All Episodes
Previous Next
March 24, 2018 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
33:08
Jeffrey Smith’s GMO update, July 2012 - covers latest research, GMO labeling and more
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
- Hello and welcome everyone to the Health Ranger Report.
This is Mike Adams, the Health Ranger editor of NationalNews.com.
Today we're joined by Jeffrey Smith.
Yeah, the Jeffrey Smith of the Institute for Responsible Technology.
The tip of the spear on the GMO education effort and he's here to talk to us today with the latest updates on what's happening in the battle against GMOs and also GMO labeling and that initiative in California.
That and much more right here.
Jeffrey, Thank you for joining us today.
It's great to connect with you again.
Great to connect with you again.
Well, what is the latest, Jeffrey?
What's on your radar?
Well, I've got about 10 items.
One thing that's kind of a blast from the past for me is that there was a report in Russia where scientists confirmed that laboratory animals eating genetically engineered soybean meal had basically ran out of the ability to have babies.
They said that basically it was a ban on offspring.
It's possible these were the same guys talking about their hamster research, which as you'll recall, by the third generation, most lost the ability to have babies.
They also reported that there was a higher proportion of female offspring for those that were able to give birth, and also there were slower growth rates.
So this was basically, according to the report, it was proving that genetically modified soy harmed reproduction.
Now, proving is a strong word, and it might have been the reporter saying it and not the scientist.
But it was interesting, when I last corresponded with these scientists in Moscow, They said that they hadn't published the research because they weren't sure if the culprit was the genetic engineering or the Roundup, which is used on the genetically engineered crops.
And as you know, Roundup can cause birth defects and endocrine disruption and can easily be responsible for reproductive failures.
But the genetic engineering process not only has the inserted gene, but massive side effects that can occur as well.
So that's still, we're waiting for publication on that one.
You know, it's fascinating that you mentioned this loss of reproductive ability after multiple generations.
Now, I know you don't get into conspiracies and all that, but one of the topics of conversation circulating these days is, you know, Bill Gates says he wants to reduce the world population.
Ted Turner says we've got to reduce it down to 1 billion people.
That means eliminating 5.8 billion, by the way.
So there's a lot of speculation that GMOs may be part of an effort to have infertility kick in so that long-term people can't have babies and therefore the population collapses down to a much smaller level.
Do you want to offer any comment or speculation on that topic?
Well, I haven't seen any documentation that had anyone believing in advance that this stuff causes reproductive failure.
But I can tell you that we know from laboratory animal studies, as well as livestock, that reproductive failure is rampant in relationship to GMOs.
In laboratory animals, female rats fed GM soy.
I think you've heard all this.
More than half of their babies died within three weeks.
The babies were also smaller and could not reproduce.
Testicles changing color from pink to blue, damage to young sperm cells, damage to the uterus and ovaries, changes in the way the DNA function in the embryo offspring, genetically modified corn that was Roundup-ready, MBT, resulted in fewer babies and smaller babies.
And now we're seeing livestock reports like crazy.
There was a Danish farmer, and I believe you reported on this, that when he took his 450 sows and their offspring and put them on non-GM soybeans, The conception rate was higher, the birth defects were completely eliminated, the litter size increased, the stillborn rate was down.
In addition, he also had fewer infections, so his antibiotic use dropped by half, his diarrhea problems went away within two days, and so did the death rates, as well as the digestive problems, which had claimed about 38 pigs Wow, huge effects being observed out there in the animal world.
You know, related to that, just to clarify too, there was that big talk about the, at first it was called GMO, Tifton 85 grass in Texas.
You know, I went out to the ranch and found, that's not GMO, it had nothing to do with GMOs, but that was a big, a lot of people misreported that, including I think ABC, or what was it, CBS News, originally misreported that as GMO. Yeah, in fact, that's often the situation.
Sometimes the confusion happens when people hear about crops under development, like bentgrass is not yet commercialized, but it has been deregulated, or things like apples and onions and eggplant, which have not yet been deregulated but are under development.
People hear about it and wonder which product is genetically engineered.
Fortunately, there's only nine genetically modified food-related crops right now, and grass right now is not one of them.
You know, I think part of that is because the public is now so afraid of being lied to by the media and the government and the USDA and Monsanto, of course, that the public is suspicious of everything they're told.
