Divide and conquer: Clinton machine paid the young turks nertwork $20 million

By Jay Syrmopoulos - August 29, 2017

It was recently announced that The Young Turks Network, led by Cenk Uygur, had secured $20 million dollars in funding to bolster their business/media presence. But while Cenk Uygur attempts to sell his brand to the public as a progressive alternative media outlet, facts reveal that this is nothing more than a façade meant to lure young liberal pragmatists into buying into a hidden corporatist agenda.

The $20 million in funding is slated to be used to increase the size of the TYT newsroom and for business operations – but where did the money actually come from?

It is important to note that TYT has reported on some hard-hitting stories and exposed serious problems within the state, and Uygur was unafraid of calling out corruption—so much so that he quit his job at MSNBC to work on the media project. However, once we start following the recent money, we can see a telling revelation begin to unfold.

The funding comes from a number of sources, so let’s take a look at these entities and the people behind them to better understand the agenda at play.

The main conduit for the funding is a newly created growth equity fund called 3L Capital, with additional financial backing from venture capital groups Greycroft Partners, E.ventures, and WndrCo. — which was recently launched by Hollywood mogul Jefferey Katzenberg.

“News is red hot right now and being positioned on the progressive side of the coin has put us in a very good place,” Uygur said, according to Bloomberg.

Far from being an independent progressive news source, as they proclaim to be, the TYT network is now being supported by your run of the mill corporatist Clinton money machine. Although attempting to publicly operate as an insurgent progressive activist outlet – think Bernie Sanders – the financial backing by the aforementioned entities reveals something vastly different.       More

Defending Against the Next Generation of Bioweapons

29.08.2017 Author: Ulson Gunnar

Chemical and biological weapons conjure in the mind terror and have been repeatedly cited as a pretext for both acts of military aggression and even entire wars. Scenes of soldiers and civilians choking on toxic chemicals or covered in boils after exposure have been the stuff of nightmares both geopolitically and in fiction.

While current chemical and biological weapons are far more limited than movies and politically-motivated narratives suggest, emerging biotechnology is making possible a new generation of biological weapons that may actually live up to the terror current weapons inspire.

A US policy think tank as early as 2000 in a publication titled, “Rebuilding America’s Defense” (PDF), a virtual blueprint of the plans and means the US sought to utilize toward achieving global hegemony, would make particular note of bioweapons and the use of genotype-specific weapons, stating:

Although it may take several decades for the process of transformation to unfold, in time, the art of warfare on air, land, and sea will be vastly different than it is today, and “combat” likely will take place in new dimensions: in space, “cyber-space,” and perhaps the world of microbes… 

…advanced forms of biological warfare that can “target” specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.

In 2004, the Guardian in an article titled, “Could you make a genetically targeted weapon?,” would warn:

The prospect that rogue scientists could develop bioweapons designed to target certain ethnic groups based on their genetic differences was raised this week in a report by the British Medical Association (BMA).

The report, Biotechnology, Weapons and Humanity II, warns that construction of genetic weapons “is now approaching reality”. Such “genetic bombs” could contain anthrax or bubonic plague tailored to activate only when genes indicated the infected person was from a particular group.

The topic of genotype-specific bioweapons has held interest across the West for  decades.  The Apartheid regime in South Africa attempted to produce biological weapons to induce infertility among the nation’s black population.

PBS Frontline’s article, “What Happened in South Africa?” would recount:

In 1998 South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission held hearings investigating activities of the apartheid-era government. Toward the end of the hearings, the Commission looked into the apartheid regime’s Chemical and Biological Warfare (CBW) program and allegations that it developed a sterility vaccine to use on black South Africans, employed toxic and chemical poison weapons for political asssassination, and in the late 1970s provided anthrax and cholera to Rhodesian troops for use against guerrilla rebels in their war to overthrow Rhodesia’s white minority rule.

While South Africa’s entire CBW program was abhorrent, what is particularly frightening is the use of South Africa’s national vaccination program as a vector for infecting black women with viruses meant to sterilize them. Now that vaccination programs are being pushed globally, there lies the danger that such weapons could be used against entire regions of the planet.

PBS would elaborate further on the CBW program, stating that the South African government:

Developed lethal chemical and biological weapons that targeted ANC [African National Congress] political leaders and their supporters as well as populations living in the black townships. These weapons included an infertility toxin to secretly sterilize the black population; skin-absorbing poisons that could be applied to the clothing of targets; and poison concealed in products such as chocolates and cigarettes.   

PNAC’s dream of genotype specific bioweapons then, is not some far-off science fiction future, it is something that has been pursued in earnest for decades and apparently by interests aligned to the West, not enemies of it.           More

Google sets new restrictions against extremist Youtube videos

By Mark Bergen, August 24, 2017

Starting on Thursday, Google will police YouTube like it never has before, adding warnings and disabling advertising on videos that the company determines crosses its new threshold for offensive content.

YouTube isn’t removing the selected videos, but is instead setting new restrictions on viewing, sharing and making money on them. A note detailing the changes will go to producers of the affected videos on Thursday, according to a spokeswoman for the Alphabet Inc. company. 

Google outlined these moves in June, but the implementation comes as debate about extremism and political speech is front-and-center in the national spotlight -- and when tech giants like Google and Facebook Inc. face deeper scrutiny over how they moderate information distributed through their digital services.

"These videos will have less engagement and be harder to find," Kent Walker, Google’s general counsel, wrote about the plans in a June blog post. "This strikes the right balance between free expression and access to information without promoting extremely offensive viewpoints." A Google spokeswoman declined to comment further on the changes.

The new restrictions, which target what Walker called "inflammatory religious or supremacist content," are expected to hit a small fraction of videos, according to person familiar with the company. YouTube says it uploads over 400 hours of video a minute. Videos tagged by its new policy won’t be able to run ads or have comments posted, and won’t appear in any recommended lists on the video site. A warning screen will also appear before the videos, which will not be able to play when embedded on external websites. YouTube will let video creators contest the restrictions through an appeals process, a spokeswoman said.

The world’s largest video service has changed its policies several times this year. In March, Google introduced new software and staffers to monitor videos after a slew of marketers pledged to pull YouTube spending over concern their ads were running alongside extremist content.

Google added new features to restrict YouTube ads the following month. Executives claimed the number of impacted videos was minute, yet stressed that neither humans nor artificial intelligence systems could ensure YouTube is entirely free of controversial videos. A recent example of the challenge: YouTube recently reinstated thousands of videos documenting violence in Syria after civic groups criticized the company for pulling them earlier, arguing the footage could be used as documentation in war crime prosecutions.

Earlier this month, YouTube said more than 75 percent of videos removed for violating its policies were flagged by its new software before human intervention. With its latest policy, YouTube is targeting trickier borderline content, such as videos that espouse Holocaust denial theories and clips from white supremacist David Duke.

