Trump, RFK Jr. & Vaccines

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
February 3, 2017

Regular readers of this site are aware that from time to time I have blogged about the controversy over vaccines and autism, and more recently, about vaccines being used covertly, under the guise of mandatory vaccination laws, to inject people with a whole host of things from nanobots to new types of vaccines designed to vaccinate others, against their will and even without their knowledge, through such a simple thing as a human sneeze, which is the latest gizmo being cooked up in Big Corporation Land. I have also blogged about studies of the vaccine-autism link that were based on the testimony of mothers who have had their children vaccinated who then came down with symptoms on the autism spectrum. The paper was first approved for publication, then withdrawn with the usual Big Corporation pressure was exerted.The paper was withdrawn for being based on “anecdotal” and not “scientific” evidence. As I pointed out at the time, this was a whole short-circuiting of the diagnostic process, for every human therapy begins when the patient tells his or her physician “what’s ailing them,” and this anecdotal evidence becomes, and must become, the basis on which the physician makes his or her initial diagnosis in most instances. To dismiss hundreds of stories in the historical record as merely “anecdotal” is to dismiss a priori a whole class of evidence simply on the basis of a dogma, rather than sincere investigation. The film Vaxxed came out detailing similar concerns, and was quashed.

In this context a story has emerged recently that President Trump was (or is) considering the appointment of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to head a panel to explore not only this question, but the wider role of the Center for Disease Control and the role of Big Pharma in manipulating its results. Consider these two articles, and particularly the second one by our friend and colleague Jon Rappaport, which has extensive quotations from Mr. Kennedy(Oh, and by the way and for the record, it was Mr. Rappaport who, years ago, coined the term “fake news” for his website, which of course recently the corporate controlled media tried to run with):

Trump Sets Off Media Firestorm With Creation of Vaccine Safety Review Panel

Robert F Kennedy’s devastating quotes on vaccines and the CDC

Mr. Kennedy “gets” it, and so does Mr. Rappaport. Consider first Mr. Rappaport’s take on what the CDC is:

Kennedy understands the inherent conflict of interest at the CDC, which operates as a vaccine sales and marketing company, while at the same time posing as a neutral scientific body that assesses vaccine safety—AND OF COURSE, THE CDC PRESENTS AN EVER-EXPANDING SCHEDULE OF “NECESSARY” VACCINES TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Think of it: the CDC has the power—backed by federal and state governments, and supported by the fake-news media—to buy and sell vaccines, while deciding how many vaccines the population should submit to. What salesman wouldn’t want to work for an outfit like that?

As we’ve also noted before on this website, note how the CDC mirrors in an almost exact way the role of the FDA in certifying the safety of GMOs under the doctrine of “substantial equivalence”, first promulgated by the administration of (you guessed it) the ever-deplorable Bush family during the administration of G.H.W. Bush. F. William Engdahl and other researchers into the GMO issue have chronicled the revolving door of personnel between that agency and the very GMO companies it was intended to monitor. And of course, there were no long-term inter-generational study of GMOs, just as there were not of the vaccine cocktails currently being urged, or forced, on the public, as pointed out in the first article noted above. The Ukrainian crisis was driven, in part, by the GMO issue, as the Ukraine was to be the lever by which to coopt agriculture in Russia. The sanctions regime was intended to reinforce that. Something went wrong however; Russia didn’t cave in to surrendering another significant portion of its economy to the West. Instead, it embarked on what I have been calling “GMO geopolitics,” and placed bans on the products, began to increase its natural agricultural production, and passed laws undertaking long-term intergenerational studies, the very studies missing in corporate-dominated western regulatory agencies.

But if you think Rappaport’s comments are strong, just consider Mr. Kennedy’s which are, as Mr. Kennedy points out, based on actual investigations of the agency:

“The CDC is a very troubled agency, and it’s not just me saying that. There have been four separate, intensive federal investigations by the United States Congress—a three year investigation, 2001, 2002, 2003, by the United States Senate, Tom Coburn’s committee, by the Inspector General of HHS in 2008, by the Office Integrity in 2014. All of them have painted the CDC as a cesspool of corruption, of an agency that has become an absolute subsidiary of the pharmaceutical industry, and that has become a sock puppet, a spokesperson, a shill for the industry.”

