Archive for category Big Agriculture & Big Biotechnology
November 11, 2014
Back in 2011, we declared Monsanto to be the worst company of the year for threatening both human health and the environment at large. Our decision was met with massive support, even amid the still growing climate of understanding when it came to what Monsanto and mega biotech at large were truly doing to the food supply. In 2014, however, the global resistance is making even greater strides.
Now, a relatively new poll from Nielsen found that Monsanto’s reputation ranked 3rd worst among 60 high-profile companies, right behind oil juggernaut BP (responsible for the worst oil spill in U.S. history) and Bank of America (known for being a key player in the meltdown of the financial market).
Monsanto, a major biotech corporation responsible for genetically modifying and taking over many of the nation’s crops, isn’t necessarily a consumer-facing company. Yet it faces public opposition unlike no other.
As reported by 247Wallst:
> Reputation score: 57.27
> 2013 Reputation score: 61.70
…few businesses have had such a long-running negative public perception. The company’s promotion of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has been controversial because many consumers remain suspicious about crop engineering. Monsanto has also actively worked to protect seed patents, including suing farmers who have used its seeds without permission and proper payments. The company’s opposition to proposed GMO labeling laws, which require that foods sold to consumers containing GMOs include a label, has also not helped its image.”
EPA Gives More Credibility To Industry-Funded Studies Than Peer-Reviewed Science When Approving Pesticide Use
November 9, 2014
A memo from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) highlights the way that this agency gives more weight to poorly conducted, industry-funded studies than to the overwhelming body of evidence showing that pesticides are harmful.
The memo concerns an insecticide named chlorpyrifos (trade name Lorsban), manufactured by Dow Chemical. Until 2000, the chlorpyrifos was widely used in household bug sprays such as Raid. But due to strong evidence that the chemical was poisonous, especially to children, the EPA struck an agreement with Dow that the chemical could continue to be used for agriculture if it were banned from indoor use.
“These data do suggest that inhalation or dermal exposure can lead to life-threatening effects,” the EPA said at the time.
Still harming children’s brains
Dow has been on the defensive about chlorpyrifos for years. Even before restricting the chemical’s use, the EPA fined Dow $876,000 for 327 separate counts of violating the Federal Insecticide, Rodenticide, and Fungicide Act (FIRFA) with regard to chlorpyrifos. FIRFA requires pesticide manufacturers to report all complaints about pesticide poisoning within 30 days.
In 2004, the New York Attorney General’s office fined Dow $2 million for falsely claiming, for decades, that the chemical was safe, even after it was proven otherwise.
Studies have also shown that chlorpyrifos continues to be harmful even in agricultural uses. For example, a 2008 study found that pregnant women exposed to the pesticide gave birth to children with lower IQs, while a 2011 study found that chlorpyrifos-exposed children had reduced problem-solving ability.
“Toxic exposure during this critical period can have far-reaching effects on brain development and behavioral functioning,” said Virginia Rauh of Columbia University, who was not involved in those studies. “Some small effects occur at even very low exposures.”
The CHAMACOS (Center for Health Assessment of Mothers and Children of Salinas) study, conducted on farm workers between 1998 and 2011, found that children exposed to organophosphate pesticides (including chlorpyrifos) either before or after birth had lower cognitive abilities. Mothers with higher levels of the chemical in their urine had children with lower IQs and decreased verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, working memory and mental processing speed.
November 9, 2014
The makers of neonicotinoids, the bee-killing insecticide that was banned all over Europe, won’t be able to refute this latest phenomenon. Millions of bees were found dead after GMO corn was planted in Ontario, Canada. This isn’t new news, but it should be known news.
The keeper of these bees, Dave Schuit, who produces honey, reported that he lost over 600 hives – around 37 million bees.
“Once the corn started to get planted our bees died by the millions,” Schuit said.
With increasing bee deaths and consumer petitions targeted to places like Home Depot and Lowe’s who sell neonics, the US Department of Agriculture has failed to ban neonicotinoids, manufactured primarily by Bayer CropScience Inc., as well as other biotech companies.
Two of Bayer’s best sellers are suspect this time around: Imidacloprid and Clothianidin. They are both known to seep into pollen and nectar, damaging beneficial insects such as bees.
The more widely they are used, the more bees seem to die.
