Shut Up And Eat

Be Afraid, Be VERY Afraid

2006-09-23T14:23:00.000-07:00

. . . Or just tell me lies, sweet little lies - because the truth is just not what it's cracked up to be. Since I believe most serious health freedom advocates prefer the unvarnished truth, no matter how unappetizing - what follows here is a full plate of it.

One of our favorite health freedom crusadors, Dr Rita Laibow, MD has a cameo role in this unnerving 6 minute video in which she discloses that an FBI brochure out of the Phoenix Office on Counterterrorism states:

"Defenders of the U.S. Constitution against the Federal Government and the United Nations who make numerous references to the US Constitution should be monitored as potentially murderous and finatical terrorists. . . who by extension should be considered mentally unstable. further and under the New Freedom commmission those considered "mentally unstable" must be medicated on a compulsory basis with lethal, untested but very profitable drugs".

In this same video a former Director of Nursing speaks - from personal experience - about a health care system "which finds a reason to medicate everyone" through (among other things) the world-wide promotion of "cradle to grave" medication, taking place under the auspices of the UN and other international bodies.

This same Nurse also talks about the devastating effect of such anti-depressants as Wellbutrin and Prozac, both of which, along with other drugs and medical treatments I write about on my website. Below is the entry I included on Prozac which is taken from the book Health Myths Exposed:

"Both the dangers of prescription drugs and the greed of the pharmaceutical industry are glaringly obvious when we study the FDA approved drug Prozac (fluoxetine). . . the popularity of Prozac is a result of marketing, not science. . .The first testing of Prozac was performed on cats and dogs. Every trial showed that Prozac use caused aggression amongst normally calm and friendly animals, as could be seen by increased hissing and growling. When the animals were taken off the drug, they returned to their usual friendly behavior. . . By mid 1978, Prozac testing moved to humans in controlled clinical trials. . Despite the lack of scientific methodology, this study concluded that Prozac worked well to a "statistically significant" degree in a population of depressed patients. . . Both of these animal and human studies raised red flags about a potential causal relationship between Prozac and violence/suicide. . . Since its approval, the potential for Prozac-induced suicide has become frighteningly clear. . . Under the FDA's own analysis, there have been more than 20,000 Prozac-related suicides since 1987. Clinical studies performed on Prozac show 191 side effects per 100 people. . . Despite the many adverse side effects associated with it, the FDA approved its use for children in 2003! (p3-5) [Despite this, one article appearing in the July 2005 issue of the British Medical Journal said that "It is now medical malpractice not to treat depression with medication.]"

Please spend some time reading about Codex as it has developed under the auspices of the World Health Organization and the Food and Agricultural Organization, both arms of the UN. Meantime just remember, be safe and don't mention the Constitution. Be extra safe and watch what you say in general. Can't be too safe nowadays so maybe just don't talk at all.

Please forward

Sixth Grade Science

2006-05-02T14:41:00.000-07:00

Do you still use a microwave oven, even "just to heat water"? If so, you might want to rethink your decision, because "The purpose of this report is to show proof - evidence - that microwave cooking is not natural, nor healthy, and is far more dangerous to the human body than anyone could ever imagine. "

On the other hand if you want the short form, then take a look at this sixth grade science project which concerned itself with the effects of microwaved water fed to plants. A picture truly is worth a thousand words.

The results of our sixth grader's findings are confirmed by yet another science fair project appearing online which also devotes itself to determining the effects of microwaved water on plants. Check the photos and graphs these kids placed on the "results" page. You might even want to read their intro which says in part:

In our world of evolving technology, we have been presented with new appliances, unheard of a few decades ago. Amongst these appliances, cell phone and microwaves among other things are causing death and sickness. With health care costs rising progressively each day, an increase of awareness is required in order to prevent further harm. Inaudible “noise” emitting from advanced devices are causing impairment to the human brain, crippling even the best and smartest of technologically advanced nations. Many agree that this century is our last chance to change our ways and to stop abusing ourselves and our planet.

Studies show that “the higher the frequency, the more damage”. In other words, you would do better living next to chemical waste than to be on your cell phone, while eating a micro-waved meal, which causes decreased nutritional value as it renders all vitamins useless. A micro-waved meal, in reality, has the nutritional value of a piece of paper. All in all, microwaves could cause diseases and infections such as: stomach and intestinal cancers, digestive and excretive disorders, higher risks of sarcoma and brain tumors and a lot more. The stress induced by micro-waves and the resulting high blood pressure can cause migraines, dizziness, anxiety and stomach pain. Among these illnesses, regular micro-wave meal consumers are prone to crankiness, depression, disconnected thoughts and sleep interruption. All nutrients in micro-wave food are reduced and altered so much to a point that your body receives little or no benefits from the food it consumes. “Nuking” your food as you can see, has deadly consequences. “Recent research shows that microwave oven-cooked food suffers severe molecular damage. When eaten, it causes abnormal changes in human blood and immune systems. Not surprisingly the public has been denied details on these significant health dangers”. –Dr .Mercola

. . . In the future, microwaves may be used to land aircraft, track anything on the earth, and many other things. Public awareness of these dangers is an absolute necessity. The everyday appliances in our homes are killing us. The Forensic Research Document of AREC Research states “The effects of micro-waved food by-products are long term [and] permanent within the human body.” This is our last chance to change our ways, before it’s too late and before the effects of microwaves permanently change and twist our lives.

Amen. And out of the mouths of babes!

Bird Flu, Vaccines and Propaganda

2006-03-29T14:46:00.000-08:00

In this August, 2005 article, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny discusses a "blueprint" that was developed for the Center for Disease Control. This blueprint provides a seven step plan which will tap into "[t]he major media outlets [which] are intended to become providers of millions of dollars of free advertising for the drug companies, in an attempt to secure economic success from the sale of this year's flu stocks."

Supplying links to a slide presentation of the report itself, Tenpenny goes on to say:

Concerned over data revealing that nearly 65% of people surveyed did not receive the flu shot in 2003 - including nearly 47% with chronic illnesses and 78% of children aged 6-23 months of age - a new strategy has been devised. The program called "The Seven-Step Recipe for Generating Interest in and Demand for, Flu (or any other) Vaccination," [1] is designed to methodically manipulate the general public. Language within the presentation reveals the intent of the government and their drug company partners to use major media (newswires, TV) to send scheduled, fear-based messages to convince an unsuspecting public to not only accept the flu shot as necessary, but to motivate them to demand it.

In a related article, Dr. Michel Chossudovsky (who is professor of Economics at the University of Ottowa) suggests that, while the threat is real enough, the new official interest in avian flu carries with it the risk of militarizing our public health agencies even as it contributes to our spiraling defense budget. Says Chossudovsky: "The pandemic is being presented to public opinion as an issue of National Security. . . [Further] the hidden agenda consists in using the threat of a pandemic and/or the plight of a natural disaster as a pretext to establish military rule, under the facade of a "functioning democracy."