“CDC is not an independent agency. It is a vaccine company. CDC owns over twenty vaccine patents. It sells about $4.6 billion of vaccines every year. And its primary metric for success in all the departments in the agency are vaccine sales. The groups, for example the Immunization Safety Office, where the scientists who are supposed to be looking at efficacy and safety in vaccines, they are no longer a public service…agency. They are subsumed in that metric: We have to sell as many of these things as possible. And so they do things to their science to make sure that nothing interferes—no information—interferes with sales. (Emphasis added)

And Mr. Kennedy echoes my own experience with vaccines:

“When I was a boy, I got three vaccines. My children got sixty-nine vaccines. It changed in 1989.”

“Why did it change in 1989?”

“Because in 1986, Congress, [was] drowning in pharmaceutical industry money—pharma puts more money into lobbying than any other industry—Pharmaceutical companies have more lobbyists on Capitol Hill than there are Congress people.”

“Do you think oil and gas has big influence in the Capitol? Well, that’s the next biggest. The pharmaceutical industry puts twice into lobbying, double the amount that the oil and gas, and four times what defense and aero space put in. So they control Congress.”

“In 1986, Congress passed the Vaccine Act, and there were good reasons for them to pass it. …At that time vaccine companies were being sued and were threatening to stop making vaccines. [Congress] said, okay, we’re going to insulate them from lawsuits. They made it illegal to sue a vaccine company in this country, no matter how reckless the behavior, no matter how negligent, no matter how toxic the product, no matter how grievous the injury to the child, you cannot sue.”

“You know how badly the pharmaceutical industry behaves when they are being sued, when there’s a whole bar of lawyers who spend their whole life looking for ways to sue the pharmaceutical industry and tell these stories to juries, and how many billions every year are won from that industry.”

“What do you think would happen if all of a sudden, all the lawyers disappeared, all the class action suits, all the multi district litigation, all the depositions, all the document searches, the discovery? Just gone. Nobody can sue. You can make anything you want.”
(Emphases added)

You can make anything you want. Let that sink in. This is not Mr. Trump and his right wing populist “deplorables” talking; this is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. talking, hardly a right-winger and a populist. You can make anything you want, and not get sued: you can slip in a microchip for tracking (and other) purposes (like a “kill switch”?). You can slip in a “sneeze vaccine” and vaccinate others involuntarily against whatever it is you want to vaccinate against. You can turn children into autism victims thus requiring families to spend even more money on costly drugs from your company over the years. And maybe you could even combine “vaccines” and GMOs and have people eat their “disease prevention.” And all this, let it be noted, with no real long term intergenerational science to…

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Trump Sets Off Media Firestorm With Creation of Vaccine Safety Review Panel

vaccine safety panel
Source: Mecola.com
Dr. Mercola
January 24, 2017

Only nine days away from his swearing-in as president, Donald Trump held his first press conference since the election and announced that the pharmaceutical industry was “getting away with murder” and that during his presidency he would do something about high drug prices with more competitive bidding for federal contracts. His remarks sent drug stocks into a sudden nosedive.1

As noted by Brad Loncar, manager of Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF: “When somebody that high-profile says something that negative, people do not want to invest in it.” According to Reuters:2

“Trump’s campaign platform included allowing the Medicare healthcare program to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies, which the law currently prohibits.

He has also discussed making it easier to import drugs at cheaper prices. ‘We are going to start bidding. We are going to save billions of dollars over time,’ Trump said.”

Trump’s comments came only one day after Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told reporters that Trump had asked him to “chair a commission on vaccine safety and scientific integrity.”

Although the Trump transition team quickly denied that any decision had been made on such a commission, shockwaves reverberated throughout the drug industry in speculation as to what impact this commission, if formed, might have on vaccine uptake and sales.3

Robert Kennedy and Media Coverage of a Possible New Vaccine Safety Commission

Although Trump himself has not made a public statement, if you had any doubts whatsoever that conventional media is following an industry-created script, look no further than the incredibly biased coverage of Kennedy’s reported appointment.

