This is how Big Pharma bought it's way onto FDA advisory panels

by Ethan A. Huff – Natural News

It is now an undeniable fact that the pharmaceutical industry weaseled its way onto key U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panels, which were instrumental in shaping the way drugs are safety tested and approved. According to The Washington Post (WP), a recent public records request has revealed that drug companies purchased special access onto these panels, where they were given the keys to the kingdom in swaying decision-makers about official drug policy.

Based on critical information gathered from hundreds of leaked emails, pharmaceutical companies have doled out hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years to attend private meetings with the FDA, many of which were geared towards the regulation and approval of painkiller drugs. Drug companies would reportedly shell out upwards of $25,000 or more per meeting to have their voices heard, a small price to pay for direct access to the $9 billion American painkiller market.

According to the WP, officials from both the FDA and the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) would regularly meet with pharmaceutical representatives in private to discuss regulatory protocols, co-write scientific papers and collaborate on various ways to help streamline the drug approval process. And the only parties who actually paid to attend such meetings were the drug companies, a fact that one official from the NIH expressed serious concerns about in an email, referring to the whole scheme as a “pay to play process.”

Others who have since reviewed the emails agree, noting that, while the FDA did not necessarily benefit financially from these private meetings, many FDA officials went on to work as pharmaceutical consultants. In other words, FDA staff who agreed to grease the palms of the drug industry during these private meetings were later rewarded with high-paying positions in the drug industry. This is just one glaring example of how the line between the regulator (FDA) and the regulated (pharmaceutical companies) has been blurred beyond recognition.

“These e-mails help explain the disastrous decisions the FDA’s analgesic division has made over the last 10 years,” said Craig Mayton, the Columbus, Ohio, attorney who made the public records request to the University of Washington, to the WP. “Instead of protecting the public health, the FDA has been allowing the drug companies to pay for a seat at a small table where all the rules were written.”

Big Pharma, FDA corruption runs deep

It is no longer a conspiracy theory, then, that the drug industry owns the FDA. In this particular case, it was two academics by the names of Robert Dworkin, from the University of Rochester, and Dennis Turk, from the University of Washington, who allegedly orchestrated the painkiller plot. But there have been many other plots with the same ultimate end, a fact that NaturalNews and many others in the so-called “alternative” media have been shouting from the rooftops for years, but that the mainstream media has ignored, until now.

“Shame on the FDA and NIH for sending representatives to this panel, cooked up by two unethical professors and their drug company cronies,” wrote one WP commenter about the scandal. It should be noted that FDA officials actively participated in the painkiller scheme, all the while knowing full well that the private meetings they attended were hatched by Big Pharma. “Congress should come down hard on both agencies for participating in what was clearly pay-to-play, with awful consequences for the health of many suffering Americans.”

Such consequences include a flood of dangerous analgesic drugs to the market that were approved based on questionable or flawed safety studies. According to MedpageToday.com, the drug industry was successful during these meetings in convincing the FDA to adopt an “enriched enrollment” guidance for safety trials that eliminated patients who experienced adverse reactions. These and other modifications made it much easier for drugs to be declared safe and effective, and thus gain rapid approval.

Source: naturalnews.com

Sources for this article include:

http://www.washingtonpost.com

http://www.medpagetoday.com

http://seattletimes.com

Pro-GMO Lobby Forced to Disclose Donors After Lawsuit

Image: www.occupy.com

(cornucopia.org via buzz.naturalnews.com) 

Friday, October 18, the Grocery Manufacturers Association released a list of contributors to the anti-GMO labeling No on 522 campaign after the Washington Attorney General filed suit for violating state election disclosure requirements.