Perhaps not so coincidentally, the same biotech conglomerates can look forward to a financial bonanza. As Chossudovsky concludes:

The threat of the avian flu pandemic will result in multibillion dollar earnings for the pharmaceutical and biotech industry.

In this regard, a number of major pharmaceutical companies including GlaxoSmithKline, Santo-Aventis, California based Chiron Corp., BioCryst Pharmaceuticals Inc., Novavax and Wave Biotech, Swiss pharmaceutical giant Roche Holding, have positioned themselves in the procurement of vaccines in case of an avian flu outbreak. Maryland based biotechnology company MedImmune which produces "an inhaled flu vaccine" has also positioned itself to develop a vaccine against the H5N1 avian flu.

(Although it has no expertise in the avian flu virus, one of the major actors in the vaccine business, on contract to the Pentagon, is bioport, a company which is part owned by the Carlyle Group, which is closely linked to the Bush Cabinet with Bush Senior on its board of directors.)

This page will supply more information on Vaccines and "biological terrain".

Bird Flu Fact and Fantasy

2006-03-23T14:58:00.000-08:00

As facts reported in one recent article tell us :

Chicken never has been cheaper. A whole one can be bought for little more than the price of a cup of coffee from Starbucks. But the industrial farming methods that make ever-cheaper chicken possible also may have created the lethal strain of bird flu virus, H5N1, that threatens to set off a global pandemic.
According to University of Ottawa flu virologist Earl Brown, lethal bird flu is entirely man-made, first evolving in commercially produced poultry in Italy in 1878. The highly pathogenic H5N1 is descended from a strain that first appeared in Scotland in 1959.

People have been living with backyard flocks of poultry since the dawn of civilization. But it wasn't until poultry production became modernized and birds were raised in much larger numbers and concentrations that a virulent bird flu evolved. Somehow, the virus that arose in Scotland found its way to China, where, as H5N1, it has been raging for more than a decade.

Industrial poultry-raising moved from the West to Asia in the last few decades and has begun to supplant backyard flocks there.

Then this in an online financial newletter:

. . . industrial poultry is the cause of the spread of the bird flu outbreak worldwide.
Several studies show that transnational poultry industry is the root cause of the problem. The spread of industrial poultry production and trade networks have created ideal conditions for the emergence and transmission of lethal viruses like the H5N1 strains of bird flu.

Inside factory farms viruses becomes lethal and multiply. Air thick with viral load from infected factory farms is carried for kilometres, while integrated trade networks spread the disease through many carriers like live birds and chicken manure.

Finally, the facts presented in an extremely well-documented report just released by the international organization GRAIN clearly support the idea that the industrialized poultry industry is the main culprit in spreading bird flu - which as the above article states, has been with us for decades.

The press release for the GRAIN report prepared by Devlin Kuyek concludes with:

A burning question is why governments and international agencies, like the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, are doing nothing to investigate how the factory farms and their byproducts, such as animal feed and manure, spread the virus. Instead, they are using the crisis as an opportunity to further industrialise the poultry sector. Initiatives are multiplying to ban outdoor poultry, squeeze out small producers and restock farms with genetically-modified chickens. The web of complicity with an industry engaged in a string of denials and cover-ups seems complete.

"Farmers are losing their livelihoods, native chickens are being wiped out and some experts say that we're on the verge of a human pandemic that could kill millions of people," Kuyek concludes. "When will governments realise that to protect poultry and people from bird flu, we need to protect them from the global poultry industry?"

Hmmmmm. . . . good question. But a good bet is that the answer will never see the light of day unless and until said governments (and their peoples) forthrightly address the pernicious influence of big M-O-N-E-Y as it relates to the various profit centers which surround the bird flu issue.

For example, a move is afoot in the US to have all free range birds vaccinated while some British scientists have announced intentions to work on the development of genetically modified birds which would be resistant to bird flu. Meanwhile no one in position of influence and policy-making seriously addresses the role of the industrial poultry industry.

Perhaps worst of all is the sad but all-too-real fact is that these various and sundry profit centers often draw the most well-intentioned among us into a carefully woven fantasy which in reality focuses on profits over people.

Vitamin Levels in Fruits & Veggies Continue to Decline

2006-03-20T14:42:00.000-08:00

Continuing the pattern revealed by over 100 years worth of studies, yet another study confirms what should by now be considered a long overdue wake up call. This new study- using data from the USDA - shows "decreases of up to 38% in protein, calcium, vitamin C, phosphorus, iron and riboflavin when compared with produce from past decades."

Yet again the blame is attributed to farming methods which place a higher value on increasing yield by focusing on faster, larger growing crops irrespective of nutritional value. The so-called "green revolution" has in fact delivered the opposite of what it promised over 50 years ago.

When taken in the context of 100 years worth of studies describing declining nutrients in our food supply, this continued decline provided even by fresh foods truly does make one wonder how it is we manage to even function, much less stay alive and vibrant.

Or is the real state of our health yet another unacknowledged story?

Making Food Cheap

2006-03-10T15:14:00.000-08:00

Excerpted from an article titled (appropriately enough) I'm Hatin' It:

If you're going to talk about poverty, food, and the environment in the United States, you might as well start in the Corn Belt.

This fertile area produces most of the country's annual corn harvest of more than 10 billion bushels, far and away the world's largest such haul. Where does it all go? The majority -- after accounting for exports (nearly 20 percent), ethanol (about 10 percent, and climbing), and excess (another 10 percent) -- anchors the world's cheapest food supply in purchasing-power terms.

Our food system is shot through with corn. It [UN-NECESSARILY] feeds the animals that feed us: more than 50 percent of the harvest goes into domestic animal operations. About 5 percent flows into high-fructose corn syrup, adding a sweet jolt to soft drinks, confections, and breakfast cereal. All told, it's a cheap source of calories and taste. Yet all this convenience comes with a price -- and not just an environmental one. . . .

. . . . If the USDA's food pyramid recommends two to five cups of fruits and vegetables per day, its budget -- mandated by Congress through the Farm Bill -- encourages different behavior altogether.

Under the Farm Bill, the great bulk of USDA largesse flows to five crops: corn, soy, cotton, wheat, and rice. Of the $113.6 billion in commodity subsidy payments doled out by the USDA between 1995 and 2004, corn drew $41.8 billion -- more than cotton, soy, and rice combined. . .

The huge corn payouts encourage overproduction, and have helped sustain a long-term trend in falling prices. According to figures from the U.N.'s Food and Agriculture Organization, the inflation-adjusted global commodity price for corn plunged 61 percent between 1983 and 2002. Today a bushel, roughly 56 pounds, fetches about $2.