A vast majority of the articles written are so blatantly slanted and unbalanced, it is hard to understand why self-respecting professional journalists would ever want their names associated with them. Repeatedly, such articles claim the science on vaccines is settled and vaccines are safe.4 Period.

The New York Times — which recently promised to rededicate itself “to the fundamental mission of Times journalism … to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives”5 — wrote a remarkably biased article about Kennedy’s appointment, saying:6

“Mr. Trump … asked a prominent anti-vaccine crusader to lead a new government commission on vaccine safety and scientific integrity, ushering debunked conspiracy theories about the dangers of immunization into the White House …

Among his many political pursuits, Mr. Trump picked up the anti-vaccine cause a few years back. In 2012, he tweeted … ‘A study says @autism is out of control — a 78 percent increase in 10 years. Stop giving monstrous combined vaccinations.’ These views, to say the least, are not the scientific consensus …”

So, The New York Times, supposedly newly rededicated to impartial reflection on all sides of the issue, simply decides there’s a consensus among all scientists and makes no attempt to address a single argument made by those who provide substantial evidence that there are big gaps in vaccine safety science.

That’s hardly upholding journalistic integrity. Yet, this is what we’re seeing everywhere in news reporting by conventional media dominated by corporate interests these days.

Is Vaccine Safety as Established a Fact as Gravity?

There are no long-term studies comparing differences in health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.

The pharmaceutical and medical trade industries claim a vaccine’s benefits always outweigh the potential harms, but no solid scientific evidence is provided to back up such claims. It’s really little more than opinion.

The government and pharmaceutical industries say it would be unethical to study vaccinated versus unvaccinated children, as the unvaccinated children would be put at risk. Yet more and more parents are having first-hand experience with adverse reactions, and choosing to opt-out of the government vaccine schedule.

Ask a parent of a child who died or suffered permanent brain damage after vaccination and I’m sure you’ll get a very different response. Curiously, anyone who dares to question the quality and quantity of vaccine studies is immediately branded anti-science and a medical heretic.

In response to Kennedy’s announcement that Trump had asked him to head up a commission on vaccine safety, Dr. David Kimberlin, co-director of the Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), said:7

“We don’t have to keep asking if gravity is real. We don’t have to keep asking if clean water is a good thing. Yes it is. Vaccines are good things. They save lives.”

According to Kimberlin, “The science proving the safety of vaccination is settled and does not need to be investigated again.” But if it’s settled, where are the studies?

Where’s the research showing that 50 doses of 14 vaccines administered to children in combination and repeatedly in the first six years of life equals long-term health and results in few, if any, problems? What are the multi-generational effects to the immune system with so many vaccine doses?

The sad fact is the often repeated mantra that vaccines are absolutely safe and that there is nothing to worry about is a case of thinking that if a falsehood is repeated over and over again, and long enough, people will believe it’s true.

Why are vaccine proponents so terrified of an honest vaccine safety review? This in and of itself raises serious questions.

Another fact that should give everyone pause is the witch hunt unleashed on anyone who dares to question the never-proven-hypothesis that vaccines are so unequivocally safe and beneficial for everyone that everyone should be forced, by law, to get vaccinated with every government-recommended vaccine.

Cleveland Clinic Doctor Faces Disciplinary Action for Stating the Obvious

One of the latest victims of such a witch hunt is Cleveland Clinic physician Daniel Neides, director of the Cleveland Clinic Wellness Institute. Neides writes a monthly column for cleveland.com, a publication that is part of the Sun News organization, which also publishes the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

In his January 6 column,8 Neides expressed his concerns about the ever-growing toxic burden humans face and his disappointing experience with the annual flu shot, which left him bedridden for two days. He also touched on the potential vaccine-autism link, saying:

“Why do I mention autism now twice in this article. Because we have to wake up out of our trance and stop following bad advice. Does the vaccine burden — as has been debated for years — cause autism? I don’t know and will not debate that here.

