All Episodes
Previous Next
March 23, 2018 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
01:36:18
War on Health - Gary Null's documentary exposing the FDA
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
We have the FDA, the IRS, the EPA, FEMA, and many others functioning autonomously and unchecked with the full force of the federal government.
It's a government of, by, and for the bureaucrat.
It really is a government that's out of control and that threatens our liberties every day.
There's a concern right now that the FDA has been influenced by Big Pharma in such a way that they're going to remove from the marketplace all of the new dietary ingredients that were introduced after October 15, 1994.
They've also tried to institute maximum dose levels so that dietary supplements sold above a certain dose level will only be available by prescription.
The FDA uses its power to censor and disallow truthful claims about the value of nutritional supplements.
The dietary supplement industry is under siege by the FDA. Drug lobbyists do not want the American public to have access to low-cost, totally safe nutritional supplements that compete with pharmaceuticals.
The FDA uses Gestapo-like tactics when it decides to take action against a dietary supplement company or a food company.
We have 100,000 armed federal agents, many of them working for the Food and Drug Administration, and we see that those agents are engaging in behaviors that are reprehensible.
They started walking around, they drew their guns, and I'm like, why are you drawing a gun?
The raid on Rossum involved no less than five government agencies.
In the past three years, there have been at least eight government raids across the US involving raw dairy.
The US Food Safety and Modernization Act would give the FDA more money to hire agents and begin arresting small organic gardeners, raw dairy farmers, people who provide food to local farmers markets.
Are we going to be forced to consume GMOs and chemically-laced food and milk with recombinant bovine growth hormone?
Are we going to have to eat animals with antibiotics?
And the answer is you already are.
You could be violating laws you don't even know exist.
We need to plan a march on FDA headquarters with a list of all our demands.
Bureaucrats effectively taking control of the way in which we choose to manage our own health.
The FDA is obviously following drug company instructions.
And that's really the basic problem that we have here in America.
If they implement all the power they already have, we will live in a food fascism world.
It's almost guerrilla tactics.
It's very threatening and coercive and intimidating.
The process is broken and in bad need of repair, and the American public is at risk.
The FDA is truly a rogue agency being run by robes from industry, government, academia.
The drugs that are approved in this country are not always approved based on scientific data.
They're approved based on who has the right political connection.
It's obvious that the Food and Drug Administration Should be subjected to a real housecleaning by outraged families who've lost their loved ones.
There are many drugs that the Food and Drug Administration has approved that are unsafe, at least too unsafe for the FDA's own medical reviewers to agree that they should be on the market.
We have confidence that drug approved by the FDA is safe and effective.
We now have to wait for millions of people to take it and to see what kind of reactions they have in the real world.
Vioxx has killed at least 60,000 Americans.
Increase in heart attack risk was over 500%, and yet the drug company making Vioxx covered that information up.
Where there's criminal activity by executives of drug companies, they frequently get away with paying a fine and have no major disruption of their enterprise.
They're spending six million dollars a day on lobbyists in Washington DC alone.
FDA receives 40% of their budget from drug companies.
They're hired guns.
And they're out there serving the best interests of the company.
They do not represent the American public.
The FDA, in my opinion, has probably killed more Americans in this country than all the wars that the U.S. has ever fought combined.
How can it possibly be that a branch or a division of this government is not beholden to the Constitution?
This is a government of tyranny.
In the relationship between government-approved standardized medicine and all the other healing arts, we can see a pattern that goes back all the way.
In, I think, about 1540, Parliament passed a law, the first medical licensing act.
It said nobody may practice medicine within the City of London unless they are first examined and approved by the College of Physicians and Surgeons under the Bishop of London.
And of course, once that law was passed, the College of Physicians and Surgeons immediately started harassing all the other healers in the community.
Within a couple of years, Parliament had such an outcry raised that a new law was passed, what is now called the Herbalists' Charter.
It was 1546.
It was in the 35th year of the reign of Henry VIII. And that charter, which was intended and stated it was a charter for all times, And it applied not just to the realm of England but to the king's other colonies.
And hence, of course, that means to the American colonies.
And those American colonies, when they became free and independent states, adopted the common law of England as our common law.
All the common law of that time as part of our common law unless the legislature explicitly changes it.
And so, the herbalist charter, which reviews the history of the relationship between the physicians and the wise women and the herbalists and the others of its time that we would call alternative practitioners, or as I like to say, advanced healthcare practitioners, healers, understand the charter and understand that it's part of a very long tradition Of healing within the community.
And that tradition is one which we applaud and which we are humbled by.
About a hundred years ago, things were really beginning to change in the United States.
We were changing from an agrarian economy to an industrial economy.
Titans of industry really wanted to be able to control the world financial system as a whole.
When the Rockefellers took over the allopathic medicine, there were many types of medical education in the United States.
There were homeopathic doctors and there were naturopathic doctors who were using natural medicines to heal, and they were having very good outcomes.
Once the Rockefellers took over the system, they closed down those other schools and they only promoted the sale of their drugs, they promoted surgery, and they promoted radiation.
The Rockefellers were also in charge of the oil industry and the chemical industry, and they also made an alliance with a huge German concern called IG Farben, which was a big chemical industry in Germany.
The Food and Drug Administration was started in the 1930s and it was sold to the people of the United States as an agency that was going to protect its food and drug supply.
And of course, in the early part of the century, people wrote about some of the terrible things that were happening with the meatpacking industry and in the food industry in general.
Patented drugs were being advertised all over.
And then there were, nostrums were considered secret formulas.
And there usually were proprietary formulas.
So they got all these addictive drugs in there.
They weren't even listening by the labels.
So people were thinking heroin and cocaine, morphine and other types of opiates.
They weren't being told that they were even on the label, so they forced a labeling.
There was a lot of mischief going on in the food industry, and the FDA was set up to correct that problem.
They evolved into regulating drugs, medical devices, and at this point they regulate just about anything that goes into the human body.
In the 1930s, 1938, the FDA became a monster.
And from that point forward, it has grown by leaps and bounds until the 60s when it acquired jurisdiction over both safety and efficacy of drugs.
Then in 1938, they passed a law under Franklin Roosevelt defining a new drug, safe and effective for prevention, treatment, mitigation of disease, whatever.
The FDA basically appointed itself as the experts.
Senator Estes Kefaufer sponsored an amendment that was passed expanding the The authority of the FDA to go beyond the safety of new drugs to the effectiveness of new drugs.
And that was signed into law in October 10, 1962 by John Kennedy.
At that point, the FDA was largely captive of industry.
The FDA does no clinical testing.
of drugs itself that relies entirely on submissions made to it by the drug companies.
This would appear to the average person to be a gross conflict of interest and in fact it is.
There's a concern right now that the FDA has been influenced by Big Pharma in such a way that they're going to remove from the marketplace all of the new dietary ingredients that were introduced after October 15, 1994.
And regrettably, those are some of the most effective supplements that Americans are now taking.
We're talking about resveratrol.
We're talking about the ubiquinol form of coenzyme Q10. There have been substantial improvements made in the quality of dietary supplements.
Drug companies are seeing this.
They're seeing their profit margins threatened because people can go and use a dietary supplement in lieu of a prescription drug and perhaps get a better benefit With no risk of side effects.
Recently the FDA promulgated a thing called the New Dietary Ingredient Guidance.
In the first decade of application of the New Dietary Ingredient Guidance, FDA took a rather conservative view of what a new dietary ingredient was.
