The “military
industrial complex” has become the military industrial government.
Other industries seem to have taken over our healthcare, banking,
food and agriculture at the federal level as well
Attacks
on your civil liberties will likely eventually affect your right
to choose what foods you want to buy, the supplements you want
to take, and the healing modalities you want to pursue to stay
healthy
The FTC
recently circumvented current law and made new ones, squashing
free speech in the process, when it ruled that POM Wonderful had
made disease claims on its product, and that “a double-blind random-controlled
trial (RCT) is required for any “efficacy” claim, and two double
blind RCTs for any claim that might seem to be related to a disease”.
Double-blind RCT’s required for making disease claims is actually
an FDA labeling standard for drugs not food. It’s not for
the FTC to demand a product provide such evidence
If the
FTC prevails in requiring double-blind RCTs, only pharmaceutical
companies will be able to make health claims on their patented
and FDA-approved products
A new bill
called the Free Speech about Science Act (FSAS) has been introduced,
which would allow natural product companies to cite peer-reviewed
science in their advertising. Please take action to support this
bill
President
Eisenhower’s farewell address, in which he warns Americans about
the Military Industrial Complex. Many may not remember that President
Eisenhower was a General before becoming President, so he spoke
from a place of personal knowledge.
The “military
industrial complex” has become the military industrial government...
It doesn’t stop with the military; other industries seem to
have taken over our healthcare, banking, food and agriculture at
the federal level as well.
To say that
your civil liberties are in jeopardy would be a gross understatement,
and while spy drones and the reintroduction of yet another cyber
security bill1
may seem off topic for a health website, remember that your right
to learn about, apply, and buy alternative health strategies and
products may not be as inalienable as you might think anymore.
The US government
is hard at work suppressing and limiting your rights to choose your
own health care and your right to take control of your own health
in a wide variety of ways.
Health freedom
and civil liberties are under attack from every conceivable angle,
which is why you simply cannot afford to stay idle any longer.
Any attack
on your civil liberties will eventually affect your right to choose
what foods you want to buy, the supplements you want to take, and
the healing modalities you want to pursue to stay healthy.
From Drone
Warfare Abroad to Drone Surveillance Across the US
Federal agencies
are stepping up efforts to “ensure safety” by way of
massive military and National Security Agency (NSA) spending. A
bill passed last year, which allocates more than $63 billion to
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) would unleash some 30,000
unmanned spy drones in civilian airspace across the United States.2
According
to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU):
“Unfortunately,
nothing in the bill would address the very serious privacy issues
raised by drone aircraft. This bill would push the nation willy-nilly
toward an era of aerial surveillance without any steps to protect
the traditional privacy that Americans have always enjoyed and expected.”
“The
Electronic Frontier Foundation, a watchdog group, has brought a
lawsuit against the federal government requesting the FAA release
records on agencies, almost 300 of them, carrying authorization
for domestic drone operations.
Jennifer
Lynch, an attorney with EFF told Talking Points Memo the new drone
bill increases the importance of the lawsuit. 'I think the fact
that Congress is pressuring the FAA to expand its UAS program through
the FAA Reauthorization Act only reinforces the need for these records,'
she noted.
It’s
important that we learn more about how the federal government and
state and local law enforcement agencies are already using UASs
before we expand their use further. The privacy concerns posed by
the use of drones for domestic surveillance are too great to excuse
the FAA’s lack of transparency on this issue."
In an ironic
turn, President Obama, who entered the presidency denouncing predecessor
George W. Bush's expansive use of executive power in his "war on
terrorism" and lack of transparency is now being attacked in some
quarters for using similar tactics — including secret justifications
and undisclosed intelligence assessments. As revealed in the fall
of 2011:4
“American
militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list
by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then
informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.
There
is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel,
which is a subset of the White House's National Security Council,
several current and former officials said. Neither is there any
law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which
it is supposed to operate.”
A War Against
Unidentified Foes has No End...
Since then,
the Obama administration has been secretly developing a new blueprint
for pursuing terrorists5
— a next-generation targeting list called the “disposition
matrix.” While conventional wars are winding down, the US
government clearly intends to keep adding names to these clandestine
“kill lists,” creating a sort of bizarre secret warfare
in which no one really knows who the target is or, after the fact,
why the targeted individual was chosen for assassination in the
first place. As stated by the Washington Post:6
“...Obama
has institutionalized the highly classified practice of targeted
killing, transforming ad-hoc elements into a counterterrorism infrastructure
capable of sustaining a seemingly permanent war.”