What I will stand up and scream is that newborns without intact immune systems and detoxification systems are being over-burdened with PRESERVATIVES AND ADJUVANTS IN THE VACCINES.

The adjuvants, like aluminum — used to stimulate the immune system to create antibodies — can be incredibly harmful to the developing nervous system.

Some of the vaccines have helped reduce the incidence of childhood communicable diseases, like meningitis and pneumonia. That is great news. But not at the expense of neurologic diseases like autism and ADHD increasing at alarming rates.”

His comments ignited a media fire storm and prompted the Cleveland Clinic to issue a statement saying Neides would face disciplinary action for his comments.9

The column was briefly removed from the cleveland.com site, but mysteriously reappeared and became accessible again after Neides retracted his statements and apologized for what his physician colleagues and the media are characterizing as an anti-vaccine “rant.”

If a prominent, well-respected physician cannot state the obvious without facing potentially career-ending consequences, what hope do we have of ever getting at the truth? WHY is open dialogue about vaccination not permitted?

It’s simply not reasonable to shut every discussion down with the old “the science is settled” claim, while the scientific literature is still littered with outstanding questions.

Coincidence Claims Falter as Vaccine Damage Becomes More Common

On January 11, a group of concerned parents rallied at the State Capitol in Mississippi in the hopes of having their voices heard in the vaccine debate.10 One of those parents was Dr. Scott Guidry, whose son developed autism spectrum symptoms following some of his childhood vaccinations. Guidry told WJTV:

“My son was vaccine-injured, and we reversed the vaccine injury, and now he’s recovered from autism. I’m not against vaccines. I learned the same importance of vaccines like every other physician who went to med school did. I know. But it’s never really been studied, the safety of vaccines. There’s never been a long-term safety study on vaccines.”

According to this news report, Mississippi has one of the highest vaccination rates in the U.S. It also has one of the highest autism rates, as well as the highest infant mortality rate in the country.11 Coincidence? No one knows, but in the absence of firm proof either way, many parents are renewing their call for the legal right to make voluntary decisions about which vaccines their child should receive and if or when they should be given.

The same scenario is playing out in other states across the nation. The numbers of children suffering with chronic illness and disability, including autism spectrum disorders, are increasing. The numbers of children and adults who have experienced serious vaccine reactions are also increasing.

It has become so common that a majority of people now have a family member or know someone who has been adversely affected by one or more vaccines. Eventually, this first-hand experience with vaccine reactions will come to include most physicians and politicians, as well.

At a certain point, the coincidence-theory simply cannot hold water any longer, and that’s what we’re starting to see now. Very often, people don’t care enough to get involved in the discussion until it’s personal and, in recent years, we’ve seen a growing number of influential people speaking up and describing their personal experiences with vaccine reactions in the public forum.

Robert De Niro is the latest example of a well-known celebrity parent, who has gone on the public record questioning vaccine safety and the reported link between vaccines and autism. Not surprisingly, like everyone who raises questions about vaccine safety, he has been attacked by the media as being uninformed and promoting dangerous ideas.

Rick Rollens, former secretary of the California State Senate, and retired Representative Dan Burton (R-Ind.) are two examples of individuals who worked for government and publicly shared their personal experiences with vaccination and autism. They were strongly criticized for speaking out as they attempted to open up discussions about vaccine safety. Absolutely no one is above ridicule should they dare question the safety of vaccines.

Paul ‘For Profit’ Offit’s at It Again

Wherever discussion about vaccine safety is covered by the media, Dr. Paul Offit is there in the middle of it. A vaccine developer for Merck and author of several books attempting to marginalize vaccine safety critics, Offit has become the “go-to” doctor whenever corporatized conventional media wants a spokesperson to deny vaccine risks and defend “vaccine safety.”

Rarely, if ever, does media note his deep ties to the vaccine industry, and the fact that he stands to profit personally from maintaining the illusion that vaccines are absolutely safe for everyone all the time, which also protects the status quo for industry profitmaking.

