MedicalConspiracies- u-s-warned-al-qaida-hit-squads-coming

"Hasn't been validates" !!!!!  ROTFLMAO !!!!!  It'll be "VALIDATED" the day AFTER
it happens !!!!!  bruce

http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/u-s-warned-al-qaida-hit-squads-coming/

MedicalConspiracies- Fw: [apfn-1] Aspartame to be added to milk, yogurt, eggnog and cream

Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 3:41 PM
Subject: [apfn-1] Aspartame to be added to milk, yogurt, eggnog and cream

  You have to sign up & then You can make Your page-there's an easy way n once Ye get in, The Light should come on-cept Facebook gives You spy bots, tracking cookies for the CIA n gossad squad   

 

Just copy n paste IT to ur FBook page-clik on my link & IT will open to 100's of others

 

formaldehyde causes cancer

 

  When I's a lil Boy here on Pete's Farm-I used to milk the cows by hand n feed the Ktyns by JET STREAM of Milk-all the Kytns would line up in a row n wait their turn

 

I learned a lot a little too late,Donut learn as I did.  Take care & beware,FTG  The sun shineth upon the dunghill & isnt corrupted. We fear things in proportion to our ignorance of them. Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis  http://wp.me/PmtmV-4W2     

                 

Fully Informed Jury Association

From: Ruth Daily <doulin@gmail.com>

Has does one go about adding this to Facebook? It is easy to do when someone already has it started but I haven't done that.

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:32 PM, ftgfarm ftgfarm <ftgfarm@yahoo.com> wrote:

I posted did be4;  aspartame turns to formaldehyde

 

 formaldehyde causes cancer

 

Check all formice, linoelum glues as THEY have a WARNING FORMALDEHYDE CAUSES CANCER

 

I learned a lot a little too late,Donut learn as I did.  Take care & beware,FTG  The sun shineth upon the dunghill & isnt corrupted. We fear things in proportion to our ignorance of them. Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis  http://wp.me/PmtmV-4W2     

                 

Fully Informed Jury Association

From: spook <spooky2th1@yahoo.com>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 10:07 AM
Subject: [Light-Spectrum] Aspartame to be added to milk, yogurt, eggnog and cream

 

The U.S. dairy industry is petitioning the FDA to redefine "milk" so that aspartame can be secretly added to milk, yogurt, eggnog and other dairy products.  Yep: They want the FDA to green-light hiding aspartame in milk products and not even listing it on the label.

http://www.naturalnews.com/039244_milk_aspartame_FDA_petition.html

U.S. dairy industry petitions FDA to approve aspartame as hidden, unlabeled additive in milk, yogurt, eggnog and cream

(NaturalNews) You probably already know that the FDA has declared war on raw milk and even helped fund and coordinate armed government raids against raw milk farmers and distributors. Yes, it's insane. This brand of tyranny is unique to the USA and isn't even conducted in China, North Kora or Cuba. Only in the USA are raw milk farmers treated like terrorists.

But now the situation is getting even more insane than you could have imagined: the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) have filed a petition with the FDA asking the FDA to alter the definition of "milk" to secretly include chemical sweeteners such as aspartame and sucralose.

Importantly, none of these additives need to be listed on the label. They will simply be swept under the definition of "milk," so that when a company lists "milk" on the label, it automatically includes aspartame or sucralose. And if you're trying to avoid aspartame, you'll have no way of doing so because it won't be listed on the label.

This isn't only for milk, either: It's also for yogurt, cream, sour cream, eggnog, whipping cream and a total of 17 products, all of which are listed in the petition at FDA.gov.

As the petition states:

IDFA and NMPF request their proposed amendments to the milk standard of identity to allow optional characterizing flavoring ingredients used in milk (e.g., chocolate flavoring added to milk) to be sweetened with any safe and suitable sweetener -- including non-nutritive sweeteners such as aspartame.

This is all being done to "save the children," we're told, because the use of aspartame in milk products would reduce calories.

Milk industry specifically asks to HIDE aspartame from consumers

Astonishingly, the dairy industry is engaged in extreme doublespeak logic and actually arguing that aspartame should be hidden from consumers by not listing it on the label. Here's what the petition says:

IDFA and NMPF argue that nutrient content claims such as "reduced calorie" are not attractive to children, and maintain that consumers can more easily identify the overall nutritional value of milk products that are flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners if the labels do not include such claims. Further, the petitioners assert that consumers do not recognize milk -- including flavored milk -- as necessarily containing sugar. Accordingly, the petitioners state that milk flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners should be labeled as milk without further claims so that consumers can "more easily identify its overall nutritional value."

In other words, hiding aspartame from consumers by not including it on the label actually helps consumers, according to the IDFA and NMPF!

Yep, consumers are best served by keeping them ignorant. If this logic smacks of the same kind of twisted deception practiced by Monsanto, that's because it's identical: the less consumers know, the more they are helped, according to industry. And it's for the children, too, because children are also best served by keeping them poisoned with aspartame.