They would say, oh well, if it was in the food supply, and you can show that it's in the food supply, we will allow you to sell it and not prohibit you from selling it, not require you to make a scientific submission.
Well, Increasingly, in the 90s, the FDA took a more restrictive approach, increasingly requiring the submission of new dietary ingredient petitions before it would allow substance in the market, and expanding its definition of a new dietary ingredient, keeping more things out of the market as a consequence.
The purported purpose for the guidance is to help create more safety for consumers out there that are consuming dietary supplements.
The interesting thing to note is that there have been zero deaths from dietary supplements as long as the CDC has been keeping track.
Supplements are very safe.
They're based on food.
Congress recognized the safety of supplements when they grandfathered all the supplements to date.
In 1994, when they passed the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act legislation that governs the regulation of supplements, now Congress did at that time say any new supplements that were to come into the marketplace would be required to notify FDA so that FDA could keep track of what was happening going forward.
Well, 90% of the dietary supplement companies that now exist did not exist in 1994.
And those that did exist, hardly any have records from 1994.
What the government is saying is, catch 22.
Your product is grandfathered, but only if you can prove it.
And being on our published list isn't proof anymore.
That's the sort of manipulation that we see coming out of the FDA. If the individuals working for the FDA were taking their jobs seriously, they would not do that.
The FDA has issued a guidance that not only requires notification, it goes above and beyond by requiring basically a pre-approval, a system, and puts in place something akin to a food additive program that requires such enormous barriers to entry, so to speak, that it will eventually, according to our analysis by a law and economics professor Joanna Shepard Bailey Emory, will result in a loss of almost 30,000 supplements to the American public.
It would cost somewhere between 150,000 dollars to 1.2 or 3 million per NDI submission.
They've also said that an approval of an NDI for one company would not be transferable to any other company even if it made the same product.
As a consequence, they require every company that sells the very same product to submit a new dietary ingredient petition.
So there are going to be literally blizzards, truckloads, train car loads of paper that manufacturers are going to be forced to file.
They can't do it electronically with FDA. Oh, and by the way, just because they file it, do they get to use it?
No!
This idea of notifying FDA has been perverted into an approval process.
And they did all this on purpose.
It ain't making the product safer, they were safe to begin with.
All they did is, it's just pure harassment, economic harassment, against the dietary supplement industry.
The only purpose of that is to try to push them out of business, just to make room for a total monopoly of patented drugs.
The American public will be at the total mercy of the pharmaceutical industry.
If they want a drug that will inhibit certain cancer processes like curcumin does, they'll have to rely, unfortunately, not on a natural, low-cost, safe compound like curcumin.
They'll have to go with an expensive pharmaceutical.
The ingredients that we've used to manage our health, from foods to functional foods to concentrated nutrients that are sold in dietary supplements, or as we call them in Europe, food supplements, are now being given this requirement to prove safety before they can be used.
And what is so interesting is that this is right at the heart of the NDI draft guidance itself, that the FDA is now trying to push through.
Congress passed the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act.
Now that legislation basically stated that dietary supplements were to be treated as food and not drugs.
And FDA was directed to create some guidelines around that new dietary ingredient notification process.
But FDA sat on their heels and waited.
It's been 17 years.
And FDA is just now coming out with this draft guidance.
And FDA has gone very far above and beyond congressional intent in the draft guidance.
The agency has had a long-term bias that was identified by Congress in the DSHEA legislative history.
And there is quite a bit of congressional testimony about the bias.
And the whole aim of the agency has been to restrict the access of consumers to those products and to limit what can be said about them.
The FDA tried to circumvent it.
They didn't like the idea that supplement companies were now able to inform the public about peer-reviewed research documenting safety and efficacy of nutritional supplements.
So, you see, this rule is calculated by the agency to have a devastating effect, to be another weapon in their arsenal to take down the dietary supplement industry.
It is cleverly masked with a public safety rationale.
Point of fact, the rule doesn't operate to protect public safety.
So you've got three times as much regulations for dietary supplements as you have for pharmaceutical drugs.
Senators Hatch and Harkin both explained to the FDA that this guidance goes well above and beyond congressional intent.
It creates a pre-approval system that Congress did not intend, and they asked FDA to halt the process.
Sit down with interested parties to discuss all of our concerns.
The FDA denied that request.
They declined to cooperate.
Now, the consumers have been made aware of this, at least the vitamin consumers who are significant.
They are contacting Congress.
They're protesting this.
There's a chance that the FDA will not succeed.
It's an interesting approach that the FDA used, creating a guidance instead of a rule, Because it doesn't provide standing for any of us to pursue legal proceedings against the FDA. It's, I think, a very strong strategic ploy on their part.
They're trying to keep this out of the courts because in many of the situations and sections of the guidance, they just don't have a leg to stand on.
Now, a few years ago, FDA inspectors, they went around and they told everybody, you've got to Call all these products dietary supplements.
It gives FDA jurisdiction to impose its dietary supplement.
Good manufacturing practices are the manufacturer of that product.
There's one thing that people don't know if you read the Dietary Supplement Health Education Act, that a dietary supplement doesn't fall under that act unless you label it as a dietary supplement.
Whereas you had the option of not putting that on there and leaving it under the food GMT, which is very easy to follow.
Because it's been an effect for over half a century and it's not a...
it's a no-brainer.
Why should we be required to go through an additional major hurdle when in fact the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act, for which millions of American consumers fought so hard to get, It basically doesn't require an additional regulatory burden for those products that are already safe and effective.
Fear that the dietary supplement industry has is that if the FDA is given the power to restrict Americans' access to natural New ingredients.
These are ingredients that people are ingesting as part of their diet for the most part.
And then when a company extracts that and puts it into a capsule or a powder, the FDA wants to come in and say, well, now you've got to prove to us that that's safe and effective, even though there's no evidence that it's not safe and effective.
The fear is that the FDA will try to do an end run.
Around all the legal and political victories that have been won over the last 20 years and be able to restrict Americans from having free access to dietary supplements, to nutritional powders, to natural approaches to preventing and treating disease that compete against pharmaceutical interests.
The Food Safety Modernization Act makes the situation at the FDA even worse than it has been up until now.
The FDA does not have the capacity to figure out how products that are not clearly unsafe or clearly safe should be regulated.
The FDA Modernization Act of 2007 gave the FDA unprecedented power over food.
It gave it power to ban the interstate commerce and any food which had ever been studied for medical use.
We fought very hard in 2007 to make sure that there was an exemption in that law for dietary supplements.
Now, we did that because we understand that that agency abuses power.
And this act would give the FDA even more power, more money to hire agents to canvas the countryside across the USA. And begin arresting small organic gardeners and begin intimidating raw dairy farmers and intimidating even people growing food in their own yards, in their own gardens, people who provide food to local farmers markets.
All of these people are about to be assaulted by a new regulatory wave of intimidation and oppression that is really targeted against those who produce real food in America.
The idea that we would treat something that's essential as if it were harmful and require that it have all the kinds of double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that underlie drug testing is designed to undermine the health of the public, to remove choice from the individual consumer, and to take responsibility away from us for taking care of our own health.
So I think there's a tremendous movement now across the country called a local food sovereignty movement where people are tired of the FDA and the USDA and EPA covering up for the criminality of our industrial for-profit food system and basically pretending that it's the little people.
It's the small farmer.
It's the small rancher.
It's the small grocer.
