hexane, a petroleum by-product and EPA-identified neurotoxin.
Martek still deceptively claims organic status for its products. While the FDA has announced it will investigate such claims about DHA/ARA infant formulas, and that they do not really support brain and eye development, that most corrupt of US agencies, has failed to act.
Negative health effects of GMO altered DHA/ARA
From 2002 onwards, parents and medical professionals have observe a range health problems after ingesting these products. They include difficulties in breathing as well as gastrointestinal disorders. When affected babies are no longer fed the formula, the ailments disappear.
Alternatively buy only organic baby food , making doubly sure that (even if labelled organic) they do not contain any DHA or ARA ingredients that are added artificially.
Long-term breastfeeding – this is the best initial option, and to insure your baby gets the best nutrients that nature intended (Lance, 2011).
Genetically engineered US baby products to avoid or boycott
Earth’s Best Organic Soy with DHA & ARA (Hain Celestial Group)
Enfamil LIPIL (Mead Johnson Nutritionals)
Enfamil Next Step (Mead Johnson)
Isomil 2 Advance (Abbott Laboratories)
Nestle Good Start Supreme with DHA & ARA (Nestle USA)
Future testing for GMO ingredients in baby food (beginning in Europe where GMO labels are required)
In Europe there is a Eureka Project that’s developing screening methods for testing the presence of GMO ingredients in baby foods. Initially their testing kit will look for two common ingredients in baby foods, glycine max proteins and maize starch.
Consumer action is needed in US
It is important, in the US, to ask the American National Organic Standards Board to revoke the use of their DHA and AHA ingredients in organically-labeled products (Keegan, 2011) . We should also boycott the products that have their ingredients.
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) Normally we write just about health issues. However, certain recent political developments are so threatening to the freedom of our culture that they affect the health of all aspects of our lives.
When it comes to politics there is an elite in control. And what has spooked that elite of our country the most?
It is not difficult to figure out.
Trying to control the collective mind
Back in the 1960′s there was a very powerful cultural movement that threatened the soul of modern capitalism. To remedy that threatening climate, bills were soon passed to consolidate control of all the media, setting the stage for an essential killing of America’s spirit. The aim was to guarantee that a 1960′s style or unconventional cultural revolution would never happen again. That effort was highly successful, and has held its ground for nearly four decades. But just as flowers and grass dare to eventually grow through the cracks in cement sidewalks, something new and alive is popping up that threatens to overturn this apple cart.
It’s the freedom of the Internet.
The power of Internet freedom
We have seem its power of the Internet in the Middle East, helping to overthrow authoritarian governments.
Make no mistake about it, the elite in America have gotten the message, and quite a long time ago (considering that they began to build FEMA camps over a decade ago). Their plans have accelerated to retake control in 2012.
This includes the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to allow for indefinite confinement of US citizens just by being accused or suspected of being a “terrorist”
Attempting mind control
A follow up thrust is a bill called SOPA in the House and a parallel bill called Protect IP Act in the Senate.
Thus what began as an attempt to restrain foreign piracy on the Internet has totally changed into a bill to essentially kill the Internet’s freedom. Make no mistake about it. This is a criminal piece of legislation. Congress no longer represents the American people when passing legislation. It represents lobbyists and corporate influence, no matter how malevolent.
Why Congress is moving so quickly on these bills
The answer is simple. If they don’t, and in as little as a year, the elite will lose out big time.
Movements like the citizen effort in California to put on the ballot a bill to label genetically engineered foods will set a trend that will eventually bankrupt Monsanto.
Such uncontrolled public efforts, circumventing Congress, are scaring the daylights or freaking out the elite.
They want to retake and maintain full control. But because their thrust is so malevolent and evil, this time it will require violence.
The combined effort of NDAA’s unlimited detention law, the building of FEMA camps, and now the SOPA/IP Act’s attempt to destroy the Internet – these are all part and parcel of the same big picture to retake control.
SOPA and IP Act thrusts to destroy Internet free speech
Thus the proposed legislation would be an Orwellian power grab by the U.S. Justice Department to be able to shut down any Internet site it wants to, and by fiat. All the “Justice” Department has to do is claim a site violates this law. As with the National Defense Authorization Act, the accusation, without trial, suffices to criminalize the target. There will be no due process in the Courts. It would establish an unbridled “thought police and set a worldwide precedent.
A mere accusation is enough
Again under the proposed legislation, a mere accusation shuts down a site, supposedly because it unlawfully featured copyrighted content. The accusation need not be proven or even accompanied by probable cause. This is similar to how the FDA is threatening and has successfully put out of business natural supplement companies.
Again, all that the government accuser has to do is point a finger at a website and it is dead.
Financial death too boot
Additionally, the bills grant regulators the right to choke off revenue to the owners of these newly classified “rogue” websites by accusing their online advertisers and payment providers as co-conspirators in the alleged “piracy.” Again, no finding of fact would be required – the mere allegation of impropriety is all that’s needed to cut the website’s purse strings. The bill would threaten to make linking illegal, except for the linking from and to government approved (or not disapproved) sites.
Who’s vulnerable to this legislation?
Just about all websites. The bill would criminalize sites like Youtube or even Facebook. The penalty for posting “copyright” material is 5 years in jail!
Don’t be fooled these bills are not at all about protecting copyrights any more than the Clean Air Act was about clean air. The latter was about allowing for more pollution. Know the difference between a pretext and the real reason a bill is being passed.
SOPA and the IP Act are the equivalent of curing a headache with a guillotine.
If they go through Congress, kiss goodbye to America’s freedom of speech. Know the ulterior and clear motive has really absolutely nothing to do with copyrights. There are enough laws on the books for that already. The real goal to kill freedom of expression that is threatening the elite
End of internet, internet freedom, for net neutrality, net neutral, internet neutrality, net neutrality cons, net neutrality pros neutrality net, netneutrality, neutrality legislation, fcc and net neutrality, internet net neutrality, public knowledge internet, net neutrality
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) You might the headline is just a cute joke but unfortunately it isn’t. The mainstream media doesn’t want you to know any of this story, even though it is one of the most important we have ever reported on, since our inception. It affects everyone’s health as well as liberty and free rights to pursue happiness.
Literally repealing the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights
The US Senate jus voted, as part of the National Defense Authorization Actto essentially repeal the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. The law authorizes the U.S. military to operate on U.S. soil, conduct secret kidnappings of American citizens and throw them in secret military prisons. There they can and will be “legally” tortured, interrogated and even murdered.
Welcome to the NEW AMERICA
All that is required to become a detained outcast from the NEW AMERICA is the accusation that you are somehow linked to “terrorism.” There is no definition of that term, no due process and no evidence required. This has already been voted on by a traitorous U.S. Senate, led by Republicans like Sen. John McCain who should, due to that vote, themselves be in jail.
News Blackout
As with the Constitution-destroying provisions of the “Patriot Act,” you won’t find any depth coverage of this story in mainstream media, which has been bought up, lock-stock-and-barrel by an elite that is simultaneously behind the passage of this law. This is no joke. How and which newspaper and media magnates are involved is another story.
If you thought Bush was bad, just wait until a Republican wins the election in 2012 and then uses this law to declare open war on the American people. Impossible? The massive FEMA detention camps, built by Halliburton, and to hold a million or more American “terrorists” have now been built. This year they even have paid management, and with representatives ready-to-go in every state.
FEMA camps no joke
Where do you think the U.S. military planned to put all these U.S. citizens they round up under this new law? The FEMA camps. There is no longer any doubt!
Detention or concentration camps can’t happen here – think again
We’ve got the entire censored episode of Jesse Ventura’s “Conspiracy Theory” that reveals these FEMA camps in full detail. Watch it now with renewed knowledge of why these internment camps have been constructed across the USA: Learn about FEMA CAMPS!
All this harkens back to World War II and the Japanese internment camps set up on U.S. soil, followed by the military rounding up of Japanese citizens: About Japanese internment camps.
You think they won’t do it again? Why did they just pass a bill declaring the entire USA to be a “battleground” of terrorism – and opening the door for the military occupation of US cities? Your hometown?
On the verge of becoming a military dictatorship
Our liberty and the soul of our country is at stake. Our survival as a free nation. It is time thus for all of us to reaffirm the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, we are nothing but a military dictatorship, led by bankster criminals?
Time for all to become constitutionalists
The looming scenario is we get this law signed by Obama declaring “I’ll never use it on American citizens.” Then Newt Gingrich gets elected in 2012 and all hell breaks loose. Mike Adams of naturalnews suggests “he might unleash the U.S. military on California pot dispensaries, using armed troops to round up everybody who smokes a little weed, then throwing them in secret U.S. military prisons where they are subjected to torture. No charges, no public defense attorneys, no due process, no accountability whatsoever. All 100% legal because it was voted into law by the traitorous U.S. Senate. You think this couldn’t happen in America? Wake up, people: The Patriot Act was passed with the promise that it would “never be used against Americans” and was only for “terrorists,” right? But now up to 90% of the Patriot Act prosecutions are being leveled against American citizens for things that have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism: See (Looming Destruction of America by Patriot Act)
Power corrupts andabsolute power corrupts absolutely
That’s for certain. Wake up America. Tyranny is at our doorstep.
The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to limit government power. It was prevent secret arrests, torture, assassinations, unlimited detention and other police-state tactics used by nations like Nazi Germany, North Korea, China and Cuba. But with this Senate bill, the USA will become among them, in short order. All the things we in the USA complain about in these other nations will become routine in the US – illegal arrests, torture, etc. – as it will be entirely LEGAL under U.S. law! The complaints against the tyrant dictators in other nations may pale in comparison to what is in store. So will Hillary Clinton organize a United Nations invasion of America to “protect the innocent protestors?” Don’t hold your breath.
List of criminal U.S. Senators who voted for this bill
The U.S. Senators who voted for this bill are criminals to be arrested, since they are the true terrorists who have openly attempted to destroy the very U.S. Constitution they swore allegiance to. The list is mostly of disgusting Republicans. Do they represent your state. Be sure to vote against them come the next election.
corrupt power, corruption of power, power corrupts absolute power, japanese camps, fema camp, internment camps for japanese, concentration camps america, internment camps in the usa, fema concentration, fema concentration camp, the laws of the constitution, repeal the constitution, repeal the bill of rights, bill of rights of the constitution, the constitution bill of rights, articles of the united states constitution, constitution of the united states of america
(Healingtalks) There has been not only a raid of the Mormon food storage facility to get its list of customers, but according to Channel 5, a denial this ever happened while the feds are engaged in a door-to-door questioning of Tennessee citizens about their stored food!
“War on Terror” stretches home
As was the plan, the “War on Terror” has officially targeted the American public. This was crystal clear in the recently passed and traitorous National Defense Authorization Act by the US Congress. It essentially abrogates the Bill of Rights, allowing for the arrest of Americans, on American soil, without even being tried or charged of a crime. But in order to fully implement the goal of total control and tyranny, the federal government is collecting names of individuals that are preparing for the future by buying and storing emergency food supplies!
Feds at invade Oath Keepers’ facility
Oath Keepers, an association of active servicemen devoted to upholding their oath of guarding the republic and protecting individual liberty, has reported that federal agents recently paid a visit to a Latter Day Saints food storage cannery in Tennessee (Raid of Oath Keeper’s facility). These agents then allegedly interrogated the manager and demanded to see a list of customers who had purchased, and were storing, food there.
Oath Keepers Tennessee Chapter President Rand Cardwell confirmed this, as he is in close contact with a fellow veteran who happens to store his own food at the facility in question. According to this man’s account, agents entered the facility and began demanding payment records and personal information for everyone connected with the operation.
“The manager informed the agents that the facility kept no such records and that all transactions were conducted on a cash-and-carry basis,” Cardwell is quoted. “The agents pressed for any record of personal checks, credit card transactions, etc., but the manager could provide no such record. The agents appeared to become very agitated and after several minutes of questioning finally left with no information.” Watch the full interview between Steward Rhodes and Alex Jones at: Alex Jones interview of Steward Rhodes.
Why feds raided a Mormon food storage facility
Oath Keepers suggests the government is trying to gather intelligence on food-storing Americans to later confiscate that food as freedom-loving patriots who are preparing for social upheaval are most likely to pose a threat to the power structure.
You can read the entire account at Mormon food storage facility raid.
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today announced legislation that would prohibit open-air cultivation of Genetically Engineered - GE pharmaceutical and industrial crops so as to prevent biological contamination of our food supply. The bill would also establish a tracking system to regulate and ensure the safety of the same GE pharmaceutical and industrial crops.
Wise words from Kucinich
“We must take steps to prevent genetically engineered organisms from being grown in a way that could do irreversible damage to our food supply. Under pressure from profit-minded industry, we have already allowed the spread of genetically modified crops into our agriculture at great cost to our economy and with unknown effects on our bodies,” said Kucinich.