Consumers have always been kept in the dark about pink slime, meat glue, rBGH and GMOs in their food. And now, if the IDFA gets its way, you'll be able to drink hormone-contaminated milk from an antibiotics-inundated cow fed genetically modified crops and producing milk containing hidden aspartame. And you won't have the right to know about any of this!

The FDA confirms this "secret" status of aspartame, stating, "If the standard of identity for milk is amended as requested by petitioners, milk manufacturers could use non-nutritive sweeteners in flavored milk without a nutrient content claim in its labeling."

FDA requests comments

The FDA is requesting comments on this petition. You have until May 21st, 2013 to submit your comments. Click here for instructions.

This is a clue to stop drinking processed milk and milk products altogether

There's a bigger story here than just the industry hoping to get FDA approval to secretly put aspartame in milk products while not listing aspartame on the label.

The bigger question is this: If an industry is pushing to hide aspartame in its products, what else is it already hiding?

How about the pus content of its dairy products? How about its inhumane treatment of animals who are subjected to torture conditions and pumped full of genetically engineered hormones? How about the fact that homogenization and pasteurization turn a whole food into a dietary nightmare that promotes obesity, autoimmune disorders and cardiovascular disease?

There are lots of dirty little secrets in the dairy industry of course, and that doesn't even get into the secret closed-door conversations to encourage the FDA to destroy the competition of raw milk.

The only rational answer to all this is to stop buying and consuming processed dairy products, period!

I gave up ALL milk products many years ago and have never looked back. I drink almond milk, not pus-filled pasteurized cow's milk. (Click here for a recipe to make your own almond milk at home.) I don't eat yogurt. If I want probiotics, I get them from tasty chewable probiotics supplements such as Sunbiotics. I parted ways with processed dairy products many years ago, and as a result, my cardiovascular health, skin health, digestive health and stamina have all remained in outstanding shape.

There's also a philosophical issue here: Don't buy products from an industry that habitually LIES about everything. The dairy industry is like a mafia. They actively seek to destroy the competition, keep consumers ignorant and monopolize the market. They run highly deceptive ads with ridiculous claims like, "drinking milk helps you lose weight" and other nonsense.

The U.S. dairy industry is steeped in deception at every level, and now they want you and your children to unknowingly drink aspartame that's secretly blended into the product.

The dairy industry is to food as Lance Armstrong is to sports. It's all a big lie, laced with secret chemicals and false claims.

Stop drinking milk. Stop financially supporting the food mafia.

Recommended videos:

Raw Milk Rover (hilarious animation)  http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=273C2497DFDE9F61CB9E8867113CA5CA

Got a PUStache? (satire)  http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=C463AA940B9AEBA5D294F87FF0716579

Jonathan Emord raw milk freedom speech:   http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=F8DF9A42CC5479D8829A2445C56AFEF3

Farmageddon interview with Kristin Canty   http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=3340FCCC93B2C17EEFA43C7E6296728D

Sources for this article:

This petition was originally brought to our attention by a reader who says it was covered on Activist Post. I haven't yet read that article but may update this article with a link to that article once I identify the URL.

FDA petition page:   http://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/02/20/2013-03835/flavore...

 

Articles Related to This Article:

• Asthma explained by common allergy to milk and dairy products

• Raw milk battle reveals FDA abandonment of basic human right to choose your food

• What's best? Soy milk, cow's milk, raw milk and fermented milk (kefir)

• Dairy industry ridiculously claims milk prevents type 2 diabetes based on distorted study (opinion)

• Four Ways Milk Causes Acne

• Dairy Un-Forbidden: Discover the Virtues of Raw Milk (Opinion)

 

--
****
Where Ignorance is our MASTER
there is no possibility of Peace
--Peace is YOURS if you MAKE it!
  Deli Lama

MedicalConspiracies- palin-washington-buying-bullets-for-us

I guess those death panels won't depopulate fast enough.  bruce

http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/palin-washington-buying-bullets-for-us/

MedicalConspiracies- Why Russia Needs Alaska---any Russian attack upon the United States will come through Alaska and I am now of the opinion that Russia will not wait for us to attack Iran before attacking the United States.

Check this out: http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2013/02/27/why-russia-needs-alaska/ (sent by Yahoo! Toolbar)

MedicalConspiracies- obama-hid-gay-life-to-become-president

AHHHHH, the thrills o' dixie cups and turkey basters;-)))))  bruce

http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/claim-obama-hid-gay-life-to-become-president/

MedicalConspiracies- Fw: [NewWorldOrderWhistleBlowers] 10 Health Lies and Myths That Mainstream Nutritionists Spread

 