It's the small restaurant that's causing the problem.
And what they're going to do with that authority is what they've done with all the authority they've had up until now.
And that is to argue that every product that comes on the market should be assumed to be an unsafe product until the people manufacturing that product prove that the product is in fact safe.
That's a good standard for something that's intrinsically harmful, like a drug or even a food attitude.
It is not a good standard for products such as herbs and nutrients, which are intrinsically benign and which are products that have been used for thousands of years and are essential for our health.
This is a government of tyranny.
It is a government where the parties that under the Constitution are supposed to have, the branches of the government, that are supposed to have exclusive legislative, executive, and judicial power, have delegated those powers to unelected individuals who are not restricted in their actions by any serious have delegated those powers to unelected individuals who are not restricted in their actions by any serious limitation
The FDA uses what could reasonably be described as Gestapo-like tactics when it decides to take action against a dietary supplement company or a food company.
The agency can come in and take everything that I own of any value, can do it without any advance notice to me, with weapons out of their holes.
Barge into the business, put everyone up against the wall or kick them out of the business, seize assets, so they freeze your bank account, seize all the products, seize all of the material inside the offices, frequently taking everything, including computers, all paper, all files, even before a trial on merits, even before I've been convicted of any crime, all based on innuendo, allegation.
And they can utterly destroy my business, they can ruin my client relationship, and they can make it impossible for me to afford my defense against charges that may be civil and criminal and could result in an incarceration for as long as a life term.
In 1993, they raided Jonathan Wright's clinic, the pioneering doctor who's made so many of the breakthroughs that we know now to be safe and effective available to the American public.
He was so successful in his medical practice that the FDA had to take action because he was getting results.
that they weren't seeing with FDA-approved pharmaceuticals.
He was selling injectable vitamins.
He had a number of different compounds that simply weren't in the FDA's approval directory, and they shut him down for a period of time.
But there was somewhat of a problem there.
His patients were getting benefits, and it resulted in a citizen's uprising, and the result was the passage in 1994 of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act, It wasn't just Jonathan Wright, but it was almost like the straw that broke the camel's back.
We arrived at the clinic, my wife and myself, she's a nurse and she's our clinic general manager, and it was surrounded by cops.
We thought that something terrible had happened, some murderer had got inside or something, and they were guarding the place.
And it turns out that agents from the FDA Had herded all of our clinic employees into the waiting room and were holding them there.
Our receptionist reported that just before 9 a.m., the locked doors of the clinic had all been kicked open and men had been running in with guns, yelling, Raid!
Raid!
And had presented her with a gun no less than four feet from her face.
They had presented a warrant, which they gave me.
And if it hadn't been such a We call it unusual situation.
I think we would have all laughed because the warrant said that they were there to seize our B-complex vitamins for intravenous injection and vitamin B12 and some herbal preparations.
They never hurt anybody, neither before or after, but that's what they were there to seize.
If you have the misfortune Of thinking that you can tell the truth about a dietary supplement's effects, therapeutic effects, you will likely have a rude awakening.
First you'll receive a warning letter.
The United States Attorney will then go into a federal court having acquired information frequently from a clandestine non-public investigation by the FDA Office of Criminal Investigations.
Then that information goes to a judge.
They tell the judge that you're a threat to public health.
I present an affidavit from an FDA inspector that says that you're selling a substance that is an unapproved new drug, maybe nothing more than vitamin C. He issues a warrant.
It's usually a search warrant and a seizure warrant.
One of the principal outrages occurred in the early 1930s.
It turns out that if one looks up the archives of the Los Angeles Times, one will find that there's a celebratory dinner held in Los Angeles for a non-doctor by the name of Royal Rife.
And this celebratory dinner was attended by faculty members from the University of Southern California, all of whom had signed affidavits To the effect that cancer patients they had sent to Royal Rife, treated by Royal Rife with energies, had all been cured.
Alright, what happened?
Why is cancer such a problem now if Royal Rife could cure it?
A lawsuit was instituted against Mr.
Rife.
The lawsuit dragged on.
Oh, and his place that manufactured his equipment mysteriously burned down.
In 2008, they had a very long inspection at my office, and that was It lasted like three and a half days.
This is a small office here, right here in West Dallas.
And I made a few products there, some herbal extracts.
I made a colon formula called Perfect Colon Formula.
Another product called LeBose Cold and Flu Formula.
I provided information in there on the benefits of the various ingredients in the formula.
So I did, like I have been doing since 1994, I did research at the National Library of Medicine to see what the health benefits were.
The U.S. Attorney then said, well, if you small fine, no jail time, $100 maybe.
And I said, I'll think about it.
And then I decided to close the business down because I So there's no point staying in business if you can't tell people how products prevent disease.
You see, the FDA shuts down all speech, prior restriction, regarding nutritional supplements, unless the FDA gives permission for such speech.
It's incredible.
This blanket restriction of speech is clearly a violation of the First Amendment guaranteeing free speech.
Let's talk about the cherry growers.
A group of cherry growers had a website and on that website there was a link.
It was to Harvard's website and their research on the benefits of cherries in terms of treating gout, I believe.
So FDA looked at that website.
There were no health claims on that website, but it linked to another website That discussed scientific peer-reviewed research, and FDA determined that that was sufficient to be making an illegal health claim.
FDA went after the cherry growers, literally with guns blazing, knocked down their doors, forced them to sign a consent decree, and agreed never to share any information about the benefits of cherries, again, at the risk of all sorts of legal proceedings and essentially the loss of their company.
When it wants to censor someone from speaking out about cancer, or when it wants to exterminate a company that is providing nutritional supplements to the marketplace, the FDA will stop at nothing.
It will violate laws.
It will violate civil rights.
It will violate due process.
It will commit international crimes.
I didn't realize until it was carefully explained That the FDA was a criminal.
Let me say that again.
The FDA was a criminal organization.
The FDA routinely violates the administrative procedure.
Now, this is a law.
It was meant to protect citizens and businesses from arbitrary and capricious regulatory activity.
It states clearly that businesses that are regulated by the federal government must have a clear understanding of the regulations.
And more importantly, the regulations cannot be arbitrary and capricious.
The FDA asserts that it would approve all claims presented to them that met the FDA's quote, standard of scientific agreement.
Yet nowhere in any FDA writing whatsoever was significant scientific agreement ever defined.
Does that mean 10 studies in the American scientific literature?
15 studies in the worldwide literature?
If the FDA cannot or will not define significant scientific agreement, Then all of the regulatory actions are arbitrary and capricious.
And that is against the law.
If you're involved in alternative medicine, if you're involved simply in producing a healthier, more natural food, FDA doesn't always like that because the processed food companies, they don't want the competition.
FDA will respond by literally sending in armed officers to raid the makers of healthy, natural products who don't have the wherewithal to defend themselves.
The major milk producers, dairy producers, lobbied the Food and Drug Administration to rid the marketplace of an emerging new competitive threat from organic farmers.
And to eliminate this threat they did what many, many large companies do.
They unleashed their K Street lawyers on the regulatory agencies and on Capitol Hill.
And the upshot of that was The adoption by the Food and Drug Administration of a rule that categorically prohibits the interstate transportation and sale of raw milk.
It doesn't apply upon proof that the raw milk in question has unsafe levels of pathogens.
It applies regardless of the safety of the raw milk.
It applies to any shipment of raw milk in interstate commerce.
What the heck is going on over there?
Do police have nothing better to do in L.A. than raid organic food stores?
