by Mike Adams
NaturalNews has learned that the FDA is intentionally plotting to deceive consumers over the labeling of irradiated foods, attempting to eliminate any requirement for informative labeling or replace the word "irradiated" with "pasteurized."
In a feature story published by NaturalNews yesterday, we stated that the FDA does not require foods to be labeled as irradiated. We received a lot of questions from readers about that point, with some stating the FDA does, in fact, require foods to be labeled when irradiated. This is not always correct: Most foods are not required to be labeled as irradiated. This story explains the FDA's food irradiation labeling policy in more detail and reveals the FDA's plot to deceive consumers by misleading them into thinking irradiated foods are NOT irradiated.
Foods that are exempt from irradiation labeling:
According to current FDA regulations, any food used as an ingredient in another food does NOT have to be labeled as irradiated. For example, if you buy coleslaw, and the cabbage in the coleslaw has been irradiated, there is no requirement that the coleslaw carry any labeling indicating it has been irradiated.
However, if raw cabbage is irradiated, then current FDA regulations do require it to carry an irradiation label. This label, however, is a symbol, not text, and many consumers have no idea what the symbol really means -- it actually looks like a "fresh" symbol of some sort. In no way does it clearly indicate the food has been irradiated. This is the FDA's way to "hide" the fact that these foods have been irradiated. (The symbol looks a lot more like leaves under the sun than food being irradiated...)
That same head of cabbage, by the way, if served in a restaurant, requires absolutely no irradiation labeling. All restaurant foods are excused from any irradiation labeling requirement. As stated at the FDA's own website (1):
Irradiation labeling requirements apply only to foods sold in stores. For example, irradiated spices or fresh strawberries should be labeled. When used as ingredients in other foods, however, the label of the other food does not need to describe these ingredients as irradiated. Irradiation labeling also does not apply to restaurant foods.
How the FDA plans to deceive consumers and further hide the fact that foods are being irradiated
As stated above, the FDA does not want consumers to realize their foods are being irradiated. Consumer awareness is considered undesirable by the FDA; an agency that also works hard to censor truthful statements about nutritional supplements and functional foods. Accordingly, the FDA pursues a policy of enforced ignorance of consumers regarding irradiated foods, nutritional supplements, medicinal herbs and all sorts of natural substances. It is currently illegal in the United States to state that cherries help ease arthritis inflammation if you are selling cherries. (http://www.naturalnews.com/019366.html)
On the food irradiation issue, the FDA is now proposing two things that are nothing short of astonishing in their degree of deceit:
FDA proposal #1: Irradiated foods shouldn't be labeled as irradiated unless consumers can visibly tell they're irradiated.
This ridiculous proposal by the FDA suggests that foods shouldn't be labeled as irradiated unless there is some obvious material damage to the foods (like their leaves are wilting). Thus, foods that don't appear to be irradiated should not have to be labeled as irradiated.
Imagine if this same ridiculous logic were used to regulate heavy metals content in foods: If consumers can't SEE the heavy metals, then they should be declared free of heavy metals!
FDA proposal #2: Irradiated foods should be labeled as "pasteurized," not "irradiated."
This FDA proposal is so bizarre that it makes you wonder whether the people working at the FDA are smoking crystal meth. They literally want irradiated foods to be labeled as "pasteurized."
And why? Because the word "pasteurized" sounds a lot more palatable to consumers, of course. Never mind the fact that it's a lie. Irradiated foods are not pasteurized, and pasteurized foods are not irradiated. These two words mean two different things, which is precisely why they each have their own entries in the dictionary. When you look up "irradiated," it does not say, "See pasteurized."
But the FDA is now playing the game of thought police by manipulating the public with screwy word replacement games that bear a strange resemblance to the kind of language used in the novel 1984 by George Orwell. And it is, indeed, an Orwellian kind of mind game that the FDA wants to play with the food supply: After unleashing Weapons of Mass Destruction (radiation) onto the foods, the FDA wants to label them all as simply being "pasteurized," keeping consumers ignorant and uninformed.
How do I know the FDA wants to do this? The agency said so itself in an April 4, 2007 document filed in the Federal Register (Volume 72, Number 64). As published in the document (2):
FDA is also proposing to allow a firm to petition FDA for use of an alternate term to "irradiation'' (other than "pasteurized''). In addition, FDA is proposing to permit a firm to use the term "pasteurized'' in lieu of "irradiated,'' provided it notifies the agency that the irradiation process being used meets the criteria specified for use of the term "pasteurized'' in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) and the agency does not object to the notification.
Did you follow all that mind-warping logic? The FDA is essentially begging a company to petition it to use the term "pasteurized" instead of "irradiated" as long as they both result in the food being killed. Once it receives such a petition, it will approve it, claiming it is meeting "the needs of industry."
The FDA already allows lots of word substitutions in the areas of health and medicine. The phrase "Toxic Poison" has been replaced with "Chemotherapy," for example. "Over-medicated with dangerous psychiatric drugs" has been replaced with the term, "Treatment." And the phrase, "Regulated with life-threatening synthetic chemicals" has been replaced with the word "managed," as in "her diabetes has been managed."
So why not introduce all sorts of other word substitutions that might continue the Orwellian "Ministry of Language" propaganda put forth by the FDA?
I say we substitute the word "medicated" with "treated" and "treated" with "rewarded." That way, when a patient describes what drugs she's on, she can say, "I've been rewarded with ten different prescriptions!"
Better yet, let's replace the word "surgery" with "enhancement." So anybody who undergoes heart bypass surgery, for example, can say they've really just had "Heart bypass enhancement!"
It sounds a lot easier to swallow, doesn't it? And that's what it's all about, folks, when it comes to irradiating the food supply: Making it all sounds a lot less treacherous than it really is. Control the words and you control people's ideas, and if there's one thing the tyrannical FDA is really, really good at, it's controlling words!
What the FDA really wants to accomplish
Let's get down to some blunt truth about the FDA's real genocidal agenda. What the FDA wants here is two things:
1) The destruction of the food supply (genocide)
2) The complete ignorance of the consuming public (nutritional illiteracy)
Genocide and illiteracy. Ignorance and fear. Tyranny, radiation and chemicals... These are the things the FDA truly stands for.
That pretty much sums up the FDA's intent on this whole food irradiation issue. Destroy the food and mislead the People. And then wait for the windfall of profits at Big Pharma as the People degenerate into a mass of diseased, disoriented and desperate health patients. It's business as usual at the FDA.
That's why Dr. James Duke, creator of the world's largest phytochemical database (http://www.ars-grin.gov/duke), had this to say about the FDA's food irradiation policy:
"Perhaps the FDA should call up a billion dollar team to consider irradiating another health hazard - the FDA itself, which is almost as dangerous to our health as the pharmaceutical industry."
Why I call this the unleashing of "Weapons of Mass Destruction"
In my previous article on this issue, I've called this food irradiation agenda a "Weapon of Mass Destruction" against the food supply. A couple of readers questioned me about that. Why, they asked, do I consider food irradiation to be a WMD?
WMDs include weapons that indiscriminately cause damage to people and infrastructure that serves the People. Dumping a radioactive substance into the water supply that serves a major city, for example, would be considered using a Weapon of Mass Destruction.
Interestingly, the use of Depleted Uranium by the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan is also an example of Weapons of Mass Destruction, making the U.S. guilty of yet more crimes against humanity. (A previous example is the dropping of nuclear weapons on Japan's civilian population in World War II.)