"YouTube doesn’t allow hate speech or content that promotes or incites violence," the Thursday letter to YouTube creators reads, according to a copy viewed by Bloomberg News. "In some cases, flagged videos that do not clearly breach the Community Guidelines but whose content is potentially controversial or offensive may remain up, but with some features disabled."

In the wake of a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, earlier this month, several tech companies, including Google, Facebook and Airbnb Inc., have taken steps to cut associated people and groups off their platforms.          Bloomberg

Houston under water

Published on Aug 29, 2017

Tens of thousands of people have had to flee their homes in Houston, Texas, as a result of flooding caused by Tropical Storm Harvey. Sky News Correspondent Ashish Joshi reports.

Pope to Catholic lawmakers from around the world: let church teaching influence your work

Inés San Martín, August 29, 2017

ROME - Speaking to a group of Catholic lawmakers from around the world on Monday, Pope Francis urged them to bring a commitment to Church teaching to their public lives in order to build a better society.

The pontiff also urged Catholic politicians to transcend partisan divides, calling on them to “build bridges of dialogue between diverse political perspectives.

“While the contribution of the Church to the great questions of the society of our time can often be called into question, it is vital that your commitment is continually permeated by her moral and social teachings in order to build a more humane and just society,” Francis said, according to the Spanish edition of Vatican Radio.

The pope also asked the group to promulgate and apply laws that build bridges of dialogue between diverse political perspectives, particularly when their purpose is to promote greater care for the defenseless and the marginalized, “especially towards the many who are forced to leave their homeland.”

He also encouraged the legislators to draw on the fruits of their reflections in Rome about “how the Catholic faith conducts towards a just understanding of the person” when they go back to their countries.

The pope’s remarks came on Sunday, as he was addressing members of the International Catholic Legislators Network (ICLN), created in 2010 to discuss the promotion of Christian principles in the political arena.

With the patronage of Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna, Austria, and British parliamentarian Lord David Alton of Liverpool, it was founded by Dr. Christiaan Alting von Geusau of the Netherlands.

Speaking with Vatican Radio, Schönborn said that popes have always encouraged the group. He also said that Catholic politicians “find great encouragement from the Church’s approval to their commitment, because many times they feel quite alone in their parliaments as they have to face difficult situations.”

The scope of their annual meetings, he said, is to reinforce their faith which is the reason why the group has daily Mass, prays the Rosary together, and shares moments of Eucharistic adoration, in addition to having access to the sacrament of Reconciliation.

According to the network’s website, the ICLN meets near Rome each year at the end of August, bringing together some 120 people, including top-level politicians, to discuss urgent policy issues. The four-day event is held under the Chatham House Rule, with no journalists, press releases, or published speeches.

The Chatham House Rule, named after the headquarters of the UK Royal Institute of International Affairs, is invoked at meetings with the aim of providing anonymity to speakers and to encourage openness and the sharing of information.

In the case of the ICLN meetings, this applies also to the pope’s remarks, which is why Francis’s yearly addresses to the group haven’t been disclosed, nor those given by Benedict XVI on previous opportunities.

The list of topics discussed by the groups include abortion; euthanasia and assisted suicide; free market economy; communicating Catholic thought in secular politics, immigration and secularization and the persecution of Christians.

Among the participants of this year’s gathering was U.S. Congressman Alex Mooney (R-WV). Speaking with Vatican Radio, he said that it’s very “inspiring” to see “how people are fighting for family values.”

He defined the gathering as “an opportunity to meet here with other Catholic legislators and elected officials from other parts of the world, and to discuss common concerns - problems, opportunities - for our faith, and how to work together and support each other.”

At the end of the audience, when participants greeted the pope, there was a final twist definitely not on the official program: One participant took advantage of the moment to propose to his girlfriend in front of Francis.       Cruxnow

WCC: "an extraordinary ecumenical chance at this point" for hope and peace

August 29, 2017 3:47 PM

[WCC] The World Council of Churches (WCC) General Secretary, Revd Dr Olav Fykse Tveit, has reflected on the work of the ecumenical movement in 2017, describing the present as “an extraordinary ecumenical chance at this point in history.”

Addressing a week long conference of the International Ecumenical Fellowship in Wittenberg, in Germany, Revd Olav  reflected that, if we are living in a very dangerous phase of human history, we are also witnessing a moment of renewed hope for life.

“The tensions around the Korean Peninsula have brought us even closer to a nuclear stand-off during the last weeks,” he said. “In addition, the denial of global warming and its consequences and the violence and war in the Middle East and other regions are other factors darkening the horizon of the future of humankind.” In contrast to this bleak picture, however, more and more people are realising they cannot remain silent bystanders but must act.

“Was this not the case for so many who were moved and motivated by Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli or John Calvin at the time of the Reformation?” Revd Olav asked. “Of course, we learned that this momentum can get lost, can even be turned upside down as a legitimisation of human power and a justification for violence and war.”

Revd Olav also described the signs of hope he has seen in his travels. “I just visited the people and churches in the Pacific who still suffer the consequences of nuclear testing in their region and see their islands threatened by the consequences of climate change,” he said. “But they continue to celebrate life and to look out for the solidarity of their sisters and brothers worldwide that is so important for them.”

He also described the hope he felt when the WCC leadership met recently with Pope Francis for a private audience.

“There is only one common future and hope for all or there is no hope for the future at all,” he continued. “We have seen in the ecumenical movement how repentance and mutual accountability have contributed to the deepening of the fellowship and the capacity to address the dividing powers of this world.”

Rather than focusing on our enemies, we should pay attention to the forces that make people enemies to one another, he said. “We have to analyse how the polarizing and dividing powers that lead to conflict and war today are working against the will of God in this world.”

The churches are in many ways affected by the divisions of our times, Revd Olav continued. “In theological terms the lack of the capacity to relate to the other or the neighbour in responsible ways reflects the brokenness of community with the other and with God,” he said. “The continuing existence of injustice, racism, war, killings, persecution and despair driving people to flee from their dear homes and families reminds us that these are not just matters of history but remain a reality for Europe and the world today.”

Revd Olav urged people to see the value of moving forward together as churches in a pilgrimage of justice and peace. “We do have an extraordinary ecumenical chance at this point in history. Let us pray that we don’t miss it.”         Anglican News

Sunday as a rest day is slipping away across Europe

Delphine Allaire, August 28, 2017

Polish bishops cast a vote on Wednesday, 23 August, in favor of a complete ban on working on Sundays. In this fervently Catholic country legislation on Sunday work is relatively liberal.

Here is an overview of the European countries where Sunday is no longer an institutionalized rest day, despite regular pleas from religious communities.