The Daily Beast recently ran an article12 penned by Offit, in which he says “Trump needs vaccine experts, not conspiracy theorists.” How do you know a propagandist when you see one? For starters, they’re extremely fond of throwing around derogatory and humiliating terms like “conspiracy theorists,” “hacks” and “quacks,” in lieu of making a solid argument.

Offit has earned tens of millions of dollars in royalties from the Rotateq vaccine, and has notoriously stated that infants can tolerate 10,000 vaccine doses at once without ill effect. He’s also been caught making unsubstantiated and false statements about former CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson, and lying to the OC Register about providing CBS News with the details of his financial relationship with the vaccine maker Merck.13

Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the non-profit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), sued Offit for defamation in 2009, along with reporter Amy Wallace and publisher Conde Nast. “She lies,” Offit was quoted as stating “flatly” about Fisher in Wired magazine. However, no evidence supporting his accusation was provided and Fisher was never asked by the reporter for a comment on Offit’s baseless allegation.

Fisher sued in the Fourth Circuit federal court in Virginia for a jury trial and $1 million in damages, but Judge Claude Hilton dismissed the defamation lawsuit. Hilton’s primary argument for dismissal was that both Fisher and Offit are public figures and that, in his opinion, Offit’s allegation that “she lies” was made in a moment of emotional exasperation and the heat of spirited public debate, which is the hallmark of free speech protected by the First Amendment.

It is interesting how the free speech argument was used to dismiss a clear-cut case of defamation. The big question today is: Will the First Amendment protect Neides or anyone else in the U.S. who dares to publicly criticize the safety or effectiveness of vaccines?

In Absence of Reliable Injury Reporting, How Can Safety Be Ascertained?

In 2015, media reports noted that a “study” by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had confirmed that vaccines rarely ever cause serious reactions. The study in question used CDC Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) data, concluding there were only 33 “confirmed vaccine-triggered anaphylaxis cases” among the 25,173,965 vaccine doses administered between January 2009 and December 2011.14

However, there’s a significant problem with using this study to “prove” safety, as…

Continue Reading At: Mercola.com

 

Book Review: Seeds Of Deception – Exposing Industry & Government Lies About The Safety Of The Genetically Engineered Foods You’re Eating by Jeffrey M. Smith

GENR.jpg
TheBreakaway
Zy Marquiez
August 18, 2016

Seeds Of Deception – Exposing Industry & Government Lies About The Safety Of The Genetically Engineered Foods You’re Eating by Jeffrey M. Smith is a relentless foray into the veil of deception obfuscating genetically modified food that has been cast by Big Biotech companies like Monsanto & Co.

Seeds Of Deception is chock-full of hundreds of references that eviscerate the conventional narrative in very incisive ways.  These countless examples shown by the author poignantly point out many of the issues that genetic engineering of organisms is fraught with.

A snippet into some of the inherent issues that plague genetically engineered foods mentioned in the book involve code scramblers, messing up the host’s normal DNA, horizontal gene transfer and antibiotic resistance, gene silencing, environmental influences, turning on your genes, waking sleeping viruses, cancer and more safety issues that are highly unknown in society.

Regarding cancer, in fact, Smith elaborates:

“The CaMV light switch and other viral promoters used in GM crops can also activate other, non-viral genes in species where it “happens to be transferred,” says Ho and others.  “One consequence of such inappropriate over-expression of genes may be cancer.”  Stanely Ewen, one of Scotland’s leading experts in tissue diseases, agrees.  He says that CaMV promoter “could affect stomach and colonic lining by causing a growth factor effect with the unproven possibility of hastening cancer formation in those organs.”[1][Bold Emphasis Added]

Not only are the health issues involved with genetically modified organisms [GMOs] detailed at length, but the author goes beyond that to cover the downright corruption that is taking place between Big Biotech and government as best exemplified by the revolving door between Monsanto and the FDA.  Coupled with that is the fact that many of the scientists that are working behind the scenes are also board members of Big Biotech companies in a classic conflict of interest scenario.

In fact, FDA corruption was so bad that hundreds of scientists either quit or retired.