Irradiating the food supply is also an application of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and here's a thought experiment that will clearly demonstrate it:
Suppose you wanted to irradiate your own garden vegetables. The minute you start trying to buy a machine that produces radiation, you would be quickly considered a terrorist and investigated by the FBI. They would visit your home and ask, "Why do you need a radiation machine?" And if you said you needed to irradiate your garden vegetables, they would look at you like you were completely nuts and probably haul you into the local FBI field office for yet more questioning, all while considering you a possible terrorist and likely adding your name to the no-fly list so you could never travel on commercial airlines.
If you don't believe me, try to acquire a high-powered radiation emitting device and see what happens...
So why is it considered bizarre and possibly criminal when an individual buys a radiation machine to irradiate their own foods, but when the FDA pushes the same agenda on a larger scale, they call it "safety?"
Irradiated food isn't altered, claims the FDA
Of course, the FDA says the irradiated food isn't altered by the radiation. This statement is an insult to the intelligence of anyone with a pulse. Why? Because if the radiation doesn't alter anything, then how can it kill e.coli and salmonella?
The whole point of the radiation is to kill living organisms. And it works by causing fatal damage to the tissues and DNA of those microorganisms. So guess what it does to the plants? Since radiation isn't selective, it also irradiates the plant fibers and tissues, causing DNA damage and the destruction of enzymes and phytochemicals.
Amazingly, the FDA claims this does not count as "altering" the food because these changes aren't visible.
If it weren't such a nutritional atrocity, it would be downright hilarious. DNA changes are not visible to the human eye, but they can result in serious health consequences. Just ask anyone born with two Y chromosomes.
Eat up, guinea pigs!
Of course, the radiation pushers will claim that nobody really knows whether irradiating the food kills just 1% of the phytochemicals or 99% (or something in between). And they don't know what the long-term effect is on human health, either. This is exactly my point: The irradiation of fresh produce is a dangerous experiment, and we've all been involuntarily recruited as guinea pigs.
I will be curious to see a serious scientific inquiry into the nutritional damage caused to fresh produce by irradiation. I also find it simply astonishing that this decision by the FDA has been made in the absence of such scientific studies. Much like it does with the pharmaceutical industry, the FDA prefers to poison the people first, and then figure out later just how much damage might have been caused.
I say when you're dealing with the food supply, you should err on the side of caution. We are talking about the health of the nation here. This is not a small matter. It should be treated with extreme caution, skepticism and scientific scrutiny. Instead, it is being addressed with a gung-ho attitude framed in mind games and enforced ignorance.
In other words, rather than figuring out whether food irradiation is actually safe, the FDA would rather simply pretend it is.
Welcome to Make Believe Land, where all your food is now safe and nutritious, courtesy of the FDA!
Organic Consumers Association News Headlines
overview of AmericA
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
by Neil McLaughlin
While most have heard of vitamins and minerals, there are 14 other categories of active plant components and they also offer medicinal benefits. Becoming familiar with all of these elements is essential for understanding their benefits and combinatorial effects. This article summarizes the 16 active constituents found in plants.
1) Minerals - Minerals are essential trace elements such as Copper and Magnesium. They are the simplest form of matter: basic elements found in the Periodic table. The best raw sources include Blueberries, Almonds, Broccoli and Cauliflower.
2) Vitamins - Vitamins are essential molecules required in order for cells to function properly. Without ingesting all vitamins we will suffer disease and die. Lack of Vitamin C (Ascorbic Acid), found in citrus fruits, causes Scurvy for example. Some plants contain more vitamins than others, but all plants contain at least trace amounts of vitamins, often playing synergistic roles with other elements found in the plant. The best sources of vitamins include raw Spinach, Beans, Oranges, Carrots and Apples.
3) Tannins - This element should be familiar to wine drinkers, and especially those who cannot drink wine as tannins can cause headaches. Produced by all plants, tannins are the harsh, astringent taste of bark and leaves designed to repel some life forms, namely insect pests. They are used to "tan" leather. They cause contraction of tissues, whether a saddle or your tongue. The best sources of tannins include Pomegranates, Grapes and Persimmon.
4) Flavonoids - Found in a wide variety of plants, flavonoids are anti-inflammatory components that have useful actions, mainly serving to improve circulation. The best sources of flavonoids include Citrus juice like Lemon, Lime and Grapefruit.
5) Volatile Oils - One of the most important medicinal aspects of plants, volatile (or essential) oils offer the main fragrant element and are used for aromatherapy. Different fragrances have vastly different effects on mood. Volatile oils are strongly antiseptic and normally have anti-inflammatory properties. The best sources of volatile oils include Tea tree, Peppermint, Lavender and Sandalwood.
6) Mucilage - Mucilage is a component of many plants that contains polysaccharides (large sugar molecules) that retain water to produce a jelly like mass that offers soothing effects on skin in the mouth, throat, digestive tract and even extends to the lungs and other organs. The best sources of mucilage include Mullein, Aloe Vera and Psyllium seed husks.
7) Alkaloids - The most active ingredient, these (normally nitrogen bearing) molecules have various medicinal and even cancer fighting effects on the body. The best sources of (healthy) alkaloids include Garlic and Onions.
8) Bitters - An essential food group (and one of the five flavors we sense, including sweet, salty, sour and umami), bitters have largely been factored out of our diets. Bitterness however is key to digestion as it causes the secretion of important salivary enzymes that nourish and strengthen the body. Swedish Bitters is a great way to get all of your bitters in one shot. The best sources of bitters include Coffee beans, Dandelion, and Aloe vera.
9) Phenols - Also called Salicylates, Phenols are a component of many compounds that include salicylic acid (the organic form of Aspirin). Phenols are antiseptic and anti-inflammatory components that actually have an irritant effect when applied directly to the skin. The best sources of phenols are dark berries like Raspberries, Blueberries, Cranberries and Goji berries.
10) Saponins - A group of two expectorant elements that induce hormonal activity, saponins (including triterpenoid and steroidal) have similarity to the human body's own naturally occurring hormones. The best sources of saponins include Licorice, Peas and Soybeans.
11) Coumarins - Found in many plants, coumarins offer widely divergent strengthening mechanisms including sunscreen protection, blood thinning and muscle relaxant action. The best sources of coumarins include Mullein, Vanilla grass and Tonka bean.
12) Glucosilinates - Glucosilinates have irritant effects, causing inflammation and blistering. They are used to increase blood flow to an affected area, helping facilitate waste removal and joint problems and reducing thyroid function. Glucosilinates are found exlusively in the Mustard family that includes Radish, yellow mustard seed and brown mustard seed.
13) Anthraquinones - These natural laxative components (found in Senna, Cascara Sagrada and Chinese Rhubarb) relieve constipation, having an irritant effect on the large intestine that causes peristaltic action. They are also natural stool softeners. The best sources of anthraquinones are Senna, Aloe Vera and Chinese Rhubarb.
14) Anthocyanins - These are the pigments that give fruits and flowers their blue, purple or red hue, and they help keep blood vessels healthy. The best sources of anthocyanins include Grapes, Blackberries and Rainforest herbs like Samambaia.
15) Cardiac Glycosides - These natural diuretics have strong, direct action on the heart, strengthening the rate of contraction when it is failing. They improve the circulatory system and urinary tract while lowering blood pressure. The best sources of cardiac glycosides include Yellow Foxglove, Woolly Foxglove and Common Foxglove.
16) Cyanogenic Glycosides - Though based on the poison cyanide, these have a helpful sedative effect on the heart and muscles in small doses. Cyanogenic glycosides are used to suppress and sooth a dry cough caused by irritants. The best sources of cyanogenic glycosides include Wild Cherry Bark and Elder flowers.