THEY ARE KILLING YOU BY SLOW TORTURE!!! AND YOU ARE GOBBLING IT UP, LITERALLY!!!!!!!!   STOP THOSE STATIN DRUGS !!!!! START EATING THAT [YES, ANIMAL !!!] FAT!!!   YOUR BODY NEEDS THAT FAT/CHOLESTEROL !!! OR IT WOULDN'T MAKE IT WHEN YOU DON'T EAT ENOUGH!!!   --- On Mon, 2/25/13, Sardar <sardar@spiritone.com> wrote: 10 Lies and Misconceptions Spread By Mainstream Nutrition February 25, 2013 | 164,280 views | + Add to Favorites       6,827  177 64   1.9k        Email       Print By Dr. Mercola   There's no shortage of health myths out there, but I believe the truth is slowly but surely starting to seep out there and get a larger audience. For example, two recent articles actually hit the nail right on the head in terms of good nutrition advice.   Shape Magazine features a slide show on "9 ingredients nutritionists won't touch,"1 and authoritynutrition.com listed "11 of the biggest lies of mainstream nutrition."2   These health topics are all essential to get "right" if you want to protect your health, and the health of your loved ones, which is why I was delighted to see both of these sources disseminating spot-on advice. I highly recommend reading through both of them.   Here, I will review my own top 10 lies and misconceptions of mainstream nutrition—some of which are included in the two featured sources, plus a few additional ones I believe are important. Lie # 1: 'Saturated Fat Causes Heart Disease'   As recently as 2002, the "expert" Food & Nutrition Board issued the following misguided statement, which epitomizes this myth:     "Saturated fats and dietary cholesterol have no known beneficial role in preventing chronic disease and are not required at any level in the diet."   Similarly, the National Academies' Institute of Medicine recommends adults to get 45–65 percent of their calories from carbohydrates, 20-35 percent from fat, and 10-35 percent from protein. This is an inverse ideal fat to carb ratio that is virtually guaranteed to lead you astray, and result in a heightened risk of chronic disease.   Most people benefit from 50-70 percent healthful fats in their diet for optimal health, whereas you need very few, if any, carbohydrates to maintain good health... Although that may seem like a lot, fat is much denser and consumes a much smaller portion of your meal plate.   This dangerous recommendation, which arose from an unproven hypothesis from the mid-1950s, has been harming your health and that of your loved ones for about 40 years now.   The truth is, saturated fats from animal and vegetable sources provide the building blocks for cell membranes and a variety of hormones and hormone-like substances, without which your body cannot function optimally. They also act as carriers for important fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E and K. Dietary fats are also needed for the conversion of carotene to vitamin A, for mineral absorption, and for a host of other biological processes.   In fact, saturated is the preferred fuel for your heart! For more information about saturated fats and the essential role they play in maintaining your health, please read my previous article The Truth About Saturated Fat. Lie # 2: 'Eating Fat Makes You Gain Weight'   The low-fat myth may have done more harm to the health of millions than any other dietary recommendation as the resulting low-fat craze led to increased consumption of trans-fats, which we now know increases your risk of obesity, diabetes and heart disease—the very health problems wrongfully attributed to saturated fats...   To end the confusion, it's very important to realize that eating fat will not make you fat!   The primary cause of excess weight and all the chronic diseases associated with it, is actually the consumption of too much sugar -- especially fructose, but also all sorts of grains, which rapidly convert to sugar in your body. If only the low-fat craze had been a low-sugar craze... then we wouldn't have nearly as much chronic disease as we have today. For an explanation of why and how a low-fat diet can create the very health problems it's claimed to prevent, please see this previous article. Lie # 3: 'Artificial Sweeteners are Safe Sugar-Replacements for Diabetics, and Help Promote Weight Loss'   Most people use artificial sweeteners to lose weight and/or because they're diabetic and need to avoid sugar. The amazing irony is that nearly all the studies that have carefully analyzed their effectiveness show that those who use artificial sweeteners actually gain more weight than those who consume caloric sweeteners. Studies have also revealed that artificial sweeteners can be worse than sugar for diabetics.   In 2005, data gathered from the 25-year long San Antonio Heart Study showed that drinking dietsoft drinks increased the likelihood of serious weight gain, far more so than regular soda.3 On average, each diet soft drink the participants consumed per day increased their risk of becoming overweight by 65 percent within the next seven to eight years, and made them 41 percent more likely to become obese. There are several potential causes for this, including:     a.. Sweet taste alone appears to increase hunger, regardless of caloric content.     b.. Artificial sweeteners appear to simply perpetuate a craving for sweets, and overall sugar consumption is therefore not reduced—leading to further problems controlling your weight.4     c.. Artificial sweeteners may disrupt your body's natural ability to "count calories," as evidenced in studies such as this 2004 study at Purdue University,5 which found that rats fed artificially sweetened liquids ate more high-calorie food than rats fed high-caloric sweetened liquids.   There is also a large number of health dangers associated with artificial sweeteners and aspartame in particular. I've compiled an ever-growing list of studies pertaining to health problems associated with aspartame, which you can find here. If you're still on the fence, I highly recommend reviewing these studies for yourself so that you can make an educated decision. For more information on aspartame, the worst artificial sweetener, please see my aspartame video. Lie # 4: 'Your Body Cannot Tell the Difference Between Sugar and Fructose'   Of the many health-harming ingredients listed in the featured article by Shape Magazine—all of which you're bound to get in excess if you consume processed foods—fructose is perhaps the greatest threat to your health. Mounting evidence testifies to the fact that excess fructose, primarily in the form of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), is a primary factor causing not just obesity, but also chronic and lethal disease. In fact, I am convinced that fructose is one of the leading causes of a great deal of needless suffering from poor health and premature death.   