Why are so many questioning vaccines?
May 23rd, 2019
| 
Author: 
Why are so many questioning vaccines?
People are labeling anyone questioning the safety of vaccines as ‘anti-vaxxers’. Since when is questioning the safety of a product, especially one used on our babies and elderly a bad thing?
Since 1986 the vaccine companies have ZERO liability if their products injure or kill you or your child. Can you imagine if the auto industry had zero liability? How are we expected to have confidence in a company that does not have to stand behind their product? How does no liability make them care about safety?
As part of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, there was supposed to be ongoing safety testing. It’s never happened. In 1986 vaccines were a billion dollar a year business and kids got 7-8 vaccines, now it’s a 50 billion dollar business with 69 doses (never tested together for safety) and there are hundreds of vaccines in the works. No wonder the companies want vaccines mandated. Pharmaceutical companies also buy approximately 70 percent of all advertising. That gives them quite a bit of control over the media. Merck is the company who makes the MMR vaccine. Merck is also the company that paid out 830 millon dollars in settlements when they were convicted of selling Vioxx while knowing it was killing people.
Vaccines have not been proven safe – The average testing time for vaccines is 2- 4 days! Compare this with drugs like Lipitor, which had a testing period of 4.8 years. The gold standard of medical testing is the double blind placebo test. This has never been performed on any vaccine. Most of the studies use another vaccine for the control group. That is not science, that’s company sponsored tobacco science. There has only been one study that compared vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children. The children who were not vaccinated were much healthier: https://www.nvic.org/nvic-vaccine-news/august-2017/survey-shows-vaccinated-children-get-sicker.aspx
This is one of the best presentations I’ve seen on vaccine safety, please watch and share:
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/vsp/
There’s a top CDC scientist that has come out as a whistleblower with proof that a study showing an MMR/ Autism connection was altered at the CDC.
It’s not the viruses in the vaccines that are the problem but the adjuncts. Aluminum, thiomersal (a mercury based preservative), formaldehyde and others. These are proven neurotoxins and given in amounts that are beyond the safe adult threshold, let alone for infants. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/interwoven-global-epidemics-mercury-toxicity-autism/
“In young children, a highly significant correlation exists between the number of pediatric aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines administered and the rate of autism spectrum disorders.” — C. A. Shaw, MD, Vaccine safety researcher
Vaccines have not been proven effective. There’s a US Navy ship that’s been quarantined at sea for three months with a mumps outbreak. They are 100% vaccinated. There was a recent outbreak of whooping cough at a school in LA and every child who contracted it was vaccinated. They are adding more and more boosters because vaccines are failing. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/failure-to-vaccinate-or-vaccine-failure-what-is-driving-disease-outbreaks/
When the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed the Federal Government took over liability for vaccine injuries and deaths with the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. They only pay out for proven vaccine injuries and have paid out over 4 billion dollars to date.
What percentage of the decision makers at CDC and FDA have financial ties to the vaccine industry? Way too many. This is unconscionable and a breech of ethics. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/why-you-cant-trust-the-cdc-on-vaccines/
Why are they fighting so hard to sensor safety questions if they have nothing to hide?
I think vaccines could be a wonderful thing if they were safe and effective. Right now there is no proof that they are either.
The pharmaceutical companies can try to censor free speech all they want but us mama bears will never stop protecting our babies and grand-babies.
Mom
A few notes:
Robert F Kennedy, one of the top environmental attorneys of our time has a lot to say about vaccine safety. Learn more here: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/
The National Vaccine Information Center has links to numerous government studies and unbiased, factual information about vaccines. https://www.nvic.org/
Lots of great info from Del Bigtree and Highwire here: https://thehighwire.com/
“Labeling people concerned about the safety of vaccines as
“anti-vaccine” risks entrenching positions. The label (or its derogatory
derivative “anti-vaxxer”) is a form of attack. It stigmatizes the mere
act of even asking an open question about what is known and unknown about the
safety of vaccines… the label too quickly assumes that there are “two sides” to
every question, and that the “two sides” are polar opposites. This
“you’re either with us or against us” thinking is unfit for medicine.”
~ Dr. Peter Doshi, Associate Editor, British Medical Journal (BMJ)
Posted in 
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Press Conference – The Science of Vaccines Forum
It’s a bit fuzzy and takes a few minutes – the news conference starts about 9 minutes in – this is critical information for all of us.
After you’ve watched the video, I recommend you go to the Children’s Health Defense website. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/
Please learn and share. We can all get this information out and protect our children.