As you can see, there are many other important elements besides vitamins and minerals and while they have powerful health benefits themselves, they just don't sound the same on a cereal box. A balanced diet ideally will includes all of these substances.
The Encyclopedia of Medicinal Plants - Dorling Kindersley and Andrew Chevallier (page 14-15 has pictures of all of these components).
Posted by A at 9:00 PM
"No one asked us for the supplies."
That was the response of a FEMA official when asked why tens of millions of dollars in critical supplies were not distributed to survivors of Hurricane Katrina. With poor people still living in trailers three years after the worst natural disaster in US history, that is FEMA's excuse?
Were those supplies needed?
"Of course they were," said Glenda Perryman, director of Mississippi-based, and Oxfam America partner organization, United Hearts Community Action Agency.
Recently, CNN did a report on how millions of dollars' worth of supplies were given away, rather than sent to help people in need. The reason? FEMA said no one asked for them. Can you believe that?
Help Oxfam America do something to change the situation. Please tell FEMA today that you want the supplies delivered to people who need them most - those affected by Hurricane Katrina.
Even before Hurricanes Katrina and Rita devastated the Gulf Coast, Louisiana and Mississippi were the two poorest states in the nation. Nearly one in five residents lived below the national poverty line of about $20,000 in annual income for a family of four. Good schools, job opportunities, and decent housing were scarce. Now the region is in crisis.
Nearly three years after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita carved their destructive paths across the Gulf Coast, life is still far from normal for many thousands of people displaced by the storms. Many have not been able to rebuild their houses, and so they continue to live in trailers or even in buses or on boats.
Oxfam America, working through its partner organizations in the region, continues to support efforts to ensure that all survivors - including people most direly affected by the storms, such as African-Americans, the elderly, immigrants, and poor people - have a voice in decisions about the recovery process.
Unfortunately, FEMA is still not doing its part. Join OxfamAmerica and our partners in calling on FEMA to do everything it can to get the supplies to Katrina survivors.
Friday, August 22, 2008
by Mike Adams
The FDA has announced that beginning today, spinach and lettuce sold across the United States may now be secretly irradiated before it reaches grocery store shelves. What's "secret" about it? The FDA previously decided that irradiation warning stickers would not be required on any food items because it would be "too confusing to consumers." (The word IRRADIATION apparently has too many letters to be understood to food buyers.) Thus, irradiated foods will not be labeled as such, and consumers are going to be left in the dark about all this (except for those who actually eat the irradiated food, in which case they will glow in the dark).
The FDA, of course, insists that the levels of irradiation used to kill e.coli will have no effect whatsoever on the nutritional value of the food. This astonishing statement comes from an agency that doesn't believe food has any nutritional value in the first place, so lowering the value to zero by destroying all the phytonutrients does not, in the opinion of the FDA, alter its nutritional value at all. Thus, destroying all the anti-cancer nutrients in a head of broccoli merely brings that broccoli into "compliance" as a non-functional food, according to the FDA.
Radiation, of course, destroys delicate phytochemicals in plants -- the very phytochemicals protecting consumers against cancer, heart disease, high cholesterol, inflammation and other diseases. Microwaving broccoli, for example, destroys up to 98% of its anti-cancer nutrients. (The FDA has not yet acknowledged this scientific fact, either.) In a similar way, irradiating food destroys much of its nutritional content, including vitamins, carotenoids, anthocyanins and other delicate protective nutrients that are right now providing the last, desperate nutritional defense against the American diet of meat, milk, fried foods and processed junk.
Irradiating fresh produce will leave the U.S. population in a state of extreme deficiency in protective plant-based nutrients.
Does the FDA plan to destroy the health of the U.S. population?
Many people suspect that's what the FDA really wants. A nutritionally-deficient, disease-ridden population would mean a windfall of profits for the FDA's buddies in Big Pharma -- the folks who sell patented medications at monopoly prices. With the food supply destroyed by radiation, ordinary people would have virtually no remaining sources of protective phytonutrients!
In promoting this food radiation policy, the FDA has accomplished what all the terrorists in the world could not: The mass irradiation of the U.S. food supply -- much like setting off a dirty bomb over the nation's farms (but with less radiation). This destruction of the nutritional value of the food supply is a far greater threat to the health of the U.S. population than any terrorist event, including 9/11. And yet it is being done by our own people, TO our own people, by a lawless agency that answers to no one. FDA officials are not voted into office by the People; they are appointed by politicians. They answer to no one, they refuse to follow federal law, and they operate as tyrants over a quarter of the U.S. economy.
And now they have taken it upon themselves to destroy the national food supply.
We should be more than just alarmed -- we should be outraged! The FDA has committed an act of war against the People. With this decision, the FDA has firmly positioned itself as an enemy of the People, and a bringer of death and disease to the nation. Why are our elected representatives in Washington allowing this madness?
Think about this: If the FDA has its way:
• All your food will be irradiated, pasteurized or killed
• All your children will be vaccinated
• All your medicine will be based on pharmaceuticals
• All your free speech about health will be suppressed
• All informative labeling on food and supplements will be outlawed
• Growing and selling non-irradiated garden vegetables will become a crime!
Today it's spinach and lettuce; tomorrow it's all fresh produce
Don't think the FDA will stop with spinach and lettuce, either. They're already talking about irradiating tomatoes, peppers and onions. Before long, radiation could become mandatory for ALL fresh produce, and all the fresh fruits and vegetables that are supposed to contain health-protecting nutrients will be transformed into sterile, inert plant mass with no health benefits at all. (Brilliant scam, huh?)
This is by design. I believe the FDA wants the American public to be sickened and diseased. Why else would they ban Free Speech about healing foods like cherries, broccoli and garlic? Why would they outlaw the selling of herbs and nutritional supplements that claim to treat and prevent disease? The FDA wants you to be sick, enslaved and medicated, and irradiating the food supply is the quickest way to accomplish that.
He who controls the food controls the People.
He who destroys the food can profit from the People's sickness.
The FDA's crimes against humanity
In pushing this radiation agenda, the FDA is committing a crime against humanity -- a nutritional atrocity that violates fundamental human rights. And yet the FDA's top decision makers continue to operate with zero oversight and zero accountability. They make decisions in a corporate-sponsored vacuum, absent any input from reasonable, health-conscious consumers or scientists. And because they have been granted tyrannical powers by Congress, the FDA operates above the law.
It is not subject to any laws whatsoever; not even the U.S. Constitution which is supposed to protect the People's right to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" (as stated in the Declaration of Independence).
The mass irradiation of the food supply is a violation of the "Life" part of that phrase, wouldn't you agree? If we can no longer buy nourishing foods with their nutrients intact, then we are all doomed to degenerative disease and death... but not before paying out our life savings to doctors, drug companies and hospitals. That's the evil genius of the food irradiation plot: It kills you slowly, at just the right pace to drain your bank account before you expire from malnutrition.
I truly believe this irradiation of the food supply is the beginning of the end of America. No nation can survive the destruction of its food supply. The FDA is dooming America to a slow, painful, medicated death. In a generation, this nation will be lost, destroyed from within by short-sighted tyrants who violated nature and left the People to rot.
What you can do right now to fight this latest transgression by the FDA
For starters, you can:
1) Grow your own food. A little gardening is good. Grow whatever you can, even if it's just a few kitchen herbs.
2) Buy your food at farmer's markets, co-ops and CSAs. See http://www.localharvest.org/csa
3) Ask your grocery store if they are buying irradiated spinach. If they don't know, demand they find out!
4) Raise hell with your Senators and Congresspeople, demanding they pass new laws protecting consumers from the FDA and its plot to destroy the nutritional value of the food supply.