Many conventional health "experts," contend that sugar and fructose in moderation is perfectly okay and part of a normal "healthy" diet, and the corn industry vehemently denies any evidence showing that fructose is metabolically more harmful than regular sugar (sucrose). This widespread denial and sweeping the evidence under the carpet poses a massive threat to your health, unless you do your own research.   As a standard recommendation, I advise keeping your total fructose consumption below 25 grams per day. For most people it would also be wise to limit your fructose from fruit to 15 grams or less. Unfortunately, while this is theoretically possible, precious few people are actually doing that.   Cutting out a few desserts will not make a big difference if you're still eating a "standard American diet"—in fact, I've previously written about how various foods and beverages contain far more sugar than a glazed doughnut. Because of the prevalence of HFCS in foods and beverages, the average person now consumes 1/3 of a pound of sugar EVERY DAY, which is five ounces or 150 grams, half of which is fructose.   That's 300 percent more than the amount that will trigger biochemical havoc. Remember that is the AVERAGE; many actually consume more than twice that amount. For more details about the health dangers of fructose and my recommendations, please see my recent article Confirmed—Fructose Can Increase Your Hunger and Lead to Overeating. Lie # 5: 'Soy is a Health Food'   The meteoric rise of soy as a "health food" is a perfect example of how a brilliant marketing strategy can fool millions. But make no mistake about it, unfermented soy products are NOT healthful additions to your diet, and can be equally troublesome for men and women of all ages. If you find this recommendation startling then I would encourage you to review some of the many articles listed on my Soy Index Page.   Contrary to popular belief, thousands of studies have actually linked unfermented soy to malnutrition, digestive distress, immune-system breakdown, thyroid dysfunction, cognitive decline, reproductive disorders and infertility—even cancer and heart disease.   Not only that, but more than 90 percent of American soy crops are genetically modified, which carries its own set of health risks.6 I am not opposed to all soy, however. Organic and, most importantly, properly fermented soy does have great health benefits. Examples of such healthful fermented soy products include tempeh, miso and natto. Here is a small sampling of the detrimental health effects linked to unfermented soy consumption:         Breast cancer  Brain damage  Infant abnormalities         Thyroid disorders  Kidney stones  Immune system impairment         Severe, potentially fatal food allergies  Impaired fertility  Danger during pregnancy and breastfeeding Lie # 6: 'Eggs are a Source of Unhealthy Cholesterol'   Eggs are probably one of the most demonized foods in the United States, mainly because of the misguided idea implied by the lipid hypothesis that eating egg yolk increases the cholesterol levels in your body. You can forget about such concerns, because contrary to popular belief, eggs are one of the healthiest foods you can eat and they do not have a detrimental impact on cholesterol levels. Numerous nutritional studies have dispelled the myth that you should avoid eating eggs, so this recommendation is really hanging on by a very bare thread...   One such study7, conducted by the Yale Prevention Research Center and published in 2010, showed that egg consumption did not have a negative effect on endothelial function – a measure of cardiac risk – and did not cause a spike on cholesterol levels. The participants of the Yale study ate two eggs per day for a period of six weeks. There are many benefits associated with eggs, including:         One egg contains 6 grams of high quality protein and all 9 essential amino acids Eggs are good for your eyes because they contain lutein and zeaxanthin, antioxidants found in your lens and retina. These two compounds help protect your eyes from damage caused by free radicals and avoid eye diseases like macular degeneration and cataracts  Eggs are a good source of choline (one egg contains about 300 micrograms), a member of the vitamin B family essential for the normal function of human cells and helps regulate the nervous and cardiovascular systems. Choline is especially beneficial for pregnant mothers as it is influences normal brain development of the unborn child         Eggs are one of the few foods that contain naturally occurring vitamin D (24.5 grams)  Eggs may help promote healthy hair and nails due to their high sulphur content  Eggs also contain biotin, calcium, copper, folate, iodine, iron, manganese, magnesium, niacin, potassium, selenium, sodium, thiamine, vitamin A, vitamin B2, vitamin B12, vitamin E and zinc   Choose free-range organic eggs, and avoid "omega-3 eggs" as this is not the proper way to optimize your omega-3 levels. To produce these omega-3 eggs, the hens are usually fed poor-quality sources of omega-3 fats that are already oxidized. Omega-3 eggs are more perishable than non-omega-3 eggs. Lie # 7: 'Whole Grains are Good for Everyone'   The use of whole-grains is an easy subject to get confused on especially for those who have a passion for nutrition, as for the longest time we were told the fiber in whole grains is highly beneficial. Unfortunately ALL grains, including whole-grain and organic varieties, can elevate your insulin levels, which can increase your risk of disease. They also contain gluten, which many are sensitive to, if not outright allergic. It has been my experience that more than 85 percent of Americans have trouble controlling their insulin levels -- especially those who have the following conditions:     a.. Overweight     b.. Diabetes     c.. High blood pressure     d.. High cholesterol     e.. Protein metabolic types   In addition, sub-clinical gluten intolerance is far more common than you might think, which can also wreak havoc with your health. As a general rule, I strongly recommend eliminating or at least restricting grains as well as sugars/fructose from your diet, especially if you have any of the above conditions that are related to insulin resistance. The higher your insulin levels and the more prominent your signs of insulin overload are, the more ambitious your grain elimination needs to be.   