The list was made up of some of the largest food products manufacturers, including many of the most prominent brands in natural and organic food. The following list shows the disclosed companies and the amounts of funding contributed:

Pinnacle Foods Group LLC $120,846The J. M. Smucker Company $241,091Rich Products Corporation $24,049General Mills, Inc. $598,819PepsiCo, Inc. $1,620,899Bunge North America, inc. $94,993Bumble Bee Foods, LLC $36,073Bush Brothers & Company A $16,233

Moody Dunbar, Inc. $1,804Dean Foods Company $120,245Kellogg Company $221,852Nestle USA, Inc. $1,052,743ConAgra Foods $285,281Bimbo Bakeries USA $94,693Welch Foods, Inc. $28,859Knouse Foods Cooperative, Inc. $14,429Bruce Foods Corporation $3,006Abbott Nutrition $127,459Campbell Soup Company $265,140Del Monte Foods Company $86,576Sunny Delight Beverages Company $21,043Shearer's Foods, Inc. $25,251Mondelez Global LLC $144,895Land O'Lakes, Inc. $99,803The Coca-Cola Company $1,047,332The Hillshire Brands Company $97,398The Hershey Company $248,305Hormel Foods Corporation $52,908Clement Pappas & Company, Inc. $21,043McCormick & Company, Inc. $102,208Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. $55,313FlowersFoods, Inc. $141,288Cargill, Inc. $98,601The Clorox Company $12,024Total: $7,222,500.

These are the companies that decided that they don't want their customers to know what is in the products they buy. These companies hid behind a national association to disguise their role in influencing elections and misleading consumers. They deserve to lose at least as much as they contributed to their campaign of misinformation. Please join in spreading consumer awareness about these companies and let everyone know to avoid buying their products, so they realize just how damaging their actions can be and hopefully adopt better practices, with consumer safety in mind, in the future.
Source: cornucopia.org & buzz.naturalnews.com

5 year old girl contracts shingles from the chicken pox vaccine

For the past several years, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been actively promoting the shingles vaccine as the solution to what some experts say is a building shingles epidemic. But a new study published in the German medical journal Der Hautarzt, or “The Dermatologist” in English, has revealed that the childhood vaccine for chicken pox, a common viral disease related to shingles, may actually be directly responsible for triggering this epidemic.


Also known clinically as varicella-zoster virus (VZV), chicken pox is a relatively mild form of herpes virus that typically manifests itself during the early childhood years. Nearly all children who develop the condition at a young age, in fact, never develop it again, and are also usually imparted with lifelong immunity to both VZV and its relative, herpes zoster, a more severe form of the disease commonly referred to as shingles.
According to the new study; however, getting vaccinated with the chicken pox vaccine, which first became commercially available in the U.S. back in 1995, could damage this natural immune cycle. Based on the available data, getting vaccinated for chicken pox may end up blocking the mechanisms the body uses to develop its own natural immunity to both chicken pox and shingles, causing much worse infection later on down the road.

Image: www.nationsvaccineclaim.com

A five-year-old girl, it turns out, was found recently to have developed severe symptoms of shingles not long after being vaccinated for chicken pox. Researchers from Helios Klinikum in Germany conducted a direct immunofluorescence assay on the child to look for evidence of the vaccine strain in the infection, and found that the vaccine strain had, indeed, caused the child to become infected with the much more severe shingles virus.

“This case demonstrates that a negative VZV direct immunofluorescence assay does not exclude an infection with the vaccine strain,” wrote the authors in their study abstract, which you can view here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23358727
Chicken pox vaccine prevents body from developing its own natural immunity to shingles
Adults, and particularly those who have not yet had the chicken pox, are said to be most prone to developing shingles, which is why the CDC and others are urging individuals over age 50 to get a shingles vaccine. But what this bloated bureaucracy is failing to disclose publicly is the fact that the sudden uptick in shingles cases is directly associated with the advent of the chicken pox vaccine.

People who were vaccinated for chicken pox as children beginning in the 1990s are now eclipsing into adulthood. Many of these children have never had the chicken pox, which means their bodies have never had the chance to develop natural immunity to both future infection with chicken pox and shingles. As a result, this chicken pox-vaccinated generation is not only seeing an increase in shingles infections rates, but is also shedding the virus onto others.

Back in 2005, Dr. Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D., the formed Editor-in-Chief of the charity Medical Veritas, published a study in the International Journal of Toxicology showing that even if the chicken pox vaccine did eradicate chicken pox as claimed, it would induce a much more severe shingles epidemic that would gradually build in intensity for up to 50 years. It now appears as though Dr. Goldman’s findings were, indeed, correct.