Well, the Los Angeles Times broke this story, and what's shocking about this story is that police officers are going into this grocery store.
It's a co-op, organic, raw food store.
Guns drawn.
And we put this up on Survive and Thrive TV, and it's basically created a firestorm on the Internet.
People are really, really shocked that the police and the district attorney don't have anything better to do That the agency has become much more draconian in defense of these economic interests from the large dairies.
What they have done is they've had a national, systematic campaign of enforcement going after raw milk producers, coordinating with state officials, and doing these raids.
And this approach is being used all across the United States.
So the FDA maliciously is actively working against the idea that we should have access to really healthy foods so that we can become healthy human beings.
The Food and Drug Administration has been quick to go after the producers of pomegranates, Cherries of any product that is in any way associated with a therapeutic effect.
In the case of pomegranates, pomegranate juice, antioxidants and pomegranates are associated with various positive health effects.
Pom Wonderful, makers of pomegranate products in the United States, principal maker, communicates that information to American consumers.
And the FDA and the Federal Trade Commission become involved.
The Federal Trade Commission goes after them for deceptive advertising, hopes to destroy them because they had the audacity to communicate to the American public the potential health effects of pomegranate juice.
The same is true of many different kinds of foods.
They've gotten a $2.5 million fine against oregano for making statements about how it could be useful in your health.
Made arguments against prunes and against cranberries.
All of these things that people in their common sense could use to their benefit, the FDA is putting barriers up in front of.
The walnut growers are not permitted to tell you about the benefits of walnuts.
The people who manufacture nutrients are not permitted to tell you what the nutrients do.
in a clear and unambiguous and truthful method.
They ban absolutely the right to make treatment claims for any non-drug product and in this way they keep people largely ignorant at the point of sale so that they are dependent upon drugs as their only means of achieving a therapeutic outcome even though The overwhelming scientific literature supports the conclusion that food fundamentally influences our health and influences our ability to overcome disease.
If you tell the public that your food has these kind of health benefits, that food then transforms into a drug.
And since the FDA has not approved that food as a drug for that indication, it's an unapproved drug.
The FDA doesn't want you to know that foods like oranges and celery have anti-cancer elements or that you could drink raw broccoli juice and actually prevent breast cancer tumors or prostate cancer tumors, especially if you combined it with other nutrients.
But the truth is, health is available in abundant intensive form And diseases go away when the body gets what it needs at every level.
And one of the ways that it needs to cure itself is intensive nutrition.
Health and food, freedom and justice.
Are not just local issues and national issues, they're truly international issues.
We are facing challenges locally, nationally and worldwide to our health and food freedom.
We need to understand where the challenges are coming from.
And they're coming from the same sources.
And so we have on the international level, for example, Codex Alimentarius.
That's Latin for the World Food Code.
World Food Code arose originally from the Napoleonic Code for the part of it that dealt with food trade.
Codex Alimentarius was created in the early 1960s by the United Nations.
The stimulus was generated by a man named Fritz Termier.
Fritz Termier had been the head of IG Farben.
The directors of IG Farben went to jail after the Germans lost World War II for crimes against humanity.
Fritz Tremier, for example, created Auschwitz, both the death camp and the slave labor camp.
Fritz Tremier was involved in the selling of humans for Vile experiments and in a variety of unthinkable, inhuman activities.
Fritz Termier.
After he was released from prison, called together pharmaceutical executives whom he had worked with, and they asked the United Nations to take over the world's food supply as a way of moving their world domination agenda forward.
The United Nations said, what a good idea.
Codex's mandate is to promote world food trade and promote safety of that food.
Oftentimes, what is written in the law books and what's really happening are not the same.
Instead, we have an agency which is now controlled by the worst of the crony corporatist interests.
The worst case scenario for Codex Alimentarius, if it were to be implemented in the United States, would be for the almost complete suppression of vitamin and mineral supplements in this country.
That is, all of the high potency, all of the great variety, Of dietary supplements that we see would be no longer on the market.
Instead, what you would see is just more low-potency vitamins, Fred Flintstone kind of vitamins, nothing that would really help a person.
In terms of the FDA's involvement, is what are they doing on the international stage?
And of course, within the food environment, the Codex Alimentarius, the International Food Code, is basically the It's a particular forum that the FDA gets its chance to have input into systems that govern the way in which food will be controlled and the trade in food will be managed and how the consumers of foods will be protected.
What has interested me over the years in attending Codex meetings is the FDA is one of the major controllers of policy.
Whatever the United States wants, pretty much Codex goes along with and what does the United States want?
The United States wants what Big Agra, Big Kema, Big Pharma, Big Biotech, and Big Medica want.
The average, typical Codex delegate, that they seem to be the unwitting tools of those who have another agenda Which is to push GMO crops on us, to poison us with melamine, to poison our foods, our meats with ractopamine, let alone fluoride and all the other poisons in our environment.
And they accumulate in the human body, and so who's protecting us from that?
Codex is supposed to do that, but in effect what they're doing is giving a free pass to a lot of the industry to push these poisons through.
People who reside in Europe and frankly other countries in the world where pharmaceutical interests have had so much power that they're able to restrict the potencies of dietary supplements down to levels that are so low that the supplement no longer has any efficacy.
What Americans have free access to are not available to Europeans.
There is no doubt that the move by codex to put maximum permissible upper limits on nutrients that can be traded internationally and that are permitted in food is a genocidal maneuver.
Those levels are below the levels necessary to prevent the chronic deficiency diseases.
of a variety of nutrients that all of us need.
If the United States were to sign on to Codex, once they've gotten to the end of their process in terms of determining values of supplements that are going to remain available, that impacts the RDAs and the levels.
So, for example, you may only get enough beta-carotene that you would get in half a carat, as opposed to the much larger amounts that we all need to stay healthy.
I take 10,000 The level permitted by Codex is 10.
That's a thousand-fold difference.
If I believe that my body requires 10,000 international units of vitamin D3, as suggested strongly by numerous research studies, why should I not be permitted To have that information, Codex says that that information has to be kept from me.
Why should I not be permitted to have access to it on the shelves?
Harmonization, and I capitalize the first four letters, H-A-R-M. Harmonization of national standards with Codex standards and guidelines.
Would make anything over 10 international units of vitamin D3 per day unacceptable and unavailable, indeed illegal.
Daily reference amounts can very easily turn into upper limits in dietary supplements, and we see that threat.
In every instance, except one, the daily reference amount for the nutrient Is less than the amount you need to avoid the deficiency disease.
You need, if you're a woman, one and a quarter grams of calcium a day to avoid osteoporosis.
Reference amount?
One gram.
Just below what's needed to avoid being ill.
Except for one, one so-called nutrient, fluoride, which of course is a toxin, a neurotoxin, and a mind control drug.
Fluoride?
Four grams.
It's okay.
The FDA has been quietly agreeing with Europe.
For many Americans, this will come as quite a shock because they can go onto the FDA website and say, look, we understand that there are a lot of concerns about codex, but don't you worry, we would never impose it in terms of our national trade.
We would only have to impose it when we were to comply with WTO rules on international trade.
Now, the United States government declared in the Federal Register on October 11, 1994, that it would harmonize with international standards, even those not yet promulgated.
So Codex, even if it hadn't finished its work, Would become the standard for all standards in the United States.
Codex itself, Codex Alimentarius Commission, in its own strategic planning statement, they put out these booklets and they've had two or three versions by now.