Also, listen to two podcasts I've posted on this topic. The first was recorded several months ago, where I publicly predicted the FDA would do exactly what we're seeing right now. Listen to that podcast here: http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Podcas...
The second podcast was just posted today. I recorded it right before writing this article. It goes into much greater detail about the FDA's plot to destroy the health of the U.S. population. You can listen to that here: http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Podcas...
Finally, don't stand for this food supply madness! Raise your voice. Write your local paper, call your representatives in Washington and tell them you strongly oppose the irradiation of the food supply. Teach people about phytonutrients. And stay tuned to NaturalNews as we continue to cover this important story.
The FDA has gone mad. Criminally mad. It is an agency that will literally kill you if given the chance, and it is up to all of us to stop this madness before we lose our health, our children and our very nation.
by Maryann Marshall
A Dutch woman decided to will her body to science when she was 82 years old. When she turned 111, she contacted the researchers, worried that she was too old to be of interest to them. On the contrary, they assured her, because of her age, they were especially interested in her.
Over the next four years, she submitted to testing twice. The results showed her to be above average, even for people aged 60 to 80 years of age. There were essentially no signs of cognitive decline or memory loss.
Gert Holstege, a neuroscientist at the University Medical Center Groningen, in The Netherlands, examined her body after she died at 115 years of age. The results are reported in the August issue of the journal Neurobiology of Aging.
To the surprise of the examiners, the woman's brain showed no sign of Alzheimer's. They found no signs of atherosclerosis, a narrowing of the arteries. Very few brain abnormalities were evident, almost no deposits of so-called beta-amyloid, which are characteristic in Alzheimer's brains. Other abnormalities present, including "neurofibrillary tangles," were too mild to cause significant mental impairment. In fact, the number of brain cells she retained was similar to that expected in healthy people between 60 and 80 years old.
Scientists were amazed at these findings, because they showed that Alzheimer's and dementia are not inevitable as people age.
On the Spanish island of Minorca, a man recently died at the age of 114. Reports speak of him riding his bicycle to tend to the family's orchards until he was 102. He is survived by a brother, who is 101, a nephew who is 85, and two daughters, aged 81 and 77. All seem to live an active health-filled lifestyle.
Scientists tested the family's DNA for two markers associated with healthy bones and longevity. The markers were not found. Gil Atzmon, of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York informs us that some 10 to 20 genes have been identified as related to longevity thus far.
These findings lead scientists to believe that longevity may be more complicated than a single gene, or group of genes.
In the 1930's, Cornell University researchers found that rats fed a lower calorie diet lived 40 percent longer. The increased life span occurred regardless of the age of the rats at the time of their diet change.
A mother's nutrition while she is pregnant and nursing can have a profound effect on her offspring's life span. Scientists at Cambridge University in England found that mice fed a high protein diet during pregnancy and a low protein diet while nursing had pups that lived fifty percent longer than those whose diets were reversed.
Happily married couples tend to live longer, claims a study from the University of Chicago. Linda Waite reported that married men were found to live, on average, 10 years longer than non-married men, and married women lived about four years longer than non-married women.
A May 2, 2006 article in the American Journal of Medicine reports that walking is a factor in health and longevity. In their study, patients in their 70's who were in good health were challenged to walk a quarter mile. Those who completed the course were more likely to survive the next six years without disability. Those who walked slower were at higher risk of death and disability than the faster walkers, but still ahead of those who could not finish.
As a matter of fact, additional studies show that walking or other exercise three or more times a week is a hedge against Alzheimer's.
Staying mentally and physically active throughout life is the best way to keep the mind sharp.Individuals with high mental stimulation had a reduced risk of Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia by nearly half by building and maintaining a reserve of stimulation. Another study showed that after five weeks of memory-based exercise, participants increased brain chemistry markers in a direction that was opposite to that seen in Alzheimer's. The change was concentrated in the hippocampus, one of the first brain regions to be affected in dementia.
Posted by A at 5:00 PM
by Rich Stacel
I recently received great news from the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) that after a long fourteen year battle between OCA, public interest and family farmer groups against Monsanto's Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), Monsanto has announced on August 6th that they will sell off their controversial rBGH. This is very good news since rBGH has been fed to cattle since the early 1990's and has been implicated in a wide array of health issues, some very serious ones for both the animals themselves and anyone who consumes anything from the animals who are fed rBGH.
rBGH is said to be responsible for a number of health issues ranging from premature puberty in children to colon, prostate and breast cancer to increased antibiotic residues and elevated levels of a potent cancer tumor promoter called IGF-1.
rBGH is a genetically engineered variant of the natural growth hormone produced by cows. It is manufactured by Monsanto and sold to dairy farmers under the trade name Posilac. This hormone forces cows to increase milk production by about 10%, but it also increases the incidences of mastitis, lameness as well as reproductive issues.
Another health concern, especially in regards to women is how this genetically modified hormone can interfere with a woman's sensitive hormonal system and could also affect human reproduction as it is currently doing to cow's reproductive systems. Countries like Canada and many European nations have banned the import of U.S. milk unless it specifically says "No rBGH".
The fight is not over yet as Monsanto has been pressuring state legislatures to force dairies to use Posilac (rBGH). They also want to prevent these dairies from telling the public that they're rBGH free.
Here is an announcement from the Organic Consumers Association:
"Monsanto has been lobbying state legislatures and departments of agriculture around the country to harass dairies that won't use Posilac. Monsanto wants to take away dairies' right to tell consumers they're rBGH-free. Please go to the following OCA state action centers to learn more and take action: (http://www.organicconsumers.org/rbghlink.cfm) ."
Man made chemicals and genetically modified foods pose very serious health issues to your family. This is why it's very important to learn what chemicals and ingredients are being put into packaged and processed foods in order to take greater control of your health and life and to help avoid serious health issues.
Posted by A at 3:00 PM
Thursday, August 21, 2008
by Mike Adams
Another FDA-approved diabetes drug has now been linked to life-threatening pancreas inflammation that has resulted in at least two deaths. Byetta is the latest FDA-approved diabetes drug to be linked to organ damage and death. Several years ago, Rezulin was being pushed into the diabetic market in the United States by the FDA even though the drug had already been banned in Europe and was linked with severe liver damage of at least 10,000 patients. After keeping the drug on the market for as long as possible to boost Big Pharma profits, the FDA finally conceded and banned the drug.
Rather than banning Byetta, the FDA has announced it would simply require stronger warnings on the product label. This is the FDA's scheme for keeping dangerous drugs on the market so that its clients -- the drug companies -- can keep making money selling products that pose serious health hazards to consumers.
Notably, when an herb is reported to harm or kill even a few people, the FDA immediately bans it, declaring it to be "unsafe at any dose." But when a pharmaceutical kills people -- even tens of thousands of people -- the FDA applies no such logic and instead resorts to requiring a stronger warning label that nobody reads.
Drugs don't treat diabetes
What the FDA and drug companies don't want consumers to really find out, of course, is that drugs don't really treat, prevent or cure diabetes. Virtually all diabetes drugs are toxic, and they simply don't do anything to address the underlying causes of diabetes.
But curing diabetes is easier than you might think, and a new documentary called Simply Raw: Reversing Diabetes in 30 Days documents how people are curing diabetes by shifting to a plant-based diet that's rich in raw, living foods.
I cured my own pre-diabetic condition using superfoods and nutrition, and thousands upon thousands of people around the world are now discovering that simple dietary changes can cure diabetes for life.