Sources:
http://www.naturalnews.com/038997_chicken_pox_vaccine_shingles_epid
http://www.thelibertybeacon.comhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23358727http://healthimpactnews.comhttp://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/09/01/12896.aspx

This is why high fructose corn syrup is dangerous

High Fructose Corn Syrup, also known as HFCS, glucose-fructose syrup, glucose syrup, fructose syrup, glucose/fructose, high-fructose maize syrup or corn sugar is a corn-based sweetener that is used in thousands of food products including sodas, soft drinks, fruit juices, ice cream, candy, baked goods, cookies, ketchup, soups, salad dressings, breads, crackers, etc.

HFCS is a mixture of fructose and glucose, and is used by food companies because it is cheaper than sugar and gives food products a longer shelf life.

Image: www.ener-chi.com

HFCS is responsible for a host of health problems such as obesity, high cholesterol, insulin problems, Type 2 diabetes, liver damage, hypertension, high blood pressure, heart disease, cancer, migraines, ADHD, etc.
HFCS is often contaminated with mercury which can lead to brain damage.

Here is a great video about the dangers of HFCS:


Corn, the source of high fructose corn syrup, is now often genetically modified, which causes many serious health problems.

Glucose is used as fuel and metabolized by the cells in the body. In contrast, fructose can only be metabolized by the liver which turns fructose into fat. When consuming fructose, 30% will be stored as fat… Fructose, in contrast to glucose, has no effect on appetite, which results in overeating and obesity.

Image: www.milehimama.com

The fructose found in fruit and in some vegetables is actually quite healthy as it contains fiber, vitamins, minerals, enzymes and beneficial phytonutrients. In contrast, the fructose found in HFCS contains no nutrition and actually pulls nutrients from the body! HFCS hinders the absorption of minerals such as magnesium, copper and chromium and affects the receptors of insulin, leading to Type 2 diabetes. In addition, HFCS causes high cholesterol and impairs the immune system.

The food industry is trying to convince us that High Fructose Corn Syrup is natural, equal to sugar and therefore perfectly safe.

Do no longer believe the lies of the food industry and the ‘mainstream’ media. Contrary to what so-called ‘health experts’ claim, HFCS is not safe!

Avoid HFCS for 60 days and discover how your health will improve dramatically!

Other forms of fructose to avoid: crystalline fructose, chicory, inulin, iso glucose and Agave syrup, a highly processed sweetener that is nearly all-fructose.

Also avoid energy and sports drinks because they are loaded with sugar, chemical additives and artificial sweeteners.

Healthier HFCS alternatives:
Organic raw cane sugar, maple syrup, coconut nectar, palm sugar, raw honey and Stevia, the low calorie, all natural sweetener used in Paraguay for centuries.

Source: rawforbeauty.com

Feds to parents: kids can't bring lunch to school without a doctor's note

It looks like the days of trading half of your peanut butter and jelly sandwich for half of your best friend’s ham sandwich may soon be over if the federal government has anything to do with it.

A Richmond, Virginia mother received the following note, telling her not to pack a lunch for her pre-school age child. (source: Momdot.com)

Image: http://www.momdot.com/a-doctors-note-for-gmos/

As a family, we have made the decision to avoid a host of ingredients that are all found in abundance in school lunches.  We don’t consume:

• GMOs
• Pesticides
• Artificial colors and flavors
• Preservatives
• Hormone laden meat and dairy

But this week at my daughter’s school, the offerings are:

• Corn dog or chicken nuggets, tater tots
• Beef tostada boat or PB and J on white bread
• Pepperoni pizza or fish sticks with roll
• Pretzel sticks with cheese sauce or chicken teriyaki
• Cheeseburger or breaded chicken patty with seasoned fries

There is not one thing on that list that falls into our normal diet. Add a side of rBGH-filled milk and a corn-syrup laden “fruit cup” and you have a complete nutritional disaster.

Why should the parents be required to bear the expense of a doctor’s visit to get the required note to be allowed to send healthful, homemade lunches for their children?

I’m glad you asked.

It’s all about profit and control.

Because, you see, the federal government must have all the little children on board in order to subsidize the farmers, make the rich richer, and make the poor sicker.  Throw in some Obamacare to treat the resulting nutritionally-driven illnesses and it is a win-win situation – at least it is if you own a food processing plant, a medical facility, or a factory farm and you’re not the ones eating that so-called food.