Schuit’s report of dead bees is corroborated by other farmers, too. Nathan Carey is another local farmer who noticed a disappearance of bees on his farm this past Spring. There were so few that he could not count on them as he normally did to help pollinate his crops. He correlates their absence to the use of these toxic insecticides.
While many scientists are still unconvinced that “colony collapse disorder” (CCD) is caused by neonicotinoids, there has been a consecutive die-off of bees in the U.S. for seven years now – directly correlated to higher insecticide spraying.
Even US scientists have found 121 different pesticides in samples of bees, wax and pollen, lending credence to the notion that pesticides are in fact a problem.
November 9, 2014
The new documentary Bought dives deeply into the inner workings of the industries at the core of our food and healthcare system, exploring the truth about how vaccines and drugs are developed and rushed to market and the ongoing secrecy behind the genetic engineering of our food supply.
For a limited time proceeds from renting or purchasing this film will be donated to the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), a non-profit organization advocating for vaccine safety and informed consent protection in the public health system.
Filmmaker Jeff Hays believes, as I do, that you have a right to the truth so that you can make educated decisions about your health, food, and medicine. Unfortunately, the truth is not easy to come by today.
Like the banks, the food and drug industries have grown more powerful and less transparent over time, and profit has become the primary motive. Hays may be best known for his 2012 documentary “Doctored,” which exposes how the medical and drug industry conspire to control the health care system.
Hays’ new film peels back the layers to show how the drug, vaccine, and chemical technology industries have joined forces as one supervillain, with its “undisclosed location” smack-dab in the middle of the White House.
You can’t effectively address one industry without addressing them all, as they are now inextricably linked. Until enough people raise their voices, nothing is likely to change. According to Hays:1
“From opiates, to statins, to a blizzard of psychotropic medications that do far more harm than good, the film covers how our entire health care system, from education to practice has been Bought… three story lines converge on Wall Street, in a tale of corruption, greed and shocking lack of conscience.”
Federal Vaccine Court: Designed Specifically to Clean Up the Trail of Destruction Left by Vaccines
Vaccines are a $30 billion per year industry. Today, four dominate the world market (Pfizer, Merck, Sanofi Pasteur, and GlaxoSmithKline). Given the furor that erupts when anybody publicly questions vaccine safety, you would assume that the US government considers vaccines completely safe.
But in reality, that’s not the case as evidenced by the establishment of a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) where vaccine injury claims are decided in a Federal Vaccine Court2 to compensate vaccine victims, but in reality protects the vaccine industry from lawsuits. The official line by federal health officials is that vaccines are safe and never cause autism.
However, the fact is that for many years, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Justice and the Federal Vaccine Court have been quietly settling cases of brain inflammation and permanent brain damage (encephalopathy) that included symptoms of autism.
These VICP awards have been made to cover treatments related to autism. The VCIP was established in 1986 when Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act,3 which protected vaccine manufacturers, pediatricians and other vaccine providers from nearly all civil liability for injuries and deaths caused by government recommended and mandated vaccines.
If vaccines are so safe, then why has the government set up a federal compensation program specifically to manage the damage they cause? In Bought, families who have won and lost in Vaccine Court share their heartbreaking stories.
These parent and health care professionals speaking out about their experiences are articulate, knowledgeable, and compelling witnesses to the damage that vaccines and one-size-fits-all vaccine policies have done. They are not part of some anti-vaccine campaign—in fact, the reason they were in Vaccine Court is because of what happened when they DID vaccinate their children!
Most Vaccine Reactions Are Never Connected to Vaccines
Proving causation is extremely difficult with vaccine injuries in part because there are huge gaps in vaccine safety science and, also, unless a vaccine reaction is immediate and obvious, parents may not connect their child’s deterioration in health to the shots the child was given.
When parents report their child’s regression into chronic poor health following vaccination to their child’s pediatrician, they are typically told the illness couldn’t possibly be related to the vaccine or vaccinations the child was given.
Sometimes reactions occur within hours or days of vaccination and are dramatic and life threatening and the child is taken to the emergency room and the vaccine reaction symptoms are recorded in the child’s medical record. Usually, only the most clear cut and identifiable vaccine reactions end up in Vaccine Court—the ones where the “dots” are easily connected.