Cheap corn, underwritten by the subsidy program, has changed the diet of every American. It has allowed a few corporations -- including Archer Daniels Midland, the world's largest grain processor -- to create a booming market for high-fructose corn syrup. HFCS now accounts for nearly half of the caloric sweeteners added to processed food, and is the sole caloric sweetener for mass-market soft drinks. . .

. . . . From a short-term economic viewpoint, the Ding Dongs present a better deal: 360 calories per dollar, and no need for the time or skill to cook. "If you're on a limited income trying to feed a family, in a sense you're behaving rationally by choosing heavily sweetened and fat-laden foods," Drewnowski says. . .

"Energy-dense foods ... are the cheapest option for the consumer," Drewnowski says. "As long as the healthier lean meats, fish, and fresh produce are more expensive, obesity will continue to be a problem for the working poor."

. . . . ."Essentially, this economy is extractive," Meter says. "Our food system doesn't build wealth in our high-producing areas, it extracts wealth." Meter says the area's economy benefits not local farmers or consumers, but rather the large operations like Archer Daniels Midland and Cargill, which thrive on low prices for commodity inputs. The federal government picks up the tab for a failing economy; between 1997 and 2003, federal subsidies poured into southeastern Minnesota an average of $98 million per year.

Meter reckons that if the region's consumers were to buy 15 percent of their food from local sources, it would generate as much income for the region as two-thirds of farm subsidies.

Poverty and Hunger: Qui bono?

2006-03-05T13:44:00.000-08:00

OK, so everyone knows that we live in a land of plenty - especially when it comes to food. But did you know that the U.S. actually produces enough food to feed each and every American TWICE over – and that is after excluding exports?

Why is it then that 20% of America's children go to bed hungry every night, and upwards of 30 million Americans do not get "three squares" a day when we so clearly live in a land of such food abundance?

Appallingly, the wealthiest countries are the very ones with the largest numbers of children are going hungry. In fact, and according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science : "78% of all malnourished children under the age of five live in countries with excess food."

Although the nutritional quality of most of this food is highly debatable, the controlled competition and government subsidies, incentives and tax breaks that are provided compliments of we taxpayers help keep the price of our foods artificially low – and often below the cost of the farmer to produce. These enticingly low prices keep we consumers buying, with little awareness of the dynamics which not only allows 20% of children in this land of abundance to go to bed hungry each night, but tens of millions to starve to death worldwide every year.

Yes, that is correct. TENS of MILLIONS STARVE to death EVERY YEAR. Hundreds of millions more are so seriously malnourished that they suffer a myriad of otherwise easily preventable health problems.

So how much food is produced worldwide? Well, according to figures calculated from reports released by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations the world produces enough to feed everyone in the world about 4.3 pounds of food every day, including one pound of meat, milk and dairy.

Yet, hunger and starvation are actually increasing, particularly in those poor countries that are being forced by WTO-protected multinational agribusiness ventures to produce two or three crops to sell to world markets in place of the multiple kinds of crops traditionally and successfully used to feed their own peoples, however “poor” these peoples may have been when judged by our own modern standards.

This emphasis on "commodity crops", which are traded on stock exchanges around the world, create an oversupply which forces the price paid to the farmer to levels well below the cost of production. In the "rich" northern countries the difference is often made up with a complex array of subsidies, incentives and tax breaks at all levels of government.

Meanwhile, the high cost of high tech farming is forcing less energy-and-chemical intense small farmers everywhere off the land, only to be replaced by giant, energy-and-chemical intense agribusiness farms. Even these industrial-style mega-farms are having an increasingly difficult time surviving, even though they get the lions shares of subsidies and so forth.

The simple fact is that small farmers cannot afford high tech farming and are not the main beneficiaries of subsidies, tax breaks and incentives - or so-called "free trade" agreements. Likewise, the poor in all countries simply can not afford to buy industrialized food - even if it could be argued that it was good for them (and us) in the first place, which it cannot.

In the final analysis,

Food security or freedom from hunger depends fundamentally on:

1) the availability of food (of sufficient quality and quantity), and

2) people’s access to food through self-provision, purchase/exchange or entitlement.

It follows that people experience food insecurity when they lack money to buy food that is readily available or if they are deprived of access to or control over the productive resources necessary to produce it themselves.

Vandana Shiva, farm activist and author of Stolen Harvest and other books, speaks about growing up in a cashless economy, which was nevertheless one in which she and her peers wanted for nothing that was life-giving and life-sustaining. In other words, hunger and starvation are and always have been a political and economic decision made primarily by those who stand to gain the most from such decisions, while “poverty” may well be in the eye of the beholder.

By What Authority?

2006-03-02T14:40:00.000-08:00

Today is a special day for health conscious people - and indeed anyone else who is concerned about the direction our nation is going - because today marks the day that the House of Representatives was to have voted, WITHOUT PUBLIC HEARING, on "The National Uniformity for Food Act" otherwise known as HR 4167

Sponsored by giant food and biotech firms, HR 4167 would deny consumers the right and ability to monitor the infiltration of our food supply by a panoply of genetically modified organisms, synthetic hormones and a wide variety of drugs, all manner of pesticide and mercury residues, increasing food irradiation, and more. HR 4167 would do this by requiring "uniform" labeling in all 50 states

Even worse and more alarming is the fact that this law - like the harmonization provisions contained in the WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA and the FTAA - has the power to overturn hundreds of local and state laws already on the books but which do not "harmonize" with the provisions of HR4167. In addition, and if this bill becomes the law of the land, we citizens of local and state governments can forget about trying to pass laws which seek to alert us to the presence of genetically modified ingredients, or any other undesireable ingredient that might be added to our food.

At issue here is the basic right of health conscious consumers to have easy access to important information concerning the foods we eat, something we have not had for many decades thanks to oceans of propaganda spewed forth by both big business and our compromised politcians.

Maybe it's time that we demand to know BY WHAT AUTHORITY is it that major corporations are allowed to incorporate genetically modified foods and other alarming subtances into our food supply, without our knowledge and consent. And BY WHAT AUTHORITY do our own legislators so consistently side with the demands of big business even when these demands are so clearly and overwhelmingly against the rights, interests and concerns of we the citizen and we the consumer?

Following the money would be a good start for finding answers to our questions, and maybe some solutions too.

Because of public outcry, the vote together with provisions for debate, has been delayed till next week but if the past is any predictor there may be a hard road to hoe for "We the People."

Go to one of these sites to "Take action" on next week's vote: The Food Uniformity March or Democracy in Action or Nocrony.com

May I Have a Little PFOA with That?

2006-02-22T14:04:00.000-08:00

According to a recent Associated Press release now making headlines, it was disclosed that perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA, which is used in teflon, stain-resitant textiles and grease resistant food wrapping is so pervasive in the environment that it is now being found in cord blood of newborn babies. Inasmuch as PFOA can be found in the blood of 90% of Americans it comes as little surprise that PFOA also shows up in newborn cord blood.