If you are one of the fortunate ones without insulin resistance and of normal body weight, then grains are fine, especially whole grains—as long as you don't have any issues with gluten and select organic and unrefined forms. It is wise to continue to monitor your grain consumption and your health as life is dynamic and constantly changing. What might be fine when you are 25 or 30 could become a major problem at 40 when your growth hormone and level of exercise is different. Lie # 8: 'Milk Does Your Body Good'   Unfortunately, the myth that conventional pasteurized milk has health benefits is a persistent one, even though it's far from true. Conventional health agencies also refuse to address the real dangers of the growth hormones and antibiotics found in conventional milk. I do not recommend drinking pasteurized milk of any kind, including organic, because once milk has been pasteurized its physical structure is changed in a way that can actually cause allergies and immune problems.   Important enzymes like lactase are destroyed during the pasteurization process, which causes many people to not be able to digest milk. Additionally, vitamins (such as A, C, B6 and B12) are diminished and fragile milk proteins are radically transformed from health nurturing to unnatural amino acid configurations that can actually worsen your health. The eradication of beneficial bacteria through the pasteurization process also ends up promoting pathogens rather than protecting you from them.   The healthy alternative to pasteurized milk is raw milk, which is an outstanding source of nutrients including beneficial bacteria such as lactobacillus acidophilus, vitamins and enzymes, and it is, in my estimation, one of the finest sources of calcium available. For more details please watch the interview I did with Mark McAfee, who is the owner of Organic Pastures, the largest organic dairy in the US.   However, again, if you have insulin issues and are struggling with weight issues, high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer or high cholesterol it would be best to restrict your dairy to organic butter as the carbohydrate content, lactose, could be contribute to insulin and leptin resistance. Fermented organic raw dairy would eliminate the lactose issue and would be better tolerated. But if you are sensitive to dairy it might be best to avoid these too. Lie # 9: 'Genetically Engineered Foods are Safe and Comparable to Conventional Foods'   Make no mistake about it; genetically engineered (GE) foods may be one of the absolute most dangerous aspects of our food supply today. I strongly recommend avoiding ALL GE foods. Since over 90 percent of all corn grown in the US is GE corn, and over 95 percent all soy is GE soy, this means that virtually every processed food you encounter at your local supermarket that does not bear the "USDA Organic" label likely contains one or more GE components. To avoid GE foods, first memorize the following list of well-known and oft-used GE crops:         Corn  Canola  Alfalfa (New GM crop as of 2011)         Soy  Cottonseed  Sugar derived from sugar beets   Fresh zucchini, crookneck squash and Hawaiian papaya are also commonly GE. It's important to realize that unless you're buying all organic food, or grow your own veggies and raise your own livestock, or at the very least buy all whole foods (even if conventionally grown) and cook everything from scratch, chances are you're consuming GE foods every single day... What ultimate impact these foods will have on your health is still unknown, but increased disease, infertility and birth defects appear to be on the top of the list of most likely side effects. The first-ever lifetime feeding study also showed a dramatic increase in organ damage, cancer, and reduced lifespan. Lie # 10: 'Lunch Meats Make for a Healthy Nutritious Meal'   Lastly, processed meats, which includes everything from hot dogs, deli meats, bacon, and pepperoni are rarely thought of as strict no-no's, but they really should be, if you're concerned about your health. Virtually all processed meat products contain dangerous compounds that put them squarely on the list of foods to avoid or eliminate entirely. These compounds include:     a.. Heterocyclic amines (HCAs): a potent carcinogen, which is created when meat or fish is cooked at high temperatures.     b.. Sodium nitrite: a commonly used preservative and antimicrobial agent that also adds color and flavor to processed and cured meats.     c.. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs): Many processed meats are smoked as part of the curing process, which causes PAHs to form.     d.. Advanced Glycation End Products (AGEs): When food is cooked at high temperatures—including when it is pasteurized or sterilized—it increases the formation of AGEs in your food. AGEs build up in your body over time leading to oxidative stress, inflammation and an increased risk of heart disease, diabetes and kidney disease.   This recommendation is backed up by a report commissioned by The World Cancer Research Fund8 (WCRF). The review, which evaluated the findings of more than 7,000 clinical studies, was funded by money raised from the general public, so the findings were not influenced by vested interests. It's also the biggest review of the evidence ever undertaken, and it confirms previous findings: Processed meats increase your risk of cancer, especially bowel cancer, and NO amount of processed meat is "safe." A previous analysis by the WCRF found that eating just one sausage a day raises your risk of developing bowel cancer by 20 percent, and other studies have found that processed meats increase your risk of:     a.. Colon cancer by 50 percent     b.. Bladder cancer by 59 percent     c.. Stomach cancer by 38 percent     d.. Pancreatic cancer by 67 percent   Processed meats may also increase your risk of diabetes by 50 percent, and lower your lung function and increase your risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). If you absolutely want or need a hot dog or other processed meats once in awhile, you can reduce your risk by:     a.. Looking for "uncured" varieties that contain NO nitrates     b.. Choosing varieties that say 100% beef, 100% chicken, etc. This is the only way to know that the meat is from a single species and does not include byproducts (like chicken skin or chicken fat or other parts)     c.. Avoiding any meat that contains MSG, high-fructose corn syrup, preservatives, artificial flavor or artificial color   Ideally, purchase sausages and other processed meats from a small, local farmer who can tell you exactly what's in their products. These are just some of the health myths and misconceptions out there. There are certainly many more. The ones listed above are some of the most important ones, in my view, simply because they're so widely misunderstood. They're also critical to get "right" if you want to protect your health, and the health of your loved ones. For more great advise, please review the two featured sources. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/02/25/mainstream-nutrition-biggest-lies.aspx?e_cid=20130225_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20130225