And this is part of the reason, I think, why labeling is so important, so that people can actually make informed decisions.
Your thoughts on that, Jeffrey?
Well, labeling is key because most Americans say they would avoid GMOs if they were labeled, 53% in a recent poll.
Now, that means if labeling was required, say, in California, where there's a ballot initiative, it'll be voted on in November.
If it passes, we believe that most companies would remove GMOs rather than admit they use them.
So Monsanto, for sure, is taking out the big guns.
We expect tens of millions of dollars, maybe $100 million in disinformation campaigning.
And they're already starting saying that labeling is going to cost people more money, that it's confusing, that it'll result in lawsuits.
All of these are lies.
And we're going to be rolling out a tour in California.
I'm releasing a film next month, in part due to your support.
Thank you again.
And so we're going to be focusing our efforts on California education so that it'll antidote the lies of the biotech industry.
But there's two other labeling issues that came up this past week.
One is that the American Medical Association Did not support a proposal by the Indiana chapter, which passed the resolution in favor of labeling of GMOs.
The national conference did not.
However, in a kind of a schizophrenic move, they did say that they were in favor of requiring pre-market safety testing.
Right now you can put a GMO on the market without any required safety studies.
You don't even have to tell the FDA. Well, according to the AMA, they think that should be changed, and studies like allergenicity or antibiotic resistance should be carefully done before products are approved.
So they're admitting on the one hand that it might cause allergies, but they don't want people to know if it's genetically engineered, so they wouldn't be able to know how to protect themselves.
That is kind of schizophrenic, but it does show that the issue is getting attention even in the established medical community.
It's also bubbling into pop culture.
There was a video put out, well, on Bill Maher's show, I think June 22nd issue episode, Bill Maher and Rachel Maddow were on there actually supporting the labeling of GMOs and calling the corporations liars.
I was astonished.
I almost couldn't believe what I was watching.
Did you see that episode?
I did not, and thank you for telling me about that.
I usually don't miss something like that because I have so many listservs in my inbox, I usually see things 11 times.
Now, there was another labeling issue that I'm sure you're aware of, and that is that Bernie Sanders and Barbara Boxer had a proposal for the Farm Bill amendment which would specifically allow states To require labeling.
Now, there's no law that disallows them to label, although Monsanto had threatened to sue the state of Vermont and the state of Connecticut if they passed labeling bills.
And so, this was the first time the Senate ever had voted on a labeling bill.
It was defeated by over 70 votes to 20-something.
Nonetheless, Bernie Sanders from Vermont said this is a good first step in that it's being paid attention to for the first time.
So it was kind of a mixed thing, like the American Medical Association.
They described it and evaluated it for the first time, but they didn't yet have a rational, realistic vote.
You know, it's fascinating getting back to the labeling rationale.
The argument against GMO labeling is really the same argument as saying, well, food companies shouldn't even be required to list ingredients or nutrition facts or anything.
Why not just let the food companies put whatever they want on their labels and let the consumers remain completely ignorant of everything that's in the product?
I mean, that is essentially the argument of the anti-labeling crowd.
Well, in California, it's getting more sophisticated.
They're doing a lot of polling and focus, and what they're trying to say is, if you vote for this measure, it's going to cost you hundreds of dollars per year in your grocery bills.
And they're saying, this is not a right to know, it's a right to sue, because of Prop 65 has resulted in a lot of lawsuits.
Their logic is completely false, because this is completely different, but they're doing it to confuse.
And so they have all sorts of disinformation pieces, and they don't mention genetic engineering.
One of the front groups is the Coalition Against the Costly Food Labeling Bill.
It doesn't mention genetic engineering, and this is part of their tactic.
Yeah, I noticed that a lot of the language is starting to shift from genetic engineering to biotechnology or even high-tech agriculture.
That's a term they're using now.
Well, they've been trying to cook the books on the languaging for a long time.
Genetic engineering, genetically modified, they even tried to make genetically modified refer to everything like beer and hybridization, even though it's been used as genetic engineering for years in the United States and especially in Europe.
Incredible.
There's some other news coming out.
In Europe, for example, Syngenta is being charged with hiding information about how a trial with their now defunct BT corn, which used to be on the market, that was fed to cows in a trial, and four cows died within a couple of days, or two cows died within four days, I think that was it, and they stopped the trial.