“Catholics, non-Catholics, and atheists all need to have Sundays off," stated Stanislaw Gadecki, archbishop of Pozna (north-west Poland) and president of Poland’s Bishops’ Conference.

Even with the support of the independent Polish trade union Solidarnosc, the Polish Church hasn’t managed to instate a blanket ban on Sunday work. In this mostly Catholic country, people are allowed to work on Sundays and public holidays. 

The country’s conservative government is in favor of a ban but seems to be taking its time bringing about reforms, stating that it will address the issue in the autumn.

Religious and social interests united

Keen to avoid basing their whole position on religious arguments, Polish bishops also defend Sunday rest days by arguing for “quality of life”. “Families don’t just need financial support, they also need free time," said Wiktor Skworc, archbishop of Katowice (south-west Poland).

Legislation governing working on Sundays is constantly changing. However, across the rest of Europe, the main model remains a general ban with a range of exceptions. Christian leaders regularly reiterate the religious and social importance of this rest day.

Countries like Austria and Germany remain bastions of Sunday rest. Article 139 of the German constitution states: “Sundays and the public holidays recognized by the state remain legally protected as days of rest from work and of spiritual edification." In Belgium, only three non-rest Sundays are permitted per year, apart from in tourist cities.

However, in a number of other European countries including the UK, the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Hungary, Romania, the Czech Republic, Ireland, Italy, and Portugal as well as in the Spanish capital of Madrid, businesses are open 52 Sundays a year. In the strongly Catholic countries of Italy, Portugal, and Spain, heated public discussions erupt regularly.

In 2014, the Spanish bishop Vicente Jiménez called for a “united effort”, appealing to authorities to resist “economic pressures” liberalizing opening and working hours.

The Italian Bishops’ Conference has been doing a lot of background work to protect “workers’ rights to spend time with their families on Sundays”, supporting the country’s main business association, Confesercenti.

European and ecumenical support

Pitched at a pan-European scale, the “European Sunday Alliance”, was created in Brussels in 2011. This unites trade unions, social organizations, and religious communities, demonstrating the common ground between social and religious interests.

The Commission of the Bishops’ Conference of the European Community (COMECE), an affiliate of the Alliance, launched its program “for the protection of Sundays across Europe”, which was re-launched around the 2014 European elections. They stress the link between workers’ health and Sunday rest and underline the importance of Sundays for maintaining “social cohesion”. 

The European bishops argue that “a shared day of rest per week allows families to come together and means that citizens can spend time participating in cultural, spiritual and social activities".

John Paul II’s 1998 apostolic letter, Dies domini, reminds us that Sunday rest means we can “withdraw from the sometimes excessively demanding cycle of earthly tasks in order to renew our awareness that everything is the work of God".

This movement goes far beyond the Catholic community. Included in the list of organizations engaged at a European level are the German Protestant Church, the Anglican Church, the Orthodox Church of Cyprus, the Greek Orthodox Church’s representative to the European Union and the Baptist Union of Great Britain.           La Croix

Proof that the Burning of Jerusalem by the Babylonians was real

By Lulu Morris 03 August 2017

An excavation at The City of David in Jerusalem has unearthed an ancient biblical story.
 

Archaeologists at the site have exhumed burnt artefacts dated 2,600 years ago. The discovery of the artefacts solidifies the passage in the bible, where Jerusalem is burnt down by the Babylonians around 587 BC.

Researchers found burnt pieces of wood, grape seeds, burnt pottery and bone all concealed by layers of ash. The burning of Jerusalem was described in the Old Testament in the book of Jeremiah.

"Now on the seventh day of the fifth month, which was the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. He burned the house of the Lord, the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem; even every great house he burned with fire."

The archaeologists from the Israel Antiquities Authority were looking under layers of rock in the eastern area of the City of David when they found the artefacts. Alongside the burnt remains found were storage jars, many bearing stamped handles and rosette seals. The seals were the driving evidence that led the researchers to date the artefacts at 2,600 years. Dr Joel Uziel, the leader of the excavation, explains

“These seals are characteristic of the end of the First Temple Period, [They] were used for the administrative system that developed towards the end of the Judean dynasty."

Find ing the burnt pottery and artefacts in the dig site corroborate Jeremiah’s testament, though perhaps not to the extent he described it, but Jerusalem was at one point, during 587BC burnt to the ground by Babylonian invaders 2,600 years ago.         National Geographic

Four lethal connections between Big Pharma and some of our most popular consumer products

Cameron S. Bigger, August 15, 2017

Listed below are four lethal connections between Big Pharma and some of our most popular consumer products, of which all consumers deserve to be made aware.

 

Nestlé and Prometheus Therapeutics & Diagnostics

Nestlé is the world’s largest food & beverage corporation, owning more than 2,000 brands in 191 countries. The vast majority of Nestlé’s profits come from dairy-centric products. Some of their most popular brands include Gerber Baby, Nesquik Chocolate Milk, Toll House, Kit Kat, Crunch Bar, Hot Pockets, DiGiorno, Lean Cuisine, and Dreyer’s Ice Cream.

Nestlé also owns the pharmaceutical company Prometheus Therapeutics and Diagnostics, whose message to doctors is: “Prometheus is your partner in helping patients with chronic digestive disorders live active, healthy lives.”

Celiac disease is one of today’s most prevalent and lucrative digestive disorders, estimated to affect 1 in 100 people worldwide. Prometheus has its very own celiac disease website, which heavily warns against gluten intake, but doesn’t mention that a patient’s symptomatology could be caused by lactose intolerance, even though the symptoms of the two diseases are very similar, and it’s well recognized that celiac patients have a proven high chance of lactose intolerance. In fact, regarding the global rise in celiac disease prevalence, prominent celiac researcher Dr. Detlef Schuppan declared: “The amount of gluten ingested does not explain it.”

When a corporation so heavily profits from the commercial use of dairy, a well-known digestive irritant, while also profiting from prescribing treatments for the side effects of improper digestion, that is a major conflict of interest. If we continue to pay Nestlé $92.3B per year, watch celiac cases continue to skyrocket—even amidst all the new gluten-free options.

 

Johnson & Johnson and Janssen Pharmaceuticals

The main ingredient of Johnson & Johnson’s (JNJ) baby powder is talcum powder, or talc. Several studies have linked frequent usage of talc in the genital region to pelvic inflammation and an increased risk of ovarian cancer.

JNJ also owns Janssen Pharmaceuticals, who manufactures one of the top ovarian cancer chemotherapy drugs: Doxil. Doxil costs $2,758 per every 25ml. Ovarian cancer patients are recommended to have 50ml injected once a month for at least 4 monthly cycles. So, 50ml of Doxil, the monthly dosage, costs $5,516, and if repeated for 4 monthly cycles, as recommended, the total cost of Doxil treatment is $22,064.