They even mention that Codex, multiple times they mention that Codex will be applied at the national and international level.
And then you combine this with what the FDA itself has said, Where, in its own federal regulation, it is indicated some years ago that it intends to harmonize American law to that of codex, that of international law.
And we believe that if the US had technical and ideological problems with what the Europeans were doing, they would have been opposing it.
But they're not.
And what then becomes even more interesting is to say, well, Where is the collusion occurring?
In the same way that government agencies have been captured by special interest groups because they have the most to gain from it, Codex Alimentarius, at least certain elements of it, have been captured by pharmaceutical interests.
And what they've done and how they started is quite a tale because what they've done is they realized early on, especially once the WTO came into effect in 1994, they realized that there were enforcement powers processes.
That is, that once the Codex guidelines and standards were established, by capturing and directing and controlling the efforts of Codex, then they could have their agenda put in force, and their agenda being the suppression of natural alternatives that would compete with them.
Because what do they do when they're faced with competition?
They either beat it in the marketplace, or they do what the time-honored tradition is.
You run to the government and you get laws and monopolistic Rules and regulations pass that will enable them to put their competition out of business.
So what's the best way here?
Grab the global agency.
And the global agency in this case is Codex Elementarius Commission.
From a Codex point of view, you've got to understand that the FDA is not being an ally to the American people.
It's not speaking a language that is in any way in support of the dietary supplement industry.
Or the practice of natural medicine.
So we have a situation where we are faced with this irrational power to abuse our lives.
And we have a choice.
We can stand our ground, or we can knuckle under it.
Constant public pushback is needed to make sure that the United States does not harmonize with codex restrictions.
There is what we call the Codex Two-Step, which Jim Turner, President of Citizens for Health, and myself developed.
We're reading the Codex rules very carefully.
It's clear how they're enforced.
They're not enforced by Codex.
They're not enforced by the World Trade Organization.
If you violate Codex rules, you may find yourself at the end of a trade sanction.
You have various treaties that the United States is a signatory to, including, but not limited to, the sanitary, phytosanitary agreements, the SPS agreements, technical barriers to trade agreements, the Central American Free Trade Agreement,
the North American Free Trade Agreement, and you look at that and you see that we are increasingly tied in by this Interwoven, interlocking web of treaties and executory agreements, handshakes and the like, that we won't be able to avoid even with Deshaies.
And primarily as well, there is this overwhelming sense of international harmonization And there will just be the sheer psychological force, in fact, of forcing us to conform with the way the rest of the world is headed.
That's a problem and that's something that we face and that's the response to these people who say nothing's going to happen here.
Genetically modified organisms, GMOs.
Yes.
Poe's unparalleled threats.
Nothing like them has ever existed.
In the entire course of life on this planet.
The campaign of ignorance that is currently being waged by the FDA is so insidious that the FDA actively opposes the honest labeling of genetically modified foods.
Every single independent study conducted on the impact of genetically modified food shows that it damages organs, it causes Infertility, it causes immune system failure.
It causes holes in the GI tract.
It causes multiple organ system failure when it's eaten.
It causes a variety of changes, some of which we can't even guess at, as new proteins are coded for by the altered DNA that we've never seen before.
We are playing with genetic fire.
The FDA came out with its infamous policy stating that genetically engineered foods are substantially equivalent to non-genetically engineered foods.
The person in charge of labeling policy at that time was Michael Taylor.
Who had previously worked as an attorney and lobbyist for Monsanto.
After Taylor left the FDA in the early 90s, he went back to Monsanto and then came back to the FDA. The reason why we have 170 million acres of genetically engineered corn and soybeans and cotton and canola oil and sugar beets in the United States is because it doesn't have to be labeled.
The GMO standards are being passed at the Codex level because, frankly, through lies, they're telling them that they're safe crops, that they're safe food products.
They don't need to be labeled.
We've been fighting for years to get mandatory labeling of GMO foods, and we almost succeeded.
But what happened at the last Codex meeting in Geneva is that the U.S. tried to force this issue and actually called for a vote of this issue and they lost.
They actually lost because they wanted to use it as a bargaining chip for WTO, World Trade Organization, trade dispute to ram GMO foods down the mouths of the European Union, China and Russia and they lost.
The FDA position at the Codex Commission level have always been that these products, these two products, are substantially equivalent.
That is, GMO foods and non-GMO foods.
And they argue that they're inherently safe.
They don't need to be labeled.
In fact, the FDA has argued at Codex meetings that the average consumer is too ignorant to recognize the difference between a GMO labeled food and a non-GMO labeled food, and they'd make the wrong choice.
And that's their stated reason for opposing GMO labeling.
For one example of many, In 2001, a small California biotech company called Epicyte patented a product, patented a gene, which causes both men and women who eat it in the form of any product To produce antibodies to sperm.
If the men eat the epicyte gene, they produce antibodies to their own sperm, rendering them irreversibly sterile.
If women eat the epicyte gene, When they have intercourse, their bodies produce antibodies to the sperm that has been deposited and they become infertile through the destruction of the sperm.
Now, DuPont and Monsanto formed a joint venture Purchased the epicyte firm and, quote, commercialized the epicyte gene.
Do you want to know if the food that you're eating contains the epicyte gene?
Sure you do.
How about the food that your children are eating or your grandchildren?
Sure you do.
But the FDA, the Fraud and Death Administration, has made sure that under current laws, it is illegal for you to have that information.
The United States has been transformed from a republic, a limited federal republic that the Constitution defines, into an unlimited bureaucratic oligarchy.
What is perhaps most extraordinary about the US Food and Drug Administration is that whatever it says is accepted as gospel by the conventional media and the conventional medical industry.
FDA receives 40% of their budget from drug companies and it's been this process where slowly but surely drug companies have gotten their hooks into FDA deeper and deeper.
You have whistleblowers and you have former FDA staff members and employees who have come out and said that it's absolutely understood that FDA works for drug companies, they work for device companies, they work for the companies who pay their paychecks.
But it's even worse than that.
The FDA also stacks its panels, its advisory panels, with people who have strong financial ties to the drug companies themselves.
So the FDA might form a panel on whether a certain vaccine should be approved because there's a certain epidemic that's expected to occur, for example.
But the FDA won't reveal That the experts on that panel, usually 80% of them have some kind of financial ties, if not direct ties, actually taking money directly from the drug companies themselves.
Some researchers have been shown to be unethical and there have been studies where documents have been altered where subjects who did not fit the criteria were enrolled in trials.
Studies that were put together for the new antipsychotics that were submitted to get these drugs approved.
There were two doctors down in Georgia.
They ended up in prison.
They were down there doing these studies, just bogus clients and not reviewing the studies right, just taking all the money.
Supposed to be running it through a university, but really having a practice on the side and doing it.
And the patients that they were enrolling in these studies were not qualified to be in the studies.
I mean, just all kinds of things wrong.
But yet the FDA approved those antipsychotics with studies from these guys, and they ended up sitting in prison.
The FDA didn't do anything and say, well, we can't, you know, we got to pull that approval because, you know, it was Roduline's studies that got it approved.
The problem is that almost any of the drugs, the well-known drugs, the popular drugs, the blockbuster drugs, if you will, those will inordinately have been tested in a One can say fraudulent way.
In this little game of monopoly where you spend 900 million dollars and you get a new drug approval and then the public becomes the fourth stage of testing.
We find out whether in a few years so many people are dying that it has to be pulled off the market.