Not only that,
but as OpEdNews recently pointed out:7
“For
the first time in history a civilian intelligence agency is using
robots to carry out military missions killing people
in countries where the U.S. is not officially at war.”
It will be
interesting to see what comes out of the UN’s investigation
into the legality of the US drone program,8
launched late last month. Many are now wondering when the first
drone attack will occur on US soil. Time will tell.
In the meantime,
drones are under Moore’s Law and their ability continues to
rapidly improve at the same time that their costs are decreasing.
Inventors are coming up with all sorts of uses for drones, such
as delivering anything from documents to burritos to your GPS location.
Yep, you read that right. One of the competitors in the AngelHack
finals was Burrito Bomber, by Darwin Aerospace. It’s a drone
that finds you based on your smart phone location, and drops a parachute-endowed
tube containing a hot and fresh burrito into your lap... It didn’t
win, and is not going to be commercialized any time soon, but it
just goes to show there’s no shortage of brains churning out
ideas.
Power Grabs
by the FTC are Underhanded Threats to Your Health
But let’s
move on to health related issues. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have both taken serious
steps to restrict or eliminate your access to certain foods and
supplements. For example, the FTC recently decided to “make
up its own law and squash free speech,” the Alliance for Natural
Health (ANH) reports.9
"Last
year, an administrative law judge (ALJ) for the Federal Trade Commission
upheld [POM Wonderful’s] right to make what the FDA would
call structure/function claims in ads. Structure/function claims
include statements such as 'calcium helps build bones.' They don’t
directly talk about curing a disease. At the same time, the ALJ
found that some of the company’s claims went too far (specifically
where they claimed the juice could help heart disease, prostate
cancer, and erectile dysfunction).
Because
the ALJ’s decision was a partial victory for both POM Wonderful
and the FTC, both sides appealed, which necessitated a ruling from
the FTC as a whole.
Last Wednesday,
the Commission took a much more unreasonable line. It found that
thirty-four of POM’s forty-three claims were implied disease
claims — fifteen more than the ALJ had found. The full Commission
further ruled that a double-blind random-controlled trial (RCT)
is required for any 'efficacy' claim and two double blind RCTs for
any claim that might seem to be related to a disease. The $35 million
on peer-reviewed scientific research previously spent by POM was
brushed aside because the studies were not RCTs, which are commonly
used for drug testing.
This is
a major one-two punch. The FTC is being draconian about what it
considers an implied disease claim. One commissioner noted in remarks
accompanying the decision: 'It is difficult to imagine any structure/function
claims that POM could associate with its products in the marketplace
without such claims being interpreted, under the FTC precedent set
in this case, as disease-related claims.'"
With its ruling,
the FTC grossly blurs the line between the FTC and the FDA. First
of all, the FTC is charged with regulating advertising only. Its
job is to make sure ads aren’t deceptive or misleading, and
you certainly do not need pharmaceutical RCT trials to determine
that. Double-blind RCT’s required for making disease claims
is actually an FDA labeling standard for drugs
— not food. It’s not for the FTC to demand a product
provide such evidence. Such studies are extraordinarily expensive,
and are typically only done if the substance in question is or can
be patented. Natural substances, such as pomegranate juice, cannot
be patented (unless it’s genetically engineered).
“Now
the FTC is unnecessarily and arbitrarily deciding to use an FDA
drug standard for disease claims in advertising. Some industry observers
even wonder whether the FDA has asked the FTC to do this because
the FDA would not be able to go this far on its own. There is absolutely
no statute justifying this. It is making up law without congressional
approval,” the ANH writes.
Personally,
I believe we’re inching ever closer to a point where you will
be completely barred from getting any information about the healing
potential of regular foods. I believe that’s their
end game, because foods and nutritional supplements are the only
competition to the pharmaceutical monopoly. As the ANH so succinctly
points out:
“Who
benefits from such a change in policy? Just follow the money. If
the FTC prevails in requiring double-blind RCTs, only pharmaceutical
companies will be able to make health claims on their patented and
FDA-approved products.”
FDA’s
Sordid History of Overreach and Abuse of Power
Meanwhile,
the FDA has been, and still is, engaged in its own shenanigans.
The agency, which has been sorely compromised by the revolving door
it keeps with both the pharmaceutical and biotech industry, has
a sordid history of attacking natural products and procedures that
threaten to interfere with big business, including pharmaceuticals,
agriculture and more, while allowing obviously harmful products
to remain on the market. Here are but a few examples:
In December
2011, the FDA
reneged on its plan to withdrawal approval of penicillin and
tetracycline antibiotics intended for use in food-producing animal
feed – a measure it had been planning since 1977.