In 2017, about 22,000 women in the U.S. will receive a new diagnosis of ovarian cancer, and about 14,000 U.S. women will die from ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer is ranked 5th among all cancer deaths in women, making it the most lethal form of cancer of the female reproductive system. Today, an American woman’s risk of developing ovarian cancer during her lifetime is around 1 in 75, and her chances of dying from ovarian cancer is around 1 in 100.

When we multiply the 22,000 thousand new U.S. cases of ovarian cancer per year by the $22,000 cost of a round of Doxil chemo, this comes out to a $484 million per year opportunity for JNJ. It should now be evident why Johnson & Johnson shouldn’t be allowed to sell talcum-laced baby powder while also selling ovarian cancer chemo treatments.

 

Merisant Sweeteners and vTv Therapeutics

Merisant is a top global manufacturer of artificial sweetener brands whose products are currently being sold in over 90 countries. Equal Zero Calorie Sweetener is Merisant’s flagship product, which produced sales of $36.2 million in 2014.

Merisant is owned by MacAndrews and Forbes, who also own vTv Therapeutics. vTv Therapeutics is a biopharmaceutical company engaged in the clinical-stage discovery and invention of treatments, primarily for Alzheimer’s disease and Type 2 Diabetes, as well as central nervous system diseases, metabolic disorders, inflammation, and cancer.

Now, one of Equal Sweetener’s main ingredients is aspartame. Human research has already proven aspartame’s connection to memory loss and learning impairment, and there is promising animal research indicating both aspartame’s role in promoting obesity by blocking gut enzyme activity and that aspartame induces significant increases in lymphomas and leukaemias at doses very near to those at which humans can be exposed.

Should we really continue to allow the people who so massively profit from selling aspartame-laced Equal Sweetener the opportunity to also own and sell the pharmaceuticals that deal with the side-effects of aspartame consumption?

 

Hearthside Food Solutions and 21st Century Oncology

Hearthside Food Solutions is the United States’ largest independent bakery, and the global food industry’s leader in the full-service contract manufacturing of processed grain-based foods and snacks, including baked goods, granola bars, snack bars, energy bars, cookies, crackers, pretzels, croutons, and breadcrumbs.

Hearthside is owned by Vestar Capital Partners, who also own 21st Century Oncology.

21st Century Oncology is a leading cancer-care service provider across multiple modalities, including colorectal, breast, uterine, and testicular cancers, and was also named the world’s largest radiation oncology provider, operating 179 global radiation centers, including 143 locations in 17 U.S. states.

While most people already know that eating processed grains is unhealthy, some might not be aware of the high correlation between the consumption of processed, simple carbs with certain types of cancer development, such as prostate, colorectal and uterine cancers, while on the contrary, choosing healthy, complex carbs like legumes and leafy greens is correlated with a significant reduction in the risk for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers.

Even the ultra-conservative American Cancer Society states on its website that “Food processing may alter foods in ways that might affect cancer risk. An example is the refining of grains, which greatly lowers the amount of fiber and other compounds that may reduce cancer risk.”

Should we really continue to allow the global leaders of processed grain-based foods and snacks the ability to also own the world’s largest tumor radiation company?       Walking Times

Cashless society, universal income and total control.

By Greg Hunter On August 16, 2017

Market analyst Lynette Zang says get ready for a “money standard shift.” A reset in how we buy and sell things is being put into place. Zang contends, “Look at the crypto currency area because they know that’s where they want to go. They have to take us there so they can get rid of cash, and they can control everything directly. . . . Generally speaking, all these new crypto coins that are coming out and are making lots of money and people marry that money because of nominal confusion, what is really happening is they are preparing us . . . for a money standard shift.”

Zang explains that the U.S. dollar has lost about 96% of its value since inception of the Federal Reserve, and its value is “nearing the bottom. . . . So, there is no place else to go but to digital currency,” says Zang.

On interest rates, Zang says with all the massive debt out there globally, rates cannot be allowed to rise, and central bankers “need interest rates to be negative.” Zang says, “Interest rates will not go up too much further because that will trigger the derivative market unless they are ready for the shift . . . because all that debt keeps coming due. It’s not like they are paying that debt off, they are just rolling it into additional debt. Rising interest rates will cost everybody more money.”

If rates go up to around 4%, Zang contends, “That would be a trigger and cause a derivative event that will implode all the markets.”

Zang says we are headed towards an undemocratic technocratic financial system. Zang explains, “Technocrats don’t care about people, they care about systems. That’s what the most important thing is. The formulas that guide all of those systems is not how a democracy works. . . . Essentially, what they are trying to do is get all wealth held in cyberspace and the title to all wealth held in cyberspace. Then the “Smart Contract” can immediately transfer that title. You can go to the mall and spend the equity in your house.”

Zang warns that central banks could make a big mistake and lose control quickly. Zang says, “They could lose control because it’s all about confidence. Why do they keep testing all of this confidence? People have been losing a lot of confidence in the governments and central banks. Why do they need a trustless system? They could lose control.”

Zang says every fiat currency will reset against gold and silver, and if it happened today, she estimates “gold would be more than $9,300 per ounce” and “silver would be more than $625 per ounce.”  Zang says, given all the unpayable debt in the world, those are conservative estimates.     USA watchdog

Influential Chinese economist warns country's debt becoming problem

18 August 2017

China’s growing debt is affecting the country and the global economy, according to Charlene Chu, an influential China analyst. 

Everyone knows there’s a credit problem in China, but I find that people often forget about the scale. It’s important in global terms," Chu said in an interview with the Financial Times.

Chu, who made her name warning of the risks from China’s credit binge, has predicted that by the end of the year, the country will accumulate $7.6 trillion worth of the so-called "bad" debt.

The comment came the day after the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned that Chinese debt could be the reason for the next financial crisis as borrowing becomes unsustainable.

"International experience suggests that China’s credit growth is on a dangerous trajectory, with increasing risks of a disruptive adjustment or a marked growth slowdown," the IMF report said.

The IMF said China needed three times as much credit last year to achieve the same amount of growth as in 2008.

A report in June by the Institute of International Finance (IIF) said China's total debt was over 304 percent of GDP as of May this year.

Moreover, “the household debt-to-GDP ratio hit an all-time high of over 45 percent in the first quarter of 2017 —well above the Emerging Market average of around 35 percent,” the IIF said.

Since the 2008 financial crisis, China has become the growth engine of the global economy. The country has contributed to more than half the increase in world's GDP in recent years.   RT

Research group finds 267 contaminants in tap water in the U.S.

Anna Hunt,  August 9, 2017

Research conducted by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) revealed that hundreds of contaminants are present in U.S. tap water. To be exact, EWG revealed that 267 out of 500 contaminants were detected during tests conducted by more than 48,000 utilities companies across 50 states. This shows that no matter where you live in the U.S., your tap water is very likely contaminated.