One such recent article on PFOA and DuPont reveals, among other things, that PFOA is a "likely" carcinogen according to the EPA. Perhaps more incriminating is the fact that Dupont, which is the sole North American producer of PFOA, tells us at its very own website that fumes from "overheated" teflon pans can injure pet birds and cause flu-like symptoms in humans. Hmmm, wonder if those pet birds are related to the canaries taken into coal mines?

Complaints and concerns voiced for years are finally turning into fines and at least one class action law suit against DuPont. Nevertheless, and not surprisingly,"The company has maintained the chemical does not represent a human health risk. "

This last statement seems a bit disingenuous to say the least, especially in view of the evidence which has been steadily mounting against PFOA. Excerpts from an article cited by one physician who has been trying to spread the word for years reveals still more unhealthy facts:

" Studies have shown that PFOA causes cancer and other health problems in laboratory animals. PFOA is ONE of the toxic chemicals released when Teflon-coated pans are overheated. . . Now it's been reported that there are likely other major sources of PFOA out there. . .

"In one frightening example, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has looked at microwaveable popcorn packaging and found that PFOA is not only present, but that it migrates to the oil from the packaging during heating. [In addition to popcorn packaging], fluorotelomers are used in packaging for fast foods like sandwiches, chicken and French fries, packaging for pizza, bakery items, drinks and candy [AND] paper plates."

Sadly for us, PFOA is only one of the many Poisons by another name showing up in our food supply, and is only one of many undesireable elements in our commonly accepted food prep practices.

For a Bit of Fun, with a Bit of Truth Thrown In

2006-02-16T15:08:00.000-08:00

These short online videos will take less than ten minutes total of your time, but pose some interesting questions if you think about it.

In this first video, we might ask to what extent this is a sign of the times and a part of our future.

In the second video, and for those of us who know the value of fresh raw milk, dairy and meat from healthy, humanely treated, pastured animals we can dream of a "cow revolution".

The last video is from a previous post which bears repeating, not only because it is funny but because it is so sadly true.

Enjoy

On the Bright Side

2006-02-14T14:44:00.000-08:00

How to stay safe in the world today

1. Avoid riding in automobiles because they are responsible for 20% of all fatal accidents.

2. Do not stay home because 17% of all accidents occur in the home.

3. Avoid walking on streets or sidewalks because 14% of all accidents occur to pedestrians.

4. Avoid traveling by air, rail, or water because 16% of all accidents involve these forms of transportation.

5. Of the remaining 33%, 32% of all deaths occur in Hospitals. So, above all else, avoid hospitals!!!

BUT . . . You will be pleased to learn that only 001% of all deaths occur in worship services in church, and these are usually related to previous physical disorders. Therefore, logic tells us that the safest place for you to be at any given point in time is at church!

And... Bible study is safe too.
The percentage of deaths during Bible study is even less.

So, for SAFETY'S sake...
Attend church, and read your Bible.
IT COULD SAVE YOUR LIFE!

Mineral Levels in Milk and Meat Plummet

2006-02-12T14:23:00.000-08:00

In a recent article it was revealed that a newly released study of government records of the chemical composition of everyday foods shows that there has been a marked decline in important minerals over the last 60 years. This study links this precipitous decline to intensive farming methods which have been used increasingly since the end of WWII. Naturally the food and agribusiness/farming industry are disputing the results and conclusion of this study.

Interestingly enough, this is only the latest in a long line of such "studies" and reports, beginning with USDA agricultural maps from 1900 forward. Obscure journals such as Astral Healing Health and others have also reported that even organic foods show a disastrous decline in critical minerals in particular.

This latest study was the result of research that was conducted by chiropractor and nutritionist David Thomas, who in 2000, had also published a historical review of the nutrient content of vegetables and fruit. This review also showed a disturbingly similar decline of nutrients in those foods. Thomas's findings have been backed up by academics in the US and in Denmark.

"[In a "fair and balanced" search for answers, our article continues] Scientists at the University of Newcastle's agriculture school have looked at differences in the fat and vitamin composition of milk produced in different farming systems. "We know that the faster grass grows the more you dilute the uptake of trace elements," Gillian Butler, a researcher, said. Another explanation might be that in traditional farming, clover, which is higher in minerals than grass, also played a greater part in feeding animals.

"The director of the Italian parmesan consortium, Leo Bertozzi, said the figures were a puzzle. "Our methods of making cheese have not changed, but milk in 1940 was not the same as milk today. Today cows yield five to six times as many litres a day, and their feed is different, with cereals and soya added to hay. But I find these figures surprising," he said."

The opposing point of view, which is given toward the end of the article could actually support the study results - at least if additional facts are disclosed and considered. Here is what is argued in part:

"The Food Standards Agency, which publishes The Composition of Food, agrees that using the government tables to make historical comparisons is problemmatic. "Any differences over time could be due to a wide variety of factors, including variety and breed, animal husbandry, growth, storage conditions, preparation and cooking methods as well as diferences in analytical methodology," it said in a statement. . .

"The Meat and Livestock Commission also attributed the decline in nutrients to better testing methods. "What goes in is what comes out, and the only signficant shift in beef production has been from hay to silage. If these figures were true we'd expect to see a lot of anaemic cows wondering around," Mike Attenborough, an MLC technical expert, said."

Some pertinent, unmentioned facts:

Better testing methods notwithstanding, the fact is that USDA Soil studies which have been conducted since 1900 have consistently shown continuing declines in various nutrients in farm soils across the US. A USDA report to Congress in 1936 on the subject of declining minerals and other nutrients in soil and the foods from them prompted Congress to require that a handful of unstable, synthetic vitamins be added back in to flour and grain products. Earlier studies than these had been done mostly on farmlands on the Eastern seaboard as far back as 1850. In other words decline in nutritional content of our foods due to "over-farming" is really not all that new. What seems to be new is a flagrant disregard for both the escalating severity of the problem and the potentially devastaing impact on our health and lives.

Certain traditional breeds of cattle that are pastured fed, especially with clover and similar grasses, will produce more and higher quality butter and cream than their hybridized counterparts - and their meat and milk will have a far healthier fatty acid profile and nutritional content. Just as important the grasses these animals feed off of do not need to be treated with pesticides (since many of them are considered weeds to begin with) and further help rest and replenish the soil.

Storage, preparation and cooking methods have indeed changed dramatically since 1900, and even more dramatically since the 1930's. Many studies show that each of these methods is dramatically alterring and reducing the quality and nutritional value of the foods we eat and are told to consume. Nevertheless, as the director of the Italian parmesan consortium says in the statement above: "Our methods of making cheese have not changed, but milk in 1940 was not the same as milk today."