Unfortunately, at that point the damage is done and the child may be left with lifelong chronic illness and disability. The vast majority of vaccine adverse reactions are never reported to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Still, CDC’s VAERS database4 lists 8,000 different adverse vaccine reactions, from localized swelling and anaphylactic shock to autism, coma, and death.5
Because of the factors already discussed, the actual number of reactions is probably much higher than the database reports. As vaccine safety advocate Dawn Loughborough said in “Bought:”
“We used to have this idea we were protecting children from infectious diseases. And we created the National Vaccine program with children in mind, but somewhere in time protecting the program became more important than what’s happening to our children.”
November 9, 2014
As we get closer to the holidays, many people look for ways to cut back on sugar and other indulgences so that when the New Year rolls around, they won’t have to work so hard to lose those extra pounds. While it is a good idea to avoid sugar altogether, using the artificial sweeteners Splenda or Aspartame might be even worse. There are numerous reasons you should avoid the stuff in little yellow packages (or pink, or blue). Here is why.
Donald Rumsfeld, the very same politician who supports GMOs, is perhaps the singular man who got Splenda onto the market after the FDA initially refused it. If you have gotten sick from consuming this toxic substance, you can thank him, along with its makers. Splenda was created by the British company Tate & Lyle along with the pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson.
Perhaps you remember when the Coca-Cola company launched its ad campaign to fight obesity back in the early 80s? This was all part of a ploy to begin the use of aspartame, whose patent was once owned by none other than Monsanto! Ironically, there are numerous studies that show this stuff causes obesity. It doesn’t prevent obesity.
Before they started selling you Splenda, it was called NutraSweet. In 1985, Monsanto purchased G.D. Searle, the chemical company that held the patent to aspartame, the active ingredient in NutraSweet, as well as Splenda and many other artificial sweeteners. Is Splenda safe? It depends who you ask.
Let’s look at a little timeline, shall we?
- 1901: Monsanto Chemical Works is formed.
- 1976: When Ford loses the 1976 election, Rumsfeld returns to private business life, and is named president and CEO of the pharmaceutical corporation G. D. Searle & Company, during which time he leads the legalization of Aspartame.
- 1977: Monsanto stops producing PCBs.
- 1997: Monsanto businesses are spun off as Solutia Inc.
- 1999: John Hunter is named chairman and CEO.
- 2000: Monsanto’s Pharmaceutical Services Division is created. Monsanto also merges with the drug-maker Pharmacia & UpJohn Inc., which took control of the Searle pharmaceutical operations, and the current Monsanto Co. was incorporated as a subsidiary in October 2000.
- 2002: PCB trial results in sharp drop in stock price.
November 7, 2014
November 5, 2014
Biotech Covers Up GMO Devastation Of Farmland
The European Association for bio-industries, EuropaBio, wants you to believe that “GM crops can protect soils from erosion through less ploughing, conserving soil moisture, too. GM herbicide tolerant crops reduce the need to plough fields in preparation for planting crops. This saves fuel because less tilling is necessary. GM insect resistant crops require less treatments with insecticides, which also decreases the need for tractor use.” But these statements are completely false.
This is essentially the requisite lie told by all of biotech – including:
- Monsanto – Known for creating or helping to create 13 highly carcinogenic and toxic products including saccharin, PCBs, Polystyrene, DDT, the atom bomb, nuclear weapons, dioxin, Agent Orange, Petroleum based fertilizers, Round Up, rGBH, aspartame, GMOs, and terminator seeds. Monsanto sues everyone to keep dealing their dirty products, but the most recent suit, involving Dustin Barca, a surfer-turned mixed martial arts fighter in Hawaii is of special note. He is taking it personally that Monsanto poisons him, and bringing activism to a new level.
- Dow Chemical Company (also Union Carbide) – This wonderful company helped toreleased methyl isocyanate and other chemicals in 1984 by their pesticide plant in Bhopal, India, causing one of the worst industrial disasters in history. They are also one of the five corporationscompletely dominating the seed market, making food sovereignty precarious for farmers and families around the world. Along with three other companies they also helped to create Dibromochloropropane (DBCP), a known carcinogen, reproductive toxin, and endocrine disruptor that contaminates ground water. They continued to produce and sell DBCP even after it was banned due to strong evidence linking the chemical to sterility.