History of open field testing
The Department of Agriculture has allowed more than 300 outdoor field trials of plants—including feed crops including corn, soybeans, rice, safflower, barley, alfalfa, mustard greens, peas, sugarcane, tomatoes, and wheat—which are genetically engineered to produce experimental pharmaceuticals, industrial enzymes and novel proteins. Those GE substances are not intended to be incorporated into food or to be spread into the environment or our food supply. Yet there are examples of such contamination, with enormously destructive consequences.
“Many Americans are unaware that crops that are genetically engineered to produce experimental pharmaceutical drugs are being grown in this country in the open, allowing them to contaminate conventional crops without detection. We cannot rely on industry to prevent the unintended spread of genetically engineered organisms,” said Kucinich.
Kucinich’s Genetically Engineered Safety Act and GE Right to Know Act
H.R. 3554, The Genetically Engineered Safety Act, which would prohibit the open-air cultivation of genetically engineered (GE) pharmaceutical and industrial crops. The bill would prohibit
Use of common human food or animal feed as the host plant for a genetically engineered pharmaceutical or industrial chemical.
Would establish a tracking system to regulate the growing, handling, transportation, and disposal of pharmaceutical and industrial crops to protect native ecosystems and traditional farms from the unstudied dangers of growing GE organisms.
Note that the legislation is part of a package of bills introduced by Kucinich, which includes H.R. 3553, the GE Right to Know Act.
“We have taken few steps to ensure that our own genetic experiments are kept in check. This commonsense legislation would simply ensure that our experimentation with genetic engineering and cloning do not disrupt our traditional food supply. When you are talking about the safety and stability of the food supply, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” said Kucinich.
Genetically Engineered Safety Act (Introduced in House – IH)[H.R.3554.IH][PDF] 2 . Genetically Engineered Technology Farmer Protection Act (Introduced in House – IH)[H.R.3555.IH][PDF] 3 . Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act (Introduced in House – IH)[H.R.3553.IH][PDF] 4 . National Sustainable Offshore Aquaculture Act of 2011 (Introduced in House – IH)[H.R.2373.IH][PDF]
(Healingtalks) There is an emerging discontent and mistrust or our “healthcare” or more rightly sickcare system in America. The wealthy and educated in particular, are demonstrating this in America is by refusing to let their children be vaccinated. Although the vaccination of children may once have been a common practice, studies now show the vaccination rates are decreasing.
Why parents are refusing to vaccinate their children
It may be because oftenvaccinated children have 2 -5 times more diseases and disorders. Thus an anti vaccination movement has grown substantially, along with knowledge of numerous natural alternatives. The fact is that vaccines have so many added chemical toxins in their mix, adjuncts like mercury. When the prestigious magazine Lancet in 1988 made public the link between MMR vaccine and autism it sparked a decade-long controversy about the “triple jab.” (Mihalovic, 2011).
Study reveals drop in number of vaccinations
The National Committee for Quality Assurance recently released its annual State of Health Care Quality. It showed a drop in several routine childhood vaccinations. Measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccines decreased from 93.5 percent in 2008 to 90.6 percent in 2009. Diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough rates fell from 87.2 percent to 85.4 percent in that one-year period. The proportion of kids getting vaccinated for chickenpox fell from 92 percent in 2008 to 90.6 percent in 2009 (Source: US News Health, 3rd November 2010).
The wealthy and the educated
At the same time it appears the upper class, the wealthy and educated, is the first group to move to preserve the health of their children from pharmaceutical assaults and deceptions. A finding published in the journal PLoS Medicine, showed that parents with more education were much less likely to let their daughters get HPV shots. Nearly half or 47.9 per cent of parents would not let their daughters get HPV shots because they did not have confidence in the effectiveness of the vaccines. They tend to be better informed about how to achieve optimum health for their children. It was clear that highly educated parents were the first to react to the information that the MMR had so-called “side effects” that could do harm (Mihalovic, 2011).
The importance of the alternative news movement
The internet has seen the growth of media sources that deliver news without tampering and manipulated by powerful pharmaceutical giants and their allies. You won’t find Big Pharma or corrupt government agencies essentially telling lies to the public via alternate news. The latter publish news without the filtering that is commonplace with the major media. The target audience for this truth-speak is not just the upper class and more educated. It is anyone of any class who open to find a different truth, buried underneath the common disinformation campaigns that mainstream media create for ad paying clients over the best interest of the public! A study by two New York University researchers showed that Big Pharma spends almost twice as much on promotion as they do on research. Nielson Media Research tracks the spending of pharmaceutical ads, which now dominate the airwaves.
Vaccination for children, vaccination of children, HPV shots, big pharma, mmr vaccine, alternative new, vaccines for children, childhood vaccination, travel vaccinations, flu jab, child vaccination
There is a brand new thrust toward adulterating what goes into our mouths. It is yet another dangerous modification of our food supply, and it involve a universal favorite, chocolate! Could there be anything more evil and disturbing than to mess with this great “ambrosia” or food of the gods?
Shocking as it sounds, this is exactly what’s on the horizon. Plans are under way to genetically modify 70% or more of our global cocoa supply. The campaign involves using hybrid, gene-modified cocoa trees and in collaboration the “Gang of Eight”
MARS (makers of MARS bars)
USDA’s ARS or Agricultural Research Service
IBM
NCGR (National Center for Genome Resources)
Clemson University
HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology
Indiana University
Washington State University (CGD).
Where cocoa is grown
Modern role and prior history of harvesting cocoa
Before going into the details of this terrible plan, lets look at the modern role and prior history of harvesting cocoa.
Cocoa actually ranks among the top ten agriculture commodities in the world. The cocoa industry thereby creates a livelihood for more than 6.5 million farmers in west and central Africa, Mexico, South America and parts of Asia. The first use of cocoa appears to have occurred around 1100 BC (Wiki). In the Americas, this crop has been cultivated for at least three millenniums, especially in Mexico, Central and South America.
So the question arises, if humans have been growing cocoa plants so successfully for so long, why should we ever tinker with this track record? Why fix what’s not broken?
Alluring false promises of GMO research
Researchers claim we can ‘accelerate’ the breeding process of cocoa trees..and that that will benefit the chocolate industry and cocoa growers in West Africa — the home of 70% of the world’s production (CGD). The farmers don’t seem to have any voice in the above. Although CGD boasts better profits for altered plants, then if so at what expense and for lining whose pockets?
Dangers of genetically modified foods
Why worry about genetically modified foods?
In brief, genetic engineering involves a mechanical way of looking at nature that goes against the principles of life. Is not surprising thus that animal-feeding studies have shown that with GMO-altered feed, animal’s immune systems, general health, and the ability to procreate does downhill.
Many HealingTalks articles listed below go into this in much more detail.
Cocoa is a nutrient-rich product that can bring on feelings of great well-being and happiness.
It does this because cocoa containsphenylethylamine, a slight antidepressant and stimulant. Cocoa can also increase the level of serotonine, likewise contributing to a feeling of well-being and happiness as resonating in your brain. This wonder product also contains some essential minerals including:
magnesium,
calcium
iron
zinc
copper
potassium and manganese
vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, C, E and pantothenic acid.
Cocoa keeps your high blood pressure down. It reduces the blood’s ability to clot (CocoaWeb).
And the best way to insure getting all these ingredients is by purchasing organic dark chocolate.
Raw chocolate recipe
Say no to GMOs by going organic. Make this delicious, organic, nutrient-rich desert by yourself and share it with friends and family:
Ingredients:
1 Cup of Raw Organic Raw Cocoa powder
½ Cup of Raw Cocoa Butter or Coconut Butter
1 Teaspoon of Stevia powder
1 Cup of soaked Almonds (Chopped)
Directions:
Use double boil method to melt the butter. Cook gently to about 110 F.
Add Stevia and mix well (Turn off water heat)
Add Cocoa
Poor onto a plate (Which has plastic wrapper)
Finally add nuts proportionately
Call to action
Given this thrust, we need to protect ourselves and our food supplies.
Labeling foods that contain GMOs in not mandatory in America.
However the California GMO labelling initiative that requires labeling can be a true Death Blow to GMOs. Also the Cacao Genome Database (CGD) welcomes your feedback about their cocoa modification project. Tell them you don’t want it and won’t buy such products. Comments can be posted here.
About genetically modified food, Genetically modified, Cocoa chocolate, genetically modified foods, what is in chocolate, Raw chocolate recipe, genetic engineering, ingredients in chocolate
what is genetically modified organism, the chocolate tree, enjoy life chocolate, no gmo foods
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
A counterattack
(Healingtalks) The National Health Federation has introduction legislation to counter the FDA’s infamous new Draft Guidance on New Dietary Ingredients (NDIs). That draft, if finalized, would destroy the natural supplement industry, which is Big Pharm and the FDA’s endgame plan. It would require require perfectly safe supplements to undergo needless and impossibly expensive testing or be removed from the market – which is the intent. On the other hand, synthetic vitamins, usually harmful, would be exempted because Big Pharma produces them for a profit.
Historical background
Since the passage of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DHSEA) consumers in the US have enjoyed excellent access to essential nutrients. More recently, however, we have watched as the FDA nearly destroy that law with ever more onerous regulations. Now the FDA wants to go for the kill – to enforce impossible “safety” standards for supplements introduced after 1994 – to effectively outlaw them.
Dietary Supplement Protection Act (DSPA)
The counteracting bill is the brainchild of the National Health Federation and is being introduced by health-freedom advocate Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN). (For more information on Rep. Burton, visit the website http://indianadan.com.) This act amends DSHEA by moving forward the grandfathering date from 1994, thereby putting thousands of safe products immediately out of the NDI Draft Guidance‘s range. Thus the formulators and manufacturers of some 26,000 products added since 1994 can continue to remain on the market.
Putting this into perspective
In 1994 there were approximately 4,000 supplement products on the market. Now there are about 30,000. Thus an overwhelming majority or 87% of all our supplements might soon be removed from the marketplace by regulatory fiat.
Zero deaths
Scott Tips, president of the National Health Federation, asks, “Where are the dead bodies from these new ingredients? There are none. The FDA knows this …yet wants to push these safe supplements off the market… through expensive and useless regulations camouflaged as ‘protecting the public.’
Chief aim is to destroy a safe industry
Essentially the FDA with Big Pharma’s support wants to destroy the safe and healing supplement industry because it competes with an industry that routinely cause over 100,000 deaths a year in the US alone, and when so-called “properly” prescribed. It causes over 200,000 deaths when we add the “correctly” and incorrectly prescribed drugs.
Stop this evil effort
With the Dietary Supplement Protection Act we can turn the tide in the opposite direction.
National Health Federation: Established in 1955, the National Health Federation is a consumer-education, health-freedom organization working to protect individuals’ rights to choose to consume healthy food, take supplements and use alternative therapies without unnecessary government restrictions. The NHF is the only such organization with recognized observer-delegate status at Codex meetings.
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
FDA really threatens to
ban vital supplements
- ACT IMMEDIATELY
ABSOLUTELY NO JOKING – The FDA In our “Land of Liberty”
Is Planning To Remove ALL Supplements Innovations Since 1994
***ACT IMMEDIATELY***
DEADLINE BY DECEMBER 2, 2011
(Healingtalks) The FDA is proposing regulations to effectively ban vital dietary supplements to help its corporate Big Pharma buddies – to ban some of the most effective natural plant extracts, herbal formulas, probiotics, etc.
This has happened in Europe and other countries and could soon be happening here
DO NOT LET IT IMMEDIATELY - RIGHT THIS MINUTE- SEND A LETTER BELOW TO RESPOND TO THE FDA
TELL THE FDA TO RETRACT THE NDI – NEW DIETARY INGREDIENT REGULATIONS!
Follow just 3 Steps Below
You need to customize your letter because duplicate form letters simply won’t work.. and below are instructions on how to do it.
When you finish the letter fax it to Beth Clay, our liaison in DC, at 202-318-7557 and she will bundle them and get them to the FDA. Or go online and submit your letters directly on the website – http://www.regulations.gov/#!home.
WHAT TO DO:
Copy the beginning and end text (Sections in BOLD) into your original letter.
Copy or add your own talking points
Fax the finished letter to Beth Clay, our liaison in DC:202-318-755
(Beth will bundle them and get them to the FDA)
THE SAMPLE LETTER AND POINTS: (copy and paste this section in bold)
Dec 1, 2011
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852
RE: Draft Guidance for Industry; Dietary Supplements New Dietary Ingredient Notifications and Related Issues (FDA Docket No: 2011-D-0376)
Dear Sir or Madam:
I submit the following comments to the Record on FDA Docket No: 2011-D-0376.