Most telling of all is the sad fact that dairy cows (which are forced to subsist on "scientifically correct" and chemically engineered diets) today live for a maximum of 4 1/2 years on average, compared to their pastured counterparts who live 14 years on average. This fact is obscured by the practice of slaughtering dairy cows when they begin to slow down in milk or calf production. The bones of these commercial animals basically disintegrate upon slaughter. While milk, cheese and beef production is up, and while it may (or may not) be true that these scientifically-fed commercial dairy cattle are not anemic, they certainly are not healthy either. We have an oversupply of milk, and an abundant supply of beef available to us, but at what cost to us and our environment?

As the great soil scientist William Albrecht once said: "Food is fabricated soil fertility."

The WTO Tightens the Noose Around EU Consumer Resistance to GM Crops

2006-02-09T15:15:00.000-08:00

In a prolonged and very protracted battle the EU may soon be facing trade sanctions and hefty fines if it continues to resist GM crops. Never mind what consumers want, never mind what the science - often kept secret and hidden from public view - clearly indicates.

According to this article,

"Europe faces new pressure to open its markets to genetically-modified food from the US after the World Trade Organisation ruled that the EU broke international rules with its moratorium on new licences.. . . .The US, Canada and Argentina brought the WTO complaint against the EU, in May 2003, arguing that the moratorium was about protectionism, not science. The three countries say there is no scientific evidence for the EU action, which was an unfair barrier to producers of biotech foods wanting to do business in Europe. .. . [Even worse] Last night's ruling was greeted with relief by US farmers."

Now for some recent studies. This one was reported last May 2005 in an article titled "Revealed: Health Fears Over Secret Study into GM food - Rats fed GM corn due for sale in Britain developed abnormalities in blood and kidneys." This according to details of secret research carried out by Monsanto which were revealed by the Independent/UK after review of a confidential 1,139 page report.

In a follow up article nine months later this article ran with the headline: "GM: New Study Shows Unborn Babies Could Be Harmed: Mortality rates for new-born rats six times higher when mother was fed on a diet of modified soy."

Excerpt:

"Women who eat GM foods while pregnant risk endangering their unborn babies, startling new research suggests. . . [Moreover] The research - which is being prepared for publication - is just one of a clutch of recent studies that are reviving fears that GM food damages human health. Italian research has found that modified soya affected the liver and pancreas of mice. Australia had to abandon a decade-long attempt to develop modified peas when an official study found they caused lung damage."

This is scary stuff, especially when US farmers welcome the chance to shove GM crops down the throats of unwilling consumers. Maybe that's because they read this kind of bunk and spin

Flouride's Dirty Secrets

2006-02-08T13:46:00.000-08:00

Flouride may well be the most insidious of all additives and poisons which are increasingly wending their way into our food and water supply. Be prepared to brace yourself because you, like us, may well be shocked and dismayed by what was known and recorded into the public record about sodium flouride - also known as flourine - as early as 1939. For example did you know that the Department of Agriculture Yearbook of 1939 said that "It is especially important that flourine be avoided from birth to the age of 12?"

The following are excerpts from two articles detailing what can only be termed "expert" testimony from people who were present from the beginning of sodium flouride's debut into our food and water stream. Note that much of this material has remained buried or even "scrubbed" from the public domain. In the full second article there is a forward to the main text which describes one of many methods used to hide or even eliminate such information from the public domain and discourse.

We apologize ahead of time for such long quotes, but we have tried to distill our two articles down to their essence. The articles themselves are much longer. Read them and see. Especially read the forward to the second article.

Excerpts from our first article titled Flouride Stupidity which can be found under archived articles on this archived main page:

Let's begin at the beginning: The first occurrence of fluoridated drinking water on Earth was found in Germany's Nazi prison camps. The Gestapo had little concern about fluoride's supposed effect on children's teeth; their alleged reason for mass-medicating water with sodium fluoride was to sterilize humans and force the people in their concentration camps into calm submission. (Ref. book: "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben" by Joseph Borkin.) . . .

[Now quoting a letter received by the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, Milwaukee Wisconsin, on 2 October 1954, from Mr. Charles Perkins, a chemist]: "I have your letter of September 29 asking for further documentation regarding a statement made in my book, The Truth About Water Fluoridation, to the effect that the idea of water fluoridation was brought to England from Russia by the Russian Communist Kreminoff. In the 1930's, Hitler and the German Nazi's envisioned a world to be dominated and controlled by a Nazi philosophy of pan-Germanism. The German chemists worked out a very ingenious and far-reaching plan of mass-control which was submitted to and adopted by the German General Staff. This plan was to control the population in any given area through mass medication of drinking water supplies. By this method they could control the population in whole areas, reduce population by water medication that would produce sterility in women, and so on. In this scheme of mass-control, sodium fluoride occupied a prominent place. . . .

[Continuing with quotes from the same letter by Mr. Perkins]: "Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluoride will in time reduce an individual's power to resist domination, by slowly poisoning and narcotizing a certain area of the brain, thus making him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him. [So] . . .

"The real reason behind water fluoridation is not to benefit children's teeth. If this were the real reason there are many ways in which it could be done that are much easier, cheaper, and far more effective. . .

"When the Nazis under Hitler decided to go into Poland, both the German General Staff and the Russian General Staff exchanged scientific and military ideas, plans, and personnel, and the scheme of mass control through water medication was seized upon by the Russian Communists because it fitted ideally into their plan to communize the world. ...

"I was told of this entire scheme by a German chemist who was an official of the great IG Farben chemical industries and was also prominent in the Nazi movement at the time. I say this with all the earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years' research into the chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology of fluorine--any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person mentally or physically." - CHARLES E. PERKINS, Chemist, 2 October 1954.

[NEXT quoting] Einstein's nephew, Dr. E.H. Bronner (a chemist who had also been a prisoner of war during WWII) in a letter printed in The Catholic Mirror, Springfield, MA, January 1952. Excerpts follow: "It appears that the citizens of Massachusetts are among the 'next' on the agenda of the water poisoners. . .

"As a research chemist of established standing, I built within the past 22 years, 3 American chemical plants and licensed 6 of my 53 patents. Based on my years of practical experience in the health-food and chemical field, let me warn: fluoridation of drinking water is criminal insanity, sure national suicide. Don't do it.

"Even in small quantities, sodium fluoride is a deadly poison to which no effective antidote has been found. Every exterminator knows that it is the most efficient rat-killer. ... Sodium fluoride is entirely different from organic calcium-fluoro-phosphate needed by our bodies and provided by nature, in God's great providence and love, to build and strengthen our bones and our teeth. This organic calcium-fluoro-phosphate, derived from proper foods, is an edible organic salt, insoluble in water and assimilable by the human body, whereas the non-organic sodium fluoride used in fluoridating water is instant poison to the body and fully water soluble. The body refuses to assimilate it.

"Careful, bonafide laboratory experimentation by conscientious, patriotic research chemists, and actual medical experience, have both revealed that instead of preserving or promoting 'dental health,' fluoridated drinking water destroys teeth, before adulthood and after, by the destructive mottling and other pathological conditions it actually causes in them, and also creates many other very grave pathological conditions in the internal organisms of bodies consuming it. How can it be called a "health" plan? What's behind it?