Drugs don't treat diabetes; they merely mask symptoms while ignoring the underlying causes of the disease. Even worse, most diabetes drugs cause severe damage to your liver or pancreas, leaving patients in far worse health than before they started taking the drugs. Only nutrition, plant-based foods and exercise can cure diabetes, and they can cure it in a matter of just a few weeks.
Both type-I and type-II diabetics have been cured of diabetes using plant-based diets. Yes, you read that correctly: Even Type-I diabetics. In fact, later this week I'll be featuring an interview with a former Type-I diabetic who is now completely off insulin and has cured his condition using nothing but raw, living foods and exercise.
The American Diabetes Association, FDA and Big Pharma don't want you to know about this. They all want you to keep taking medications while suffering under the delusion that there is no way to take charge of your health and reverse diabetes.
They're all lying to you, of course, and they're doing it to keep you trapped in a high-profit system of disease "management" and "blood sugar control" rather than teaching you the real truth about curing diabetes.
Empower yourself with the truth about diabetes. No one has to suffer with diabetes any longer, and no medications are necessary to treat or manage diabetes. It can be entirely cured using simple nutritional strategies. Watch the movie trailer yourself, and be enlightened:
Simply Raw: Reversing Diabetes in 30 Days
The film features David Wolfe, Dr. Gabriel Cousens, Tony Robbins and many other pioneering health leaders. Watch for a full review of the film later this week on NaturalNews.com.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Consumers already worried about genetically engineered or cloned food may soon find another worry in their grocery carts: nano-foods.
Nanotechnology involves the design and manipulation of materials on molecular scales. Companies using nanotechnology say it can enhance the flavor or nutritional effectiveness of food. Food produced by using nanotechnology is quietly coming onto the market, and consumer groups want U.S. authorities to force manufacturers to identify them.
U.S. health officials generally do not place warning labels on products unless there are clear, known reasons for caution or concern. But consumer advocates say uncertainty over health consequences alone is sufficient cause to justify identifying nano-foods.
Reuters July 30, 2008
Sunday, August 10, 2008
As plastic ages or is exposed to heat or stress, it can release trace amounts of some of its ingredients. Of particular concern are bisphenol-a (BPA), used to strengthen some plastics, and phthalates, used to soften others.
These chemicals are used in hundreds of household items; BPA is in everything from baby bottles to can linings, while phthalates are found in children's toys as well as vinyl shower curtains. They enter your body through the food, water and bits of dust you consume, or are simply absorbed through your skin.
BPA and phthalates are endocrine disrupters, which mimic hormones. Estrogen and other hormones in relatively tiny amounts can cause vast changes, so researchers worry that BPA and phthalates could do the same, especially in young children.
To cut down on your exposure, avoid plastic bottles and toys labeled with the numbers 3 or 7, which often contain BPA or phthalates, and canned foods, especially those with acidic contents like tomatoes. You should also avoid heating plastic in microwaves.
Time July 10, 2008
Saturday, August 9, 2008
by Barbara L. Minton
How did the powerful gain power over the rest of us? In a time when the power and freedom of the average American is being eroded at terrific speed, many of us wonder how this could be happening. What we may not realize it that the powerful have specific tools or principles to use to con the rest of us into surrendering our power to them. One of the most effective principles used in the last several years with great success is the Hegelian Principle.
The principle is simple, consisting of only three steps toward a preconceived goal. Once you are able to see how it works, you may want to analyze many of the events unfolding around you in terms of this principle. As the principle is often used today, it can be explained as:
Step One: Create a problem or conflict - Perceive a problem that exists and build it up out of proportion to its actual importance, or create a problem or conflict where none existed before.
Step Two: Publicize the problem and create opposition to it - Relentlessly place stories about this problem in the major media outlets. Report on it daily until it becomes a steady drumbeat and a truism for the public who then begin clamoring for a solution to this problem.
Step Three: Offer a solution - The best solutions are those that appeal to the emotions of the public and make them think something really good is being done for them, when in fact, something really bad is being done to them. This solution is one that the public never knew it needed until the conditioning of Step Two was successfully completed.
A simple example of the Hegelian Principle at work was the food industries' conning of the public to throw out their butter and run to buy margarine. It goes like this:
Step One: Food industry is geared up to provide food for soldiers during WWII. When war ends, food industry needs to turn its capacity into something it can sell during peace time. It wants to use cheap ingredients to make a high margin product and decides on the manufacture of margarine, but needs to find a way to get the public to buy it. They decide on a scheme to turn the people against butter.
Step Two: Food companies spread propaganda convincing the populace that butter is deadly to their health. Appeal to fear. Get doctors and nutritionists to help in the spreading of propaganda. Sponsor medical studies to "prove" that butter is deadly. Convince housewives who had grown up healthy while eating butter that they are placing their families in jeopardy if they serve butter.
Step Three: Food companies rush in to save the American public from having to put butter on their tables. They present margarine. Women who want their families to love them stampede to buy margarine. Voila!
One of the classic and most sinister examples of the Hegelian Principle involves the Nazi's rise to power that quickly followed the burning of the German Parliament building, the Reichstag, on the night of February 27, 1933.
Step One: Adolf Hitler, the new Chancellor of Germany, has no intention of abiding by the rules of democracy that installed him into the Chancellor position. He intends only to use those rules to legally establish himself as dictator as quickly as possible, and begin the Nazi revolution. But opposition lurks in his path.The Nazis, led by Joseph Goebbels, devise a scheme to burn down the Reichstag, the building where the elected officials of the republic meet to conduct the daily business of government, and blame it on the Communist opposition.
Step Two: Hitler acts as though he is enraged over the fire and speaks out that the German people have been too soft on the Communists, proclaiming that "every Communist official must be shot. All friends of the Communists must be locked up. And that goes for the Social Democrats and the Reichsbanner as well!" Hitler directs the newspaper's coverage of the fire. He and Goebbels put together papers full of lies about a Communist plot to violently seize power in Berlin. The newspaper proclaimed that only Hitler and the Nazis could prevent a Communist takeover.
Step Three: Hitler demands an emergency decree to overcome the crisis. There is little resistance, and the decree is signed "for the protection of the people and the State". According to the decree, "Restrictions on the personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed." The Nazi dictatorship is established.
The Hegelian Principle was first described by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, a 19th century German philosopher. The principle defined a method used to produce a oneness of mind on any given issue or thought. Since its conception, it has been used repeatedly and very successfully to gain power, status, money and control. The original terms for the three steps were Thesis, Antithesis, and Synthesis.
Under Hegel's theory, one type of government or society (Thesis) would give rise to another that was the opposite of this type of government or society (Antithesis). This would result in conflict between the two types since they were opposites. After thesis and antithesis ideas battle each other for an extended time without either side winning, both sides become ready for change. This change (Synthesis) is then brought about by the creation of a third type of government or society.
These three steps are easily seen in the example of the Nazi rise to power, in which the Democratic government battled the Communist form of government. When the public was conditioned to ask for change, a new government system was installed.
The principle is often seen at work in the downhill slide of education toward the goal of ensuring children grow up unable to be intelligent participants in their democracy.
Step One - The federal government wants to assert control over the educational system, previously the providence of the states. As a way of doing this, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) is created as a tool to gain power by doling out money to the school districts if they would accept the strings attached. Slowly but surely the pot of federal dollars that could be had is increased, while state support is undermined. Under ESEA mandates, academic programs are replaced by social programs.