While Congress asked that the FDA clarify the existing New Dietary Ingredient (NDI) regulation established in 1997 as a result of the 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), the draft Guide Document is fatally flawed and needs to be retracted in its entirety.
The following points are a few of my concerns:
…..
…..
…..
( ABOVE INSERT TALKING POINTS FROM THE LIST BELOW OR SAY IT IN YOUR OWN WORDS)
As the above points indicate, the guidance document if finalized as written will have a number of far-reaching effects on industry and the marketplace.
Consumers, like my family, and me are not well served by the resulting higher prices and reduction in some products in the market that surely will follow if industry is forced to comply with these overburdened proposed procedures.
As such, I call for the FDA to retract this draft NDI Guidance document in its entirety and craft a simpler, more appropriate guidance document in coordination with the industry and interested citizens.
Signed:
Name:
Address:
************************************************************* (TO AVOID A PARALYZING EFFECT ON NATURAL HEALING ARTS IN THE US
PLEASE
CUT AND PASTE IN THE BODY OF THE ABOVE LETTER THE TALKING POINTS YOU PREFER
OR REWRITE THEM TO CREATE YOUR OWN ORIGINAL LETTER):
The extensive 86 page with than 50 attachments NDI Guidance document is an attempt at “Rulemaking by Guidance Document” which is forbidden by federal law. It encroaches on the legislative and legal authority.
The document proposes protocols that will result in higher consumer prices for supplements.
Congress did not intend the guidance to be more limiting than the existing rule or to create “unreasonable regulatory barriers” which this, if finalized in its current form, would certainly do.
Throughout the draft guidance document, the FDA is setting the stage to pull the dietary supplement regulations closer to the drug regulations model, which is in conflict with the will of the American people and current law through DSHEA.
The NDI Guidance document, if implemented as written, broadens the NDI scope of definitions and would create significant new burdens on the industry for any “new” dietary supplement, “new” meaning retroactive inclusion of 90% of the dietary supplements on the market today.
These regulations will create many barriers for innovations in the Dietary Supplement industry and, in particular, deter smaller companies with fewer resources from protecting their formulas, ensuring a fair market share because of pre-market approvals and conducting more research than is actually necessary.
The end result of passage of these regulations is limiting access by consumers, especially those with limited financial means, to quality products and adequate dosages without prescriptions and putting health care out of reach for many. This has happened in Europe and other countries and I do not want this to happen in the United States.
The entire premise from which the FDA crafts this draft guidance document is fatally flawed from the fundamental crafty framing to herd supplements made from food into drug categories to an assumption that there is a problem in nature that has to be solved, to a focus on specific definitions and sections of the DSHEA to support its big pharmaceutical and big chemical company leanings in lieu of fair and balanced policy making principles for everyone.
There appears to be an underlying attempt to create rules that regulate food-based nutritional supplements as if they were toxins, which not only restricts our abilities to choose natural approaches to health, but, represents a rejection of the entire history of human experience with nature and its life affirming nutrients.
The FDA is creating significant burdens on both industry and the agency itself by proposing that an NDI notification will likely be needed for every product in since 1994 and any with a slight variation or modification.
The FDA has erroneously limited the “marketplace” language of DSHEA to mean only the marketplace of the United States. This is not what Congress stated; this is not a fair policy for the American supplement industry.
There are likely products in the marketplace today that, if this guidance document is finalized as written, could lead to adulteration notifications on products that contain ingredients that were in the food supply in 1994, but were not confirmed to be in dietary supplements prior to the grandfathering in date.
Products that contain ingredients marketed in supplements outside the United States, but not in the US, may be at risk for an adulteration NDI notification also with extreme and costly measures of proof at stake. Yet, there is no way to control foreign manufacturing processes or formulation – an excellent example being vitamin C where 90% of it is synthetic and comes from China.
Products with probiotics may be eliminated from the marketplace under the provisions of the NDI Guidance Document. This has a special bleed through even to large industries where many types of chemicals are used similar to fertilizing in the beginning of the fermentation process yet never reported, labeled, or monitored. Transparence for one is transparency for all.
The FDA’s proposed guidance document would trigger significant new NDI submissions when manufacturer processes are innovated or modernized from this date forward, as well as those from the past from 1994. Changes in manufacturing procedures or formulas trigger the need for an NDI Notice.
Using a different part of a plant will require an NDI notification. Using a plant or herb at a different stage of maturation could trigger an NDI notification requirement.
Heating up or baking ingredients could require an NDI notification as well any variations in temperature at different stages.
Changing the agricultural or fermentation conditions of the ingredients (such as sprouting or using a medium such as sodium selenite) could trigger an NDI notification requirement.
Drug Research May Keep Products Out of Dietary Supplements: The FDA’s current thinking on when a dietary ingredient is barred from being marketed as a dietary supplement is impractical on its face and would limit access to ingredients simply because a pharmaceutical company is considering drug development.
The FDA suggests that a Citizen’s Petition would be required to market a dietary ingredient that has been part of a drug development program but is no longer being studied.
The current thinking is that an article that has been authorized for investigation as a new drug or as a biologic before being marketed as a food or dietary supplement cannot be marketed as a dietary supplement if substantial clinical investigations of the article have begun and the existence of such investigations have been made public.
A dietary ingredient could be barred from being marketed as a dietary supplement if the drug industry is researching a component of the ingredient as an investigational new drug under IND.
The draft guidance document is in conflict with the following provision of DSHEA: “…the Federal Government should not take any actions to impose unreasonable regulatory barriers limiting or slowing the flow of safe products and accurate information to consumers…” and thus should be retracted in its entirety.
Video
Along with writing the above URGENT letter,
you can additionally call your legislators as suggested in this video.
Mike Adams discusses the end game of FDA to utterly destroy the supplement industry
Shows examples of the many vital supplements that will be banned and taken off the shelves
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) When Michelle Obama first entered the White House, she wished to share her spirited persona – her style, beliefs, and pet projects. This included growing an organic garden with children and in order to inspire a connection with deeper nature as well as to help a nearby food bank. Not since Eleanor Roosevelt grew a Victory Garden at the White House during World War II had a First Lady again tilled that soil. But it was the first time the garden was distinctively postured as organic, thereby “breaking new ground.”
Ms. Obama teaching a lesson to children
The intention of Mrs. Obama was simply to educate children about growing their own pure, unadulterated whole food – and at a time when the opposite, or processed foods contributed and were causing an epidemic of obesity and diabetes in the United States. This was a valuable lesson in nutrition and growing food to high and pure standards. The Obama White House garden was grown organically and using the methods of farming this country has used for centuries to yield the most nutrition and “clean” foods to Americans.
Setting an inspiring example
- with the whole family involved
The garden was 1,100 square feet, and 23 children from Bancroft Elementary School from Washington D.C., helped her dig the garden and plant the vegetables near the Obama swing set. Barack Obama, the President promised to pull the weeds when necessary and even Michelle’s mother was involved as a supervisor. Michele Obama broke the ground with her own foot, tilled the soil with the children to produce a magnificent garden that yielded fresh, organic and non-pesticide food for her own First Family. Many Americans were inspired because they naturally prefer produce that is locally grown – the way it was a century ago in usually extended-family and small farm settings.
Big Ag and the chemical/GMO industry didn’t see it that way
Quickly, the lobbyists went to work to stop our President’s wife’s blasphemy and they have successfully silenced her – stopping her forever for uttering the following most verboten or banned and banished words:
Organic Food
Organic Gardening
Pesticide-Free Food
The lobbyists correctly instructed Michelle Obama instead to use the term:
“Crop protection food products” – with Round Up, Monsanto GMO seeds and non-traditional chemically agriculture being more essential.
Why Mrs. Obama grew her “nasty” garden
Mrs. Obama noticed the family was eating too much processed foods so that her girls, Sasha and Malia, were gaining weight. Then her pediatrician advised her to have them move away from eating junk foods – those that included excessive salt, sugar and fat.
But Mrs Obama succumbed to “better” advice from political forces
Her family needs soon became secondary to the required political messages enforced by lobbyists who pay big mullah to elect politicians. They silenced her misguided zeal about organic gardening.
Who pulls the puppet strings in Washington, DC.
This so dramatically illustrates the reigning power of lobbyist in the Obama administration. So does the fact that Obama hired Tom Vilsack, a hard-core supporter of GMOs, to head of the USDA.
Michelle should have known better!
Though Mrs Obama caved to lobbyist, she long ago should have known better . Having a nation of healthy children is not what the pharmaceutical industry has in mind for American – especially if the children start out in life to learn such healthy, organic nutrition lessons. The resulting good health would bankrupt the industry’s game. It would put thousands of chemists out of work, adding the the nation’s already strained unemployment roster.
One of the greatest “successes” of the Big Pharma industry is seeing 1 in 4 children regularly taking medical drugs. They are not ingesting organic foods – come on now, what a yuk idea! From a business point of view, half of all teenagers in America wonderfully suffer from some chronic illnesses that needs treatment – like diabetes, obesity and the four A’s, asthma, allergies, autism, and attention deficit disorder. The statistics have doubled over the last 30 years and so have the profits. We don’t want America to go backwards now, do we ? A whole nation shifting to a nutrient rich diet would play havoc with the great gains of pharmaceutical stocks on Wall Street.
Mrs Obama’s dangerous and maverick project thus had to be stopped
Michelle Obama must have been taking hallucinogens when she said: “You can begin in your own cupboard by eliminating processed food, trying to cook a meal a little more often, trying to incorporate more fruits and vegetables.” (2009) The First Lady was thus chastized and corrected by the biggest agriculture corporations. Michele Obama’s garden first yielded 80 pounds of vegetables from seeds before Ms Obama yielded to lobbyists.
The Obama Obama’s infamous organic garden- shame on her!
Whose telling our government what best to do
Mid America CropLife Association (MACA) and organization that lobbies for the pesticide and Big Ag industry sent Mrs. Obama a letter to instruct her about living in a different world than our grandparents. It advised her that their lifestyle was not what most Americans want anymore.
Mrs Obama had to be “set right”
The First Lady should fall in line and serve her family only pesticide-rich foods to promote a future population suffering from cancer and other high-maintenance systemic illnesses. Corporate profit interests must, after all, come first – far before health, safety, eating nutritious foods. Thus Mrs Obama had to be “set right” by MACA. This same group represents Monsanto, Dow AgroScience, Dupont Corporation and so on. The fact that Michelle Obama did not use pesticide-sprayed seeds at all, and did not need to spray chemicals on her plot shows she needs some serious “re-education.” The group advised her not ever to use the word organic or to promote organic gardening in any way.
Better living through chemistry
One shouldn’t believe that pesticides or pesticide-sprayed seeds, plants, foods, and processed foods containing GMOs all are linked to cancer, cardiovascular disease, and birth defects. Rather we should follow the greater leadership of Tom Vilsack - a former defense lawyer for Monsanto. We should applaud that Vilsack was named Secretary of Agriculture by the Obama administration and for reasons not of influence peddling by big agriculture and campaign donations – but because it was the right thing to do.
Obama’s “wisdom” and trying to be with the times stretches only so far
Obama’s wisdom apparently guides him to keep his doors wide open to corporate interests, and so much so they even dominate the kind of garden his wife is allowed to grow and what ends up in his kitchen cupboard or on his dinner plate.If we can force people to have vaccinations, this doesn’t see like such a bad thing.
Still hush, hush, the Obamas are not perfect.
Sometimes they indulge themselves and dine out at an organic restaurant.
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) Each winter as we enter the flu season it is time to wonder…should we get vaccinated to avoid the flu? Back in 2009 American health officials declared a public health emergency due to swine flu cases confirmed in the U.S.
Health officials across the world feared something similar was emerging from Mexico, where seven people had died and their death was linked to a new virus.
The declared swine flu pandemic
Then on April 29th, 2009 the World Health Organization (WHO) raised its pandemic alert level to five on its six-level scale1 This meant the virus was capable of human-to-human transmission. The initial outbreaks across North America revealed an infection already traveling at higher velocity than did during last official pandemic strain, the 1968 Hong Kong flu.
Phase 5 had never been declared since the warning system was introduced in 2005 in response to the avian influenza crisis. Phase 6 means a pandemic is under way.
Several nations have imposed travel bans, or made plans to quarantine air travelers2 and despite the fact that WHO now openly admits it was not possible to contain the spread of this infection and recommended mitigation measures, not restricting travel across borders.
What is a real pandemic?
It is NOT black-plague carts being hauled through the streets with dead bodies piled high. Nor does it mean flesh eating zombies are wandering the streets feeding on life. All a pandemic means a new infectious disease is spreading, somehow or other. “Pandemic” means it is geographically widespread. Fear-mongers are always careful to add the innuendo that millions of people could and probably will die, as in the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918 that killed about 20 million people worldwide.
How does the death of even a few hundred equate to 20 million?