"That any so-called "doctors" would persuade a civilized nation to add voluntarily a deadly poison to its drinking water systems is unbelievable. It is the height of criminal insanity.

"Fluoridation of water systems can be slow national suicide, or quick national liquidation. It is criminal insanity--treason!" Dr. E.H. Bronner, Mfg. Research Chemist, Los Angeles."

WELL! Wasn't THAT food for thought? But wait - here is more from our second article which are excerpts from the transcript of a speech delivered by George Racey Jordan, Major USAF (ret) at the Hotel Statler in Washington, D.C. on February 17, 1956, as follows:

The original claims for fluoridation came from the discovery that Texas children seemed to have less cavities, which after all, is not a contagious disease. It was assumed to be due to natural high percentage of calcium-fluoride in the soil. This type of fluoride is not retained in the body like the aluminum waste product [sodium flouride].

The big problem has been for the aluminum manufacturers to so present, as to transfer the idea, of supposed benefits, from the natural calcium-fluoride, over to the unnatural sodium-fluoride.

They used the big lie technique, that, A FLUORIDE ION, is a FLUORIDE ION, whether it is in combination with calcium or sodium, it would make no difference to humans. They are completely lost if they cannot hold the line on this one point.

Their case falls like a house of cards if it is ever universally understood that calcium-fluoride which is found in hundreds of ordinary foods, is not retained in the body, to poison one, like the artificial aluminum waste product which is harmful, because like arsenic, it is retained in the body.

. . . . A new toothpaste named CREST is on the market. It cautions:

"Children under 6 should not use CREST, because. . . they might swallow when brushing".

So -- it is dangerous! Well listen to this one. Department of Agriculture Yearbook for 1939:

"It is especially important that fluorine be avoided from birth to the age of 12 years".

. . . .I could stand here all afternoon and quote reputable medical men who are urging extreme caution, but to save time I will quote only a few.

Dr. A. L. Miller, formerly Public Health Commissioner of Nebraska, now in Congress,

"These groups, dental associations, and several other health agencies, now recommending the fluoridation of water were simply endorsing each other's opinions and had never done any original work of their own."

Dr. Miley Wesson, famous urologist and former editor of the magazine, UROLOGY, informs the city manager of San Francisco by letter:

"After studying the evidence against fluoridation, city water is on my blacklist, I am drinking Poland Springs water."

Dr. Leo Spira's book, THE DRAMA OF FLUORINE. Says:

"The close similarity between the action of arsenic and that of fluorine is manifest."

Lessons Learned from the 1918 Pandemic?

2006-01-30T15:03:00.000-08:00

History can teach us many lessons if we just take the time to really look. With a new "pandemic" staring us in the face we might look to history to help us determine what might be the most prudent way to protect ourselves from any such threats. The following may provide some insights. It is the conclusion of Chapter 2 of an online book written by an expert who was actually there during the 1918 pandemic. This is what she says:

QUOTE:

It has been said that the 1918 flu epidemic killed 20,000,000 people throughout the world. But, actually, the doctors killed them with their crude and deadly treatments and drugs. This is a harsh accusation but it is nevertheless true, judging by the success of the drugless doctors in comparison with that of the medical doctors.

While the medical men and medical hospitals were losing 33% of their flu cases, the non-medical hospitals such as BATTLE CREEK, KELLOGG and MACFADDEN’S HEALTH-RESTORIUM were getting almost 100% healings with their /water /cure, baths, enemas, etc., fasting and certain other simple healing methods, followed by carefully worked out diets of natural foods. One health doctor didn’t lose a patient in eight years. The very successful health treatment of one of those drugless doctors who didn’t lose any patients will be given in the other part of this book, titled VACCINATION CONDEMNED, to be published a little later.

If the medical doctors had been as advanced as the drugless doctors, there would not have been those 20 million deaths from the medical flu treatment.

There was seven times more disease among the vaccinated soldiers than among the unvaccinated civilians, and the diseases were those they had been vaccinated against. One soldier who had returned from overseas in 1912 told me that the army hospitals were filled with cases of /infantile paralysis/ and he wondered why grown men should have an infant disease. Now, we know that paralysis is a common after-effect of vaccine poisoning. Those at home didn’t get the paralysis until after the world-wide vaccination campaign in 1918.

What a Surprise!!

2006-01-27T13:39:00.000-08:00

The following is from an email alert titled "EPA Ignores Public Opposition to Testing on Kids" and to which we can only say, What a Surprise!

We suggest you go to the full article, and be sure to scroll down to read the Q & A section, whether or not you read anything else. There is a lesson or two to be learned there. Here is the excerpt:

Several months ago, the Organic Consumers Association alerted its readers to an EPA proposed rule that would allow pesticide and other chemical testing on children. Thanks to all of you, over 50,000 comments were generated to the EPA condemning this proposal. Despite overwhelming input from citizens, congress, and EPA's own scientists opposing the proposed rule, the agency's administrators have announced they are days away from approving the proposal and allowing chemical testing on children. "The fact that EPA allows pesticide testing of any kind on the most vulnerable, including abused and neglected children, is simply astonishing," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. Even EPA's own scientists are speaking out against the agency's proposed rule. "I am somewhat dismayed that this rule was presented in such a complex -- and I would have to say, tricky -- way," said Suzanne Wuerthele, a regional toxicologist for the EPA. Earlier in 2005, Congress mandated that the EPA must ban all chemical testing on humans without exception, in order for the agency to be allocated its full budget. EPA has clearly failed to do this with this proposed rule.

Full article and "take action" here.

Is Someone Trying to Kill Us?

2006-01-24T13:30:00.000-08:00

This came to us via a friend.

Please pass along to everyone you know. As our friend says THIS IS SERIOUS STUFF!! But one has to wonder whether this is just the tip of the iceberg. Consider for example the assertion made in this article on the Vioxx debacle (where over 60,000 deaths have been attributed to a drug the FDA had claimed was safe) that "It's almost as if the pharmaceutical industry has declared war on the health of the American public."

BAD NEWS FOR PHARMACEUTICAL GIANTS . . .

Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) can cause hemorrhagic stokes or cerebral bleeding even with the first use.

The following is a list of other medications that currently use PPA.
These medicines are supposedly being recalled. Pharmaceutical companies have known about this danger for years, we unfortunately, did not.

You are urged to review the list of medicines with PPA and avoid these medications.

DRUG RECALL INFORMATION

All drugs containing PHENYLPROPANOLAMINE are being recalled. You may want to try calling the 800 number listed on most drug boxes and inquire about a REFUND Please read this CAREFULLY. Also, please pass this on to everyone you know.

STOP TAKING anything containing this ingredient. It has been linked to increased hemorrhagic stroke (bleeding in brain)among women ages 18-49 in the three days after starting use of medication. Problems were not found in men, but the FDA
recommended that everyone (even children) seek alternative medicine.