I never questioned vaccines.
I knew about drugs and that kind of thing and I knew they would market drugs and later pull them off the market and all that.
My daughter would get her vaccinations.
I couldn't believe that they would put children's lives at risk.
And now I feel like I was taken advantage of and that I was naive and as was Chris and that her life was taken from a vaccine she didn't need about which we were falsely informed And
there was no justification, no medical justification for fast-tracking this vaccine and that consumers were not being informed of the risk benefits.
There's more injury and deaths to come unless we become more aware, do something about the process.
You know, you have the FDA who approves, licenses, and follows a vaccine.
They're working in conflict of interest with themselves.
It's been three and a half years since Chris died.
She was afraid of being alone in a dangerous situation.
And I just think of that in the context of her being alone with this Whatever was happening to her the night she died and nobody was there.
And that hurts, you know, to think about it.
And the courageous part of her would want to be a voice that continues, want to help others.
She'd want to make sure that her death was not in vain, that it had some purpose, and that was in raising awareness.
That, you know, studies show that there's no scientific basis for what they're promoting.
Every drug that makes the headlines eventually, you find that their record is really, you wonder, how did they ever approve it?
It's this kind of callous disregard of the public health that has characterized the FDA's treatment of drugs.
They have protected well the financial interests of the largest institutions on earth.
State-sponsored drug monopolies.
And they have acted in ways that harm fundamentally the interests of American consumers and patients.
And you know, the FDA is not supposed to approve a drug for any disorder that's not in the DSM. In the DSM, there is no disorder of bipolar, pediatric bipolar in the DSM. But yet, it finally approved, I think it was Whisperdal, in 2006 or 2007.
For children.
The FDA isn't up to inventing disorders.
That's the, you know, the American Psychiatric Association's main job.
But the FDA just came right on and said, no, we're saying it's a disorder.
We believe it's there.
Paul Offit, who holds a patent for a rotavirus vaccine, was permitted to sit on a committee making a decision on whether or not to approve the rotovirus vaccine in spite of the fact that it causes encephalitis and pneumonia, often terminal, in infants who are vaccinated with the rotovirus vaccine.
We can look at the revolving door within the FDA. FDA pushes an agenda on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry.
Look at their resumes.
Where have they worked in the past and who are they related to?
There is a huge relationship between FDA and pharmaceutical industry and pharmaceutical interests.
FDA advisory committees that are the precursors for whether the FDA, on receiving their recommendation, is going to approve or disapprove a drug for a medical device.
And you're right, the FDA keeps saying they can't find enough qualified people, so they have to take them from industry, and so they give them waivers.
The FDA uses this as a cover story, so that when it approves a drug, it can say, well, this was recommended by our advisory panel.
The FDA is composed of smart people, but they're smart people with a conflict of interest.
They're smart people who make their decisions based on what will support their financial needs or their academic needs, not what makes scientific sense.
The current head of the FDA, Dr.
Hamburg, in the year before she became head of the FDA, received $2 million in compensation from Henry Schein, the drug company that used to advertise itself as your location for all things vaccination.
$2 million in consulting fees, now she runs the FDA. So here we have Margaret Hamburg, FDA commissioner, being told That RBGH milk will increase risks of breast, colon and prostate cancers and not doing anything about it.
So we're dealing with FDA commissioners, which in this regard and in other regards, which I could document, Have shown themselves to be recklessly irresponsible.
Well, the Food and Drug Administration is under heavy influence inside and out by the food and drug lobbyists.
Consequently, we are still being exposed to bovine growth hormone milk, which most Western countries have banned, like Canada and Norway.
And we still have hormones and antibiotics in our meat products, which are at such risk that they're not able to be exported to a lot of countries that ban them.
The FDA has removed all liability from vaccine manufacturers and participated in a vast conspiracy against humanity by covering up the damage that vaccines cause,
by covering up the damage of GMOs, by covering up the damage That pesticides and herbicides and irradiation and all the other approved techniques and technologies that the FDA so happily endorses will cause.
The biggest obstacle that we at the Government Accountability Project face is an internal environment at the FDA, which can be summed up in one word, terror.
The employee will be fired, And not only removed, but disgraced, possibly worrying about prison time, completely trashed and smeared.
Even for the most esteemed scientists, when that type of harassment comes from the highest levels of a government agency that generally is respected, that's an extreme hurdle to overcome in the future.
What's hard to understand is the enormous pressure that people at work at FDA are under and the way that the insidiousness of the system works against the best outcomes for consumers.
One person who we've worked with and talked to in great detail has had the experience of saying this drug should not be approved and having a supervisor say to him, If you look around this room and see all the other people working here, do you realize that if we lose the money from the drug industry, these people will lose their jobs?
So if you're here saying that drugs are not able to actually be approved, we're in a situation where we're putting in jeopardy all the jobs of the people you work with.
The Union of Concerned Scientists did a survey of scientists at the FDA, and 40% said that they were afraid to warn the public about public health hazards due to fear of retaliation.
The FDA's Deputy Director of the Office of Drug Safety, David Graham, has repeatedly stated that there's this undue influence that essentially he who pays the piper calls the tune.
I would argue that the FDA as currently configured is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx.
We are virtually defenseless.
It is important that this committee and the American people understand that what happened with Vioxx is really a symptom of something far more dangerous to the safety of the American people.
Simply put, FDA and the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research are broken.
When I appeared before the Senate Finance Committee and announced to the world that FDA was incapable of protecting America from unsafe drugs or from another Vioxx.
FDA is responsible for 140,000 heart attacks, 60,000 dead Americans.
That's as many people as were killed in the Vietnam War.
Within the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, About 80% of the resources are geared towards the approval of new drugs, and 20% is for everything else.
Drug safety is about 5%.
Congress has created that structure by PDU for the Prescription Drug User Fee Act by which drug companies pay money to FDA so that FDA will review and approve its drugs.
For industry, every day that a drug is held up from being marketed, in their minds, that's another one to two million dollars of profit that they're being denied.
And so the incentive is really review the drugs as quickly as possible, approve them as quickly as possible, and don't stand in the way of our making profit.
When Dr.
Graham challenged this atrocity from Our government's friendly fire against trusting citizens, he got what I call the SS tactic.
He was stripped of his duties, or there was an attempt to strip him of his duties, which was blocked thanks to support from Senator Charles Grassley.
And to have nine whistleblowers step forward together and sign a letter complaining about these outrageous medical practices was really unprecedented.
And FDA's reaction to this whistleblowing was also unprecedented.
They didn't listen to them.
They didn't make any change.
They were being forced and pressured to approve medical devices that could harm patients, and in some cases actually lead to thousands of cancers.
The device that the managers demanded be approved was submitted by General Electric, a powerful special interest.
I was fired for sending emails from my private account with the sole basis of my removal.
I was sending that information to Congress, to Office of Special Council.
We also sent personally several emails to Commissioner Hamburg.
She did not respond.
I believe there is too much politics and not enough of science.
People are going to be hurt because of negligence that is ongoing.
The entire regulatory process is premised on scientists and doctors and other professionals doing an honest look at these devices, the drugs, the vaccines, all of the medical tools that the FDA has to approve.
It's predicated on honest and independent medical assessment.
And if you corrupt that process, Through pressure, through overriding legitimate medical concerns, and ultimately by firing doctors and scientists who raise alternative and raise medical issues, The process is broken and in bad need of repair, and the American public is at risk.