But then they recruited a farmer in Germany to do trials with his cows, and they never told him about their trial.
So that was a violation of the law.
And as what happened, this farmer was feeding their Syngenta BT176 corn to his cows.
Five of them died one year.
Syngenta gave him 40,000 euros.
Seven died the next year.
Others got sick and had to be put down.
Syngenta stopped paying out any reparations.
The guy went to court and lost.
And he is now suing Syngenta because it turns out they withheld information that they needed to tell in order to recruit him properly.
And they're even suing the head of Syngenta in Germany for withholding information, not only from the farmer, but also from the courts.
But that's how the entire GMO industry operates, by withholding information.
That's what they want to do from all of us, so we are not aware of what we're eating.
And that's why you and I need to get the word out quickly, and it's actually working.
I think this whole focus on labeling has its basis A greater awareness about the health risks, because why else would people demand labeling unless it was a demand for avoiding?
So thank you again for covering all these health risks.
I read your reports and they're excellent.
Hey, thank you, Jeffrey, for all that you do.
You know, we're just trying to keep up with you, frankly, man.
You are all over the world.
You're traveling, you're interviewing, you're researching.
I don't know how you handle it all.
How do you do it?
I actually have no idea.
I traveled 187 days last year and I'm about to leave for the California campaigning of the gun for maybe three and a half months.
I have to tell you, one of the reasons why I can do this is because we're making such positive impacts.
I was in Taiwan recently and I can now share finally what happened.
I usually hide the fact that I'm going to another country and that's very important because otherwise Monsanto and company sends out their troops to try and discredit in advance and we were very successful in other countries if we just kept it quiet until we showed up.
Well, in Taiwan, I ended up meeting with the former prime minister.
My book had come out a month before my visit.
It had become an immediate national bestseller in its third printing.
Evidently, the former prime minister read most of it, and in our press conference was quoting the details of the study by Arpad Fustai and the potatoes to the press, and then called for a GMO-free zone, then a head of a I met with him in the press.
He also said he would try and get a GMO-free zone.
And then we met with Congress people, and they were so impressed with the information in the book and also that we were presenting, they set up a press conference and a public hearing at the Congress where they summoned the head of their, or representative of their FDA and agriculture and science departments.
And at the end of this very long presentation by all of us, They said, it is obvious that the laws in Taiwan are incompetent to properly regulate all of the ramifications of GMOs and their side effects, and they need to be revamped.
So, when I have a week like that, you know, go to a country for a week and have the laws change because of the revelations that we're bringing to them, you know, it's not like I run out of energy, it just gives me more energy.
Incredible!
Did they say Nihan Li Hai?
That means you kick ass in Chinese.
That's about all I know.
Hey, well, your message is getting out there no matter what language it's in.
You know, I can imagine that countries like Taiwan must be very concerned because here is a Western American type of technology that's now, it's an imperial invasion of their agricultural system with unknown future risks that could compromise their land, their seed, their genetic capital of their country.
You know, that's true, but I'll tell you, I was in Vietnam last year, and they were more concerned in Vietnam.
Monsanto has a much bigger presence in Vietnam.
It's a big agricultural exporter.
And they were working with their captured members of the government, particularly the ag industry, the ag ministry.
And when I went there last year, they also didn't mention in advance that I would be there.
I went to a government-sponsored conference on GMOs, and the first couple of speakers were very pro-GM. I think they were from the ag ministry, and they didn't know who I was, and I was introduced as the keynote speaker.
And I started to expose the lies of Monsanto, and I was told by people that these two former other speakers were looking around nervously, grabbed their cell phones and left.
And before we knew it, the trip the next day, which was planned to visit Monsanto's field trials, were cancelled.
And then a few days later, Monsanto's folks sent around an email to the officials trying to discredit me, but it was too late because I had gotten the truth out and their efforts were just another example to the officials of how Monsanto was trying to hide the evidence of the problems associated with their technology.
Yeah, it's extraordinary.
There are all these efforts by these corporate giants to try to discredit people like you and me, and most of them are just laughable.
I've been accused of being, I think, an alien reptilian Illuminati priest from Planet X or something.
Well, that's very colorful.
Yeah, that's very imaginative, yes.
I was in Zambia a few years ago, and they were really raked over the coals when they had a famine.