The following medications contain Phenylpropanolamine:

Acutrim Diet Gum Appetite Suppressant
Acutrim Plus Dietary Supplements
Acutrim Maximum Strength Appetite Control
Alka-Seltzer Plus Children's Cold Medicine Effervescent
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold medicine (cherry or orange)
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold Medicine Original
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Cough Medicine Effervescent
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Flu Medicine
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Sinus Effervescent
Alka Seltzer Plus Night-Time Cold Medicine
BC Allergy Sinus Cold Powder
BC Sinus Cold Powder
Comtrex Flu Therapy & Fever Relief
Day & Night Contac 12-Hour Cold Capsules
Contac 12 Hour Caplets
Coricidin D Cold, Flu & Sinus
Dexatrim Caffeine Free
Dexatrim Extended Duration
Dexatrim Gelcaps
Dexatrim Vitamin C/Caffeine Free
Dimetapp Cold & Allergy Chewable Tablets
Dimetapp Cold & Cough Liqui-Gels
Dimetapp DM Cold & Cough Elixir
Dimetapp Elixir
Dimetapp 4 Hour Liquid Gels
Dimetapp 4 Hour Tablets
Dimetapp 12 Hour Extentabs Tablets
Naldecon DX Pediatric Drops
Permathene Mega-16
Robitussin CF
Tavist-D 12 Hour Relief of Sinus & NasalCongestion
Triaminic DM Cough Relief
Triaminic Expectorant Chest & Head
Triaminic Syrup ! ! Cold & Allergy
Triaminic Triaminicol Cold & Cough .....

I just found out and called the 800# on the container for Triaminic and they informed me that they are voluntarily recalling the following medicines because of a certain ingredient that is causing strokes and seizures in children:

Orange 3D Cold & Allergy Cherry (Pink)
3D Cold & Cough Berry
3D Cough Relief Yellow 3D Expectorant

They are asking you to call them at 800-548-3708 with the lot number on the box so they can send you postage for you to send it back to them, and they will also issue you a refund. If you know of anyone else with small children, PLEASE PASS THIS ON. THIS IS SERIOUS STUFF!

To confirm these findings please take time to check the following:

http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/ppa/

The Hidden Motive of The Bird Flu Hype

2006-01-23T10:03:00.000-08:00

In anticipation of the spin likely to come out of the upcoming World Economic Forum, the following is quoted from this discussion thread posted January 22 which succinctly describes what is really going on in the grand scheme of things. You can update numbers as needed and as they become available - and be cautioned that a "pandemic" may indeed happen - but the basic argument is still sound. For well-sourced background information, documentation, books, and links check out those listed at the bottom of our biological terrain page, and check out our previous post on PH or acid/alkaline balance.

Now for the quote of the day:

"The "Bird Flu Pandemic" is pure, 24-carat bullshit. You are absolutely right, the real motive behind it and the calls for governments to "stockpile" tamiflu is to enrich Big Pharma at taxpayers' expense. The "pandemic" will never happen, the Tamiflu probably wouldn't prevent it anyway, the alleged "disease" has killed fewer than 50 people worldwide. Furthermore, they don't even know that the "virus" killed those people, they just "find" it with their undoubtedly non-specific "tests" and ASSUME it killed the person. . . .

I would love to know if a "bird flu" virus has even been isolated by rigorous isolation protocols. I bet not. Meanwhile, the media scream "deadly virus," "millions of birds have already died" (not mentioning that those millions are dead because they were "culled" at the recommendation of the WHO), millions of chickens have had their lives shortened by being culled, and (another MAJOR motive), governments and the WHO are calling for an end to backyard chicken and duck farming, which is ubiquitous in the Third World and a way for poor people to be self-sufficient. .. .

But WHO and the rest of the "public health" establishment are saying that because of "Bird Flu" this backyard farming must end, and all chickens and ducks must be raised on corporate "factory farms" in tiny cages where they are crammed in with other birds instead of being able to roam free on backyard farms, are shot with carcinogenic antibiotics and hormones to make them grow faster, and live lives of abject misery. And the farmers forbidden to raise them go from being self sufficient to being dependent on the whims of Agribusiness for their livelihoods. .

And who benefits from that? Why, "Big Agro" and big pharma which makes the drugs they fill these poor birds with. And who just happens to fund the WHO -- why, Big Pharma and Big Agro, among many other corporate predators. . .

The leaders of the WHO are criminals against humanity as much as any tyrant who ever walked the earth. So, too, are the leaders of "Big Media" who help them committ their atrocities. One can only hope that someday they will receive the damnation they have earned. . . "

Fear no bugs since thou understandeth pH

2006-01-22T10:04:00.000-08:00

Excerpted from the November 2005 issue of The Idaho Observer:

"The germ is nothing. The soil is everything."

~Louis Pasteur

The key to health is maintaining a [healthy] body pH . . with the understanding that no pathogens known to man are capable of existing, much less reproducing, in a [healthy] pH . . .

. . . If you understand the acid/alkaline balance as it relates to illness and health, you will no longer have any fear of bird flu, cancer, diabetes, heart disease or any other acute or chronic illness. The truth is that the appearance of disease and the severity of disease symptoms is totally dependent upon the general health of the host. The chief indicator of general health is pH. High pH means your cells are being oxygenated and they are able to take in nutrients, excrete waste, perform their intended function and are not vulnerable to infection; low pH means your cells are being deprived of oxygen, are not properly taking in nutrients or efficiently excreting waste, are not able to perform their intended function and are vulnerable to infection.

It is an axiom of life that pathogens (viruses, fungi, bacteria) do not "attack" live, healthy cells and tissue. We have been taught to believe that germs cause disease, when the truth is that dis-ease causes germs. . . .

Free Trade and Globalization

2006-01-21T13:39:00.000-08:00

Not very long ago I was a true believer in the benefits of “free trade” and globalization. After all, globalizing meant jobs for poor people in poor countries (jobs they needed in order to buy our products). The added bonus was that I benefited from lower prices.

Indeed I bought into this fantasy despite the commonsense recognition that the earth’s resources are, after all, finite - and therefore endless growth (most especially hyper-growth) together with waste-generating overconsumption is not just unsustainable it is unhealthy as well. In addition, the professed benefits of globalization also (wrongly) assume that all people, irrespective of their own cultural values, desperately want, need, and will subscribe to my consumption-oriented values.

Amazingly, the idea that substantial portions of other cultures may not want what I regarded as essential was simply not a part of my equation. And yes, it was the low (some would argue artificially low) prices which kept me and so many others so enamored.

Then one day, on my way to the supermarket, I realized that I was in big trouble. Health concerns had been forcing me to search for clean, whole, truly health-giving foods and my search was becoming more and more difficult – even impossible.