Huge fear-mongering promoted to sell vaccinations
Many were alarmed by the media’s coverage of the swine flu scare. It has a noticeable subplot – preparing you for draconian measures to combat a future pandemic and a hidden agenda of forcing you to accept the idea of mandatory vaccinations.
On April 27, Time magazine published an article which discusses how dozens died and hundreds were injured from vaccines as a result of the 1976 swine flu fiasco. This was when the Ford administration attempted to use the infection of soldiers at Fort Dix as a pretext for a mass vaccination.
Despite acknowledging that the 1976 farce was an example of “how not to handle a flu outbreak”, the article still introduces the notion that officials may soon do the same.
Back in 1976, there was a massive swine flu vaccine campaign.Within a few months, claims totaling $1.3 billion had been filed by victims who had suffered paralysis from the vaccine. The vaccine was also blamed for 25 deaths.
However, several hundred people developed crippling Guillain-Barré Syndrome after they were injected with the swine flu vaccine. Even healthy 20-year-olds ended up as paraplegics. And the swine flu pandemic itself? It never materialized.
More died from the Swine Flu vaccines than from Swine Flu!
It is very difficult to forecast a pandemic, and a rash response can be more damaging than the potential pandemic.
To put things into perspective, malaria kills 3,000 people EVERY DAY, and it’s considered “a health problem”… But of course, there are no fancy vaccines for malaria that can rake in billions of dollars in a short amount of time.
But as part of the fear mongering, an Australian news source3 stated that even a mild swine flu epidemic could lead to the deaths of 1.4 million people. It never happened. Similarly, President Bush, a close friend of Big Pharma, saidtwo million Americans would die as a result of the bird flu? So lets line up and get inoculated!
In 2005, in 2006, 2007, and again in 2008, those fears were exposed as little more than a cruel hoax, intentionally designed to create fear, andline the pocketbooks of various individuals. Dr. Mercola, going counter stream, became convinced by the evidence AGAINST the possibility of a bird flu pandemic and thus wrote a New York Times bestselling book, The Bird Flu Hoax, all about the massive fraud involved with the epidemic that never happened.
What is Swine Flu?
Regular swine flu is a contagious respiratory disease, caused by a type-A influenza virus that affects pigs. The current strain, A(H1N1), is a new variation of an H1N1 virus — which causes seasonal flu outbreaks in humans — that also contains genetic material of bird and pig versions of the flu.
Symptoms include:
Fever of more than 100
Coughing
Runny nose and/or sore throat
Joint aches
Severe headache
Vomiting and/or diarrhea
Lethargy
Lack of appetite
Swine Flu’s spread
In June, 2009, 74 countries reported 29,669 cases of influenza A(H1N1) infection over approximately a three month period and only 145 deaths in the ENTIRE world. Compare that to 3,000 dying daily from malaria or 145 to 290,000 deaths. In the United States there were 13217 confirmed cases, and 27 deaths. But often people, in our culture many have weak immune systems so that the imputed “causal link” to a specific virus is not only flimmsy but generally fraudulent. The imputed causality is designed not to inspire others to make immune-enhancing life style changes but to become customers of the medical treatment establishment. google has a swine flu tracker and you can get similar info from the World Health Organization. SeeGoogle Maps’ Swine Flu Tracker andWorld Health Organization’s Epidemic and Pandemic Alert and Response site.
Swine Flu – a WEAK virus
The real kicker is that most cases reported were mild. No massive piles of dead bodies in the streets. Apparently the virus was not all that potent for most.
Wired Magazine reported on May 4 that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory computer scientists did not find similarities between swine flu and historical strains with catastrophic effect. So the label of a pandemic does not apply.
But it does raise serious questions about where this brand new virus came from, especially since it cannot be contracted from eating pork products, and has never before been seen in pigs, and contains traits from the bird flu — and which, so far, only seems to respond to Tamiflu (or so they tell us) Was Big Pharma just lucky or was here some criminal hanky panky in this sales pitch?
With the passage of a communications act under the Clinton Administration, there was the green light given to a massive consolidation of media control, and with that corporate-induced distortions of reality suddenly became commonplace. we need to wake up to the fact that controlled fear-spreading creates further control and wealth!
What is Tamiflu?
Tamiflu (oseltamivir phosphate) is approved for treatment of uncomplicated influenza A and B in children 1 year of age or older. It is also approved for prevention of influenza in people 13 years or older. It’s part of a group of anti-influenza drugs called neuraminidase inhibitors, which work by blocking a viral enzyme that helps the influenza virus to invade cells in your respiratory tract.
Big Pharma & governmental financial stakes
According to the Associated Press at least one financial analyst estimates up to $388 million worth of Tamiflu sales in the near future10 — and that’s without a pandemic outbreak.
Swine flue is extremely convenient for governments that have to dispose of billions of dollars of Tamiflu stock, which they bought to counter avian flu, or H5N1. The US government ordered 20 million doses, costing $2 billion, in October, 2005, and around that time the UK government ordered 14.6 million doses. Tamiflu’s manufacturer, Roche, has confirmed that the shelf life of its anti-viral is three years.As soon as Homeland Security declared a health emergency, 25 percent — about 12 million doses — of Tamiflu and Relenza treatment courses were released from the nation’s stockpile. However, beware that the declaration also allows unapproved tests and drugs to be administered to children. Many health- and government officials are more than willing to take that chance with your life, and the life of your child. But are you?
Tamiflu Loaded With So-called “Side Effects”- Including Death and Can Only Reduce Symptoms by 36 Hours at BEST
Tamiflu is NOT a safe drug. Its so-called “side effects” include convulsions, delirium or delusions, and 14 deaths in children and teens as a result of neuropsychiatric problems and brain infections Japan actually banned Tamiflu for children in 2007.
But making matters worse, some patients with influenza are at HIGHER risk for secondary bacterial infections when on Tamiflu because their immune system is compromised by taking in this chemical poison.
Secondary bacterial infections, as I mentioned earlier, was likely the REAL cause of the mass fatalities during the 1918 pandemic.
Why on earth would anyone want to take a drug that has a chance of killing you, was banned in Japan, is loaded with side effects that mimic the flu itself, costs over $100, and AT BEST can only provide 36 hours of SYMPTOM relief. Just doesn’t make any sense. But it does make billions of dollars for Big Pharma to sell you on this ploy.
Serious revenue from Tamiflu
TheFinancial Times reports that governments around the world have previously stockpiled 220 million doses in preparation for a pandemic that has yet to appear. The cost of this preparation is $7 billion dollars.
Should you accept a flu vaccine — “just to be safe?”
As stated in the New York Times14 and elsewhere, flu experts have no idea whether the current seasonal flu vaccine would offer any protection whatsoever. Despite this lack of effectiveness, governments around the world ordered 90 million doses of swine flu vaccine that has NO proven effectiveness but did have a history of causing crippling neurological disease.
To make matters worse, the vaccine was often loaded with toxic mercury used supposedly as a preservative…though others claim this is an intentional harming of the victims immune system to create future Big Phara customers! See our article on the admitted link between swine flu vaccinations and serious disorders.
Whose advise will you listen to?
According to Dr. Mercola there are numerous dangers (and ineffectiveness) of flu vaccines, and why he NEVER recommends vaccines to anyone. According to Mercola, “No matter what you hear — even if it comes from your doctor — don’t get a regular flu shot. They rarely work against seasonal flu…and certainly can’t offer protection against a never-before- seen strain…Currently, the antiviral drugs Tamiflu and Relenza are the only drugs that appear effective against the (human flu) H1N1 virus, and I strongly believe taking Tamiflu to protect yourself against this new virus could be a serious mistake.”
Resitance against Tamiflu
But in addition to the dangerous side effects of Tamiflu, there is also evidence of growing resistance to the drug. In February, the pre-publication and preliminary findings journal called Nature Precedings published a paper on this concern, stating:15 “The dramatic rise of oseltamivir [Tamiflu] resistance in the H1N1 serotype in the 2007/2008 season and the fixing of H274Y in the 2008/2009 season has raised concerns regarding individuals at risk for seasonal influenza, as well as development of similar resistance in the H5N1 serotype [bird flu]. Previously, oseltamivir resistance produced changes in H1N1 and H3N2 at multiple positions in treated patients. In contrast, the recently reported resistance involved patients who had not recently taken oseltamivir.”
In short it is a potentially dangerous drug.
And, once a specific swine flu drug is created, you can be sure that it has not had the time to be tested in clinical trials to determine safety and effectiveness…which means the vaccine itself if a threat – - with a potential repeat of the last dangerous swine flu vaccination campaign which destroyed the lives of hundreds of people.
Immune from lawsuits
Topping this mess off, and if the new vaccine turns out to be a killer, the pharmaceutical companies responsible are immune from lawsuits. They have stacked the cards in their favor, politically to pass such protective laws – screwing the interest of the public royally. Next they try to get governments to mandating the vaccine — making us all fodder in their money-making scheme.
Better solutions to protect yourself from the Flu
Here are Mercola’s recommendations to which we concur:
Optimize your vitamin D levels – Mercola’s number one recommendation. These can be monitored to confirm a 50-70 ng.ml level by a reliable vitamin D lab like Lab Corp. Just go to a local local blood drawing facility, and the monitoring becomes relatively inexpensively. If you are coming down with flu like symptoms consider getting vitamin D at doses of 50,000 units a day for three days to treat the acute infection. Some researchers like Dr. Cannell, believe the dose could even be as high as 1000 units per pound of body weight for three days. However, most of Dr. Cannell’s work was with seasonal and not pandemic flu. If your body has never been exposed to the antigens there is chance that the vitamin D might not work. However the best bet is to maintain healthy levels of vitamin D around 60 ng/ml BUT regular flu, not the swine flu, has killed 13,000 in the US since January. But there is strong support that these types of figures are grossly exaggerated to increase vaccine sales.
Avoid Sugar and Processed Foods. Sugar decreases the function of your immune system almost immediately. Be aware that sugar is concentrated in foods you may not suspect, like ketchup, dried fruit and fruit juice.
Have Effective Tools to Address Stress . If stress becomes overwhelming then your body will be less able to fight off the flu.If you feel that stress is taking a toll on your health, consider using an energy psychology tool such as the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT), which is remarkably effective in relieving stress associated with all kinds of events, from work to family to trauma. You can check out EFT manual for some guidelines on how to perform EFT.
Exercise regularly. When you exercise, you increase your circulation and your blood flow throughout your body. The immune system is strengthened. You can review exercise guidelines of Mercola.
Take in omega-3 fats . Increase your intake of healthy and essential fats like the omega-3 found in krill oil and flax seed oil – which is crucial for maintaining health. It is also vitally important to avoid damaged omega-6 oils that are trans fats and in processed foods as it will seriously damage your immune response.
Wash Your Hands. Washing your hands will decrease your likelihood of spreading a virus to your nose, mouth or other people. Be sure you don’t use antibacterial soap. They are useless and often laced with chemicals.
Eat Garlic Regularly. Garlic works like a broad-spectrum antibiotic against bacteria, virus, and protozoa in the body. And unlike with antibiotics, no resistance can be built up so it is an absolutely safe product to use. However, if you are allergic or don’t enjoy garlic it would be best to avoid as it will likely cause more harm than good.
Avoid Hospitals and Vaccines – Stay far away from hospitals unless you’re having an emergency, as hospitals are breeding grounds for infections – the likeliest places to be exposed. Vaccines will not be available for six months at the minimum but when available they will be ineffective and can lead to crippling paralysis like Guillain-Barré Syndrome just as it did in the 70s.
Factory Farming Maybe Source of Swine Flu
It is a theory that factory farming might cause Swine Flu. In the United States, pigs travel coast to coast. They can be bred in North Carolina, fattened in the corn belt of Iowa, and slaughtered in California. The highly contagious nature of diseases like influenza could be supported by such long-distance live animal transport. The majority of U.S. pig farms now confine more than 5,000 animals each. With a group of 5,000 animals, if a novel virus shows up it will have more opportunity to replicate and potentially spread than in a group of 100 pigs on a small farm.
True bird/swine flu pandemic is still HIGHLY Unlikely
While factory farming may produce a viral strain, causing a pandemic is something entirely else.
H1N1 flu’s are descendants of the 1918 pandemic strain. The reason why the flu shot may or may not work, however, from year to year, is due to mutations. Therefore, there’s no vaccine available for this current hybrid flu strain, and naturally, this is feeding the fear that millions of people will die before a vaccine can be made.
However, let me remind you of one very important fact here.
Just a couple of months ago, scientists concluded that the 1918 flu pandemic that killed between 50-100 million people worldwide in a matter of 18 months — which all these worst case scenarios are built upon — wasNOT due to the flu itself!4Instead, they discovered the real culprit was strep infections that hit weak immune systems. People with influenza often get what is known as a “super-infection” with a bacterial agent. In 1918 it appears to have been Streptococcus pneumoniae.