In September
2011, the FDA issued a proposed
draft policy on dietary supplements10
that could effectively kill your right to purchase nearly all
of your favorite natural vitamins and supplements; the proposed
policy treats vitamins and other supplements as if they are drugs
but many manufacturers will not be able to afford the FDA drug
trial process. This could either force supplement companies out
of business or make supplements so expensive you won't be able
to afford them.
The FDA
has been fighting a war against raw milk, which is really an unconstitutional
assault on one of your most basic rights, i.e. your right to choose
what you want to eat and drink; they have stated that Americans
have "no absolute right to consume or feed
children any particular food."
The FDA
has long been the world's number one supporter of mercury fillings
(amalgams), despite the evidence showing the health hazards of
mercury; after making repeated promises to make an announcement
about dental
amalgam by the end of 2011, they let the deadline pass by
unmet.
The FDA
sent a warning letter to Diamond Food for making truthful, scientifically
backed health claims about the health benefits of omega-3 fats
in walnuts. Because the research cited health claims that omega-3
fats in walnuts may prevent or protect against disease, the FDA
said walnuts would be considered "new drugs" and as such would
require a new drug application to become FDA-approved.
Why the War
on Raw Milk?
It’s
important to realize that the "Food Safety Modernization Act" enacted
in 2011 gives the FDA almost unlimited authority to decide if food
is harmful, even without credible evidence. Raw foods of
all kinds have become targets of FDA overreach and abuse of power,
but raw milk is perhaps the agency’s most prominent foe. About
30 US states allow raw milk to be sold, but sales are limited to
customers within the states’ borders, as the FDA has a ban
on the interstate sale of raw milk for human consumption. The ban
began in 1987, but the FDA didn't really begin enforcing it seriously
until 2006 when the government began sting operations and
armed raids of dairy farmers and their willing customers.
Why does the
FDA allow damaging junk food filled with toxic chemicals, but prevents
people from making an educated, informed food choice in purchasing
raw grass-fed milk?
As reported
by Food Safety News last December,11
Organic Pastures, the largest raw dairy farm in the US, has filed
a lawsuit against the FDA for failing to address a “citizen
petition” filed by the dairy back in December 2008, requesting
the agency to change its interstate ban on raw milk sales. According
to law, the FDA is required to respond to such requests within 180
days. After four years of stonewalling, Organic Pastures is suing
for a response. According to Food Safety News:12
“If
the agency doesn’t give him what he’s looking for when
it responds to his request, he wants to press for a full-on jury
trial. 'I want to bring in the experts to talk about this,' he said,
referring to pasteurized milk as 'the most allergenic food in America.'
In contrast, he said, raw milk has important nutrients in it such
as enzymes that kids need to be able to digest milk.”
Take Action!
Food, drug,
and constitutional law attorney Jonathan Emord has called the FTC’s
decision against POM Wonderful “arbitrary and capricious,”
stating that:
“The
breadth of [the FTC’s new two-RCT] requirement is truly astonishing…
the health marketplace will be dumbed down considerably to the detriment
of health conscious consumers… In the end, that will mean
a loss in public health as there will now be a multi-million dollar
entry fee imposed on any who would wish to convey a health benefit
to consumers in the market.”
Indeed, Americans
spend more on health care per capita than any other nation on Earth,
yet we rank
among the worst in terms of health among industrialized
nations. There can be no doubt that lack of truthful information
about health and nutrition is to blame for this, and the suppression
of information is engineered by industries that have no other concern
than to make money. And to make money, they need you to be ill informed
and chronically sick... As long as people are not permitted to learn
about the relationship between food and health, we cannot expect
American disease statistics to improve.
I am however
heartened by the introduction of a new bill called the Free Speech
about Science Act13
(FSAS), which would allow natural product companies to cite peer-reviewed
science in their advertising. I urge you to take action to support
this bill:
“The
Free Speech about Science Act provides a limited and carefully targeted
change to FDA regulations so that legitimate, peer reviewed, scientific
studies can be referenced by manufacturers and producers without
converting a healthy food or dietary supplement into an unapproved
drug. The bill amends the appropriate sections of current law to
allow the flow of legitimate scientific and educational information
while still giving FDA and FTC the right to take action against
misleading information and against false and unsubstantiated claims.”