Take fish for example. Not only are all species becoming increasingly contaminated by any number of chemicals (the most recently publicized being methyl-mercury) but we are told that as much as 90% of the ocean’s fish supply is gone (from a combination of industrialized fishing and nitrogen fertilizer run-off which cause algae blooms and massive fish die-offs). Although farm-raised fish appears to be a good solution, I know that these fish can be heavily contaminated by PCBs and other chemicals, and their valuable fatty acid profile is dramatically and unfavorably altered. Farm-raised fish are also seriously degrading the environment.

But beyond food choices being limited to less bad and really bad, there were the conversations among supermarket employees I had been overhearing with increasing regularity as “competition” and supermarket takeovers and mergers force employees to make continual and excessive wage and benefit concessions. Many of these acquisitions and mergers are being orchestrated by multi-national companies whose main objective, understandably at least in the eyes of the shareholders, is to not just maintain - but to increase profitability.

Corporate profitability is maintained through a combination of reduced wages, increased subsidies, tax breaks and incentives as well as the government-sanctioned power to “encourage” third world nations to produce crops for “northern” countries such as Europe and the U.S. in place of the kind of crops that have in the past been used to feed their own peoples. Meanwhile the rich “northern” countries heavily subsidize their own commodity crops.

This whole process not only decreases traditional food supplies through displacement with “commodity” crops, it increases overall world supply of a relative handful of “commodities”, thereby reducing prices ALL farmers receive for their labor. As a result, increasing numbers of small farmers everywhere are forced from their land even as more and more people in third world nations are starving while “Northern” countries are awash in food.

In addition, “new and enlightened” crop production methods which provide the modus operandi of agribusiness are heavily reliant on chemicals, expensive patented seeds, and energy intensive machinery, processing and transport costs. So much so that an estimated 90% of your food dollar and mine goes to support various related auxiliary industries rather than real food.

Then trade rules are set up to further “facilitate” globalization. These trade rules can and often do, over-ride concerns ordinary citizens might have about the environment and the quality of our food supply. And they protect corporate rights over worker rights.

Incredibly, global trade agreements can and often do trump national and local laws. The World Trade Organization, created in 1995, in fact has explicit authority under international law to decide which local and national laws are in violation of its trade rules and it has ruled against every environmental law it has so far reviewed. Moreover, its decisions have already resulted in weakening not just environmental laws, but health and safety standards of several nations, including the U.S.

Loss of jobs, low wages and declining benefits, serious contamination of the environment, the overwhelming predominance of “plastic” or poor quality food, even the unspoken notion that war is necessary to secure dominance of global trade are all part of the same philosophical theme. Oddly, Adam Smith is often used to support this idea of “free trade” and globalization. Yet it was Adam Smith who argued in his Wealth of Nations that the "liberal reward of labour" is essential to an ultimately successful society.”

And it was Smith who stated that: “Our merchants and master-manufacturers complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price...They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people.”

Further, Smith and later Thomas Jefferson essentially argued that the agricultural system is "the Principle Source of the Revenue and Wealth of Every Country" and both envisioned societies anchored by the small family farmer – who out of his own concern for long-term survival and sustainability and in stark contrast to the large plantation owners – would be a good steward of the land.

We are truly at a critical crossroads in our history. What we have going on now is good for no one, not even the mega-ccorporations that promote it. The ONLY way toward a healthy, more equitable, sustainable future is to recognize, as the book Alternatives to Economic Globalization concludes, that “The current and future well-being of humanity depends on transforming the relationships of power within and between societies toward more democratic and mutually accountable modes of managing human affairs that are self-organizing, power-sharing, and minimize the need for coercive central authority.”

NAFTA On Steroids

2006-01-20T14:01:00.000-08:00

As Jim Hightower says in a past edition of his newsletter "The Hightower Lowdown", the proposed FTAA(Free Trade Area of Americas) is like NAFTA on steroids. This new "agreement" together with the WTO will be used to further "liberalize" (i.e. privatize) things like water, education, social security, electricity, prisons, etc. - AND it has language that outlaws any public regulations that are deemed "more burdensome than necessary" to the corporations providing the services. Just WHO decides what is "more burdensome"? The corporations of course!

Naturally, as in similar “free trade” agreements, the corporations have the right to sue governments they decide are impeding their profits. [Check for example, provisions in NAFTA's Chapter 11]. And naturally the decisions of the lawsuits are to be made behind closed doors by secret tribunals. Apparently, according to Hightower, there are 9 working groups of trade officials meeting every 3 or 4 months in secret to plan just how this global corporate takeover will be completed.

To assist the corporate bigwigs there is a "Trade Advisory Committee System" set up by 34 nations. And conveniently coinciding with each of the formal meetings is a gathering of corporate bigwigs sponsored by the Council of the Americas, representing the likes of AOL, ADM, Exxon, GE, IBM etc.

But as Hightower says, the Americas are not the only playground for these corporate powers. Simultaneously, additional rounds of secret negotiations have taken place thru the WTO - which is also seeking to force privatization of public services elsewhere in the world thru a global trade deal called GATS - General Agreement on Trade and Services. Companies pushing for this are Halliburton, Bechtel, Vivendi, GE and more.

Furthermore says Hightower "most members of Congress have only the vaguest notion that these negotiations are going on (they're not allowed to see the negotiating documents either), and most are willfully ignorant of the ugly details as they rush to the bank with campaign checks from the corporate thieves. . ."

The Healthiest People in the World (aren't us)

2006-01-17T14:45:00.000-08:00

The U.S. population represents just 5% if the world's total and yet more than half the total world supply of pharmaceuticals is used in the United States. Surely this means that an awful lot of us must be taking one or more of these drugs, which gives lie to the idea that Americans are among the healthiest people on the planet.

Ironically and as a testament to our overt - and unhealthy - addiction, Americans are being forced to pay two to two-and-a-half times the going rate as the rest of the world for these same pharmaceuticals. Lucky for us then that our collective drug spending is a "relatively small" 10% of the total health care bill (which as of 2003 reached $1.6 trillion, approaching 16% of the gross national product with no end in sight). Worse still and according to John Abramson, M.D. in his book Overdosed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine, "The United States spends more than twice as much per person on health care as the other industrialized nations. . . . The excess spending on health care in the United States is like a yearly tax of more than $1800 on every American citizen. "

Rarely mentioned is the obscene level of profit built into the current health care (or more accurately sickness care) system, made possible by subsidies, incentives and write-offs paid for by you and me. In the insurance industry alone profits can range from 15 to around 33%, which illustrates Dennis Kucinich's mantra of "We need health care for people not profit".

Still further adding insult to injury and despite our relatively "small" expenditure on pharmaceuticals, researchers have found that 2.2 million people per year have in-hospital, adverse reactions to prescribed drugs.

Something is wrong with this picture. For a humorous, but insightful look at our growing addictions: http://www.grab.com/fun/specials/licensetopill