Since strep is much easier to treat than the flu in modern times, a new pandemic is more than unlikely, the researchers concluded.
Biologist Paul Ewald’s view
Revolutionary biologist Paul Ewald,5 claims that a pandemic cannot happen, because in order for it to occur, the world has to change. Not the virus itself, but the world. In a previous interview for Esquire magazine, in which he discusses the possibility of a bird flu pandemic, he states: “They think that if a virus mutates, it’s an evolutionary event. Well, the virus is mutating because that is what viruses and other pathogens do. But evolution is not just random mutation. It is random mutation coupled with natural selection; it is a battle for competitive advantage among different strains generated by random mutation. For bird flu to evolve into a human pandemic, the strain that finds a home in humanity has to be a strain that is both highly virulent and highly transmissible. Deadliness has to translate somehow into popularity; H5N1 has to find a way to kill or immobilize its human hosts, and still find other hosts to infect. Usually that doesn’t happen.”
Ewald goes on to explain that evolution in general is all about trade-offs, and in the evolution of infections the trade-off is between virulence and transmissibility.
What this means is that in order for a “bird flu” or “swine flu” to turn into a human pandemic, it has to find an environment that favors both deadly virulence and ease of transmission. People living in squalor on the Western Front at the end of World War I generated such an environment, from which the epidemic of 1918 could arise. We don’t live in those conditions anymore. Crowded chicken farms, slaughterhouses, and jam-packed markets of eastern Asia provide another such environment, and that environment gave rise to the bird flu — a pathogen that both kills and spreads, in birds, but not in humans.
Ewald adds: “We know that H5N1 is well adapted to birds. We also know that it has a hard time becoming a virus that can move from person to person. It has a hard time without our doing anything. But we can make it harder. We can make sure it has no human population in which to evolve transmissibility. There is no need to rely on the mass extermination of chickens. There is no need to stockpile vaccines for everyone. By vaccinating just the people most at risk — the people who work with chickens and the caregivers — we can prevent it from becoming transmissible among humans. Then it doesn’t matter what it does in chickens.”
Proof is in the historical data
Please remember that, despite the fantastic headlines and projections of MILLIONS of deaths, the H5N1 bird flu virus killed a mere 257 people worldwide since late 2003. As unfortunate as those deaths are, 257 deaths worldwide from any disease, over the course of five years, simply does not constitute an emergency worthy of much attention, let alone fear!
Greater risk of being killed by lightening
The risk of being killed by a lightning strike in the last five years was about 2,300 percent higher than dying from bird flu.6 In just one year (2004), more than 1,170 people died from lighting strikes, worldwide.7
Where did the new virus really come from?
It is hard to conclusively know but we also need not be naive on this subject. For example, it has been solidly reported that the American pharmaceutical company Baxter was under investigation for distributing the deadly avian flu virus to 18 different countries as part of a seasonal flu vaccine shipment! Czech reporters investigated whether this was a deliberate attempt to start a pandemic. For such a “mistake” was virtually impossible under the security protocols of that virus.
The H5N1 virus on its own is not very airborne. However, when combined with seasonal flu viruses, which are more easily spread, the effect could be a potent, airborne, deadly biological weapon. If this batch of live bird flu and seasonal flu viruses had reached the public, it could have resulted in dire consequences.
There is a name for this mixing of viruses; it’s called “reassortment,” and it is one of two ways pandemic viruses are created in the lab. Some scientists say the most recent global outbreak — the 1977 Russian flu — was started by a virus created and leaked from a laboratory.
Another example of the less sterling integrity of Big Pharma is the case of Bayer, who sold millions of dollars worth of an injectable blood-clotting medicine to Asian, Latin American, and some European countries in the mid-1980s, even though they knew it was tainted with the AIDS virus.
So while it is morally unthinkable that a drug company would knowingly contaminate flu vaccines with a deadly flu virus such as the bird- or swine flu, it is certainly not impossible. It has already happened more than once.
Tracing criminal behavior of Big Pharma
But there seems to be no repercussions or hard feelings when industry oversteps the boundaries of morality and integrity and enters the arena of obscenity and criminal behavior. Because, lo and behold, which company has been chosen to head up efforts, along with WHO, to produce a vaccine against the Mexican swine flu?
BAXTER!11
Despite the fact that ink has barely dried on the investigative reports from their should-be-criminal “mistake” against humanity. According to other sources,12 a top scientist for the United Nations, who has examined the outbreak of the deadly Ebola virus in Africa, as well as HIV/AIDS victims, has concluded that the current swine flu virus possesses certain transmission “vectors” that suggest the new strain has been genetically-manufactured as a military biological warfare weapon.
The UN expert believes that Ebola, HIV/AIDS, and the current A-H1N1 swine flu virus are biological warfare agents.
In addition, Army criminal investigators are looking into the possibility that disease samples are missing from biolabs at Fort Detrick — the same Army research lab from which the 2001 anthrax strain was released, according to a recent article in the Fredrick News Post.13 In February, the top biodefense lab halted all its research into Ebola, anthrax, plague, and other diseases known as “select agents,” after they discovered virus samples that weren’t listed in its inventory and might have been switched with something else.
Bottom Line
And so the saga goes on. When routinely major and deadly “side-effects” of drugs are really their main efforts, the bottom line is don’t be fooled or consumer beware. Take measures to protect yourself in our often corrupt commercial culture. Beware of Big Pharma’s vast media influence to distribute deceptive fear campaigns … and whose dangers may outweigh by far the potentials for a series of pandemics – none of which have ever materialized in our modern, more hygienic times.
Based on an article originally written by Dr. Mercola in 2009 when the Swine Flu scare originated and was at its heights.
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) Do you think that granting corporations the rights of people in the Citizens United case is disturbing? Then think about the fact that corporations have been patenting human genes and tissues at alarming rates — in the last 30 years, more than 40,000 patents have been granted on human genes alone.
In a recent phone interview with AlterNet, Washington discussed the dark implications of corporate medical patents, how we find ourselves in this nightmarish scenario and what needs to be done to stop medical research profits from trumping human health. Washington is also the author of Medical Apartheid, which received the National Book Critics Circle Award. She has been a fellow in medical ethics at Harvard Medical School, a senior research scholar at the National Center for Bioethics at Tuskegee University and a fellow at the Harvard School of Public Health.
Brad Jacobson: The main piece of legislation that opened the door for corporations to begin patenting human life was the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Can you tell us how this law was sold to the American people?
Harriet Washington: Just to recap what the Bayh-Dole Act is, basically it was a law that permitted for the first time universities to legally transfer their patents to private corporations, to sell them, license them. That had been virtually prohibited in the past because most of these new inventions had been developed with tax dollars. And the thinking had been, “If you develop things with our tax dollars, then we shouldn’t allow them to go to private corporations who can establish a monopoly with their patents.”
It was sold to the American public primarily by [former Indiana Sen.] Birch Bayh, who of course partnered with [former Kansas Sen.] Bob Dole. But it was Birch Bayh who made the argument that we have all these patents lying around, no one’s doing anything with them. If we let corporations get them, then they’ll develop them into needed medications. So people were told this is the root to get the medications and treatments that we need.
However, what’s really interesting, though — I went behind the scenes and of course I saw that, rather than being any kind of groundswell of popular support, the law actually passed on the last hour of the last day of the last congressional session because of some good ol’ boy networking.
BJ: Also in 1980, the legal counterpart for this corporate opening came with the court decision Diamond v. Chakrabarty, in which a scientist’s patenting of an oil-eating bacteria was contested. But how is this different than what had been patentable in the past?
HW: It’s certainly a good question because living things have been patented in the past. That’s a misconception people have. Louis Pasteur had patented a yeast. Takamine [Hideo] had patented adrenaline. Numerous living things had been patented before. However, there were often legal challenges by people who would say, “This patent is not really valid because you can’t patent a product of nature.”
So in 1980, when Ananda Chakrabarty, a researcher at General Electric, decided to try to patent some bacteria that he had intensively engineered to be able to “eat crude oil,” the U.S.] patent office said, “We’ll patent the process you use, but we’re not going to patent these bacteria. They’re living things and only inventions can be patented. We can’t patent products of nature.”
So Chakrabarty and General Electric sued and the patent office decided to defer to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided that, yes, living things can be patented, which is interesting because Chakrabarty insisted he was shocked by the ruling. He said that he fully expected he had made his case, but he was surprised they decided to more broadly permit the patenting of living things.
But now it’s being applied to things where the contribution of the researcher is nowhere near so extensive. So, of course, genetic sequences found in our body are being patented. Medically important animals — like Harvard’s OncoMouse which is guaranteed to get cancer — are being patented. And so these products of nature, including products of our bodies, being patented has created huge problems for us.
BJ: In 1951, Henrietta Lacks, an African-American woman, was being treated for cervical cancer without success at John Hopkins University. Without Henrietta’s or her family’s knowledge, John Hopkins University researcher Dr. George Gey obtained a sample of her tumor from her doctors, which eventually led to his creation of an immortalized cell line used in the development of the polio vaccine as well as drugs for numerous other diseases. It also generated millions of dollars in profits around the world, yet the Lacks family was never compensated, nor did they even have health insurance at the time. How was this case a harbinger for what would follow in the context of patient rights in regard to medical patents?
HW: I actually met with the Lacks family in the mid-1990s. I wrote about her case and I think there are some things that have been promulgated that are not exactly true. It’s true the family didn’t have any health insurance and weren’t compensated. But they never evinced concern about being paid. I think that was a focus that had been imposed later by people who I think had the best intentions in the world. Some of the people who wrote about them were very concerned they weren’t paid.
But the Lacks family expressed consistently that their mother had been a medical benefactor and no one knew this. Her name had been changed in the accounts so that nobody knew who she was. They were very upset about the autonomy.
And they didn’t like having been lied to of course.
BJ: You mention in the book the paternalistic nature that Dr. Gey had taken. The excuse he’d used was that he changed her name to protect her, but they didn’t really accept that.
HW: Her husband thought they didn’t want the world to know that this is a black lady helping science. And that seemed to be the prevailing attitude in the family. They resented that.
BJ: What’s the positive impact, however, of this cell line having never been patented?
HW: So what happened to Henrietta Lacks was an abuse of her and her family. But the dissemination of her cells very cheaply, not free but very cheaply, made a lot of medical advances possible. The reason they weren’t patented was this was before 1980 and it wasn’t legally possible. It also wasn’t part of the medical culture then. Medicine was being practiced by people in university settings. They had different motivations, not money.
Now it’s impossible to speculate about exactly what would’ve happened. But had her cells been patentable, had this happened after 1980, there’s a good chance that certainly recognizing their value, Dr. Gey or John Hopkins or some other researcher would’ve taken a patent out on it and then they would’ve, as is usual, only licensed them to the researchers and universities that would have paid them a hefty fee. Or perhaps not licensed them at all.
Which means the polio vaccine probably would still be developed, but it might’ve cost a lot more money than it did. It might not have been available to everybody as it was. So those are the differences.
BJ: John Moore, a leukemia patient in the 1980s, first had his spleen removed in 1976. Unbeknownst to him, it would lead to the creation of a cell line estimated to be worth $3 million by the pharmaceutical company Sandoz. Moore sued his doctor who had removed the spleen after he discovered the doctor had filed for a patent on his cells and proteins that led to this lucrative cell line. Can you talk about the difference between what happened in the case and its impact?
HW: When John Moore was initially treated, the Chakrabarty law had not been decided yet. Bayh-Dole hadn’t been passed. So, as living things, his cells weren’t eligible for patenting either. However, once these rulings were passed, his doctor, Dr. David Golde, and the University of California, immediately responded by taking out a patent on his cells.
His doctor recognized that his spleen and his cells were medically important. He knew that, but it was before he could take a patent out on them. I’m sure at that point he never dreamed that in a few years he would be able to take this collection and sample of his cells and tissues — that he had assiduously kept alive and was researching — and take out a patent on them and control the profits from them.
So when the law was passed, Dr. Golde had already established a laboratory to do research on it. He and another researcher and the university owned the patent. Now they went to Sandoz and established a contract for $3 million — $3 million 1980 dollars. Then [Sandoz] could plan to acquire huge profits. Before that, Dr. Golde had been interested for the usual reasons. He would be able to hopefully develop some medically useful compounds and, more to the point, become famous and get some publications. Now, there was a great deal of money to be made.
BJ: You write that today, however, as opposed to the case of Henrietta Lacks and John Moore, it is normal tissues in large quantities that provides a lot of wealth for people who hold patents. So are you saying that everyone is now vulnerable to the same kind of appropriation as what happened to Lacks and Moore?