Step Two - As academic programs are displaced, test scores drop, and juvenile problems increase as children become more and more illiterate, and parental and public outcry becomes louder. Teachers are made the fall guys for the illiteracy of their students. Attempts at fixing the problems involve the creation of ever more social programs, and fail to address the issue of children's failure to learn. Parents are blamed as schools make inroads into controlling the parent/child relationship by pitting parents against their own children over school issues. Education reform is officially sanctioned as Bush announces himself the education president, proclaiming that "The people have been heard. We must do something about our ailing education system."
Step Three - We are in step three now. Progressive socialist education is upon us. We are creating a generation of people incapable of thinking, reasoning, speaking and questioning. The individual will soon be extinct, having been stripped of his uniqueness and become no more than a commodity to be valued accordingly. With the loss of uniqueness goes the loss of independence and the ability to advocate for one's self. The new generation emerges as a willing participant in its own enslavement.
Hornberger, Jacob "How Hitler Became A Dictator", The Future of Freedom Foundation
About the author:
Barbara is a school psychologist, a published author in the area of personal finance, a breast cancer survivor using "alternative" treatments, a born existentialist, and a student of nature and all things natural.
Friday, August 8, 2008
by Jo Hartley
There is now emerging research that suggests that a small protein called glutathione plays a significant role in protecting the eyes. Scientists have been aware of glutathione and its important ocular antioxidant properties for some time, but they did not know until recently how to raise glutathione levels.
Ocular nutrition and raising your glutathione level can be instrumental in preventing or resolving visual degeneration due to Macular Degeneration, Glaucoma, and Cataracts. Low levels of glutathione are often seen in patients with these diseases. Raising glutathione with improved ocular nutrition can halt progress and often reverse these conditions.
Macular degeneration is defined as a progressive loss of vision because of a breakdown of the macula. The macula is the portion of the retina that is responsible for close vision. Age-related macular degeneration (ARMD) is a top reason for sight loss in seniors over age 65.
Smoking and atherosclerosis are contributing factors that can make ARMD worse. ARMD is probably a result of cumulative damage of free radicals released because of exposure to ultraviolet sunlight. Other sources of oxidative stress may also play a role in its onset. The elderly often have low glutathione levels and this predisposes them to ARMD. This makes ocular nutrition very important.
Glaucoma is a serious condition that involves fluid pressure rising within the eye. Some pressure is necessary to maintain the shape of the eyeball, however too much pressure will compress and obstruct the small blood vessels of the eye. This will damage the optic nerve. Glaucoma is one of the top causes of vision loss.
Glaucoma becomes more common with aging, and is many times connected to diabetes, hypertension, and nearsightedness. Traditional treatment concentrates on relieving the pressure by drug therapy or surgery.
Glaucoma patients have been found to generally have very low glutathione levels. Increasing glutathione levels has been found to either prevent glaucoma or delay the onset.
Cataracts are a clouding that occurs in the lens of the eye. This is the leading cause of vision impairment in the elderly and cataracts lead to over one million surgeries every year in the United States.
Research has shown that the onset of cataracts could be delayed or even prevented by raising glutathione levels. An effective defense against cataracts is improving one's ocular nutrition.
Broccoli and broccoli sprouts have been shown to be effective in protecting the retina against oxidative damage because these foods contain a compound called Sulphoraphane. Sulphoraphane boosts the body's defense system and enables it to fight free radicals.
Glutathione and Sulphoraphane have important advantages over regular antioxidants. Not only are they effective protection for the eyes, but they also protect every other part of the body. They also last between four to five days in cells after being consumed.
Other significant protective dietary ingredients are Lutein and Zeaxanthin. These are antioxidant carotenoids that are an important part of the macular pigment that protect the retina from degeneration.
Zeaxanthin helps protect the photo receptor cells present in the macula from damaging UV rays and also from free radical damage. Lutein is plentiful in many leafy green vegetables, such as Kale, Collards, Spinach, Swiss chard, Beet and Mustard Greens, Romaine Lettuce, and Endive. It is also present in Peas, Red Peppers, Pumpkin, Beetroots, Okra, Leeks, Celery, and Brussels sprouts.
Of course, Lutein supplements can protect your eyes. However, increasing the amount of leafy green vegetables in your diet is a much better way to fight eye diseases and macular degeneration. Not only are you helping your vision by raising your glutathione levels, you are helping your entire body!
Posted by A at 8:00 AM
Thursday, August 7, 2008
by Heidi Stevenson
You might think you have the right to vote. You might think your vote counts. You might think that there's a problem here or there, but that they're the exceptions. You might think that the 2000 presidential election was an aberration, in which the U.S. Supreme Court violated ethical and court precedents to crown the election loser, countering the will of the people. You might think it can't possibly be an ongoing problem.
You might be very sadly mistaken.
Voting rights are under systematic attack in the United States. Techniques include:
* Outright disenfranchisement.
* Vote switching in election machines.
* Refusal to allow the public to see how votes are counted.
* Use of the people's courts by political parties and corporations to subvert the law.
* Use of lawsuit threats by large corporations against cash-strapped local governments to prevent them from examining voting machines.
Each one might not seem like a major issue, but taken together, it's clear that there's a coordinated attack on American citizens' rights to vote.
Brad Friedman has been following the problem for years, but even he was stunned when it happened to him when he voted in Los Angeles during the June 3rd California election:
"Right before my very eyes, the computer-printed ballot produced by the voting system I was using, incorrectly filled in bubbles for four of the races I was voting in. Had I not been incredibly careful, after the ballot was printed out, to painstakingly compare what was printed to what I actually voted for, I'd have never known my votes were being given to candidates I did not vote for."
As Friedman went on to point out, if he'd been blind, there would have been no way to know that his votes were changed. Forty percent of his votes were flipped. Because of his prominence, the machine he'd voted on was quarantined. No one bothered to check out the rest of the machines at that polling place or others of the same type.
Legitimate voters who are likely to vote for the "wrong" candidates are identified and systematically excluded from the voter rolls. Different techniques are used, but one documented by reporter Greg Palast tells of one method.
Before the 2004 election, military personnel who came from predominantly black neighborhoods were targeted. The Republican National Committee sent them letters addressed "Do Not Forward". Most, if not all, of the addressees were serving their country in foreign lands. Lists were drawn up of the names on the letters that had been returned as undeliverable. The lists were sent to the RNC. These soldiers had been "caged".
Their voting registrations were challenged, based on the returned mail. Once their names had been removed from the voting rolls -- without any attempts to locate and inform them -- they lost the right to vote in the next election, whether they had returned home and gone to the polls or they had sent absentee ballots.
Through voter caging and other techniques, over half a million voters were disenfranchised during the 2004 election. The vast majority of those who were disenfranchised by caging were black military personnel.
Lack of Transparency in Vote Counting
In the recent June 3rd election in Monterey, California, two election observers were harassed and prevented from observing the process and the equipment used for tabulating votes. From the first, when they formally requested access, citing the California code that specifies the rules for observation -- which quite clearly gives the right to check out all phases of the election, along with all computer and tabulating equipment -- they were stonewalled.
In spite of the attempts to stop them, Valerie Lane and Brian Rothenberger were able to see obviously illegal activities and clear indications that it would be easy to tamper with the vote count. They were stalled, ordered to leave, and threatened with arrest.
The second article in this series will discuss the specifics of how Mr. Rothenberger and Ms. Lane were prevented from doing precisely what the law -- and democracy -- requires.
In New Jersey's Union County, paper records of the number of voters in the recent primary election did not match the results produced by Sequoia Voting Systems' machine printouts. Naturally, the County Clerk, Joanne Rajoppi, wanted the problem investigated. The Constitutional Officers Association of New Jersey, an organization of state sheriffs, county clerks, and other similar officials, concurred, calling for an independent review. They planned to have it done by a Princeton University computer scientist who has experience with voting machines.