Agricultural surplus is used to provide a base of food which is provided to the schools free of charge.  It is then turned into processed junk for the public school system while the food manufacturers profit.  The National School Lunch Program, enacted in 1946, has a mission besides just feeding hungry children: to subsidize the agricultural business by using up beef, cheese, and pork.  The school lunches are loaded with these artery-clogging ingredients, in the most processed forms possible.  According to an article in the NY Times, here’s how it happens:

"The Agriculture Department pays about $1 billion a year for commodities like fresh apples and sweet potatoes, chickens and turkeys. Schools get the food free; some cook it on site, but more and more pay processors to turn these healthy ingredients into fried chicken nuggets, fruit pastries, pizza and the like. Some $445 million worth of commodities are sent for processing each year, a nearly 50 percent increase since 2006.
The Agriculture Department doesn’t track spending to process the food, but school authorities do. The Michigan Department of Education, for example, gets free raw chicken worth $11.40 a case and sends it for processing into nuggets at $33.45 a case. The schools in San Bernardino, Calif., spend $14.75 to make French fries out of $5.95 worth of potatoes.
The money is ill spent. The Center for Science in the Public Interest has warned that sending food to be processed often means lower nutritional value and noted that “many schools continue to exceed the standards for fat, saturated fat and sodium.” A 2008 study by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation found that by the time many healthier commodities reach students, “they have about the same nutritional value as junk foods.”
…
Why is this allowed to happen? Part of it is that school authorities don’t want the trouble of overseeing real kitchens. Part of it is that the management companies are saving money by not having to pay skilled kitchen workers.
In addition, the management companies have a cozy relationship with food processers, which routinely pay the companies rebates (typically around 14 percent) in return for contracts. The rebates have generally been kept secret from schools, which are charged the full price."

So, lots of people are making money while feeding children nutritionally bereft garbage. People who don’t know how to cook are warming up processed junk to feed to kids who cannot afford anything better.  That free lunch isn’t so free when you consider the high percentage of kids suffering from obesity and chronic illnesses due to their poor nutritional intake.

"Public schools serve more than 4 billion meals every year — a number that would make many fast-food chains envious — and officials say all those lunches are contributing to the growing health crisis among kids. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, obesity rates have doubled in children and tripled in adolescents since 1980, spurring an epidemic of type II diabetes, once considered an adult-onset condition. Obesity has also been associated with heart disease, arthritis, and certain cancers, and researchers have found fatty streaks in the blood vessels of children as young as 10.
“USDA needs to relate the current crisis in kids’ health to the meals that are being served, especially to poor kids, because that’s the population that’s most vulnerable,” says Antonia Demas, director of the Food Studies Institute, a child-nutrition group based in upstate New York. Because low-income children often eat both breakfast and lunch at school, “they get at least two-thirds of their calories from school each day, and they’re the population really showing an increase in the diet-related diseases.” (source)

As with anything the federal government touches, school lunches are cloaked in do-gooder benevolence, but they are a poisoned gift that benefits those who already have money at the expense of our society’s most vulnerable people: poor children.  As our economy continues to decline, more kids will be forced to take these “free lunches” if they expect to have anything to eat all day.

So, now, at least one school wants children to have a doctor’s note to say no to the school lunch offerings of hormones, GMOs, preservatives, and grease.  They must have the permission of a professional to avoid  junk food. A parent’s good judgement is not sufficient, it seems, to make the healthy decision to provide a toxin-free lunch. Does anyone else see the irony here?

Kids are a target. The school system is trying to change the rules to force us to feed our children these food-like substances and to disallow us the right to nourish them as we see fit.  By controlling the food that our kids eat, they are controlling their entire lives, right down to their ability to think critically, their future fertility, and their overall lifespans.

"We are lathering our skin with petrochemicals. BPA is leaching into our food and beverages.  Chemtrails and questionable farming methods are tainting the air that we breathe…it’s enough for a book, not merely an article.  Additives like MSG and unpronounceable non-food ingredients are killing off our brain cells and triggering the growth of cancerous cells in our bodies. 

And the result of all of this?
DiseaseObesityLethargyLower IQsShorter lifespansInfertility 

If it was only one toxic assault, or maybe even two or three, you might be able to write this off as accidental, something that just happened due to carelessness.  But with all of the evidence proving irrefutably that the food we eat, the water we drink, and the air we breathe is making us sick, how can we form any other conclusion than the one that states, “This is a deliberate attack.” 