Of the 267 contaminants found,

• 93 were linked to an increased risk of cancer,
• 78 were associated with brain and nervous system damage,
• 63 were connected to developmental harm in children or fetuses,
• 38 were contaminants that could cause fertility issues; and
• 45 were endocrine disruptors.

Here are a couple more important details about EWG’s findings:

• Over 80% of water systems had known or likely carcinogens at levels that exceeded health guidelines
• More than 19,000 public water system had lead levels considered potentially-harmful for formula-fed babies, at above 3.8 parts per billion

EWG publishes a public database where you can enter your ZIP code to see what’s in your tap water. Just follow this link. You can gather information about which contaminants were detected, which are present in levels above health guidelines, and what to do to filter them out.

In the U.S., the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 sets the national standards for drinking water. However, it’s been more than 20 years since the Environmental Protection Agency added any new contaminants or chemicals to the list of regulated pollutants defined under the act. Nneka Leiba, director of the Healthy Living Science Program for the EWG, stated:

“Most people turn on their tap water and think: It’s clear, I live in America, we have these laws, I’m being protected. What people don’t realize is that there have been no additions to the list of regulated chemicals for drinking water since 1996.”

The main concern isn’t so much that you’ll get sick when drinking tap water. What the EWG worries about is the effect of long-term exposure, such as drinking eight glasses per day over a lifetime.

“Legal doesn’t necessarily mean safe when it comes to drinking water,” added Leiba.

Bottled Water Is No Better Alternative

If you’re currently drinking tap water, you are most likely putting contaminants in your body.

Many people think that drinking bottled water is an acceptable alternative. The EWG doesn’t agree. The group analyzed bottled water products. It published the analysis in its Bottled Water Scorecard. It concluded the following:

The bottled water industry routinely fails to provide information to consumers about the water’s specific geographic source, purification methods and the results of purity testing.

So, it seems bottled water may be just as bad, but we won’t ever really know. Why? Because the government doesn’t require bottled water producers to disclose what toxins contaminate their products. In addition, bottles leach plastics chemicals into the water over time, especially if you store the bottles in hotter temperatures. Finally, bottled water costs up to 1,900 times more than tap water.     More

The Unknown Reasons Doctors Push Vaccines

By Catherine J. Frompovich

Blue Cross, Blue Shield, Blue Care Network of Michigan publishes online a shameless and bold report of how much cash they reward physicians for performing certain tests, and which apparently acts as an incentive to over-prescribe, thus inflating the costs of U.S. healthcare, which should be illegal.

Blue Cross/Blue Shield published the 2016 Performance Recognition Program, a 28-page report indicating how medical insurance companies actually increase the costs of healthcare!

Look what we find on the BC/BS page “Childhood Immunizations—Combo 10”!

If MDs meet a target of 63% of eligible member patients, they will receive a payout of $400 per completed eligible member.  Wow!  Now you know one of the key reasons why parents are hounded to vaccinate their infants and toddlers.  Gelt, pecunia, greenbacks—whatever you call M-O-N-E-Y.

Parents should note in the State of Michigan, 2 influenza (flu) vaccines are required for a child by 2 years of age.  No consideration, however, is given to the biochemical fact flu vaccines actually weaken the immune system [1] long-term.

Furthermore, according to Dr. Joseph Mercola, DO, “Foreign DNA/RNA from animal tissues [components of vaccines] can wreak havoc in your body and trigger autoimmunity in some people.” [1]

Get a load of this: U.S. News reported “Flu Vaccine Ineffective for People 65 and Older Last Winter” [2016-17].  The News subtitle for that article was Officials: Last winter’s flu vaccine was essentially ineffective in protecting older Americans against the illness.

With this candid admission:

But flu is particularly challenging. Over the last ten winters, overall flu vaccine effectiveness has averaged about 46 percent. [A “pig-in-a-poke”?]
Source: above U.S. News report

And yet doctors are incentivized to earn ‘prize money’ for pushing flu vaccines on infants and adults!

Are you aware physicians/MDs even earn “stars” for how many medical tests they prescribe per member, per month for Medicare PRP measures?  Page No. 17

How about $250 per service completed for each eligible member providing an MD has reached a 68% target for diabetes type 1 and 2!  However, there are exclusions to earning those cash rewards: “Diagnosis of gestational or steroid-induced diabetes, in any setting, during 2015 or 2016 …” [Page 18], which means diabetes during pregnancy or prescription steroid-induced diabetes!  Did you know steroids can give you diabetes? Would that fall under the category of “iatrogenesis” [3]? Here are the top ten steroids prescribed.

If a doctor achieves 75% target, then he/she will receive $100 per service completed for each eligible member for controlling hypertension (high blood pressure).  Page No. 20   Is that why some patients can be taking as many as three blood pressure meds at the same time?

How ironic!  The medical profession years ago was so anxious to promote cigarette smoking in advertisements of the 1940s [2], but now MDs can earn $30 per Smoking/Tobacco Cessation counselling for each eligible member.  Page No. 23

How much did the tobacco companies pay MDs for their ‘testimonials’?  Subsequently, that tobacco industry–medical profession grave scientific and medical mistake is referred to as ‘tobacco science’.

In my opinion, medical professionals, who huckster their credentials as MDs did with tobacco use, need to be taken less seriously as to how much they really know about medical science and biochemistry.  Essentially, are some con-artists?

All the above may seem incredulous to parents, especially those with vaccine-injured children, as to why pediatricians and family physicians push vaccines so rabidly.   Well, nothing explains the unconscionable reasoning and actions physicians take regarding mandating vaccines than the old adage:

“Follow the money”!  And here’s proof!

Blue Cross Blue Shield Pays Your Doctor A $40,000 Bonus For Fully Vaccinating 100 Patients Under The Age of 2
If your pediatrician recommends that your child under the age of 2 receive the flu vaccine–even though the flu vaccine has never been studied in very young children and evidence suggests that the flu vaccine actually weakens a person’s immune system over the long term–ask yourself:  Is my doctor more concerned with selling me vaccines to keep my child healthy or to send his child to private school? [CJF emphasis]
Source

Let’s add to that one more obvious criterion—out of many—why vaccines are pushed as the best ‘health’ preventive measure ever invented.  Vaccines fall under the purview of the U.S. military, which drives the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which owns numerous vaccine patents.