HW: Yes. Lacks and Moore’s vulnerability was a bit different, but it was the same principle. And today, we’re all vulnerable to that. We’re vulnerable because if we undergo surgery in certain hospitals, such as the Harvard University hospitals or Duke and a number of others, we are given a consent form to sign, which will give a private corporation, in many cases Ardais [Corp.], the rights to any tissues or cells taken from our body, often described in the consent form as “discarded and worthless.” But they’re not worthless or the corporation wouldn’t have bought them.
Also, in many cities in this country — in fact, in more than half the states — have something called medical examiners laws, or presumed consent law. These laws dictate that a medical examiner or coroner in these cities, when someone dies, can take any tissues from your body that could have some medical value. Then they’re transferred to a broker or two, who then eventually transfers them to surgeons or hospitals. At each step, there is a hefty fee paid. And then the institution pays a fee. So although it’s against the law technically to sell an organ or sell these tissues, from my point of view they are actually being sold.
And then of course medical research conducted by private corporations or in which private corporations pay medical institutions to conduct research according to the corporations’ dictate, which means they control it. So one thing they have begun doing is exploiting a 1996 law that governs medical research, which says that if you are in the United States and you’re the victim of a trauma — shot in the chest, a heart attack, hit by a car — medical research can be conducted on you without your permission.
I have spoken to research subjects who had no idea that they were used in medical research until a member of their family told them. We all expect that we’re going to be offered informed consent. In medical research, this is an exception.
BJ: Is there any legislation you know of today that is being introduced to address these issues?
HW: I know of no legislation that is being promoted or that even has been suggested. I think it’s because so few members of the public even know it’s going on. You can’t fight something if you don’t know it exists. And I find it really interesting that, although a few medical journals have called me and interviewed me about this, it’s not being published someplace where a great many people will read it.
I wrote an article for a magazine — and I’ll be prudent and I won’t name it — a popular magazine with a very large circulation. They said they loved the article, they’d love to publish it, right up to the moment where I got a phone call saying they were killing it and then they paid me for it anyway.
BJ: And what about the “consensual” situation, when a patient is made to sign a consent form right before going into surgery? That might be legal, but it’s also very misleading, no?
HW: That’s consensual. But the legality of doing this is actually kind of shadowy. I don’t think it’s been well established whether it’s legal or not to take somebody’s tissues in surgery without asking their permission first. So what happened is researchers and corporations had decided to cover themselves by getting people in this scenario to sign a consent form and the difficulty, as you suggested, is whether people really understand what they’re signing.
But the piece of paper, the consent form, is not informed consent. If you have a signed consent form in a file and you go to court, that’s not proof of informed consent. That’s only one piece of evidence to support your claim that you informed the person. Actual informed consent is an ongoing process between the researcher and the subject. You have to not only tell them all the information about the study, about what’s known about the consequences, but also if new information emerges you have to keep the person apprised of that. That’s informed consent.
What they’re doing is they’re having signed a consent form to try to prove that they’ve given these people informed consent. But the truth is, you know, if you’re a hospital patient and it’s six o’clock in the morning, and you’re still groggy from your sleeping medication from the night before, you’re woken, handed a sheet of forms to sign for surgery you presumably need and there are staff people standing around you…that’s not conducive to informed consent.
Most patients don’t read it, but that’s kind of logical. You know, you need this surgery. The last thing you want to do the second before you go under the knife is antagonize the people who are doing your surgery.
BJ: How do these medical patent laws actually impede innovation?
HW: A really good example of this, because the court case is about to go to the Supreme Court soon, are the gene patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes that predispose women to breast cancer. They’re very important genes and there are nine patents held on them by Myriad Genetics. And Myriad Genetics has behaved like a very smart capitalist. For a long time, it has minimized the number of people whom it will license access to the genes. Researchers who have been working with the genes, trying to find better treatments for breast cancer, have received cease and desist letters from lawyers at Myriad’s behest, saying, “We control this gene, we hold the patent, you can’t work on it without our permission,” which they often decline to give.
So that’s a problem right now. Then look at the pricing of the test for women who want to characterize their risk for breast cancer. And most women of course don’t need this test but the direct-to-consumer advertising by Myriad confuses women and really makes it look like more women do, which will of course increase their profits. It will also unnecessarily scare a lot of women and induce many more women than should to pay Myriad’s $3,000 to $4,000 fee.
A recent development is especially nasty because now you can pay the $3,000 to $4,000 fee, but there’s also an additional test, a relatively new test, based again on the genes. And if you want that, you have to pay an additional $600. Obviously if you’re a woman at risk, you’re not going to consider that $600 optional. So that’s a huge amount of money.
BJ: What happens if within the legal framework of today’s medical patent process a researcher seeks a more altruistic route, similar to what Jonas Salk did with the polio vaccine? Is that even possible today or is that individual crushed by the system?
HW: It is possible today and that’s a great question because one of the really exciting positive things that has happened is that, you know, certainly not just me and people like me who are criticizing them — a lot of medical researchers, as I said before, are seeing how damaging this paradigm is and they’re coming up with viable alternatives.
The Gates Foundation is probably the best-known example. Bill Gates has worked with a longstanding initiative to bring vaccines to the developing world — its acronym is GAVI. He’s also worked with the governments in the developing world and come up with a model called Advanced Market Directives. Basically, what they’re doing is they’re coming up with funds and pooling their funds and saying to pharmaceutical companies, “If you will develop, for example, a malaria vaccine that’s cheap and works well for the developing world, we will pay you, we will make sure you earn a profit.” And they were successful. They came up with a vaccine — quite a few actually — but one in particular costs $70 in the United States. It only cost 50 cents in Nigeria because of their model.
Now, I hasten to say, we’re not out of the woods yet because all of the pharmaceutical companies that did it — which I think is wonderful that they’re going along with the model and giving it a try — but they counted this as something beneficial that they were doing. Which is not exactly the case.
They’re doing this because they’re paid and it’s being guaranteed by others. And GAVI, the group that helped guarantee the payment is already $3 billion in debt because of it. So that means that even though this has worked in a couple of cases, I’m worried that it may not be a viable long-term model.
We’ve seen this before when pharmaceutical companies, for example, provided sleeping sickness medication, Eflornithine. They provided it only on a short-term basis, for about five years, and then they left. Now the people who are at risk, and I think that’s like 60 million people in sub-Saharan Africa, don’t have access to that drug. So to me that’s a cautionary tale because we need long-term solutions.
And there are other groups of researchers around the world who are also embracing a different non-corporate model. A man named Alan Edwards in Toronto put together a coalition of a lot of researchers. His strategy is one that has worked before for the government. He does not want their discoveries patented. So what they do is every day — whatever they’ve been working on that day, whatever solution they come up with, whatever they’ve identified or characterized that could be medically important – they put it on the Internet. They make it public knowledge, which means it can’t be patented.
So there are strategies that are now being embraced to work around corporate control of medical research.
BJ: How has the medical patent gold rush affected the accessibility of life-saving vaccines for widespread diseases?
HW: Well, simply because maximizing the profit on the patent is the focus, not curing the maximum number of people. Michael Kremer, a Harvard economist, put it best. He pointed out that during the period between 1975 and 1997, of the 1,233 new drugs the pharmaceutical industry devised, only four of them were drugs designed for people in the developing world.
The bottom line is that, although it’s possible to devise vaccines that will save the lives of people in the developing world, it’s not done because people there cannot pay the inflated prices a corporation charges. So they ignored these people in the developing world.
And as I point out in the case of African sleeping sickness, where Eflornithine was found affective against it, people in areas affected by African sleeping sickness cannot afford to pay high prices for drugs. So after that couple of years where they provided it for free, they stopped making it for African sleeping sickness and the exact same molecule, this Eflornithine, is now the active component in Vaniqa, which is used in the West to help women rid their faces of unwanted hair. So women pay $50 a month for Vaniqa, but people in the developing world can’t pay that $50 a month to keep themselves alive, to protect themselves against sleeping sickness.
BJ: In your book, you cite a 2009 study from the New England Journal of Medicine, which found that one-third of U.S. clinical trials are conducted abroad, mostly in developing countries, where drugs can be tested more cheaply. Can you discuss the inequity of the fact that most of the test subjects partaking in these trials — on which corporations are saving millions to perform there — will either never be able to afford, or have a need for, the drugs being tested on them?
HW: Usually both. But even in the cases where it’s a drug, as you say, that could help them, it’s not going to help them because they’re going to be charged the same high prices as people in the West. And knowing they can’t afford it, they don’t even provide it to people in that country.
What I find fascinating is that if you think about it, these people in the developing world are providing opportunity to conduct clinical trials that are a lot cheaper and a lot faster for these corporations. Corporations would have to pay a lot more money if they conducted those trials in the developed world. And so actually we’re the ones in their debt.
We have a new cancer medication, for example, that has been devised by testing it on people in the developing world so that you and I can take it without fear that we’re going to drop dead, hopefully. We owe the people in the developing world that. The corporations save so much money by using those people for their tests. Speed is very important because it maximizes the amount of patent time so they can make more profit from their patent. Also the FDA requires that studies be completed within two and a half years, which is sometimes difficult to do.
So providing them with drugs that they have made possible would seem to be the very least we could do. Yet there’s constant reluctance to provide medications for people in the developing world.
BJ: Clinical trials in developing countries can also involve testing subjects in dangerous circumstances that wouldn’t even be legal in this country. You point to the example of Pfizer’s clinical trials for an antibiotic in Kano, Nigeria in the 1990s. What went wrong?
HW: They tested Trovan in Kano and they waited until — this is quite typical, actually — they waited until there was a meningitis epidemic to test their meningitis drug. First of all, these are people who typically go their whole life without getting any medical care. They can’t go to the doctor, can’t buy medicines. When they’re sick they just hope and do the best they can to treat each other.
So there’s an epidemic. You’ve got people, especially children, dying wholesale. And Doctors Without Borders had flown in and were working feverishly around the clock trying to save as many children as they could. Doctors Without Borders had a huge tent there for a clinic. Pfizer flew its people in and set up shop right next to them. The people of Kano could not discern the difference between the Pfizer tent and the Doctors Without Borders tent. All they knew was that there were doctors and medicines in both tents. If they couldn’t get into one, they went into the other one.
Now I don’t believe they received informed consent. First of all, the records were lost. Pfizer [said it] lost the records that would’ve proved informed consent. Then Pfizer produced some letters from local doctors and local medical boards saying there was informed consent, but they were clearly forged. One doctor admitted that they were forged. Another doctor pointed out that the medical institution that supposedly approved this trial had not even been set up until a year or two after the trial had ended. So all the evidence points to the probability that these people did not receive informed consent.
But then I also ask myself, even if they had gotten informed consent, did they have a real choice? They wanted their children to get any kind of medicine. So it was inherently a coercive environment.
And Pfizer would give this medication and it did not follow prescribed methods of conducting research in this country. Although some of the things they did were permissible in their country. For example, the young girl whose fate I chronicled — she was given Trovan, didn’t get any better, in fact she got worse. And had she been in, say, Connecticut or New York, if she had gotten worse, then they would’ve switched her from experimental therapy to one that was known to work. They didn’t do that there. And she died, other children died, other children went deaf, other children had all kinds of neurological problems. In fact, there were so many deaths and so many permanent serious problems resulting from it, the FDA would not approve the drug.
In the aftermath, there were these lawsuits and finally Pfizer had to pay out a fine. But the fine they were asked to pay was just dwarfed by their amount of profits every year. It’s just the cost of doing business to them. Certainly in a case like this, considering the final cost to them, you could argue it was worth it to them.
BJ: Do you see U.S. Occupy protests as a direct outgrowth of this kind of corporate encroachment on our lives?
HW: That is a parallel that’s made very often. And I’m just going to plead ignorance here. As much as I read and as much as I think about that, I think that there’s the same frustration with the degree of control corporations have over things that should not be controlled by monetary interests. And yet that’s our habitual practice of medicine today. So as far as the Occupy Wall Street protests echo that sentiment, then I agree with them. There are other elements of course in which I think there is not a parallel between them and the people I talk about.
I began this book being really concerned about poor people, people in the developing world, people who I thought and I still think are impacted most heavily by this. But I quickly came to realize that it affects all of us. I mean it’s also middle-class people. Because the drug prices are so high and because the corporate control of medical research is so extensive and our health policy so extensively protects them, middle-class people are not really faring any better. Middle-class people are caught in the same bind.
So I guess that’s sort of a qualified yes [laughs].
BJ: Since the Citizens United court ruling, we’re living in a time where, in effect, corporations are considered people, while simultaneously corporations are buying the property rights to the very essence of human life. You’ve eerily described them as our “biological landlords.” This already has a nightmarish quality today. In regard to the future of medical patents, do you see the pendulum swinging back or the situation growing worse?