Love,
Mom
Vaccinations in the news – Part 2
Why are we talking about vaccinations in the past few months instead of food? Good question. It’s because the pharmaceutical industry is doing what the GMO industry tried to but couldn’t. They are trying to suppress valid safety questions about their products that are hurting our children.
Our main goal at Moms for Safe Food is to protect our children so this issue is very relevant to their health.
Mom
This is a great interview with a practicing pediatrician. A scientist did research on his patients and the results are eye opening and very important.
The below is a very good interview with a pediatrician, who documents the outcomes of his patients, both vaccinated and vaccinated. Important info for all of us.
Aluminum and the Neurotoxicity of Vaccines
“No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable…for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.” — President Ronald Reagan, as he signed The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986, absolving drug companies from all medico-legal liability when children die or are disabled from vaccine injuries.
“In young children, a highly significant correlation exists between the number of pediatric aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines administered and the rate of autism spectrum disorders.” — C. A. Shaw, MD, Vaccine safety researcher
“…no adequate studies have been conducted to assess the safety of simultaneous administration of different vaccines to young children.” Nor has there been “ any toxicological evaluation about concomitant administration of aluminum with other known toxic compounds which are routine constituents of commercial vaccine preparations, e.g., formaldehyde, formalin, mercury, phenoxyethanol, phenol, sodium borate, polysorbate 80, glutaraldehyde.” — L. Tomljenovic and C.A. Shaw, Vaccine safety researchers
In the last few decades since the “mysterious” autism epidemic began in the late 1980s, the giant pharmaceutical companies, free from the constraints of medico-legal liability, began pumping out more and more highly profitable vaccines, and their lobbyists in D.C., their well-paid spokespersons and the industry-co-opted “regulatory agencies” (like WHO, the CDC, the FDA and NIH) rejoiced.
Then, in 1996, the Big Pharma corporate machine and lobbyists got the US Congress to do its bidding and legalize direct-to-consumer advertising for its products, which up to then was illegal. And Big Pharma has also been bribing most US Congresspersons with lavish campaign donations and totally dominated the mainstream media debates that come up from time to time concerning drug and vaccine injuries, intoxication, sickness and death.. Up until now they have also succeeded in silencing the thousands of anguished parents of vaccine-injured children who are just trying to tell their tragic stories.
At least partly because of the dire financial consequences that these industries may have to face if the stories were to be widely told, these parents and their advocates have been essentially black-balled by every media outlet that takes advertising dollars from Big Pharma. The black-listing is probably welcome to everybody associated with Big Pharma’s industries, like Wall Street executives, Big Media executives and others in the investor classes that may have pharmaceutical stocks in their portfolios (or are simply on friendly terms with medical or pharmaceutical establishment types that don’t want to destabilize the gravy train).
Tens of thousands of angry and increasingly vocal “Mama Bear” mothers, are no longer willing to accept the excuse from their clinics that “the neurological catastrophe that your child suffered after the shots was just a coincidence”. And they are demanding an audience, some compassion, some help and some compensation for their losses.
Read more here:
The New Internet Police Protecting You From Freedom of Thought and Speech
“It has been 25 years since the nonprofit charity founded in 1982 by parents of vaccine injured children, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), began posting vaccine information on the Internet. Our mission is to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and to protect the ethical principle of informed consent to medical risk taking, which serves as the foundation for the ethical practice of medicine.46 The co-founders and parent representatives of NVIC have a long, transparent public record of consumer advocacy, including working with Congress to secure vaccine safety informing, recording, reporting and research provisions in the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and serving on federal vaccine advisory committees and testifying in congressional and state legislative hearings.47 48”
Read more here: https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/December-2018/internet-police-protect-you-from-freedom-of-speech.aspx
New Danish MMR Study Shows Autism Rate of 1 in 100—CDC Should Rush to Denmark!
COPENHAGEN, Denmark—We have another “Danish Study” that will invariably be all the talk. It’s too bad no one reads (or understands) the details about these studies that are both funded and researched by vaccine companies (this one is funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and research completed by Danish vaccine maker Statens Serum Institut.)
I won’t bore you with how consistently this particular vaccine maker has helped publish bogus studies used here in the U.S. to prove “vaccines don’t cause autism”, but it’s a long, sordid history. So, I’m just going to make six quick points about why this study doesn’t change anything about the debate (but will most certainly be used by Paul Offit and others to “slam the door” once again):
1. We’ve still only studied a single vaccine. Even though children receive 11 vaccines, and MMR isn’t given until 12 months old, long after many other vaccines. Here’s the table:
Read more here:
WHO, Pharma, Gates & Government: Who’s Calling the Shots?