According to Sayer Ji of Green Med Info:

There are CDC patents applicable to vaccines for Flu, Rotavirus, Hepatitis A, HIV, Anthrax, Rabies, Dengue fever, West Nile virus, Group A Strep, Pneumococcal disease, Meningococcal disease, RSV, Gastroenteritis, Japanese encephalitis, SARS, Rift Valley Fever, and chlamydophila pneumoniae.
There is a CDC patent for “Nucleic acid vaccines for prevention of flavivirus infection,” which has applications in vaccines for Zika, West Nile virus, Dengue fever, tick-borne encephalitis virus, yellow fever, Palm Creek virus, and Parramatta River virus.
CDC also has several patents for administering various”shots” via aerosol delivery systems for vaccines.
There’s a CDC patent on a process for vaccine quality control by “quantifying proteins in a complex preparation of uni- or multivalent commercial or research vaccine preparations.”
There’s a CDC patent on a method “for producing a model for evaluating the antiretroviral effects of drugs and vaccines.” [4]

Here’s what every person needs to factor into the U.S. medical/health insurance system and its pervasive  cult or religious-like belief regarding vaccines, which are nothing short of neurotoxic cocktails pumped into infants, toddlers, teens, adults and seniors:

The average American pediatrician has 1546 patients, though some pediatricians see many more. The vast majority of those patients are very young, perhaps because children transition to a family physician or stop visiting the doctor at all as they grow up. As they table above explains, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays pediatricians $400 per fully vaccinated child. If your pediatrician has just 100 fully-vaccinated patients turning 2 this year, that’s $40,000. Yes, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays your doctor a $40,000 bonus for fully vaccinating 100 patients under the age of 2. If your doctor manages to fully vaccinate 200 patients, that bonus jumps to $80,000. (Source: CongitiveTruths.com)

Healthcare consumers, it’s not about health; apparently it’s about follow the money, even if it harms innocent children and adults!  Please consider all the above as only one of the reasons why U.S. healthcare and health insurance cost so !@#$%^&* much.          Activist Post

References:

[1] http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/11/01/flu-vaccine-and-its-side-effects.aspx

[2] http://tobacco.stanford.edu/tobacco_main/images.php?token2=fm_st001.php&token1=fm_img0071.php&theme_file=fm_mt001.php&theme_name=Doctors%20Smoking&subtheme_name=More%20Doctors%20Smoke%20Camels

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iatrogenesis

[4] http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/examining-rfk-jrs-claim-cdc-owns-over-20-vaccine-patents

First GMO salmon in the world offered in Canada

RT, 10 Aug, 2017

Food safety activists and environmentalists are concerned over the potential risks from a new US brand of genetically-modified salmon, which has just hit Canadian shelves. Some believe Canadians are being used as guinea pigs for potentially harmful technology.

After trying for two decades, AquaBounty Technologies’ GM salmon was finally approved for sale in Canada in 2016, which led to the most recent developments.

The company’s GM salmon can grow twice as large as conventionally-farmed Atlantic salmon, according to the Guardian. The accelerated growth means the fish will reach adult size in 18 months rather than the typical 30 months. This process is established by modifying the firm’s Atlantic salmon with a growth hormone gene taken from Chinook salmon. The company also claims that their salmon consume 20 to 25 percent less food per gram of new flesh.

"The sale and discussions with potential buyers clearly demonstrate that customers want our fish, and we look forward to increasing our production capacity to meet demand," Ronald Stotish, chief executive of AquaBounty, said in a statement last Friday.

Despite the company’s positive outlook for buyers, a large backlash has been ignited by several groups and organizations who disagree with the idea of selling GM food.

IGA and Costco supermarkets posted on their websites that they do not intend to sell the salmon.

Environmentalist groups are outraged by the new product.

The Montreal-based organization GMO Vigilance has stated on their website that the sale of the salmon in Canada makes Canadians “guinea pigs,” and they believe that the government should introduce legislation that requires GM foods to be labeled appropriately.

"It's a world first … The first genetically modified animal is on the market, and consumers in Quebec and Canada will become the first guinea-pigs unknowingly. In the absence of mandatory labeling we still cannot make an informed choice,” Thibault Rehn, a coordinator at GMO Vigilance, said, according to CNBC.

Lucy Sharratt of Canadian Biotechnology Action Network said, “The company did not disclose where the GM salmon fillets were sold or for what purpose, and we’re shocked to discover that they’ve entered the market at this time,” the Guardian reported.

A 2015 case brought by environmentalist groups against the Canadian government over its approval of the GM salmon stated, among other charges, that there is a risk of the GM salmon mixing with wild fish.          More

Sleeping less that 6 hours severely damages your brain

By Phoebe Weston For Mailonline 8 August 2017

Regularly getting less than six hours sleep a night could cause the same long-term damage as alcohol abuse, according to a worrying new study. 

For the body, sleep deprivation results in increased risk of obesity, depression, heart attacks and strokes - causing experts to dub it the 'modern ill'.

However, the most worrying consequences are rooted in the brain and new research suggests the effects are far more destructive than previously thought.

Research suggests that being awake for 18 hours results in the same cognitive impairment people get from being drunk.  

This is so severe that driving while sleep deprived could be as dangerous as driving when drunk, researchers found.

Researchers from Quebec-based digital health company Medisys found people who regularly got less than six hours of sleep a night could suffer terrible cumulative health effects they may be oblivious to.

Although the odd night sleeping just six hours or less will not have a significant effect, frequently not sleeping enough is very dangerous, researchers found. 

Sleep affects hunger hormones

'Sleep plays an important role in regulating the hormones that influence hunger (ghrelin, cortisol, and leptin) that's why sleep deprivation increases appetite and leads to overeating and weight gain', neuroscientist Dr Adrian Owen at Western University, who also works with Medisys, told Digital Journal.

Researchers found your brain becomes less stable for the longer you remain wake - which reduces your attention, ability to focus and use your brain on specific tasks. 

Recent reports have suggested 1 in 3 Canadians are chronically sleep-deprived.

The brain 'eats' itself 

The news comes on the heels of research that showed having too little sleep causes the brain to eat itself if it hasn't had enough sleep.

In May researchers studied lab mice, and found that 'clean-up' cells were more active in their brains when they were sleep-deprived.

The cells, known as astrocytes, act like mini Hoovers in the brain, sweeping up cells as the brain's connections become weak and break apart.

'We show for the first time that portions of synapses are literally eaten by astrocytes because of sleep loss,' lead author Michele Bellesi told New Scientist.

According to the research team at Italy's Marche Polytechnic University, the seemingly alarming process is actually a positive thing.

Researchers found your brain becomes less stable for the longer you remain wake - which reduces your attention, ability to focus and use your brain on specific tasks (stock image)

'They [our synpases] are like old pieces of furniture,' Bellesi said. 'And so [they] probably need more attention and cleaning.'

But he added that sleep-deprived brains showed ominous signs of activity that leads to Alzheimer's.

In sleep-deprived mice, brain cells called microglials were more active.