And refused to import the U.S. genetically engineered corn for famine relief.
Now, we know that no one died.
No one died in Zambia.
They were able to obtain food from other sources.
However, this huge disinformation campaign echoed all over the United States and Europe to describe thousands dead, 20,000 dead, starving people.
Activists like you and me were trying to say that the corn was going to cause cancer or there was poison that was going to cause AIDS. And then I was in Zambia and I talked to these Jesuit priests who were agricultural researchers and they were talking about, at their conferences, the results of research on GMOs.
Which, of course, was not positive.
And so Colin Powell tried to get the head of the Jesuit order in the Vatican to silence the Jesuit priests.
And then someone from the U.S. government told the head of the Jesuit order in the U.S. that this one father had left a meeting screaming, saying, let them starve rather than eating GMOs.
I talked to this priest, and he said this was completely false, although he was called by the head of the Jesuit order who was worried about it.
The U.S. sent congressmen, senators, and professors.
I talked to a former minister of agriculture who said when he was in the U.S., and he met Secretary Veneman, the USDA secretary at the time.
He was introduced as the minister from Zambia.
She wouldn't shake his hand.
Instead, she said, backward country, and stormed off.
So this was an example of a country that was just trying to protect itself from the health, environmental, and economic dangers of GMOs.
So I ended up writing this two-fold-page spread article, which they put in their newspaper.
Huge, huge.
It was supposedly the largest article ever published in this newspaper.
It was vindication for their position years earlier, and I was On national TV and national radio and I spoke to the House of Chiefs there.
They were very grateful because they felt very alone and very victimized.
And I talked to some of the ministers who really felt personally affronted by this whole effort to force them.
And it was amazing what the U.S. has done.
You know, what a great example, too, because it shows, you know, people like you and I are bound by the honor and the intention of telling the truth.
We do the research.
We do not knowingly lie.
Sometimes, I mean, on my website, we occasionally make a mistake and then we correct it.
That happens.
It's just part of journalism.
I've caught you, actually.
Yeah, you did.
You did.
Thank you.
I appreciate that.
And just so you know, that's always unintentional if that ever happens.
Of course.
I make mistakes, too.
There's so much information that it's impossibly everything right all the time.
Right, right.
But...
My point, Jeffrey, though, is that these corporations lie as easily as breathing.
If their mouth is moving, they are lying.
They will invent anything.
They will say anything.
They're not bound by the ethics or the morals or the honor of ever telling the truth.
And that's what we are up against, you see.
So you and I, we have to work ten times harder to tell the truth, to document it, to back it up, where they can just lie and make up anything instantaneously, and they can get some traction with that sometimes.
Have you heard the name Nina Fedorov?
She was the...
She wrote the book...
Actually, I forget the name of the book.
But she wrote a pro-GM book.
She was the science advisor to Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice.
She left that position now.
She's the chairman, I think, of some big science group.
And she's...
I talked to two very conservative scientists...
About her position on GMOs, and both of them got completely agitated and said, she's a liar.
I've never seen these scientists say that.
I'm not going to say who they are.
But to them, it was absolutely blatant that she knew the truth and was willing to lie.
Now, I don't know her that well, and I can't say that, but it's very interesting that even conservative scientists that are very scared to say anything is black or white, they just got all flustered when I mentioned her name.
And I have seen clearly, you know, we've caught these guys red-handed.
In my book, Genetic Roulette, Chapter 3, or Part 3, is all about how they rig their research, and we've caught them red-handed lying, and yet it still gets counted as effective and appropriate for the FDA purposes.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, look, we are winning.
You are winning big time.
The GMO labeling campaign, it's on the ballot.
That's a huge victory.
Tell us now, Jeffrey Smith, what can Natural News readers and viewers do today to continue the victory, to have the big victory, require labeling in California, and end the curse of GMOs in our nation?
What can people do?
We're actually about to send out an email to our subscribers at responsibletechnology.org where we're going to be raising financial support for Victory in California through some of the messaging that you and I know can change not only a vote but also behavior so we can have a victory not only at the ballot box but at the cash register.
We're also going to be laying out different things that people can do.
We want to have a social media army, a click-and-send, non-GMO, revolutionary army, so people can every day repost, retweet, or pass on information that we will supply and that we will gather from others to supply.