On Jan. 16, 2019 the World Health Organization (WHO) issued a report ranking “vaccine hesitancy” as one of the top “Ten Threats to Global Health in 2019”, alongside air pollution and climate change; noncommunicable diseases; global influenza pandemic; antimicrobial resistance; and infectious diseases such as ebola, dengue fever and HIV.1 Throughout history, the greatest contributors to disease and early death in human populations have been poverty, poor sanitation and poor nutrition, 2 3 4 yet infectious diseases with pharmaceutical solutions dominated this list. And there was no mention of the major opioid addiction crisis crippling and killing tens of thousands of people in the U.S. and Europe, 5 6 or the iatrogenic medical error epidemic that every year claims more than 750,000 lives in Europe 7 and 250,000 lives in the U.S., where it is the third leading cause of death. 8
The immediate mainstream media response to the WHO’s announcement was to focus on “vaccine hesitancy.” On Jan. 19, the Editorial Board of the New York Times declared that “anti-vaxxers” are “the enemy” and called on the U.S. government to “get tough” by waging a “bold and aggressive” pro-vaccine campaign that includes “tightening restrictions around how much leeway states can grant families that want to skip essential vaccines.” 9 By Jan. 23, The Hill announced that Washington state had declared a state of emergency because of 23 cases of measles reported in an “anti-vaccination community” near Portland, Oregon,10 and there was a public call in the UK for social media platforms to “clamp down on fake news” and censor “misleading information and negative messaging around vaccination.” 11 12
The New York Times editorial headline “How to Inoculate Against Anti-Vaxxers” was a theme repeated in articles reacting to the WHO’s suggestion that people wanting to make informed, voluntary decisions about vaccination are a global menace. One doctor suggested that parents who don’t vaccinate their children are selfish: ”… it’s a matter of ‘I don’t care about other people in the community, I only care about the health and welfare of my own child.’” 13
There was no discussion about institutionally acknowledged gaps in vaccine safety science 14 15 or the fact that most parents dutifully follow the advice of pediatricians and public health officials and only became vaccine safety critics after the risks of vaccination for their children turned out to be 100 percent.16 17 No discussion about the fact that since 2011, pharmaceutical companies have no liability for injuries and deaths caused by government recommended and mandated vaccines they sell in the U.S. 18 Instead, parents of vaccine injured children and others concerned about vaccine safety, who for decades have been asking government and industry to produce better quality vaccine science and more humane vaccine policies that respect genetic and biological diversity, were stereotyped as “anti-vaxxers” and demonized as a “threat” to public health.
Read more here: https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/January-2019/WHO,-Pharma,-Gates.aspx
Herd Immunity and Vaccination
What he’s talking about is achieving and maintaining so-called vaccine-acquired “herd immunity,” the theory which maintains that once a majority of people have been vaccinated, the infectious disease in question can no longer spread and everyone is protected, including the tiny minority who for whatever reason are not or cannot be vaccinated.
The problem with this argument is that it doesn’t work for vaccines. While there is such a thing as herd immunity among populations in which a majority has had the infectious disease and acquired a long lasting natural immunity, vaccines confer only temporary artificial immunity, and so true herd immunity is unlikely to be fully achieved, even if nearly 100 percent of the population are vaccinated.
The measles vaccine, for example, wears off after about a decade3 or two. 4,5 Whatever temporary artificial protection is obtained from other vaccines also fades in time. If you are an adult, chances are that some of the vaccinations you received as a child are not protecting you today.6 What’s more, between 2 and 10 percent of some vaccines result in “primary vaccine failure,” meaning those who get the vaccine do not gain even temporary artificial protection after vaccination. 7
Indeed, public health officials are now recommending adults born in or after 1957 to get revaccinated against measles.8,9,10 Since the Disneyland-related measles outbreak in early 2015, some public health doctors are even suggesting all adults should get a measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) booster shot because as many as 1 in 10 previously vaccinated adults may be susceptible to measles due to waning vaccine-acquired immunity.11
Read more here: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/03/12/vaccine-herd-immunity.aspx
N.Y. Law Professor Addresses U.N. on Government Vaccine Policies Violating the Nuremberg Code
New York University research scholar and law professor Mary Holland recently addressed the United Nations at the 25th International Health and Environment Conference.