'We already know that sustained microglial activation has been observed in Alzheimer's and other forms of neurodegeneration,' Michele said.         Dailymail

Who controls what we eat in the food industry?

Most of us have little to no idea how behind-the-scenes forces control the food we buy, and the depth of the corruption involved. Philip Howard, Ph.D., author of "Concentration and Power in the Food System: Who Controls What We Eat?," studies food system changes, with an emphasis on visualizing these trends.¹

"My motivation [for writing the book] was to uncover what's going on, to help people understand who owns what and all the strategies these dominant firms use to further increase their power," he says.

His work has been featured by many prominent media outlets, including The New York Times, The Washington Post and Chicago Tribune. He's an associate professor in the department of community sustainability at Michigan State University and holds a Ph.D. in rural sociology.

Endgame: Global Monopolization

One fact that many don't realize is just how few firms control the global food system, from seeds to supermarkets. As noted by Howard:

"The trend in most industries is for fewer and fewer firms to increase their power. One really dramatic example is the beer industry. Four firms headquartered in Europe brew about half the world's beer. That's going to go down to three very soon, because Anheuser-Busch InBev is acquiring SABMiller.

Even if you're a very dominant firm, you're caught up in this system where you have to get bigger or become acquired by your big competitors. But it's resulting in less and less people making decisions about the food we eat. There's even speculation that InBev is not increasing its sales enough, even with this acquisition, so they're going to have to acquire a big soft drink firm, perhaps even Coke or Pepsi."

With its $103 billion acquisition of SABMiller, InBev is now one of the three largest food firms in the world. InBev also owns Anheuser-Busch, which produces Budweiser, one of the most well-known beer brands in the world. In some parts of the world, such as in Africa and Latin America, InBev has already established a monopoly.
Antitrust rules and regulations enacted by the federal government are meant to prevent these types of monopolies. In fact, when large corporations want to buy other large corporations, a rigorous evaluation process is required before they're authorized to merge. So how is it that this kind of monopoly-building is still happening? Howard explains:

"In the early 1900s, there were a number of laws passed to prevent these trusts, these combinations that resulted in monopolies in these markets. That changed dramatically beginning in the 1980s. Reagan was elected. He directed the heads of federal agencies to take a very different view towardtowards mergers and acquisitions.

At the same time, federal judges were being indoctrinated into the Chicago School of Economics. They got paid to go on these junkets to Arizona, Florida, places like that. They played golf. Then they attended these seminars where they were taught mergers and acquisitions that, unless they immediately raised prices for consumers, were good for everyone.

As a result of just one of those programs, by the early '90s, two-thirds of federal judges had participated. It's essentially impossible to win an antitrust case in the federal courts now."

The truth is, monopolies really only benefit the corporations in question, not the population at large. It merely reinforces the company's power, including their political clout. Many multinational corporate executives even serve on federal advisory committees and global trade agreement working groups.
Some of these international trade deals are kept secret even from the U.S. Congress, yet executives from large multinational firms are present during the negotiations. When large companies are able to influence the very regulatory agencies that are chartered to regulate them, they're able to circumvent the regulatory process, forming what is essentially a cartel.

"A good example is the seed industry. It was taken over by big chemical companies beginning in the 1980s. We got down to just six firms. Previously, there were over 30 firms. These big six chemical companies, which are also seed companies, have cross-licensing agreements for genetically engineered (GE) technologies.

The commodity farmers that want these GE traits, like herbicide resistance — the independent seed companies cannot access those technologies. They either become acquired by these firms or end up going out of business. Right now, it's possible that those big six will be reduced to just three.

BASF … has gotten out of the seed sales. Bayer's trying to acquire Monsanto, Dow and DuPont are planning to merge … [and] ChemChina, a Chinese-owned chemical company, is acquiring Syngenta."

Seed Monopolies Created by Chemical Companies

Monsanto is the classic example of the revolving door between government and industry. "There are people who just go back and forth between Monsanto and the agencies that are supposed to be regulating that firm," Howard notes. Without a doubt, this influence is part of Monsanto's success.
The patenting of seeds and the subsequent restrictions on seed have led to what is essentially a takeover of the farming industry by chemical companies. The patenting of seeds benefits these companies in multiple ways. Not only do farmers have to purchase new seed each year, since the patents do not allow for saving or sharing of seeds, these GE crops also demand certain chemicals to be used with them, which of course these companies also make and sell.

"Monsanto is using very strong intellectual property protections on seeds in the U.S. and trying to extend that model all over the world. With the trade agreements, they're forcing other countries to change their laws to protect companies like Monsanto, rather than allowing farmers to save and replant seeds. In the U.S., some farmers have even gone to prison for saving seeds, not to mention the millions of dollars in fines," Howard says.

There are many reasons to suspect GE seeds were developed to increase chemical sales, as most of the stated benefits of GE seeds have actually turned out to be false. As just one example, Monsanto insisted it was biologically impossible for weeds to develop resistance against glyphosate, yet resistant superweeds have now taken over more than 60 million acres of U.S. croplands.²
The chemical biotechnology industry's answer is to develop crops resistant to more toxic herbicides, but anyone with half a brain should realize that this "solution" will only aggravate the problem, creating weeds resistant to these more potent toxins as well. Sooner or later, we have to get off the chemical treadmill or foods will be too toxic to eat even in the short term.

Despite Grave Concerns, Beneficial Changes Are Also Afoot

In his book, Howard explores the entire supply chain, from seed to farm, to processing and distribution to the retail market, looking at how things have changed over the years. For example, in 1937, there were nearly 6.8 million farmers in the U.S., which at that time had a population of about 100 million. Today, we have fewer than 2 million farmers, with a population of more than 325 million.³
What's worse, an estimated two-thirds of the farm commodities sold in the U.S. come from just 100,000 farms, and these middle-to-large-scale farms just keep getting bigger. The reasons for this trend are manifold, but government subsidies play a significant role. About 85 percent of federal subsidies go to the top 10 percent of farms, which reinforces their advantages, allowing them to expand and buy out neighboring farms.
There are some very clear and real concerns about our food distribution system. But while the situation can seem depressing, beneficial changes are also occurring. As noted by Howard:

"There are a lot of efforts to resist these trends … [B]ig firms are getting bigger … because they have no other way to grow. Beer sales in the U.S., for example, are really leveled off, except for the craft brew segment. We've had this dramatic increase in the number of breweries in the U.S., thousands and thousands now.

Their percentage in sales is well over 10 percent. If you just look at the beer aisle in your supermarket, there's a lot more choice than there was 10 or definitely 20 years ago. One response the big brewers have tried, just in the last few years, is buying up some of those craft breweries.

But the genie is out of the bottle. People have moved away from those macrobrews. They're not increasing their sales at all — that's why they're having to look at other parts of the world for growth.