It isn't going to happen. Sequoia claims, without any proof, that the errors were the result of errors by poll workers -- an interesting concept, considering it's never happened before. Using double-speak without a hint of embarrassment, they say that they "welcome all such responsibly executed review activities." How that can be done, though, they don't say -- but they aren't going to let Union County do an investigation.
Sequoia threatened a lawsuit against Union County, claiming that an independent investigation would violate their licensing agreement. The county has no option but to capitulate. The cost of defending such a lawsuit is prohibitive for them.
Left in the balance are the voters who have been disenfranchised.
A Chilling Subversion of Our Democracy
The implications for American democracy are chilling. A concerted and systematic effort has been underway to prevent the will of the people from being heard. The very basis of the governance of our nation is at extreme risk.
Thomas Jefferson wrote: "Should things go wrong at any time, the people will set them to rights by the peaceable exercise of their elective rights." He had faith in the people's ability to make good decisions through voting. What would he think now, when that most basic of freedoms -- the one at the heart of our society -- is becoming a ghost, nothing more than the image of what it was meant to be?
Alexander Hamilton said that a republic's right to vote "ought to stand foremost in the estimation of the law." Now, the right to vote is becoming little more than a shadow cast behind the actions of those who cast their votes into a void. Increasingly, it exists more in form than in substance.
Different techniques that have been used -- and continue to be used -- will be discussed in depth in upcoming articles. The only way to stop the theft of democracy is through awareness of what's happening. If you know that you're a potential target of vote theft, then you can protect both yourself and the future of the nation.
The Brad Blog, by Brad Friedman, (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6043) , (http://www.blackboxvoting.org/)
Black Box Voting, (http://www.blackboxvoting.org/)
"Buffalo Soldiers Scrubbed by Secret GOP Hit List", by Greg Palast, ((http://www.gregpalast.com/massacre-of-t...)
"Plan for voting machine probe dropped after lawsuit threat", by Diane C. Walsh, Real-Time News, ((http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/0...)
"Sequoia Threatens Lawsuit Over E-Voting Machine Review", by K.C. Jones, Information Week, ((http://www.informationweek.com/news/man...)
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
by Tony Isaacs
For the past five years, the Utopia Silver Supplement Company has been waging a battle for health freedom against the giants of the State of Texas and the FDA -- one which may have major implications for all of us regarding the freedom of access to natural health supplements.
"This system operates on fear, you have no fear and that's a problem for us." - Texas district court official to Utopia Silver Company owner Ben Taylor.
Much like the Alamo defenders in days gone by, this small Texas company and its supporters of health freedom are pitted against a corrupt giant determined to impose its will and stifle freedom -- and just like the Alamo and the struggles that followed, the outcome may effect the freedom and future of millions.
The conflict began as a result of an FDA complaint five years ago that seeks to set a precedent for how much control the FDA has over all natural supplement companies and specifically the manufacture and sale of colloidal silver supplements.
While the Texas Attorney General's office may try to contend that this is merely a state action "to insure the safety of the citizens of the State of Texas", the truth is that the prosecuting Texas assistant attorney general and TDSHS officials are commissioned as officers of the FDA and there is no denying that the investigation into Utopia Silver began as a result of an FDA complaint. The certificates of Commission were obtained after several filings of Texas Public Information Act requests. Therefore, this is really a Federal action by proxy and it has pitted Utopia Silver Supplements against the Goliath of the FDA and the World Pharma lords the FDA serves.
The persecution of Utopia Silver began five years or so ago, about the same time that the FDA began renewed targeting of colloidal silver because of its effectiveness as a natural anti-biotic and rising popularity -- and, coincidentally, as a threat to the profits of Big Pharma and mainstream medicine -- the FDA sent an email to the Texas Department of State Health Services (TDSHS) essentially complaining that Utopia Silver was making medical claims which, in the eyes of the FDA turned their supplements into drugs. The TDSHS then brought the 'complaint' to the Office of the Texas Attorney General (TAG).
It has since been determined that among the targeted objections are: having 'disease' terms such as cancer, hepatitis, diabetes, etc., posted anywhere on the website; having any 'disease' terms in a search engine, and the posting of testimonials from customers who had used Utopia Silver products and defeated or improved any 'disease' condition.
Such restrictions appear to be a clear violation of the First Amendment (Freedom of Speech) of the Constitution of the United States of America, especially the supposed prohibition against posting testimonials and speaking the truth about how people believe that dietary supplements have helped them. If the FDA is to have their way, they will stifle a supplement company's constitutionally protected freedom of speech to the extent that a person seeking a natural dietary supplement for any medical condition would not be able to go to any website which offered vitamins, minerals, natural supplements or any other alternatives to mainstream medicine and be able to find that term in a search of the site or mentioned anywhere in the site. Neither would they be able to find testimonials/customer opinion from anyone who had used an alternative to FDA approved drugs and medical procedures.
It is no secret that the FDA has targeted colloidal silver, which is a safe, effective, natural and inexpensive pathogen destroyer -- four common traits of dietary supplements that represent competition to the approved drugs of Big Pharma and which frequently come under FDA attack. It is worth noting that the FDA at one time had approved 34 different prescribed and OTC (over-the-counter) medications containing silver, but withdrew approval at about the same time antibiotics came on the market and superior methods of making colloidal silver commercially and at home were devised.
The Texas state district court hearings and threatened trial are purportedly about licensing and inspections, but the FDA complaint was centered around the publication of customer testimonials which the FDA considers to be health claims that supposedly enable them to label Colloidal Silver and other Utopia Silver dietary supplements as drugs, and that too is part of the legal proceedings.
Although the State of Texas maintains that they are acting alone, Utopia Silver has obtained copies of individual certificates which show that the state health and AG employees are also "Commissioned Officers" of the FDA -- in apparent conflict with the separation of state and federal powers. It is Utopia Silver's contention that the actions to restrict them are unconstitutional restraints on the freedom of commercial speech (as borne out by previous Supreme Court decisions) and further contends that there is no constitutional jurisdiction for the state agencies, who are actually for-profit corporations (and they are listed as such by Dun and Bradstreet) disguised as constitutional entities.
Utopia Silver believes, as do many others including legal scholars, that much of the country's court system and agencies operate outside the Constitution as corporate entities, having no real jurisdiction until defendants unwittingly submit to the jurisdiction by entering into a "contract" with the courts and agencies through such measures as making a 'general' rather than a 'special' appearance before a court, entering a motion, applying for a license, hiring an attorney (who are themselves 'officers of the court'), etc. Such scholars and observers point to the yellow fringed admiralty flags flying in most of our courts as clear symbols that the courts are not constitutional courts but rather administrative corporate courts operating under the "color of law".
In the case against Utopia Silver, Taylor contends that there is no constitutionally mandated requirement for them to submit to what amounts to a commercial contract with the STATE OF TEXAS, a corporation acting under the color of law but not under the state or federal constitutions, and not in accordance with the God-given unalienable rights clearly declared by our forefathers when this country was founded.
So far the Texas Attorney General's Office (TAG), has given no indication of making a fair or reasonable settlement -- although in the Spring of 2005, the Assistant Texas Attorney General in charge of the case, Raul Noriega, first agreed and then reneged on an oral agreement that would have settled the case. When asked why, Noriega's response was that he was told by higher ups to proceed to trial despite the prior agreement to settle.
In the summer of 2006, TDSHS employees paid three separate visits to the Utopia Silver offices and demanded with a bogus warrant to make inspections. The first time, two TDSHS officers paid a visit. One identified himself as an "inspector" and the other as an "investigator". The owner of Utopia Silver, Ben Taylor, asked to see credentials so he could make copies. When they refused he ordered them to leave his premises and they complied.