All of the alphabet agencies that are supposedly there for our protection are merely arms of the giant propaganda machine.  They are there to convince us that “someone” would put a stop to it if these things were actually bad for us. They are there to dispense a false sense of confidence in our governing bodies and to make us feel as though our health and safety is their first concern. 

Moderation is not an option.  We have to fight back through strict avoidance.
Think about this. 

Would you willingly feed your child just a “little bit of cyanide”?  Would you let them have a serving of strychnine “once in a while”? Would you purposely give them a cigarette just because you “happened to be out and that is what was offered”?  Would you let them drink bleach from the laundry room as long as it wasn’t in an amount that would be immediately deadly and if it was diluted so that it didn’t burn their throats when they swallowed it?
Our politicians, government officials, and “protection” agencies are bought and paid for. They are at best, complicit, and at worst, the ones instituting this. (source)"

Article source: The Organic Prepper

Please feel free to share any information from this site in part or in full, giving credit to the author and including a link to this website and the following bio.

Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor.  Her website, The Organic Prepper, offers information on healthy prepping, including premium nutritional choices, general wellness and non-tech solutions. You can follow Daisy on Facebook and Twitter, and you can email her at daisy@theorganicprepper.ca

Vitamin D Proven More Effective Than Vaccines At Preventing The Flu

The risk of children suffering from flu can be reduced by 50% if they take vitamin D, doctors in Japan have found. The finding has implications for flu epidemics since vitamin D, which is naturally produced by the human body when exposed to direct sunlight, has no significant side effects, costs little and can be several times more effective than anti-viral drugs or vaccines according to research in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Image: PreventDisease.com

Only one in ten children, aged six to 15 years, taking the sunshine vitamin in a clinical trial came down with flu compared with one in five given a dummy tablet. Mitsuyoshi Urashima, the Japanese doctor who led the trial, told The Times that vitamin D was more effective than vaccines in preventing flu.
Vitamin D was found to be even more effective when the comparison left out children who were already given extra vitamin D by their parents, outside the trial. Taking the sunshine vitamin was then shown to reduce the risk of flu to a third of what it would otherwise be.

Dr. Damien Downing, a doctor and medical consultant has publicly stated that governments "do like" epidemics as a chance to impose their will. The London based doctor has been advising patients to increase their vitamin D intake rather than get the vaccine.

You might be shocked to know that there are many physicians in both Canada and the United States who prescribe as much as 50,000 IU of vitamin D daily as a treatment for a long list of chronic diseases.

Dr. John Cannell, MD, suggests high-dose vitamin D (50,000 IU) be consumed for three days at the first sign of a cold or the flu. If you have an infection, the truth is you need more vitamin D. That’s a given. In other words, vitamin D acts as a natural antibiotic. It works against every type of microbe (viruses, bacteria, fungi and parasites).

Vitamin D deficiency is common during the winter months, especially in countries far north of the equator. Vitamin D acts as an immune system modulator, preventing excessive production of inflammatory cytokines and increasing macrophage (a type of white cell) activity. Vitamin D also stimulates the production of potent anti-microbial peptides in other white blood cells and in epithelial cells lining the respiratory tract, protecting the lungs from infection.

50 Percent Reduction In Flu Infections Using Vitamin D

Altogether 354 children took part in the trial. Vitamin D was found to protect against influenza A but not against the less common influenza B.

The trial, which was double blind, randomised, and fully controlled scientifically, was conducted by doctors and scientists from Jikei University School of Medicine in Tokyo, Japan.

The children were given a daily dose of 1200 IUs (international units) of vitamin D over a period of three months. In the first month children in the group taking the vitamin became ill just as often as those taking the dummy tablet. But by the second month, when the vitamin level in the children’s blood was higher, the advantage of the vitamin was clear.

The Japanese scientists, writing in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, say that the anti-viral drugs zanamivir and oseltamivir reduce risk of flu infection by 8 percent in children who have been exposed to infection, compared with a 50 percent or greater reduction with vitamin D.

Anti-virals are typically more effective than vaccines for the influenza virus which suggests that both forms of medical intervention would consistently fail in similar studies when pitted against vitamin D.