Professor Holland has been one of the lone voices in the U.S. addressing the legal ramifications of removing parental rights to informed consent for childhood vaccines. She has previously written for Health Impact News on this issue. See:
Killing the Messenger: U.S. Vaccine Law and Policy
Professor Holland sees major civil rights issues involved in government vaccine policies that remove informed consent rights to refuse mandatory vaccinations. She reminds the United Nations that history has shown us the results of such overt government intrusion into personal medical rights. World-wide human rights legislation has been put into place to protect individuals from government intrusion into medical abuse, starting with the Nuremberg Code just after the atrocities of Nazi Germany after World War II.
Professor Holland states:
[T]he UN and the international community have obligations to respect human rights related to vaccination.
Since World War II, the international community has recognized the grave dangers in involuntary scientific and medical experimentation on human subjects. In the aftermath of Nazi medical atrocities, the world affirmed the Nuremberg Code which stated that the “voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.” The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights further enshrined this prohibition against involuntary experimentation in its 1966 text, stating “no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.” Such a prohibition is now so universally recognized that some courts and scholars have pronounced the right to informed consent in experiments as a matter of customary international law.
Read more here: https://vaccineimpact.com/2016/n-y-law-professor-addresses-u-n-on-government-vaccine-policies-violating-the-nuremberg-code/
Dr. Moss video
Very good video from a physician and professor.
Mom
Vaccinations in the News
I find it very disturbing that the pharmaceutical industry has succeeded in doing what the biotech industry (thank goodness) has been unable to – Anyone who questions vaccine safety is labeled an anti-science nut. Which of course is not true. Many of the people questioning vaccine safety are doctors, scientists and informed parents.
There are so many reasons that informed choice and consent about vaccination is important. The industry who makes our vaccines are the same huge corporations who are raising prices on insulin (to the point where people are dying) and who spend millions of dollars trying, and too often succeeding in buying our representatives. There have never been safety studies on the cocktail of vaccines that are now recommended for our children. How do they interact with each other and how does that affect our health.
Since 1986, vaccine makers in the US are not liable if you or your child are injured or killed by one of their products. This gives them no reason to even begin to care about safety.
Read more here:
https://www.nvic.org/injury-compensation/origihanlaw.aspx
There are risks for all vaccines and when you go to your doctor most are not showing you the vaccine inserts or going over the possible reactions with you.
Read more here:
https://www.nvic.org/Vaccines-and-Diseases.aspx
Some of my overall issues with vaccines are:
1) If they’re so effective then why does it matter if some people opt out. – If vaccines were so good they could be used only by people who choose to use them and they should be protected by whatever disease the vaccine is for.
2) Why are we vaccinating against diseases that are usually mild and incur lifetime immunity like Chicken pox, Measles and mumps. My generation had all of those diseases when young and they were minor illnesses. Our kids were taken to ‘chicken pox parties’ to make sure everyone had the disease and was over it at one time. But now the industry is using fear tactics to scare everyone.
3) The CDC is not an impartial agency. They own vaccine patents.
Read more here:
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/examining-rfk-jrs-claim-cdc-owns-over-20-vaccine-patents
This is a huge multi-billions dollar industry. They are interested in profit much more then they’re interested in our health. The current revenue from vaccines is around 30 Billion per year and is expected to grow to 77 Billion by 2024. Of course they don’t want anyone questioning the safety of their products. Just like the junk food and tobacco industries. Great article about that and the herd immunity myth here:
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/herd-immunity-flawed-science-and-mass-vaccination-failures
There are many doctors and scientists questioning vaccine safety and just like what happened with GMOs, the industry is trying to silence these voices. Industries do this when they have something to hide.
There is censorship going on as well. A number of sites giving factual, scientific information about the risks of vaccines are being censored on social media sites.
Please educate yourself. Share with friends and neighbors. It’s important.
There are many resources to learn more, here are just a few:
Movies:
Bought:
The Greater Good:
Vaxxed:
Books:
Dissolving Illusions by Dr. Suzanne Humphries
Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illness – Dr. Thomas Cowan
A shot in the Dark – Coulter Fisher
Thimerosal – Robert F. Kennedy jr.
Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies – Neil Z Miller
What about Immunizations – Cynthia Cournoyer
Vaccine Epidemic – Louise Kuo Habakus
Vaccine Whistleblower – Kevin Barry and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Vaccine Injuries – Lou Conte and Tony Lyons
How to raise a healthy child in spite of your doctor – Robert S. Mendelsohn MD
Jeffrey Smith – How to read Pet Food labels
Important info on pet food as GMO’s are in many commercial brands.