__._,_.___

Reply via web post

Reply to sender

Reply to group

Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback

.

__,_._,___

MedicalConspiracies- Fw: [NewWorldOrderWhistleBlowers] Attorney Jonathan Emord -- FDA, and the Drug Industry out to Destroy the Supplement Industry

 

THEY are taking over the Industry, classifying it under "DRUGS" and putting their BIG PHARMA POISONS IN YOUR VITAMINS !!! FDA AND THE DRUG INDUSTRY OUT TO DESTROY THE SUPPLEMENT INDUSTRY By Attorney Jonathan Emord Author of "The Rise of Tyranny" and "Global Censorship of Health Information" and "Restore The Republic" February 25, 2013 NewsWithViews.com A decade ago advisors to the leading dietary supplement companies and to their principal trade association came to the remarkable conclusion that they could not build a workable relationship with the FDA unless the FDA came to regulate every aspect of the production, holding and distribution of dietary supplements. For decades FDA had endeavored to restrict what could be said about supplements and remove supplements from the market. After much discussion, many leading supplement companies and their trade association followed the advice given them and drafted proposed regulations that would permit FDA to impose process controls governing every aspect of sourcing, production, holding, and distribution of dietary supplements. The proposal was breathtaking in its grant of discretionary power, enabling the FDA to regulate everything from the location of hand washing stations to the qualifications of quality control personnel. The proposal subsumed local health and safety and zoning laws. The promise made by the industry to its members was simple: Join us in granting FDA these powers and FDA will change its view of the industry and embrace us rather than destroy us. At that time I was a lone critic of the proposal. I explained that the proposal was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the relative bargaining power of the supplement industry in the FDA's regulatory universe. I explained that the proposal would not change FDA's negative view of the supplement industry, would redound to the detriment of the industry (in costs and loss of freedom) and would ultimately inure to the benefit of the FDA's most favored regulatee, the drug industry. The metaphor I used in speeches at the time (and since) was that of a rogue elephant (the drug industry), ridden by a blind mahout or elephant driver (the FDA), equipped with a riding crop (regulation). A pesky flea on the flank of the elephant represented the dietary supplement industry. Ridden by a blind driver, the elephant could go wherever it wanted; the blind mahout was dependent on the elephant for guidance. The mahout's only concern was to help the elephant avoid distress; so long as the flea took no action that would irritate the elephant, the flea could abide in peace but, whenever the flea annoyed the elephant, the mahout would use his riding crop to hammer the flea into quiescence. On the black day when the industry finally presented the proposed cradle to grave GMP regulations to the FDA, the FDA seized the day, recognizing that in fact it had received the industry's head on a silver platter. The industry continued to operate on a surreal plane, predicting that adoption of the GMPs signaled a new day for the dietary supplement industry where those who complied would buy themselves peace with the FDA. Not so. For decades FDA had endeavored to break down the supplement industry, the arguments about supplement safety were but a pretext (by and large dietary supplements have been safer than even foods). Science concerning dietary supplements had revealed them variously to have therapeutic effects, associating them with disease treatment and prevention. The FDA's statutory mandate (a gift of drug industry lobbying of Congress in the 1960s)--and its predisposition in light of the lucrative post-government employment offered by the drug industry--reinforced an agency role antagonistic to the food and supplement industries. To ensure that the drug industry would enjoy a monopoly over the use of therapeutic claims, it endeavored to tame the supplement market (censoring its speech and endeavoring to remove specific products). To that end, whenever the food or supplement market included claims that a food or supplement could treat or prevent disease, the FDA was quick to stamp out those claims, sending in agents and sometimes U.S. Marshals to shut down the operations with broad search and seizure warrants (on the legal fiction that the products had been transformed into drugs by the claims made for them). For decades, FDA has endeavored to assert greater control over what had historically been a robust free market in supplements. The agency tried to reclassify supplements as unapproved food additives but the courts shot down that effort, to coerce and cajole the market into dropping claims of health benefits but the courts demanded that truthful disease prevention claims be allowed, to reclassify supplements with certain dose levels of vitamins and minerals as drugs but Congress adopted legislation forbidding that move, and to ban supplement ingredients altogether. As Congress found in the 1980s, the FDA's history reveals a bias against dietary supplements. That bias complements its bias in favor of drugs. At the same time that FDA expended millions annually cracking down on dietary supplement companies, it relished in a cozy relationship with the drug industry. Repeatedly FDA's Commissioner approved drugs over the safety objections of the agency's medical reviewers. FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research director engaged in direct ex parte communications with drug company executives assuring them that medical reviewers who objected to drugs then under review would be punished, ostracized, and removed from cases or that public relations efforts of those drug firms would be complemented by favorable statements from FDA. So it was that a decade ago in speech after speech I urged the dietary supplement industry to reject the notion of going to FDA with cradle to grave regulations (the cGMPs) but to no avail. The industry went to the FDA with the regulations already drafted and obtained the support of Senators Hatch and