Every profit-seeking or power-seeking institution that is created in opposition to something else eventually begins to create the very thing that it claims to oppose in order for it to survive.
And we see this in the pharmaceutical industry.
It needs sickness and disease in order to survive.
Keeping people sick is indeed a profitable business, and it's something that should be avoided.
But to my mind, the problem isn't that it's the for-profit part.
The problem is that it's a monopolistic control by the pharmaceutical industry through their sidekicks in the government, what I would call a fatal embrace.
I think the time is coming when Congress is going to have to hear the voice of practitioners and researchers who are pointing out other ways of dealing with health issues other than by writing yet another prescription.
Because the fact of the matter is, most of the conditions we're dealing with today, whether it's diabetes or high blood pressure or cancer, high cholesterol levels, these are things where there isn't a single pill that's going to solve the problem.
We put a person on pills not for two weeks to knock out a pneumonia, We put them on drugs for life to control their cholesterol and control their blood pressure.
And it's a gold mine for the drug industry and a rather poor bargain for the patient.
The drug companies are in the business of making money.
They're not in the business of healing people.
So they look at that drug in terms of a product that's going to bring them profit.
And if certain people are harmed, that is just the cost of doing business.
I can be an executive of a Fortune 500 drug company, and I can acquire FDA approval for an agent that may kill people.
I can know that there are going to be a certain number of people who will die from this drug.
I can introduce it into the market, have those people die.
I can never have to answer personally for that decision.
Even if I violate federal law, even if I commit fraud, even if I violate the rules of the agency, I can still count on the FDA not to hurt my company.
I can still count on the FDA to accept a small pittance of the profits that I make from my products in order to continue to do business.
Unlike any other industry in the United States, pharmaceutical companies can literally get away with murder.
Pharmaceutical companies maintain control of the data collected in the clinical trials.
They conceal the harm by not publishing the cases where there were bad events, whether it's deaths or heart attacks.
Whatever is an adverse event which means a risk for anyone taking the drug.
They cover it up as if it didn't happen.
They don't publish it.
So what has happened over the last several decades is that the pharmaceutical industry in particular has become the number one cause of disease and death in America by Poisoning people,
essentially, with its toxic chemicals by weakening people's immune systems and weakening their liver, weakening their neurological functions so that they become future revenue-generating patients.
About half of all of the drugs that are approved for public distribution are quietly recalled within about five years because they're too dangerous.
Vioxx has killed at least 60,000 Americans.
It caused about 130,000 excess cases of heart attack and stroke.
It's one of the most lethal drugs ever approved because it was used by so many people.
The FDA commissioner Looking at his medical reviewers refused to remove that drug from the market.
Then FDA Commissioner Lester Crawford stood by Merck and defended that drug.
He also believed that the drug was appropriate for use in pediatric rheumatoid arthritis patients.
So he approved it for kids.
The total sales of Vioxx over its period of time it was allowed on the market was over $11 billion.
And they had to pay the federal government a $950 million fine.
They've paid out about $4 billion in settlements to the victims of Vioxx.
But the company is way ahead of the game in their fraudulent marketing of Vioxx.
There are many other drugs that can fall into the category of unsafe drugs that have been approved.
Bextra, for example, had heart toxicity risks and ultimately was removed from the market because of those risks, but for many, many years, the FDA kept it on the market.
The company making Bextra again covered up the lethal dangers, and they promoted it for uses that it never should have been used for, such as post-surgical pain relief.
Statin drugs have been approved despite the fact that At the time, the FDA convened its medical panel, the review panel, on the statin drugs.
The panel, at first, refused to approve the drug.
Well, the unfortunate reality of the drugs is that they block production of an essential energy enzyme, coenzyme Q10, which can lead to heart failure.
So here we have again a situation where a drug has been approved to lower your risk of heart abnormalities.
That in the end can contribute to heart fatalities.
K-Tick, it is a drug used as an antibiotic.
There's plenty of other antibiotics out there, but K-Tick, that one caused severe liver damage.
FDA had a hint that there was liver damage before the approval, but they approved it anyway.
What's really frightening is the clinical study that was done to validate the safety of K-Tick never occurred.
It was done at a clinical research facility that was closed at the time that the alleged study was conducted.
The key tick did get approved, and as a result, it killed a lot of people, destroyed their livers, necessitated liver transplants, thereby ruining people's lives.
It was something that never should have been allowed on the market, eventually was withdrawn, but it never should have been approved in the first place.
There's one drug, tracelol.
Tracelol was used during heart surgery to prevent some bleeding, to control bleeding.
And when they finally found that tracelol killed about a thousand people per month, the The drug company actually went to a very famous Harvard professor and tried to drown him in money to schmooze things over.
Well, the man was so disgusted with that approach, he went public, and tracelol was taken off the market all over the world.
But guess what?
Only in the US, the FDA issued a warning.
Well, how could we interfere with drug company profits?
Trazolaw's withdrawal was delayed for two years because the company did everything possible to keep it on the market.
They were charging a thousand dollars per injection.
They wanted as many people to be on this drug for as long as possible so they could continue making outrageous profits.
Most of these really terrible drugs are prescribed chronically.
They're tested six weeks.
But they're taken year after year, and that's buildup.
When a drug has toxicity, it builds up.
Diabetes doesn't happen overnight, although it is frightening the fast speed at which children become diabetic from antipsychotics.
There are several psychotic drugs or antipsychotic drugs that the FDA keeps on the market despite increased risk of suicidality and despite a substantial amount of evidence of birth defects associated with them.
And there's Paxil, Zoloft, Fexor.
These drugs and many others that are like them that are serotonin reuptake inhibitors have been shown to lack efficacy.
The British health authorities banned the substance for children and for young adults.
And in the United States, instead, the best that could be done was a black box warning so that here in our country, we still make these drugs available to youth and increase the risk of suicidality as a result.
If they had honestly told, Glasgow Smith Klein had told, parents say, that what we now know that taking Paxil is eight times more likely to cause somebody to commit suicide than taking a sugar pill in the clinical trials, which they knew before the drug was even approved.
If you were to tell a parent that, they're not about to give their kid that drug.
This is 911.
Who is this?
Where is your sister?
What is she trying to do?
do take pills?
Avandia increases the risk of heart attack and as a general heart toxin it has been condemned in the peer-reviewed scientific literature to Despite that fact, FDA's own scientific review panel held it to be a heart toxin.
Commissioner Hamburg decided that she would keep it on the market available to those who are currently using it for precisely those people who are at the greatest risk of a heart attack or other heart abnormality arising from the drug.
Accutane.
That was an acne drug.
It was supposed to be given only in the most severe cases of acne because it was known it had side effects.
It caused severe birth defects.
They denied that it caused people to commit suicide, but it did.
But they were able to keep the warning off of that for many, many years.
One congressman, Bart Stupak from Michigan, his son committed suicide at 17.
Now these are kids, they weren't diagnosed with depression, they weren't diagnosed with any mental disorder, and they take this acne drug and they commit suicide.
And so the drug companies know this, but the FDA knows it too.
When one of the producers of fractionated blood products intended for hemophiliacs realized that their product would kill people because it was contaminated with HIV, you would expect that Baxter would have destroyed the product.
They didn't.
With the encouragement of the FDA, they sold the product in Europe to hemophiliacs there and infected children with HIV. This company positively, absolutely knew that they had a medication that was infected with the AIDS virus.