Detailed below:

“FDA veterinarian Richard Burroughs described the changes he saw.  “There seemed to be a trend in the place toward approval at any price  It went from a university-like setting where there was independent scientific review to an atmosphere of “approve, approve, approve.”  He said, “the thinking is, ‘How many things can we approve this year?’ Somewhere along the way they abdicated their responsibility to the public welfare.”[2][Bold Emphasis Added]

FDA corruption is actually trenchantly detailed throughout the length of the book.

Not only that, but as Smith soberingly mentions:

“Research in the Journal of American Medical Association revealed that study of cancer drugs funded by non-profit groups were eight times more likely to reach unfavorable conclusions as the studies funded by the pharmaceutical companies.  Or consider the case of the genetically modified sweetener aspartame: About 165 peer-reviewed studies were conducted on it by 1995.  They were divided almost evenly between those that found no problem and those that raised questions about the sweetener’s safety.  Of those studies that found no problem, 100% were paid for by the manufacturer of the sweetener.  All of the studies paid for by non-industry and non-government sources raised question.  The manufacturer of the sweetener, by the way, is GD Searly, which was a wholly owned subsidiary of Monsanto during that period.”[3][Emphasis Added]

Moving forward, a very much appreciated portion of the book comes at the end of it.  Smith makes it a point to outline many of the resources available to individuals in regards to this disturbing topic.  That just might be worth the price of the book alone given the many dangers inherent therein.

Regardless, even without that, the book showcases extensive evidence of GMO dangers that individuals should be cognizant of.  This book helps individuals view what the reality is regarding this propaganda-laden topic.  Not only that, but evidence continues being amassed that only buttresses Smith’s concerns.

The question is now, what will you as an individual do about it?

_____________________________________________________________________
Sources:

[1]Jeffrey M. Smith, Seeds Of Deception, pg. 65.
[2]Ibid., pg. 142.
[3]Ibid., pg.  41-42.

___________________________________________________________________
If you want more information, please watch the documentaries:

Seeds Of Death – Unveiling The Lies Of GMOs
Genetic Roulette: The Gamble Of Our Lives

BREAKING: Taiwan Bans Genetically Modified Foods From School Lunches… Mandates GMO Labeling Nationwide… Throws Down Gauntlet On Toxic Foods From USA & Monsanto

Taiwan
Source: NaturalNews.com
Mike Adams
January 10, 2016

Even as the fascist, corrupt U.S. government and its regulators (FDA and USDA) actively conspire with the biotech industry to poison Americans with genetically modified foods, Taiwan has already passed and implemented a nationwide law to protect its citizens from GMOs.

Nearly a full year ago, Taiwan passed Food Act Amendments that achieve remarkable food safety milestones the U.S. government refuses to implement, placing Taiwan far ahead of the United States on food safety. These milestones include:

1) Requiring the mandatory labeling of GMOs on all food products that contain 3 percent or more GMOs. Foods that use no GMOs may be labeled “non-GMO” … and many already are, causing their sales to skyrocket across Taiwan. Just last year, imports of non-GMO soybeans to Taiwan grew nearly 300% to 58,000 tons.

2) Limiting the use of food additives to just 799 compounds approved by the Taiwan FDA. The FDA of the United States, by comparison, allows tens of thousands of chemicals to be used as additives, even when they are well known to cause cancer.

3) All GMO ingredients are required to be registered with the Taiwan government, and food manufacturers that use GMOs are required to establish an origins tracking system to identify where those GMOs originated.

4) All the soy milk, tofu, miso and other soy-derived products sold everywhere across the country — including at cafes and street food vendors — must be clearly labeled as GMOs if they use genetically modified soy.

5) Food products made using genetically modified soy as a processing agent or blended ingredient must also label their final food products as GMO, even if the soybean oil is not, itself, the final product.

6) Fines for violating these food safety provisions have been set at NT$50 million.

USA food safety lags far behind the rest of the world

This shows yet again just how far behind the United States is on food safety compared to the rest of the world. Instead of promoting actual food safety, the FDA gives a free pass to GMOs, heavy metals, artificial additives and other toxic chemicals, focusing almost exclusively on bacteriological contamination issues such as e.coli and salmonella.