Harkin along the way. The agency received the proposed regulations and then proceeded to ratchet them up several notches. After they were published in the federal register and available for comment, I filed comments on behalf of the Alliance for Natural Health-USA. Those comments included an economic analysis by regulatory economist Joanna Shepherd-Bailey, Professor of Law and Economics at Emory University. Her assessment revealed that upwards of 50% of the dietary supplement industry would be eliminated by enforcement of the regulations and that all players would incur several hundred thousand dollars of new costs annually, all without any demonstrable increase in the relative safety of an already very safe dietary supplement market. Suddenly those who favored the regulations began to have doubts. Several filed comparable comments in which they explained that the impact of the regulations would be profoundly negative on the dietary supplement industry, resulting in increased supplement costs, decreased supplement availability, and increased incidence of supplement company closures and consequential unemployment. But alas it was too late, FDA had what it wanted and proceeded to adopt final rules. We filed duplicate comments concerning the regulations with the Office of Management and Budget, which assesses whether the economic impact statements associated with proposed regulations are accurate reflections of cost. Apparently OMB chimed in, withholding allowance of the regulations and telling FDA that its rosy economic projections conflicted with likely costs, as expressed in the economic assessments provided the agency. To the surprise of many observers, in its final rule FDA essentially adopted the predictions of adverse economic impact, rejecting its earlier rosy prognostications, agreeing that adoption of the rule would result in the closure of many firms, increased costs for supplements, and decreased availability of products. As predicted, the regulations have been taming the dietary supplement industry, forcing the closure of several firms and costing even the biggest players huge sums annually in a futile effort to satisfy the ever changing regulatory demands of the FDA. The extraordinary discretion given FDA's investigators under the GMPs ensures that they may lord over companies, making companies change all manner of operations to satisfy an agent's whim or caprice. Failure to do so results in issuance of "observations" in a Form 483, which must be satisfied immediately or enforcement will follow. The regulations have so intimidated supplement companies that they have been transformed from robust market players to timid, largely impotent actors who labor under the constant fear that an investigator will show up and find something remiss, no matter how minor, which will under the GMPs be deemed adulteration even if products produced are perfectly safe. The authority FDA always sought over the industry to cabin it, consolidate it, and intimidate it into subservience to the dictates of the agency has been achieved. This objective is but a part of a much bigger picture, apparently misunderstood by those who advocated the GMPs. As science has revealed therapeutic effects of supplements, they have become of greater interest to the agency's most favored regulatees, the drug industry. So long as the market for supplements is robust with many players and products, competition keeps prices and profits relatively low (by drug company standards). However, if the market is honed down to a few actors, prices will rise and the opportunity to market supplements as the equivalent of over-the-counter drugs becomes more promising. At present the drug industry sits like hyenas on the edge of the supplement market. As FDA beats up that market and reduces the number of players in it, the hyenas continue to gather and prepare to seize the prey. Once enforcement under the GMPs and the new Food Safety Modernization Act provisions result in significant market consolidation, the drug industry will increasingly enter the market, buy the concerns, and establish a major presence. Once FDA's favored regulatee, the drug industry, has taken over much of the supplement market, the agency will—under drug industry lobbying—warm to the idea of reducing the effective barriers now present on supplement claims, permitting supplements to be marketed with therapeutic claims more akin to over-the-counter drugs. In exchange for those changes, the drug industry will be required to give up more control over aspects of production and content of products, resulting in even more market concentration.       Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!       Enter Your E-Mail Address: That bargain the drug industry will embrace because the right to make claims for specific products will enhance their marketability and because further lessening in what may be sold will invite increased prices. Many other changes are predictable once the FDA's favored regulatee takes control over most of the supplement market. Ironically, those who favored the GMPs because they thought they would remove small players and build a better relationship with FDA were right; they just misunderstood who would receive those oligopolistic benefits (it was not the leaders of the dietary supplement industry who advocated the GMPs, it was the drug industry). Click here to visit NewsWithViews.com home page. © 2013 Jonathan W. Emord - All Rights Reserved Share This Article Click Here For Mass E-mailing -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan W. Emord is an attorney who practices constitutional and administrative law before the federal courts and agencies. Congressman Ron Paul calls Jonathan "a hero of the health freedom revolution" and says "all freedom-loving Americans are in [his] debt . . . for his courtroom [victories] on behalf of health freedom." He has defeated the FDA in federal court a remarkable eight times, six on First Amendment grounds, and is the author of Amazon bestsellers The Rise of Tyranny, Global Censorship of Health Information, and Restore the Republic. He is also the American Justice columnist for U.S.A. Today Magazine. For more info visit Emord.com. Website: Emord.com E-Mail: jwemord@gmail.com - http://www.newswithviews.com:80/Emord/jonathan288.htm