They took the product off the market in the U.S. and then they dumped it in France, Europe, Asia and Latin America.
So they made a huge profit.
By the way, Joe, government officials in France that allowed that to happen actually had to go to prison for it.
In America, not one corporate executive for this company has been indicted or even criminally investigated by our Justice Department.
Why not?
And if you've ever wondered why a terminally ill cancer patient is given lots of chemotherapy almost up until the point that they're dying or dead, it's because the economic incentive is there to continue putting chemotherapy into cancer patients who have no chance whatsoever of benefiting from it.
In each and every case when we try to recruit a mainstream oncologist, the question they asked us is, what is your chemotherapy bonus structure?
I was unaware of this back in the year 2000.
I asked them, well, what do you mean by that?
They said, well, our pay is based on how much chemotherapy we prescribe.
That's where our profit center is.
And if we don't have a strong chemotherapy reimbursement incentive, we'll find a cancer center that will give us a strong chemotherapy bonus.
The nine-tenths of all laws made by the United States are not the product of those we elect to work here, but the product of those who inhabit the Independent Regulatory Commission, who are unelected, unaccountable to the courts, the Congress, the American people.
It's interesting that in the Declaration of Independence, they listed the acts of tyranny by King George III. It was stated that King George has created a multitude of new officers and sent swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
Now I ask you, what is the difference between King George and what he was doing to the citizens of this country and what the US regulatory agencies are doing to them today?
And the correct answer to that question is, there is no difference.
The system is so broken That it can't be repaired.
It can be pressed.
It can be shaped by serious amounts of pushback.
But ultimately, if we're going to protect our lives and our health, We have to completely redo the system.
Right now, the regulated industries, food and drugs, totally control the regulatory process.
Just as Mahatma Gandhi walked to the ocean to pay him for his own salt to violate the British Crown's salt monopoly, so we need to grow organic food Bring raw milk across state lines for our own use and for the use of those who want it.
Demand the right to trade in natural products.
Well, the question always arises what to do.
Should we write our congressman about the transgressions of the FDA? Of course!
Make some noise!
The only thing I believe that will save this country It's for the executive and the legislative branches of government that have power, use that power to dismantle or strictly eliminate the illegal activities of these regulatory agencies.
We're not going to solve the problem by incremental reforms.
The system is too corrupt from top to bottom.
We're going to have to have a mass uprising, hopefully mainly non-violent, of the citizens of this country.
I think we're going to have allies all over the world when we do this.
We're going to have to have a second American Revolution.
Because we do not have a democracy and the type of authoritarian system that we're living under right now is not just a threat to our economic livelihood.
This is a threat to our lives, a threat to our children, our grandchildren.
This is a threat to human civilization and the fragile web of life on Earth.
It's a matter of life and death.
It is the rule rather than the exception that abuses take place.
And that's why we're killing our country.
That's why our country is in such dire straits.
And we won't be able to save this nation unless these scoundrels are eliminated and unless people come into office to replace them who are dedicated to serving this country more than they are in serving themselves.
When we call Congress, when we have a couple hundred thousand grassroots activists, when they call Congress and talk about these issues, they need to be well informed and understand what it is that they're talking about.
So the most important thing that people can do is educate themselves, get the facts straight, and get in touch with those that really can help to push our agenda in Congress and otherwise.
One of you?
Two of you?
No.
Millions of you?
Yes.
How do we get millions of you?
Because you send out the action item to your friends.
Click, click, click.
We call it riding the freedom mouse.
And when the globalists, when the regulators, when the industrialists are faced with that kind of pushback, they step back.
Every time.
Simply pointing out the illegality and the tyranny of the actions of these regulatory agencies affects nothing.
We need to put pressure on our elected officials in Congress and in the White House to put restraints upon these regulatory agencies.
That's the only thing that will save us.
Citizens, even if they don't know this, we have the ability to pass our own laws.
In large numbers of municipalities and counties, we have the ability to fire these corrupt politicians.
It's called recall.
These things are happening.
It's not a question of whether we're debating about whether people have sold the country down the river in order to benefit themselves.
They have done it.
And we're seeing a situation in which reform, right now, is really essential.
Well, now there's a series of bills that would literally change health and food, freedom and justice in this country.
It's important to remember that there are people in Congress who are willing to challenge the FDA. The public has got to keep their congressmen reminded.
They have to remind their congressmen that they're not going to tolerate legislation being passed or FDA rules being put into effect that deny them access to their dietary supplements.
It's an ongoing battle.
It just doesn't stop with one victory.
Basically, you have legislation by default to downsize the government.
The Administrative Procedures Act needs to be amended so that the final Final application of any new regulation needs to be actually approved by an actual vote of Congress.
What we need is a regulatory system where the drug manufacturers are penalized both in terms of fines and in terms of responsible people going to jail.
We actually take these executives from drug companies to court.
We actually require that new drugs are more effective than older drugs.
And when we have some nutritional factors that play a key role in the prevention of diseases, the government should step in and finance research.
The movement needs to get better organized.
The FDA, they got teams.
They're organized.
They got all this information and everyone else is disorganized because they're isolated here and there and they don't communicate.
There's no central battle to plan a counter-attack against this.
We're going to have a second revolution down the road, but we need to start getting organized and very strategic about it right now.
Two sectors of the movement need to come together.
One of them is the alternative health sector, the people who see very closely how big pharma and the FDA Some are a serious threat to public health, to our survival.
And the others are that it's the movement for alternative food and farming.
Once we come together, we have millions of people.
We have the capacity to enact our own laws.
We have the capacity, if we need to, to raise millions of dollars in statewide campaigns.
Consumers have to let their voice be heard so that the hundreds of billions of dollars that the drug companies earn every single year does not allow them to perpetuate a monopoly on the healthcare system.
I'm a lawyer.
I'm used to the courtroom.
And to be able to win a case because thousands of people lend and show public support is just one of the best feelings.
I mean, that is making the system work.
And we need help.
We all need to come together and increase our ranks because we really need to build an army.
Just going to Congress, we're not even getting results.
We need to confront our oppressors directly and then get the attention of the national news media.
But, you know, this has to be well organized.
When we think carefully and when we stand their process on its head and use it to our advantage, we prevail.
Here we are today with the greatest threat coming not from foreign foes but from domestic ones who are actually filling the elected offices of the United States government and also the unelected ones.
So it is our duty to reassert our sovereignty, to take back the power and the ability that we once had To ensure that those rights are protected once again.
Our country was founded to protect the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
They didn't give them the mechanism to where a President and a Congress can merely pass a law that is more powerful than the Bill of Rights or the Constitution.
No!
They said you had to jump through hoops You have to amend the Constitution to change it, which we all know is probably a 10-year process at the most.
They wanted to make it difficult to do that, and yet we blindly now are passing laws that render the Constitution and the Bill of Rights worthless documents.
And I think that's where the trouble comes in.
We're not following the official documents of how our country is to run, and if you don't do that, then what do you stand for?
There's really only one answer.
Why do you sell your government?
Why do you sell the rights of people?
Why do you abandon this country?
Well, you do it because you're a traitor.
Because you value yourself more than your country.
Because you value your own economic future more than you do the welfare of the American people.
The only reason that things don't change It's because we didn't become activated enough to cause them to change.
But it's our planet, it's our health, it's our future, and it's our choice.
We are the people.
You will not take our rights, you will not take our liberties, and we will not let this stand.
Give us liberty or give us death!
▲
Export Selection