The next day they returned, accompanied by two Texas State Troopers, and said they had a warrant. When Taylor demanded to see a supporting affidavit, they refused, saying he could go to Austin if he wanted to see it and threatening to arrest Taylor if he did not comply. At that point, Taylor began placing a phone call to the local sheriff, and the TDSHS employees and State Troopers beat a hasty retreat. It was later determined that no properly executed affidavit ever existed.
Two days later the TDSHS employees returned for a third time, just ahead of a Sheriff's Deputy. Taylor told them that since he was expecting the deputy to be there that morning to take statements about their previous visits, he would talk to them after he spoke to the deputy. He told the two TDSHS/FDA 'officers' to wait outside until the deputy took statements from four employees who had witnessed what had transpired the previous days.
"In the middle of the first statement," said Taylor, "the investigator came and asked to speak to the deputy. The deputy followed him to the lobby and I followed right behind. The TDSHS/FDA officer asked if I was going to comply with the warrant for an inspection. I again told him that I would talk to him when I finished with the deputy."
"He then proceeded to say that since I was refusing his inspection," Taylor continued, "would I sign a document stating that I refused inspection, and I said no and they meekly left. After that, we finished giving our statements to the Sheriff's deputy and so far they have not been back."
Since then, they continued to stonewall and refused to answer questions or otherwise attempt to make clarifications requested by Ben Taylor in accordance with the presiding judge's request for both sides to work together to try to work out an agreement. When Utopia Silver asked why they were being singled out for such actions and nothing was happening to similar companies, Assistant Attorney General Noriega said that it had been decided to make Utopia Silver a test case. After he made the statement, he was interrupted by the TDSHS officer, who, according to Taylor "proceeded to hem and haw on that point, obviously not comfortable with that statement having been made by the Assistant Attorney General."
At a subsequent hearing in the Fall of 2007, the judge stated that he was ordering a trial date to be set then and tried to first intimidate and then coerce Ben Taylor to agree to date for the trial. Mr. Taylor refused to agree, since in doing so he would be in effect entering into a contract to agree to the court's jurisdiction. At one point a deputy was summoned with the clear implication that Mr. Taylor might be arrested if he failed to agree.
Taylor, after various other tactics of intimidation by the judge, told the judge that, "The court might have the power to force me into a trial, but I will never agree to any trial date and will attend only "in propria persona" (in one's own proper person) by "special appearance" in order to defend my God-given Rights." (Note: an appearance may be either general or special; the former is a simple unqualified or unrestricted submission to the jurisdiction of the court where the defendant waives defects of service, the latter is for the purpose of objecting to the sufficiency of service or the jurisdiction of the court over a defendant without submitting to such jurisdiction).
Later, Taylor was told by a court official, "This system operates on fear, you have no fear and that's a problem for us."
Instead of setting a trial, a hearing was set before a new judge to determine a date for interrogatories and discovery as well as inspections and sanctions -- all of which are slippery grounds and another step towards a trial. At the subsequent hearing, Taylor again stated his objections to the jurisdiction and a new hearing was ordered to determine jurisdiction. When the new hearing was held and both sides presented their arguments, the judge rendered no immediate verdict and said she would take it under advisement and render a subsequent decision.
As expected, when the judge made her ruling she apparently ignored all evidence against the 'court's jurisdiction' entered by Taylor and co-defendant Adask, however she failed to do so pursuant to the State's own Rules of Civil Procedure, first sending an email of her ruling and then later sending a letter of the ruling when challenged about her emailing a 'court order'. Some observers believe that such an unorthodox method of 'delivering' a purported 'court order' was yet another in a string of ploys intended to trap Taylor, Adask and other defendants into unwittingly submitting to the court's jurisdiction.
Instead of accepting the improper service, Taylor sent his own "Notice of Insufficient Process" to the court along with a demand to the court and the prosecutor to "Cease and Desist" their fraudulent actions against Taylor, Adask and Utopia Silver.
Taylor's notice was sent on November 30th of last year -- and since it was filed, a silence has descended upon the case. As Taylor reports, "We haven't heard anything from the Texas Attorney General or the courts since late November of last year (about 230 days). At that time, the "judge" issued (by email initially) a court order denying my and Al Adask's (Anti-Shyster publisher and Texas State Supreme Court Libertarian Party candidate) special appearance." (As noted previously, a "special appearance" is one in which is made without submitting to the jurisdiction of the court).
As Taylor reports, "This Notice along with co-defendant Al Adask's "Man or other animals filing", see ((http://wordpress.com/tag/man-or-other-a...) , seems to have short-circuited the Plaintiff's intention to set another court hearing date for Motions for court ordered interrogatories and depositions under oath, as well as a restraining order to prevent my selling of colloidal silver (which they say is a drug because of customer testimonials) and silver generators (which they call a medical device).
"Also filed by us into evidence was a number of other things, including, but not limited to, The Organic Laws of The United States of America, The Common Law (specifically The Herbalist Charter), The Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938, which limits the FDA's jurisdiction/authority to Washington, DC and the territories (supported by the 18th and 21st Amendments) except in the regulating (organizing for efficient flow) of interstate commerce (transportation across State lines -- there is no FDA authority to control the sale and manufacturing of anything that I can find.), the case of Lopez v. United States, Dun & Bradstreet documents showing that the Texas Courts and government 'agencies' are "corporations for profit", the United States Code 28 Sec. 3002 showing that the "United States" is a federal corporation (which is a fictitious rather than an organic entity- our God-given Rights are recognized only by the organic United States of America) and numerous other Supreme cases that establish that God-given Rights cannot be statutorily converted into privileges."
Has Taylor and health freedom triumphed over a system that is corrupt and unconstitutional? Time may tell otherwise, but so far the silence has been deafening. Many who have followed the case feel that the FDA and their state servants bit off much more than they realized when they decided to take on Taylor and Utopia Silver. Instead of finding a small company and a man they could steamroll and bully, they have instead been fought to a standstill by a man who is determined to carry this fight to the very end no matter what the personal cost.
More than one astute observer has pointed out that the powers that be may well be facing some very thorny issues that had not seen the light of day -- such as the FDA commissioning state officers, the constitutional limits on the true powers of the FDA and other such agencies' true constitutional powers, freedom of commercial speech, and the issue of whether God-given unalienable rights set out in the Declaration of Independence and secured by the Constitution trump the entire corporate "color of law" administrative system of courts and agencies which have been used to usurp our freedoms and liberties over the year.
Should the state and their FDA masters continue further actions, Taylor promises that not only will such issues be at the forefront of his case, but also that he and his co-defendants will then "go on the offensive by filing suit against key officials (in their individual capacities) who have conspired to violate our Constitutionally secured Rights. Public servants/government officials lose their "official immunity" if they overstep their authority as granted (and limited) by the Organic Laws of the USA.
Full article including notice sent to the court click here
- AlliAnce for nAturAl heAlth
- dr. joseph mercolA
- heAlth FREEdom . net
- heAlth FREEdom usA . org
- life extension foundAtion
- nAturAl news
- ph mirAcle living
- seed sAvers exchAnge
- cornucopiA institute
- network of concerned fArmers
- orgAnic consumers
- megAfood vitAmins
- christinA cooks
- michAel moore
- pAtriots question 9/11
- prison plAnet
- public citizen
- RON PAUL
- clAssicAl net
- dAft punk
- dAft punk
- metropolitAn operA
- simiAn mobile disco