__._,_.___

Reply via web post

Reply to sender

Reply to group

Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback

.

__,_._,___

Re: MedicalConspiracies- fluoridation-levels-by-county

I pass on the glass as it'll break or chip when dropped.  I've seen stainless steel ones,
that I would buy.  Thanks for the heads up.  bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: Mark S Bilk <mark@cosmicpenguin.com>
To: medicalconspiracies@googlegroups.com
Cc: excalibur25@juno.com
Subject: Re: MedicalConspiracies- fluoridation-levels-by-county
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 06:54:41 -0800

I don't get what all the crowing is about, Bruce.
Anyhow you can get an excellent distiller, which
removes all of the fluoride, here:

http://www.webeatprices.com/product_info.php?cPath=1&products_id=39

Even cheaper if you find their ad on Ebay.

Maybe Iserbyt has one.

I add 1/4 teaspoon each of calcium carbonate and magnesium
hydroxide to each gallon, so it doesn't pull minerals out
of my teeth.  You can get those here, very cheap:

http://purebulk.com/

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:41:22PM +0000, excalibur25@juno.com wrote:
>ROTFLMAO !!!!!  SOOOOO, charlottte iserbyt, author, "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America",
>lives in Maine, "AYUP !!!!!", and according to the map, Maine is @ 100 % floridated, "AYUP !!!!!".  I
>LOVE IRONY !!!!!  "AYUP !!!!!";-)))))  bruce
>http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/02/fluoridation-levels-by-county.html?showComment=1361760727476

--
--
To subscribe: MedicalConspiracies-subscribe@googlegroups.com
Alternative Medicine info: http://www.elementsofhealth.webs.com/

"ClayAdvantage" The Gift of Health   http://ClayAdvantage.com/
Holistic Store: http://www.holisticenergystore.com/

Information here in is for educational purpose only; it may be news related,  
speculation or opinion. Consult with a qualified MD before deciding on any course of treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.
FDA and FTC have not evaluated or endorsed any message or product from this group.  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MedicalConspiracies" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to medicalconspiracies+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: MedicalConspiracies- fluoridation-levels-by-county

I don't get what all the crowing is about, Bruce.
Anyhow you can get an excellent distiller, which
removes all of the fluoride, here:

http://www.webeatprices.com/product_info.php?cPath=1&products_id=39

Even cheaper if you find their ad on Ebay.

Maybe Iserbyt has one.

I add 1/4 teaspoon each of calcium carbonate and magnesium
hydroxide to each gallon, so it doesn't pull minerals out
of my teeth. You can get those here, very cheap:

http://purebulk.com/

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:41:22PM +0000, excalibur25@juno.com wrote:
>ROTFLMAO !!!!! SOOOOO, charlottte iserbyt, author, "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America",
>lives in Maine, "AYUP !!!!!", and according to the map, Maine is @ 100 % floridated, "AYUP !!!!!". I
>LOVE IRONY !!!!! "AYUP !!!!!";-))))) bruce
>http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/02/fluoridation-levels-by-county.html?showComment=1361760727476

--
--
To subscribe: MedicalConspiracies-subscribe@googlegroups.com
Alternative Medicine info: http://www.elementsofhealth.webs.com/

"ClayAdvantage" The Gift of Health http://ClayAdvantage.com/
Holistic Store: http://www.holisticenergystore.com/

Information here in is for educational purpose only; it may be news related,
speculation or opinion. Consult with a qualified MD before deciding on any course of treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.
FDA and FTC have not evaluated or endorsed any message or product from this group. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MedicalConspiracies" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to medicalconspiracies+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.