The GMO Scrapbook – India Cuts Royalties, Monsanto Threatens To…

Farmers plough and sow cotton seeds in a field in Shahpur village, India © Amit Dave

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
March 15, 2016

Yesterday I blogged about a report that allegedly was circulating in the Kremlin regarding GMOs, vaccinations, and the general state of the West’s “food” sup;ly and “nutrition.” In that blog, I raised again an idea that I have been advancing for some years regarding “GMO geopolitics,” i.e., the idea that the BRICSA bloc, if it was smart, would seek to transform the GMO debate and issue into a gepolitical issue, ie. an issue of the exercise of soft power. To do this, I’ve been maintaining that it could carefully position itself on the side of those who are increasingly raising concerns about the safety of such products. Yesterday, it will be recalled, Russia apparently has now expanded this to encompass the link between autism and the slew of vaccinations that big pharma increasingly presses in the West, and in some cases, successfully lobbies for mandatory vaccination rules.

It seems in this respect that things are also heating up on the GMO issue in India, where there has been a rising concern and political opposition to GMOs, according to this article that many have shared:

Monsanto threatens to quit Indian GM-cotton market if govt cuts its royalties

Here’s the crux of the matter:

American agrochemical giant Monsanto has threatened to pull out of India and hold back new genetically modified cotton technologies if the government continues its “arbitrary and potentially destructive” interventions that seek to cut the company’s royalty fees.

Last year the Indian government issued an order to control cotton seed prices effective from the 2016-17 crop year. In a ruling, the antitrust regulator, Competition Commission of India, accused the GMO giant of potentially abusing its dominant position on the market. The Agriculture Ministry set up a special committee tasked with implementing brackets for seed price along with royalty fees, after the completion of an investigation into the matter. (Emphasis added)

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com

Advertisements

You Tell Me – Mandatory Depression Tests

QuestionEverything
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
February 18, 2016

Many of you have been sharing this strange story with me, and if this was not the 21st century USSA, I’d be disinclined to believe it, but since it is the 21st century USSA, I pass it along with my own high octane speculations:

Ron Paul Slams Government Plan For “Mandatory Depresssion Screening” Of All Americans

The first four paragraphs say it all, and are offering their own explanation for this latest expansion of “health care”:

The United States Preventive Services Task Force recently recommended mandatory depression screening for all Americans. The task force wants to force health insurance companies to pay for the screening. Basic economics, as well as the Obamacare disaster, should have shown this task force that government health insurance mandates harm Americans.

Government health insurance mandates raise the price of health insurance. Consumers will respond to this increase by either choosing to not carry health insurance or by reducing their consumption of other goods and services. Imposing new health insurance mandates will thus make consumers, many of whom are already suffering from Obamacare’s costly mandates, worse off by forcing them to deviate from their preferred consumption patterns.

Mandatory depression screening will not just raise insurance costs. In order to ensure that the screening mandate is being properly implemented, the government will need to create a database containing the results of the screenings. Those anti-gun politicians who want to forbid anyone labeled “mentally ill” from owning a firearm will no doubt want to use this database as a tool to deprive individuals of their Second Amendment rights.

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com

Health Surveillance Gone Wild: 35 Federal Agencies To Collect & Share Your Personal Health Information

Government surveillance

Source: NaturalNews.com
Daniel Baker
January 25, 2016

One of the goals of the federal government’s Affordable Care Act is to universally implement the use of Electronic Health Records (EHR). What this means is that federal health authorities have begun a push toward converting all Americans’ health data and medical histories into a digital format which can be easily accessed and shared by doctors, insurance providers, scientific researchers and the patients themselves.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently released the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan 2015-2020, which outlines the goal of advancing the “collection, sharing, and use of electronic health information to improve health care, individual and community health, and research.”

Under the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, which was introduced in 2009, a majority of doctors and hospitals have already begun to convert patient data into digital form.

Proponents of the plan argue that it will improve healthcare for Americans by making it easier for doctors and hospitals to access and share vital patient info, and through creating a database to be used in medical research.

Although there would seem to be some merit in creating such a system, many are voicing concerns over privacy — part of the plan includes making these electronic records available to more than 35 federal agencies.

These agencies include the Bureau of Prisons, the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense and even NASA.

Although the creators of the plan state that one of their first concerns will be the protection of patient privacy, critics are skeptical — pledges to “anonymize” and “de-identify” the data are likely to fall short of the mark.

A 2009 report by the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) stated, regarding the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA):

HIPAA’s protections do not extend to “deidentified” health information. …

If a third party then reidentifies these data–for example, by using information in its possession or available in a public database–the reidentified personal health information would not be subject to HIPAA. It could be used for any purpose unless the entity holding the reidentified data was a covered entity.

It is far too easy to re-identify data which has been de-identified, and that’s just one of the potential ways in which patient privacy may be breached. The federal government has done a sloppy job of protecting personal info — the security breaches which occurred during the rollout of the Obamacare website is just one glaring example.

As the CDT report noted:

The computerization of personal health information undeniably poses risks to privacy. Tens of thousands of health records may be accessed or disclosed through a single breach. Recent headlines about the theft of laptop computers containing unencrypted health information and inappropriate access to celebrities’ records validate the concerns reflected in the survey data.

One might understandably wonder exactly why all these agencies require access to health records. Does the Bureau of Prisons, for instance, really need to be able to look at your medical history — especially if you are not a criminal?

Continue Reading At: NaturalNews.com