Anti-virals are also too expensive, and possibly too toxic, to be given to the population as a whole whereas vitamin D has additional benefits. The sunshine vitamin not only prevents bone fractures but is also believed to reduce risks of cancer, heart disease, diabetes and other illness, including various bacterial as well as viral infections.

The Japanese finding supports a theory that low blood levels of the sunshine vitamin occurring in winter explain why flu epidemics generally peak between December and March.

Vitamin D activates the innate immune system, enabling the body to produce several proteins such as defensin and cathelicidin which trigger cell activity and disable viruses.

Dr John Oxford, professor of virology at Queen Mary School of Medicine, London, said: “This is a timely study. It will be noticed by scientists. It fits in with the seasonal pattern of flu. There is an increasing background of solid science that makes the vitamin D story credible. ”

Dose and Vitamin D Levels Are Critical

Researchers have recently pinpointed the mechanism behind vitamin D3's ability to enhance the immune system and why it is so critical to our health.

- Vitamin D is not a vitamin, but a steroid hormone precursor, which has profound effects on innate immunity.

- The amount of vitamin D in most food and nearly all multivitamins is literally inconsequential.

- The correct daily dose of vitamin D for adults is approximately 5,000 IU/day, not the 200 to 600 IU recommended by the Institute of Medicine, the National Institutes of Medicine and the FDA.

- The only blood test to determine vitamin D adequacy is a 25-hydroxy-vitamin D, not the 1,25-di-hydroxy-vitamin D test many physicians now order.

- Healthy vitamin D blood levels are between 70 and 90 ng/ml, levels obtained by fewer than 5% of Americans.

- The mechanism of action of vitamin D in infection, dramatically increasing the body’s production of broad-spectrum natural antibiotics (anti-microbial peptides or AMP), suggests pharmaceutical doses of vitamin D (1,000 IU per pound of body weight per day for several days) will effectively treat not only influenza and the common cold, but help treat a host of other seasonal infections, including meningitis, septicemia, and pneumonia, in both children and adults.

Sources:

preventdisease.com
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
ajcn.nutrition.org
timesonline.co.uk

by Marco Torres. Marco is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease
prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.

Researchers Identify How Omega-3 and Vitamin D Enhance The Immune System

How to make cancer killing soursop juice

Health Benefits of Soursop
1. Curing Cancer
By eating the fruit soursop we can help to attack the cancer cells safely and naturally, without side effects such as nausea, weight loss, or hair loss.

2. Increase Immune System
Substances contained in soursop fruit such as acetogenins, annocatacin, annocatalin, annohexocin, annonacin, annomuricin, anomurine, anonol, caclourine, gentisic acid, gigantetronin, linoleic acid, muricapentocin. It makes our body stay fit and improved. Help us against disease

3. Kill malignant cancer cells
Soursop leaf has an effective target and kill malignant cells for 12 types of cancer, including colon, breast, prostate, lung and pancreatic cancer. Power works 10,000 times stronger in slowing the growth of cancer cells compared with adriamycin and chemo therapy is commonly used.

More health benefits of soursop: naturalcuresnotmedicine.com/2013/09/jamaican-soursop

Soursop tea recipe:

It's on! Farmers begin suing Monsanto over genetic pollution of wheat crops

(NaturalNews) The next wave of farmer backlash against Monsanto has just been unleashed by Ernest Barnes, a wheat farmer in Morton County, Kansas. He filed suit this week in the U.S. District Court in Wichita, Kansas, alleging that Monsanto's genetic pollution has financially damaged himself and other farmers.

Image: rawforbeauty.com

Barnes' case appears to be well supported by the facts: Last week the USDA announced the shock discovery that genetically engineered wheat strains from Monsanto's open-field experiments had escaped and spread into commercial wheat farms. Almost immediately, Japan and South Korea cancelled wheat purchase contracts from the United States, and more cancellations are expected to follow. The more countries reject U.S. wheat due to GMO contamination (genetic pollution), the lower wheat prices will plunge and the more economic damage will be felt by U.S. farmers.