HW: Unfortunately, if history’s taught us anything, it’s that things can always get worse. But I don’t think it will. The pendulum can swing back, but it’s going to need a big push from us. It’s not going to swing back on its own. Because the most powerful people in this country are being well served by this. The very wealthy people don’t have the worries that most of us have. And corporations certainly don’t have the worries we have. They’re not disturbed by their high prices. They’re constantly defending them. They’re not disturbed by the lack of care for people in the developing world. They have no problem claiming that, “Hey, don’t blame us — it’s not our patent, it’s their poverty.”
It can be done, but we’re going to have to push it. And the way to push it is to repeal Bayh-Dole and find those lawmakers. There are lawmakers out there who are trying to repeal parts of this problem, patents on genes, for example. And researchers also are beginning to see that his system is dysfunctional and starting to come up with different models.
So it’s going to be up to us to push the pendulum in the other way.
human dna, what are human genes, gene patents, gene patenting, genes patent, genetic patents, genetic patenting, dna patenting, dna patents, human genome study, patenting of genes, human genetics project, patents on genes, genome patent
<
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) The Finnish government has admitted that their swine flu vaccine “conclusively” causes narcolepsy, an illness that makes people uncontrollably fall asleep. With this admission it offered “lifetime medical care” for 79 children who have been irreparably damaged by the swine flu vaccine. 76 of the 79 children also suffered hallucinations and “paralyzing physical collapses.”
The ritual, nevertheless, continues worldwide
The profitable marketing of these vaccines continues, despite this evidence of potential harm, and with a lack of evidence that these vaccines work at all. Simple daily dose of vitamin D might do far better in halting the flu.
Suppression of truth in US about vaccines is predominant
By comparison to the Finnish government, the U.S. government falls very much behind. It refuses to admit vaccines can cause any harm at all, or at any time. The vaccine industry rather push the fabricated story that vaccines are 100% safe and effective. The truth is that vaccines have harmed millions and in ways that are almost never linked to vaccines (mild mental retardation, suppressed immune function, learning disabilities, etc.). At the same time, the vaccine industry’s own research shows flu shots really work only with 1 out of 100 people. Click article on how they are thus completely useless for 99 percent of those who take them. Cultural studies have shown worse indications, that the increased use of vaccines has not reduced the flu incidences at all. Instead of admitting any of this or the far more serious fact that vaccines have caused autism, the U.S. government has created a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program which pays parents of harmed children to make sure they cannot bring their claims to federal courts (http://www.naturalnews.com/033635_v…).
Simultaneous suppression about alternatives to vaccines
The medical establishment, through vast peer and economic pressure, vehemently refuses to advocate anything natural like using Vitamin D as a flu prevention means. Vitamin D is not only safe, by comparison, but also effective and affordable. It’s available without a prescription. It doesn’t require slowing riches upwards to pharmaceutical giants. If the truth were known, billions in national health care costs would be saved.
Vaccines cause autism?
Most Americans haven’t yet heard the interview with Merck vaccine scientist Dr. Maurice Hilleman where he openly admits vaccines carry dozens of strains of cancer-causing “stealth” viruses. Click to read the transcript or listen to theactual interview
Most vaccine consumers also don’t know that Dr. Jonas Salk, the celebrated “grandfather” of vaccines, was an unindicted medical criminal (http://www.naturalnews.com/031564_J…). The whole history of vaccines and medicine has been falsely glorified as a marketing ploy for this multi-billion dollar most profitable segment of the industry.
Medical establishment wouldn’t intentionally harm us. Right?
If you believe that, I have an amazing Brooklyn bridge to sell you.
For example, and as unbelievable as it may sound, why is mercury, one of the most toxic elements known to man, put into vaccines. Is it done intentionally and pushed on children for reasons other than to improve their health or fight the flu? Imagine that by creating future sick adults (even carefully studying statistics of what exactly accomplishes that) our “healthcare” corporations lock in their future profits or economic survival. Then they can easily hire skilled TV actors with hugely smiling faces or sexy appearances to tell a very different story and to naïve mass victims. Impossible and unthinkable? Wake up dear reader.
Lure of making money
Think hard about this. The lure of money can and does corrupt, and criminally so, our human consciousness. Here is what Mike Adams writes in the most hard-hitting way:
“As the editor of NaturalNews, having seen countless documents, tips, testimonials and other sources of information that have been given to me over the years, I can tell you with absolute certainty that the pharmaceutical industry is…using vaccines to CAUSE degenerative disease as a way to lock in future profits from that disease…(to create) lifetime medical victims…These people should be arrested, thrown in prison and charged with their role in these crimes against humanity. Occupy Wall Street is just one movement that’s rising up in opposition to the total scam of the fraudulent banking industry and the Federal Reserve, but we need another movement: Occupy Big Pharma where the sick, degenerate masses who have been harmed by all these vaccines and deadly pharmaceuticals march on the drug companies and arrest their CEOs for crimes against humanity.”
Videos
Absolutely must see video with more details and moving images
___________________________________________
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) Did you know that most turkeys raised in the US are fed a diet of genetically engineered corn and soybean meal in a factory farm?
Why it matters whether your Thanksgiving turkey is bioengineered
When Monsanto’s engineered genes were discovered in the blood of pregnant women and their babies, scientists concluded it must have gotten there through eating GMO-fed animals. And that’s not all. The drugs and chemicals found in the typical non-organic turkey form an almost endless list (1).
What about tofu turkey for Thanksgiving?
Most soy is genetically engineered. Read the label to be sure it is organic. Remember also that the healthiest soy products are both organic and fermented, such as soy tempeh. Also beware that with non-organic products thesoy is often “hexane-extracted” It is bathed in a serious neurotoxin that is banned in organic products.
Thanksgiving dairy
Love mash potatoes with butter, veggies with au gratin or desserts with desserts with whipped cream and ice cream?
Genetically engineered corn is highly toxic, according to Monsanto’s own data and as independently analyzed by scientists. Thus cornbread stuffing is usually bioengineered. High-fructose corn syrup and trans fats also can come from the same GE corn oil. Lastly, Monsanto’s genetically modified sweet corn is now on produce shelves. And GMO corn is already contaminating over 20,000 varieties of corn in Mexico and Central America.
Take action
Sign the Millions Against Monsanto petition to label GMOs and food from factory farms.
Sources for Organics
Local Harvest has local, organic, pasture-raised and heritage breed turkeys.
Raw milk from cows raised on organic pasture is the healthiest
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) The FDA and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have long conducted a coordinated national assault on raw milk production from clean, small-scale farms. Why?
Why raw milk is suppressed
It is because the larger scale corporate-controlled dairies requires pasteurization to effectively deliver milk over long distances and time spans but which denatures the milk.
If the public got wind just how unhealthy pasteurized milk is in comparison to raw milk, it would spell an economic disaster for the larger dairies. So it is vital, or more accurately it is absolutely necessary, to keep up the marketplace lie and at all costs – no matter who is harmed in the public or among producers and distributors on the chopping block.
Recently in California the government attempted to make it a multiple-felony to sell raw milk!
Truth about raw milk comes out
These agencies, in collusion and support of corporate interests, won’t admit any of the foregoing. But the CDC has come forth with the fact, being subjected to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) inquiry, that not a single person has died from raw milk consumption in over a decade!
Previous lies about raw milk dangers exposed
All the propaganda and fear-mongering about alleged severe dangers of raw milk would make one think otherwise. After petitioning the CDC for clarification about its raw milk statistics, Mark McAfee, owner of Organic Pastures Dairy Company (OPDC) in California, finally threatened to file a FOIA request. He then received a response from an unidentified official that the single “raw milk” death that occurred between 1998-2008 was actually linked to illegal raw queso fresco cheese.
As to a second fear-mongered-about death, the agency has not come forth as to whether it was from similar causes. If it did, it would expose them to admitting they had lied all this time to the public.
Refusal to discuss pasteurization health risks
At the same time, the CDC’s avoidance of discussing the dangers of pasteurized milk is glaring. In 2006 alone, over 1,300 people got sick from pasteurized milk in California alone– and yet the CDC only highlights 39 reported illnesses every year linked to raw milk. Most of these links are likely questionable because raw milk has so many health benefits over pasteurized.
what is raw milk, raw milk products, unpasteurized milk, raw unpasteurized milk, facts about milk, healthy milk, healthiest milk, raw dairy, dangers of milk, raw goat milk, raw milk cheese, unpasteurized milk cheese, real raw milk, raw milk benefits, unpasteurized milk benefits, health risks of milk, raw milk nutrition, risks of pasteurized milk, risks of raw milk, raw milk dangers, unpasteurized milk dangers, raw milk facts, raw milk safe, raw milk bacteria, drinking raw milk vs pasteurized milk.
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) Modern allopathic medicine is base, lock-stock-and-barrel on the mechanical vision of nature – and thus our bodies. Machines are made of separate parts, designed mathematically…because math symbols abstract universal separation. Machines model or represent the result of applying a mathematical vision to its heights. What’s wrong with machines?
Two main contentions
A) Failure of mechanical/math-based view
I contend machines do not model or represent the essence of nature. It is pretty obvious to see this since machines never, not once, occur naturally anywhere in nature, unless man-made. This implies mathematics does not represent the essence of nature left alone and not imposed upon. This implies separative consciousness (left-brain dominant consciousness which is separative) does not really fathom or penetrate into nature’s depths. Mathematics is the left-brain’s highest organizing symbolism, the the universal symbols of separation,One reason the vision fails is because one cannot connect a vision of nature consistently and rationally using abstractions of separation. Its irrational an impossible Had I been around in the 17th century, I would have totally demolish and made mince-meat of the arguments of Newton, Galileo and Descartes that so grossly mislead us into our modern eco-challenged or non-sustainable world – arguments and ideas that anchor and justify all of modern medicine’s foundation. It is a quicksand foundation.
B) Success of life/consciousness based view
Imagine that at the core of nature is what we experience inwardly as life and that at the core of life is consciousness – and as the universal relationship of connection. If this is true, and in my experience it is, then the mathematical/mechanical vision points systematically to and materializes not just machines made of separate parts, unconsicous and dead, but overall death in nature.
A system of medicine based on that vision thus offers not the keys to healing, but death by medicine. Non-emergency surgery is a perfect example. We cut the body apart like a machine, which accelerates death. When such practices make a marriage with commercial interests ($ signs being math symbols applied socially/environmentally), where consciousness is corrupted (separated apart) powerful in these dark directions.
Iatrogenic death
Iatrogenic means caused by a physician or the doings of a doctor. The statistics of death as well as life-long illnesses caused directly by the artificial interventions of modern medicine is daunting. Many of these statistics are provided in the video below.
Hospitals raking it in for unnecessary surgery for dying seniors
My own dad was subjected to two surgeries in his 90s, without even the approval of his medical surrogate (the doctors taking away that license) and he immediately died. His operations were not just unnecessary by a criminal act, as far as I was concerned. Only doctors and policemen can kill you legally and get away with it.
To make matters worse, doctors and hospitals in the US have a financial incentive to perform such surgery and on dying seniors because Medicare is guaranteed to pay for it, even though if and when most of the procedures fail to improve the patients’ lives. Again separative technologies go against the very essence of healing. The double negative of removing something toxic or ill or not the same as a positive in the direction of healing. It is a removal of symptoms.
Statistics of death by medicine
Statistics show that modern medicine is the overall leading cause of preventable death in the US. See references below for a backup on this statement. A case in point is the following. Harvard School of Public Health recently reported that 1.8 million Medicare beneficiaries age 65 or older died in 2008, and over 34% were operated on during their last year, 25% in their last month, and 10% in their last week of life. If the surgery was a causal element, then approximately 600,000 seniors (1/3rd of 1.8 million) died as a result.
As cynical as it sounds, doctors routinely perform unnecessary surgery for financial benefits. It becomes necessary to maintain their lifestyles, their mercedes and the like. There is a conflict of interest in caring about the lives of seniors, past the deceptive white coat purity appearance, when guaranteed financial rewards follow assembly-line unnecessary surgeries.
Supposedly there is no other way – what bunk
The Medicare website for reporting unnecessary and inappropriate surgery describes it as being an operation for a condition that could effectively be treated with medication or physical therapy. Typically, there is nothing listed about nutrition or natural healing. Mentioning natural remedies can endanger a doctors license to practice medicine. The FDA outlaws any natural remedy from claiming it can cure a disease, so the general public still believes surgery and chemotherapy are the only true options.
Arguments against “death by medicine
The argument against our thesis that modern medicine is the leading cause of death in the US is presented in a blog post by Steve Novella, MD on his site Science Based Medicine (hiding behind the cloak of “superior science,” as the 17th century mechanical/death-centered view claimed their view was superior, and providing a deeply false justification). He substitutes the word food for medicine as being the leading cause of deaths in the US. This is a common distortion, that was is natural and truly healing is what is to be feared. I have offered some of the arguments opposing that view in many blog posts, including27 years, zero deaths from vitamins, 3 million from prescription drugs.