We're looking for help in a variety of ways, specific talented things like writers and editors, etc., filmmakers, graphic artists, fundraisers, and people to host our tour of more than a dozen people around California.
Rather than go into the details now, I'd like to suggest that people subscribe to our free newsletter at responsibletechnology.org.
It goes out one to four times per month, let's say, and There'll be some specific instructions there now and also when the film comes out.
I want to thank your readership because you guys did a great thing by raising money.
We're actually out of the money now.
We need to raise more money to finish the film and then to promote it.
But we have now a film that is really amazing.
It is definitely the most powerful film ever created driving people away from eating GMOs.
I can say that without a doubt.
We know that our lectures change people's diet on the spot.
This is far more powerful.
Many, many doctors, veterinarians, farmers, scientists, individuals who have switched, parents who've changed their kids, autistic kids, with clear, unmistakable results.
So this is coming out in July, and I wanted to ask the listeners and readers of your Natural News to participate in making this thing seen by people throughout California, and there'll be a way that people can do that and pass on links for people to watch it.
It'll be a whole plan that we're putting together.
And in fact, I'm going to bring you into helping with that plan to make sure we can get it to the most number of people.
Absolutely.
We're completely on board with that.
All you got to do, you know, you and I hardly talk because we're so busy.
So just, you've got my cell phone number, just text my phone.
You don't even have to call.
Just text me and then forward the stuff to my email and then we'll get it organized and we'll get it out to our list because our readers are just busy.
Big on supporting you and your group and mandatory labeling and telling the truth about GMOs.
That's absolutely huge, so we're completely on board with that.
We'd love to show the film or trailers from it or sneak peeks behind the scenes, stuff that didn't make it into the final cut.
Everybody's fascinated by this, so please, yeah, let us do whatever we can.
In the meantime, yeah, go ahead.
So, the idea that we have for California is the messaging has to antidote the lies.
Now, there's going to be, let's say, 60 to 100 million dollars spent in the lies.
We can't go up against that with advertising money because it's going to be a pittance compared to what they'll spend.
But we can generate media, so we're looking for some pro bono media PR help.
We can generate media through events.
So we're having a big tour planned in California.
I'll be out for most of, from mid-July until the election.
We're bringing in a lot of people to speak.
We have campaigns that will help the messaging go viral.
A campaign to protect children against GMOs who are most at risk.
A campaign to bring together healthcare professionals so that they can make a statement in favor not only of labeling, but of prescribing non-GMO diets.
And there's thousands of healthcare professionals doing just that right now.
Excellent.
We have a lot of plans that we're going to be revealing to the world, I guess, right now and soon by email form.
And we'll be recruiting people to participate because it's a very interesting science here.
We know that the airwaves are going to be completely pro-GM and anti-the measure with their ads.
So we have to figure out how to use the internet to go viral, how to use the media to go viral, how to use events, how to use word of mouth.
And how to get it so that it is so sticky and so compelling that people want to talk about it.
So the messaging piece is extremely important, and this is where I've been focusing my attention for about five months in preparation.
Jeffrey, you are an amazing frontline general in this war for truth about food.
I just want to say that.
You're amazing.
Your logistics skills and abilities are amazing.
People rally behind you.
You manage to make friends, not enemies, even throughout the industry.
It's amazing.
I just want to say, be careful, man.
Watch your back.
These corporations, I can tell you from experience, they will do anything to silence your message.
So I want you to be very, very cautious.
We don't have to say any more on camera, but just watch yourself, man, because these people are dangerous.
They want to win at any cost, and they don't care who they have to harm in that process.
Thank you for your warning, but I say this.
You know, while I was in Taiwan, a student, I think, said, thank you for your bravery.
And I have to say, I don't feel particularly brave.
I know your experience in this, but to me, bravery is when you have fear and you step through it anyway.
To be honest, I have no fear.
I mean, to me, this is my assignment.
It is an opportunity.
It is an honor.
I mean, consider this, Mike.
When you think of our ability to effect change in the world, GMOs represent one of the greatest threats, not only to everyone who eats, that's the entire population, But also all living beings and all future generations because it's a permanent contamination of the gene pool.
So if we in this one generation can stop this threat, think of what good we're doing for the world.
So to me, this is an amazing opportunity and people who jump on board and participate feel great about it because of all the things that we can do in the world at this time.