That’s why the USA lags far behind the rest of the world on the banning of artificial additives and preservative chemicals, most of which have already been banned across the EU. The U.S. government continues to allow extremely toxic pesticides and herbicides to be used across the agricultural industry (including California’s strawberry operations), and as the news in this article shows, the USA now lags far behind Taiwan on the issue of GMO labeling and banning GMOs from school lunches.

Increasingly, U.S. food safety looks like a third world nation being run by a cartel of imperialistic food corporations that dictate government policy. Public health has NOTHING to do with government regulatory policy at this point. It’s all about appeasing Monsanto, Syngenta, DuPont, Kellogg’s, PepsiCo and all the other poison-pushing food and beverage companies that continue to poison a nation of food victims into epidemics of diabetes, cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s.

Taiwan bans GMOs from school menus

In yet another milestone for food safety, Taiwan has banned GMOs from school lunches.

“The latest amendments to the School Health Act are aimed at all school meal providers, to ban genetically modified raw ingredients and any processed foods that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs) from school menus,” reports the China Post. The Post also reports:

Legislator Lin Shu-fen, an advocate for passing the bill, said that studies abroad have shown a high connection between the consumption of GM foods and the prevalence of allergies, autism and rare diseases.

“Soy is a major ingredient in Taiwan’s school lunches,” said Lin. “Genetically modified soy has been shown to contains toxic residue from pesticides.”

You almost never hear such statements from the sellout politicians in America, nearly all of whom have been bribed and bought off by the biotech industry. Making matters even worse, poison-pushing U.S. publishers like Forbes.com — named the single most evil news publication of 2015 by EVIL.news — carry deceptive propaganda articles by sleazebag industry scientists like Henry Miller who ridiculously claims that herbicides are harmless and GMOs pose no health risks whatsoever.

Entire world revolting against U.S. agricultural imperialism and fascist, corporate-dictated government policy

The rest of the world, however, isn’t buying the U.S. propaganda. In fact, the rest of the world is revolting against U.S. agricultural imperialism where prostituted U.S. lawmakers and regulators are bought off by industry to shove GMOs down the throats of all the other countries under so-called “fair trade” regulations such as the TPP.

Taiwan’s pig farmers, for example, are also organizing a massive, nationwide protest over the U.S. pork industry’s continued usage of ractopamine, a toxic drug fed to pigs to cause rapid weight gain. The Taiwan government is under imperialistic pressure from U.S. trade representatives to lift its ban on the import of U.S. pork grown with the drug. If the ban is lifted, it would flood the Taiwan market with cheap, low-grade pork that’s been artificially multiplied with the use of a toxic drugs that isn’t used at all in the Taiwan pork industry, reports Asia News Network.

Continue Reading At: NaturalNews.com

The World According to Monsanto

There’s nothing they are leaving untouched: the mustard, the okra, the bringe oil, the rice, the cauliflower. Once they have established the norm: that seed can be owned as their property, royalties can be collected. We will depend on them for every seed we grow of every crop we grow. If they control seed, they control food, they know it — it’s strategic. It’s more powerful than bombs. It’s more powerful than guns. This is the best way to control the populations of the world. The story starts in the White House, where Monsanto often got its way by exerting disproportionate influence over policymakers via the “revolving door”. One example is Michael Taylor, who worked for Monsanto as an attorney before being appointed as deputy commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1991. While at the FDA, the authority that deals with all US food approvals, Taylor made crucial decisions that led to the approval of GE foods and crops. Then he returned to Monsanto, becoming the company’s vice president for public policy.

Thanks to these intimate links between Monsanto and government agencies, the US adopted GE foods and crops without proper testing, without consumer labeling and in spite of serious questions hanging over their safety. Not coincidentally, Monsanto supplies 90 percent of the GE seeds used by the US market. Monsanto’s long arm stretched so far that, in the early nineties, the US Food and Drugs Agency even ignored warnings of their own scientists, who were cautioning that GE crops could cause negative health effects. Other tactics the company uses to stifle concerns about their products include misleading advertising, bribery and concealing scientific evidence.