$-driven, illusionary worldview-driven, three-prong and deadly short-sightedness
Doctors in the United States are trained to do mainly three general procedures for the sick and dying which also connect with making money. They operate, administer chemotherapy/radiation or prescribe pharmaceuticals to mask and seemingly relieve symptoms or pain. The effort to remove cancer that surrounds or invades organs is a most surgical procedure. Unfortunately, clipping off the “tops of weeds” doesn’t get at the taproot and since the chemicals in food and overall bad nutrition fuel ill health and disease – this is the best of all worlds financially for the “disease-care industry.”
Surgery works against the connective essence of life and supports the mechanical view, the death centered. Thus not surprisingly surgery can be painful, debilitating, and life-time weakening – accelerating death. The most popular chemotherapy drug is Gemcitabine, which claims to only help about 25% of patients. So the rest either undergo useless surgery or are sent home to die with no nutritional advice. Cancer is a chemically driven disease, and chemotherapy is toxic, deprives all cells of oxygen. Often surgery also causes internal bleeding which spreads the cancer. I can’t count how many I have lost to the ravages and insanities of allopathic medicine – to death by medicine.
Resources
Occurpy modern medicine – the political revolt against corporate, profit-driven disease care
“Death by Medicine” Groundbreaking statistical summary and analysis written by Gary Null, PhD; Carolyn Dean MD, ND; Martin Feldman, MD; Debora Rasio, MD
death by medicine, dead by medicine, mecola quack, allopathic doctors, iatrogenic, iatrogenesis, iatrogenic death, iatrogenic deaths, iatrogenic disorders, iatrogenic diseases, iatrogenic injury, iatrogenic infection, iatrogenic disease, meaning of iatrogenic, definition of iatrogenic.
Nathan Batalion, Global Heath Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) There is no such thing as a health care industry and the term itself is offensive propaganda.
Real health care means:
Eating real food without genetic modifications or toxic chemicals and pesticides therein
Living organically – being cautious or moderate in your exposure to dangerous substances and activities, and detoxing periodically because you can’t totally avoid it!
Getting real exercise
Staying sane amid an insane society that systemically lies to make vulture profits
You earn it – real health care is gained through healthy lifestyles.
Health care does not mean
Eating low quality “phude” engineered to look edible by giant corporations and sold by giant corporate stores which leaves you hungry because it’s got no nutritional value and so you become obese eating ever more of this shit-junk food
Buying corporate diet pills
Cutting the body apart, as if it were a machine - thus buying low quality corporate controlled-for-profit surgery – to excise illness or degeneration cause by the standard American diet and lifestyle.
Running after cancer – when chemicals in our foods and environment cause cancer you buy corporate-controlled-for-profit radiation and chemotherapy to kill the cancer, then more corporate controlled for profit surgery to remove the cancer caused by the corporate produced toxic GMO pesticide drenched frankenfood.
Standing in line to buy toxic drugs whose harming effects are ever more deceptively called “side-effects” and where about 100,000 American die of these “side-effects” annually from toxic pharmaceutical drug intakes. Its the equivalent of many jumbo jets “accidentally” falling out of the sky daily and killing all a board – plus without ever making a single news wire headline.
Once upon a time there was no term such as the “health care industry”. There were doctors and the drug industry, and hospitals and clinics, and, of course, insurance companies.
Healthcare vs. sickcare
None of the above institutional players today really engage in health care. They wallow in sick care, disease care, or disease maintenance for profit. It takes a great deal of fooling of ourselves to believe this system takes care of our health. It does monitor and vacuum our wallets.
Those who live in the most bizarrely unnatural ways, ever surrounded by an unhealthy environment and who then turn, in likewise ill ways to an ill care system, begging to take in more poisons deep into their bodies… get the great winnings of this sick care industry!
Should we be yet more blunt about this or follow the opposite path of passively digesting and believing in all the lies that are fed to us?
A right to be harmed and deluded by the sick care system
Congress is trying to legally force Americans to buy profitable and corrupt insurance policies that pay for disease care services mostly guaranteed to maintain or worsen chronic ills. I personally watched my dad progressively go blind on a diabetes “sick-maintenance” drug – and when, in truth, his Type II Diabetes can be been reversed in most everyone in months.
As the “ice cream emperor” put it, morons of the world are uniting “screaming for this system as a “human right” and attacking those of us….conspiring to block people from this“health care” because we are elitists who want everyone to die.”
So goes the systemic brainwashing, God help us.
Keywords:
Healthcare business, universal health care, healthcare programs, physicians healthcare, advanced healthcare, information on healthcare, best healthcare, online health care, home health care services, care for the sick, caring for the sick, sick day care, nursing care of the sick, disease care, ill care, sick care
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) According to Medco Health Solutions Inc., which manages prescription benefits for about 1 in 5 Americans, over half of Americans are prescription-addicted or daily taking prescription medications for chronic health problems
Breakdown of Prescription Drug Taking
The data indicates that 51 percent of American children and adults were taking one or more prescription drugs for a chronic condition, up from 47 percent in 2001 – about a 10% increase. This breaks down into age groups as follows:
Women 20+ – About 2 out of 3
Children and teenagers – 25%
Adult men – 52 %
Seniors over 65 – 75%
What’s worse, on average 1 in 4 seniorstakefive or more medicines regularly ( 28 percent of women and 22 percent of men over 65)
Exactly what medications?
In 2006, the top five drugs by sales were Lipitor, Nexium, Prevacid, Advair Diskus and Singulair.
Multi-billion dollar sales drugs, what they claim to do
Lipitor offers to lower cholesterol
Nexium & Prevacid claim to reduce stomach acid
Advair Diskus and Singulair suppress asthma and allergies symptoms
Failings of Modern Medicine
These drugs reveal much about the failings of the mainstream medical model
Treating and suppressing symptoms – cholesterol and stomach acid are both normal, protective substances in the body. Cholesterol is no more the cause of heart disease than stomach acid is the cause of GERD or ulcers. But one of the fundamental flaws of western medicine is its tendency to treat the symptom or effect rather than the cause. Unfortunately for patients, doing so can actually make things worse, not better.
Cholesterol is essential – it plays many essential roles in the body, and lowering it does not only not prevent heart disease, but can actually increase the risk of dying from a heart attack.
Stomach acids are essential – crucial in protecting us from the pathogens we might otherwise ingest with food. Stomach acid is also required for protein digestion. It is well-established in the scientific literature that the primary cause of ulcers is a bacterium called h. pylori – not stomach acid. And there is also evidence suggesting that GERD (gastro-esophageal reflux disease) is caused by low – not high – stomach acid.
Scariest part of this study
It is the surge in children who use of chemical drugs to treat weight-related problems illnesses previously considered adult problems. Medco estimates 1.2 million American children now are taking pills for Type 2 diabetes, sleeping troubles and gastrointestinal problems such as heartburn.
Reversible Conditions
The majority of these conditions – diabetes, sleeping troubles and gastrointestinal issues – can be treated and reversed or eliminated by simple diet and lifestyle changes – rather than having someone addicted to drugs in a profitable sick care system. These changes have none of the adverse effects and risks of drugs, and their benefits extend far beyond the potential therapeutic action of the medications.
Drugs-of-necessity gloried to lure us to take drugs-of-profitablity for life
Medication has improved and even saved the lives of many in this country and around the world. Yet there’s a difference between drugs that are “medically necessary” and drugs that are promoted via slick campaigns and to be used instead of the more effective and less harmful diet and exercise approaches. Patients are lured in for a quick fix, and via no less diabolical means than effected in the sale of illegal drugs.
Why the rise in medication
One reason for the increase in medication use is the pharmaceutical industry’s “relentless advertising”. Since that is unlikely to change anytime soon, experts say the proportion of Americans on chronic medications can only multiply. On a deeper level, it is a further evolution of a progressive application of the surface/symptom illusionary, math-based, mechanical vision of nature of the 17th century. It is part of a 400 year trend to unrelenting expand a central paradigm understanding, that nature is essentially mathematical- resulting in a progressive and deep harming of not only our bodies but the entire planet’s life as a whole. This is a deep philosophical subject we’ve discussed in many posts, and how to supplant the mechanical vision with a life centered, truly healing view.
Comments
“Unless we do things to change the way we’re managing health in this country … things will get worse instead of getting better,” predicted Daniel Jones, a heart specialist and dean of the University of Mississippi’s medical school. Luckily, we don’t have to wait around for that to happen. As individuals we can take responsibility for our own health care using diet, exercise and lifestyle changes. We can choose to use “alternative” modalities to keep us healthy. And we can take action to reduce stress and promote emotional and psychological well-being.
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) The most significant breaking news on the GMOs is the California people’s initiative to gather enough signatures to put this to a historical ballot which would require the labeling of GMOs in foods. Corrupt politicians representing the interests of corporations, not the people, have refused to enact such an initiative even though 90% of Californians support such an effort.
Pathway to Victory
This is the pathway to victory against GMOs, to deal a death blow to GMOs and restore sanity and integrity to our seeds and food crops.
Audio Interview
Naturalnews interviewed Ronnie Cummins from the Organic Consumers Association (www.OrganicConsumers.org), who is a key leader in advocating mandatory GMO labeling. His organization, among many others, is helping to get this initiative on the ballot in California in 2012.
Listen to the full interview with Ronnie Cummins on SoundCloud: http://snd.sc/qPBFJk
Nathan Batalion, Global Health Activist, Healingtalks Editor
(Healingtalks) This week the grassroots Committee For the Right to Know, a wide-ranging coalition of consumer, public health and environmental organizations, food companies, and individuals submitted the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act to the State Attorney General for title and summary, prior to circulation as an initiative measure for the November 2012 election. This is part of a nationwide campaign to also raise consumer awareness and thereby reach a triggering a “tipping point” or sufficient rejection (approximately 5% of consumers) to have GMOs largely removed from the marketplace.
What the Right to Know GEFA Requires
The initiative would require genetically engineered foods (also known as genetically modified organisms, or GMOs) and foods containing GMO ingredients to be clearly labeled, similar to current labels with other nutritional information.
Genetically engineered food is usually plant or meat product that has had its DNA artificially altered in a lab with genes from other plants, animals, viruses or bacteria, in order to produce foreign compounds in that food. This genetic alteration is experimental, and is not found in nature.
Risks of GE Foods
The risk of genetically engineered foods is unclear, and unlike the strict safety evaluations required for the approval of new drugs, the safety of genetically engineered foods for human consumption has not been adequately tested, the group said. Recent studies show that genetically engineering food can create new, unintended toxic substances and increase allergies, cancer risks and other health problems, especially for children.
Experts Agree Labeling Is Necessary
Experts agree that by labeling genetically engineered food, we can help identify foods that cause health problems, the committee said.
“Because the FDA has failed to require labeling of GMO food, this initiative closes a critical loophole in food labeling law. It will allow Californians to choose what they buy and eat and will allow health professionals to track any potential adverse health impacts of these foods,” says Andy Kimbrell, Director of the Center for Food Safety.
Most Common GMO Traits
The two most common genetically engineered traits are the expression of an insecticide in the tissue of “Bt Corn” and the expression of a compound in “Roundup Ready Soy” which enables high doses of Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer to be sprayed while the plant survives.
As much as 85 percent of corn in the U.S. is genetically engineered. BT Corn is currntly regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency as an insecticide.
Worldwide GMO Labeling Movement
Robyn O’Brien, author and founder of the Allergy Kids Foundation says, “I support labeling genetically engineered foods because allergy-sensitive people can exercise caution with essential information to make informed decisions about what they eat.” Fifty countries including the European Union and Japan have laws mandating that genetically engineered foods be labeled, but the United States does not have such a requirement.
Public opinion polls indicate that over 90 percent of California voters support the labeling of genetically engineered foods. Efforts to enact labeling laws in Congress and the California legislature have been blocked by big food and chemical company lobbyists. This measure will take the issue directly to the people to decide whether genetically engineered foods should be labeled.
“These genetically engineered foods have been allowed into our food supply without warning, and they aren’t labeled,” said Pamm Larry, founder of the grassroots movement and the Committee For the Right to Know. “The bottom line is Californians have a right to know what’s in the food we eat and feed our children. It’s time to send a strong, direct message to those who govern us, whether they be agency or elected, that we want genetically engineered foods labeled.”
The California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act was carefully and specifically written to avoid any unnecessary burden or cost to consumers or producers. California voters are expected to have the chance to vote on the initiative in November 2012.
The full text submitted to the attorney general can be read below.
The Obama Obama’s infamous organic garden- shame on her!