This is fairly unique in its ability to protect, again, all living beings, all future generations.
Yeah, you know, a lot of people talk about saving the world and saving the future, saving the planet.
Well, this is something that's very practical that is actually that, literally saving the genetic integrity of the future of life on our planet.
And you're right, Jeffrey.
How often do we have an opportunity to take action and contribute to that really sacred I mean, this is a sacred mission, you could even say.
Well, I think so.
I was just talking to someone who was the chairman of Sacred Seeds, and when you think about it that way, I'm going to be speaking at the Smithsonian at the Native American Museum in July, giving a keynote about sacredness of seeds and genetic engineering.
And when they look at it from that perspective, and I've spoken to indigenous people in many, many countries around the world, They have a deeper perspective than I think I can achieve.
Because of their culture, they have a different relationship with nature.
And for them, GMO means God move over.
It means a violation of natural law and a violation of a natural law that they are intimate with.
So I am in awe and honored to be serving their purpose as well.
Well said, Jeffrey.
I know you're about out of time.
Any final thoughts as we wrap this up?
Well, I'd like to share some good news out of Brazil.
It's been a while since I've been able to share good news out of Brazil.
I've been there five times.
Monsanto has been really taking the farmers for a ride, not only collecting royalties on the seeds, but collecting royalties when people sell the crops at the end of the season.
And so a court declared that illegal, and if the Supreme Court upholds it, then they may be on the hook for $7.5 billion.
Wow!
Refunds?
I mean, they would have to refund the farmers?
Yeah, refund the farmers since I think 2004 for charging them twice.
Wow.
Wow, that's huge.
But it also shows, I mean, I wasn't even aware of that issue, but it shows the dominance of the entire food chain that is the goal of Monsanto.
They want to charge you money on the front end and the back end and own all the intellectual property and own everything, own the entire food supply and enslave the world to their food intellectual property.
It is one of the most insidious, evil agendas that we've ever witnessed on our planet.
It's incredible.
I talked to a person who heard the Arthur Anderson consultant describe the master plan of Monsanto that this company helped create.
And it was to genetically engineer 100% of all commercial seeds in the world and to patent them and to sell them along with the associated chemicals.
So this company was willing to bet the entire food supply, the entire agriculture On an infant technology for the sake of their profits and their dominance.
So I don't know.
He said it was the most arrogant statement he had ever heard in his life up to that point and since.
I can't imagine a more arrogant statement.
But I want to say this, just because I don't want to end on an arrogant note.
The way to win here, and we've discussed this many times, it is so leveraged for our victory.
Just a passing of a labeling bill or having a non-GMO revolution where 5% of the shoppers avoid GM ingredients, turning the GMOs into a marketing liability since there's no benefits to consumers.
We have to just tell the people who are already predisposed to being against GMOs a little more information.
Why that's a good idea, how to do it, what to do, just tell, just arm the choir, tell people what they already want to know, and we will get rid of GMOs for everyone.
Well said, Jeffrey, and I sense it too.
Victory is within our reach on this.
I feel a huge grassroots wave of support and recognition and even urgency about defeating this evil corporation and their agenda to dominate life on our planet.
Unbelievable that they have attempted that.
But good news that we are winning.
Good news that you are on the front lines fighting this fight for the future of life on our planet.
Literally, I don't say that as a metaphor.
This is the literal truth.
So thank you, Jeffrey, for continuing your work.
It's an honor to know you and an honor to support your work.
So thank you for your time today.
You're most welcome and thank you, Mike.
All right.
Take care, Jeffrey.
Good to talk to you.
Good to talk to you.
Thanks for watching.
This interview was brought to you by SupplySource.com.
Yes, that's our online retailer partnered up with Daniel Vitalis on that.
You can find survival and preparedness gear that really works.
It's rugged stuff that we test.
I tested on the ranch in Texas.
Daniel tested in the wilderness in Maine.
And the things that pass our tests end up on the website.
Things that break, don't.
Because we don't sell crap that breaks.
Anyway, that helps support these interviews, which is a very, it's a costly operation to keep us going.
So if you'd like to help support our video interviews with all these great guests and all these great companies, please check out SupplySource.com.
And thank you for your support.
This is Mike Adams, the Health Ranger.
▲
Export Selection