There are many [other] examples like [that] in other parts of the food system. Heritage breed turkeys, for example. The numbers have gone way up even though in the 2000s, there were less than 2,000 turkeys in the entire U.S. that weren't broad-breasted white. People are creating more and more of these alternatives. It's just hard to find them and support them."

Needless to say, one alternative is to grow some of your own food. We cannot all grow all kinds of food or raise all of our own livestock, but most people can grow something. At present, I grow about half of all the food I eat in any given week. As noted by Howard:

"Even if you have no space, you can grow some sprouts, for example. You just become a little bit self-sufficient in that way. If you don't have any space at all to even have a container garden, then you can make connections with local farmers.

There are more and more community-supported agriculture farms and cooperatives where farmers come together at a drop-off point once a month, and buy-ing clubs. It's really encouraging to see that people are really fed up with the industrial food system and are finding all these alternatives and we're creating more spaces for them to thrive."

How Corporate Takeovers and Mergers Impact Food Quality

Howard discusses many interesting case samples in his book, including that of Silk Soy milk, which is a powerful illustration of how food quality is impacted when a small, integrity-based brand is acquired by a large conventional entity. Personally, I do not recommend drinking soy milk. It's unhealthy for a number of very good reasons, its lectin content being a major detriment.
Nevertheless, Steve Demos, who started the Silk brand sincerely believed soy milk was a healthy product. One of the limitations he faced was breaking into conventional supermarkets, because they charge slotting fees to the tune of billions of dollars per year. To get a single product into a regional supermarket chain can cost tens of thousands of dollars. The way Demos was able to implement his vision was by approaching big firms like Coca-Cola.
One of the companies he secured funding from was Dean Foods. They paid the slotting fees to get Silk soy milk into the supermarkets. The brand grew exponentially, and at one point, Silk had over three-quarters of all soy milk sales, which is more or less a monopoly. The price Demos paid was losing control of his company to his investors. Dean Foods eventually acquired 100 percent of the company, and Demos was unable to block the takeover.

"Not surprisingly, Dean Foods reduced its commitment to organic ingredients. They reduced the commitment to sourcing North American soybeans. They started sourcing soybeans from China and Brazil. They went from a 100 percent organic firm to maybe 6 percent organic today," Howard says.

Stonyfield is another example of a company whose founder was an idealistic and altruistic person dedicated to providing the best product possible, but who eventually lost control of the company in his effort to grow. In the process, the quality of the product was lowered as well.

"Stonyfield was an interesting case because Gary Hirshberg, the founder, had to pay off all his investors, his friends and family that helped him create this firm. He also wanted to make those products available to more consumers.

He spent a long time negotiating a buyout with Danone, the French yogurt company. But its contention was on increasing sales, so they had to water down some of their ideals, like their commitment to organic, to increase sales. Now, they're very vulnerable. They could end up becoming a part of a foreign firm."

Examples of Companies That Refused to Sell Out

On a more positive note, some firms have resisted tremendous buyout offers, refusing to sacrifice their ideals. One example is Clif Bar. At the last minute, Gary Erickson walked away from a $60 million offer by Quaker Oats, a division of Pepsi, because he saw that many of the promises made early on in the negotiations were being reneged. He didn't feel confident they would maintain the commitment to his ideals. So, Clif Bar is still independent, and the company is giving money to a number of environmental causes.
Another intriguing example is Eden Foods, which has held very high organic standards right from the start — so high, in fact, they refused to put the USDA organic label on their food, even though it was organic, because they thought the organic label had been compromised. According to Howard:

"They're a firm that's had a commitment to sourcing from local suppliers and not [using] a lot of synthetic processing aids. They were opposed to the watering down of organic processing standards to allow synthetics. They still don't put the USDA organic label on their products. They were pretty fortunate.

They've been around so long — since the '70s — that their integrity is well-known to a certain number of consumers. They were able to get into a distribution system. It's very likely if they were trying to start out today, they would never make it. It's unfortunate more people don't know which companies are independent, companies like Nature's Path and Bob's Red Mill.

Bob actually hired someone specifically to fend off buyout offers. They would just tell people who inquired 'no.' They never even told Bob the amounts he was being offered. Bob's Red Mill and Clif Bar have both gone into an employee stock ownership program rather than to just sell out to the highest bidder."

Distribution Monopolies

The manufacturing and distribution parts of the supply chain are somewhat mysterious behind-the-scenes components of the food system that few people fully understand. First, the base ingredients have to be made, and then someone has to combine them and put them in a box. Oftentimes, different companies are hired to do certain steps of the process.
When you delegate these responsibilities to other companies, you can easily run into problems, even if they're well-intentioned, as everyone is looking for ways to cut costs. Some ethically challenged companies may sell you subpar ingredients, for example. But even when the ingredients are high quality, the food is still processed, which affects the food's nutritional value. Part of the solution is preparing your foods from scratch. Then you can bypass these hidden pitfalls.
Next, the food has to be distributed from the manufacturing facility to storage facilities and, ultimately, to stores. Howard explains some of the complexities involved, and the problem with monopolization in this area:

"You're getting things from point A to point B, sometimes with refrigeration. We had a cooperative distribution system in the 1980s. We had dozens of cooperatively owned distributors across the U.S. that distributed organic and natural foods. But as the industry grew, they couldn't keep up. They didn't have the capital to buy more trucks and warehouses and so on.

A company called United Natural Foods swooped in and acquired the two largest remaining cooperative distributors back in 2002. They're now publicly traded. Their main customer is Whole Foods. For the broader national distribution of foods, there's Sysco. At just about any restaurant you go to, you will see a Sysco truck.

They have one major competitor — U.S. Foods. At the time I wrote the book, Sysco was planning to acquire U.S. Foods. Meaning, all of these people who pitted them against each other to get better deals weren't going to have that option.

This is one of those things I wasn't expecting, but it was so clear that there were only two firms at that scale that the U.S. government actually undid that acquisition. So, there are still two, although they both continue to acquire a number of other smaller distributors."

Helpful Resources

Even though the facts are quite disheartening, there is something you, your family and friends can do to change this sad state of affairs. Remember, you have a very powerful resource — you can vote with your pocketbook, which is the ultimate arbiter of corporate behavior. Howard ends his book with resources you can use to help you make more educated choices, including the following:

• GoodGuide.com, which is also available as an app, has a database covering 75,000 products. You can take a picture of a barcode or type in the product name and get a score for the company's environmental, social and health impact, compared to other products in that category. It'll also provide ownership information, so you can see which parent company you're actually supporting with your purchase
• Buycott.com has both a website and an app that allow you to vote with your wallet by learning a product's history and ownership, and avoid companies that are being boycotted for various reasons, such as those using chocolate produced by child slaves, or those using genetically modified ingredient              Dr Mercola