Monsanto now a confirmed genetic polluter


GMO wheat (i.e. "GE wheat") has never been commercially grown in the United States... at least not on purpose. Experimental fields were approved by the USDA and planted across 16 U.S. states. Until now, it was not known that these GE wheat experiments escaped their designated field plots and began to spread as a form of self-replicating genetic pollution.

For the record, Natural News openly warned about this possibility in a 2012 article called, "Stop Out-of-Control Science." There, I wrote:

Humanity has reached a tipping point of developing technology so profound that it can destroy the human race; yet this rise of "science" has in no way been matched by a rise in consciousness or ethics. Today, science operates with total disregard for the future of life on Earth, and it scoffs at the idea of balancing scientific "progress" with caution, ethics or reasonable safeguards. Unbridled experiments like GMOs have unleashed self-replicating genetic pollution that now threatens the integrity of food crops around the world, potentially threatening the global food supply.

Those words, it turns out, were prophetic. We are now faced with precisely this situation in the U.S. agricultural sector, and farmers are starting to feel the economic losses. GMOs are just one of several areas where so-called "science" actually threatens humanity with total destruction.

See my infographic of all 12 dangerous sectors of science with this infographic:http://www.naturalnews.com/Infographic-SOS-S...
Monsanto engaged in genetic contamination


As Yahoo News reports:The petition filed by Barnes claims Monsanto knew there was a high risk the genetically modified wheat it was testing could contaminate other varieties of wheat, and the company failed to follow proper procedures to keep the wheat contained.Monsanto tested the wheat in many states, including Kansas, the top U.S. wheat-producing state, but did not disclose to farmers in those states that it was testing the controversial wheat there, the petition states.
Monsanto to sue the farmers?


Monsanto claims it will mount a "vigorous defense" against the lawsuit, expressing that it takes no responsibility whatsoever for all the genetic pollution it spews across America's farm lands. If Monsanto's genetically modified, toxin-producing crops just happen to infect your commercial crops, then that's your fault!

In fact, I'm surprised Monsanto hasn't announced plans to sue all these farmers for "stealing" its "intellectual property." That's what the company has done before, of course: sued farmers whose fields were contaminated by Monsanto's genetic pollutants.

Is this not the height of corporate evil? When British Petroleum spills billions of gallons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico, it at least pretends to be sorry about it. But when Monsanto spews its genetic pollution all over the planet, it blames the farmers! It would be like if BP drove an oil tanker right into your front yard, dumped a thousand gallons of oil on your lawn, then sued you for stealing their oil.

That's the Monsanto model. And it's yet another example of the total runaway criminality of this evil corporation that frankly should have its corporate charter yanked. This is one business that deserves to be permanently put out of business and never allowed to operate again. When corporations become such arrogant, destructive and threatening monsters that stomp on our farmers and spew their genetic jizz all across the planet like a bunch of sicko ag perverts, something has gone terribly wrong and needs to be stopped.

The recent March Against Monsanto was only the beginning. I even foresee a day when millions of citizens from around the world engage in a far more aggressive march on the Monsanto headquarters and literally tear the place apart brick by brick until this corporate demon is permanently excised from our planet.We are winning the war against Monsanto


I also predict -- but do not condone this violence -- that if Monsanto continues to engage in its crimes against farmers, nature and humanity, we are going to start seeing well-planned "acts of justice" against Monsanto executives, employees and scientists. I literally had a bizarre, disturbing dream the other night where a band of activists had kidnapped a Monsanto executive, tied him to a chair, and forced him to admit to all the crimes Monsanto has committed while being filmed on camera. The videos were then released on the internet. I realize this sounds a lot like the plot of a major motion picture, but I believe this could become reality if Monsanto continues on its current path.

Again, for the record, I do not condone the kidnapping of Monsanto executives. Kidnappings and executions are no way to resolve problems in a civilized society. If such an act actually takes place, it would actually hurt the anti-GMO movement and allow the government to paint all GMO protesters as "potential terrorists." So if anyone out there is actually thinking of doing this, please redirect your energy and focus into non-violent protests and other similar actions that are already making tremendous progress. As I said recently on Natural News, I believe we have reached a tipping point of success against Monsanto. Let's continue to pressure Monsanto in a grassroots, non-violent way, okay?

After all, we are winning this war against Monsanto and GMOs. They are in full retreat and completely surrounded... by the truth.
Source:: naturalnews.com