- Syngenta – Known for suing Kaui’i County when they wanted to keep herbicide and pesticide spraying away from their school children, homes and hospitals, and also for covering up the true toxicity of Atrazine. This company has also been implicated with colony collapse disorder, killing off our bees, and other important pollinators.
by: Christina Sarich
November 3, 2014
There is a good reason that Kellogg’s spent over $1,012,552 on media propaganda in California & Washington to defeat voter ballot initiatives that would have required the labeling of GMO foods, and now are contributing again to the defeat of labeling initiatives in Oregon (contributing $250,000).
A consumer recently sent a box of Froot Loops to a lab for genetic testing and found that the corn and soy used in the cereal are 100% RoundUp Ready GMO. So is the sugar. Never mind the other toxic ingredients in the cereal. This means that in one box of Kellogg’s cereal (and likely all their cereals contain similar GMO products), you are dining on a double dose of glyphosate and Bt toxins – glyphosate being patented as an ‘antibiotic’ by Monsanto in 2011.
Kellogg’s has been making cereal since 1898, but I seriously doubt its founders ever thought it would be poisoning the world at breakfast every morning.
Not only is the corn in Froot Loops sprayed with RoundUp, but it is a pesticide in its own right, registered with and regulated by the EPA. But it isn’t just Froot Loops that is of concern, for all of you who avoid sugar-laden cereals. The ‘healthful’ Kellogg’s brands are full of the stuff, too.
October 31, 2014
“A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies, said Jojen. The man who never reads lives only one”
– George R.R. Martin, A Dance With Dragons
There were a variety of pieces on the newstream this week.
For starters, we find Dr. Mercola covering the ever-present issue of antibiotics in large-scale agriculture.
This issues is not only extremely under-reported by the rigged mainstream media, but its also important because of the effects that antibiotics are having on our foods. Past studies have even eluded to there being a 50% chance of you purchasing meat that contains drug-resistant bacteria.
Something families can do if they are worried about the above, is eating organically grass-fed beef, eat/juice fresh fruits and vegetables, while also making sure you are filtering your local water making sure to get rid of the toxin fluoride and other chemicals.
With that in mind, the piece below by Mrs. Sarich showcases more evidence as to why organic foods are superior to genetically modified foods.
A disturbing pattern we have seen is Big Pharma dodging responsibility and engaging in their corrupt ways. Below, Ethan A. Huff details the current attempt of Big Pharma to skirt responsibility regarding Ebola.
Continuing our focus on those undermining common sense, the article below covers the current push by the Susan G. Komen Foundation to promote carcinogen-laden chemicals in a duplicitous way.
Financial issues affect everyone in a variety of ways. The overly systemic issues are covered quite thoroughly by Nomi Prins in her latest article.
That’s it for now.
Make sure you to have a great weekend and spend time with family/friends. Take care.
by: Christina Sarich
October 30, 2014
For how long will we need to go back and forth in this GMO battle before a sound conclusion is finally met? If you have been following the GMO debate at all, you probably realize that this issue will likely never rest, as numerous studies on both sides of the spectrum (one side showing safety and the other showing danger) will continue to surface. What’s more, this research as well as opinions will be born out of lies or false substantiation. You’ve likely read headlines like these lately and scoffed:
- 2000+ Reasons Why GMOs Are Safe To Eat And Environmentally Sustainable
- GMO Opponents Are the Climate Skeptics of the Left
- Study of 1 Billion Animals Finds GMOs Safe
Or how about comments like this one:
“I used to think that nothing rivaled the misinformation spewed by climate change skeptics and spinmeisters.
Then I started paying attention to how anti-GMO campaigners have distorted the science on genetically modified foods. You might be surprised at how successful they’ve been and who has helped them pull it off.”
Or if you trust one of the most hated companies on the planet, you can go straight to Monsanto’s site and read: An Overview of the Safety and Advantages of GM Foods.
Monsanto openly admits “after 30” whole “years of research” that they are convinced GMOs are safe. Just one type of pine tree lives more than 5000 years, but yea – Monsanto has all of Mother Nature figured out in its 30 years of tinkering with genes.
It’s amazing how many people have been boondoggled by biotech or are simply paid shills to keep the misinformation train choo-chooing along.
Former Biotech Scientist Speaks Out
Vrain will be the first to admit that Monsanto has conducted a lot of studies showing that GMOs are safe, but he changed his own tune about ten years ago when he started reading scientific journals from other countries.
“I started paying attention to the flow of published studies coming from Europe, some from prestigious labs and published in prestigious scientific journals, that questioned the impact and safety of engineered food.”