Mom
Easy Gluten Free Pan-Cakes
Easy Gluten Free Pan-Cakes
We’ve been making these for a few years now. So easy to make, you just blend the ingredients and cook in a pan in the oven. You can also use Greek Yogurt, instead of sour cream but I think the sour cream adds a nice tang. I got the picture at the wrong angle but when I made it today, to take a pic, it turned out with a heart in the middle. Love, Mom.
Ingredients
- 3 large organic pastured eggs
- 1/2 cup organic sour cream or organic Greek yogurt.
- 2 tbsp sweetener. Any type you prefer, I use swerve or stevia.
- 1 tsp baking powder
- 1/4 cup organic almond flour
- 2 tbsp organic butter
Instructions
- Heat oven to 425 degrees.
- Put all ingredients, except butter into a blender jar (I use my Vitamix) and blend on manual 3-4 for a few seconds until all the ingredients are completely incorporated into the batter.
- When the oven is heated, put butter in a 9″ x 12″ cake pan and place with only the butter in oven.
- Melt the butter for 3-5 minutes or until the butter is bubbling in the bottom of the pan. Remove from oven.
- Pour the batter gently over the hot butter and return to oven.
- Bake for 15 minutes, until pancake is golden and puffed.
- After baking, cut the pancake into 4 and serve. Serves 2 at 2 pancakes each – Enjoy!
GMO’s in the News
GMO’s in the News – Oct 2018
There’s lots going on this month!
Mom
New study showing organic diets cut cancer risk is a big deal – let’s treat it that way
No study is perfect — but recent findings that organic food consumption cuts cancer risk highlights an opportunity to tackle a deadly, expensive health crisis
EXCERPT: After adjusting as fully as possible for confounding factors, [the researchers] reported their main result in the studied cohort of 70,000 French citizens — a 25 percent reduction in the risk of being diagnosed with a new case of cancer within four years after study enrolment in the high-organic food intake group, compared to the low (and essentially no) organic food intake group.
No study is perfect — but recent findings that organic food consumption cuts cancer risk highlights an opportunity to tackle a deadly, expensive health crisis
More than 1.7 million Americans will be newly diagnosed with cancer in 2018, and 35 percent of these cases will prove fatal.
A little less than $150 billion was spent fighting cancer in 2017.
Imagine the excitement that would accompany the discovery of anything — a new drug, therapy, diet, or lifestyle change — that promises to cut overall cancer frequency by 5 percent.
Every year, such a discovery would spare 87,000 people this most-feared diagnosis, and reduce deaths by 30,000 and cancer-related health care costs by around $7 billion.
Such monumental benefits would justify major investments and significant policy change.
Well, not necessarily.
There is a new paper in JAMA Internal Medicine by a team of French scientists that reports a 25 percent decrease in overall cancer risk from relatively high levels of organic food consumption, compared to little or no organic food consumption, in a large, prospective epidemiological study.
Sizable reductions in prevalence were also seen for breast cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and all lymphomas. (Check out a written summary of the study methods or this 2-minute video focused on key findings).
The French scientists suspect that the reduction in pesticide dietary exposure among study participants reporting a high-level of organic food intake is the key factor driving these encouraging results. The team did all it could to control for several confounding factors.
They stressed the study’s limits and the clear need for more precise measures of pesticide dietary exposures. They emphasized the need for all consumers to eat more fruits and vegetables, conventional and/or organic.
Read more here: https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/18545-new-study-showing-organic-diets-cut-cancer-risk-is-a-big-deal-let-s-treat-it-that-way
Monsanto trial: judge rejects bid to overturn landmark cancer verdict
Dewayne Johnson originally won $289m after finding Roundup weedkiller caused illness, but judge reduces financial award
A California judge has rejected Monsanto’s appeal to overturn a landmark jury verdict which found that its popular herbicide causes cancer.
The judge’s ruling on Monday largely sided with Dewayne “Lee” Johnson, a father of three and former school groundskeeper, who won a $289m award over the summer after alleging that his exposure to Roundup weedkiller gave him cancer. During the trial, the first of its kind, the 46-year-old also alleged that Monsanto had failed to warn him of the risks of using its product.
Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, the German pharmaceutical company, filed an appeal of the verdict, which said the company was responsible for “negligent failure”, knew or should have known that its product was “dangerous”, and had “acted with malice or oppression”.
Monsanto fought to overturn the verdict, arguing the evidence was insufficient. The San Francisco superior court judge Suzanne Bolanos had suggested in an initial written ruling this month that she was considering granting a new trial. But she ultimately denied Monsanto’s request. However, she has ruled to reduce punitive damages from $250m to $39m.
The judge said in her ruling on Monday that if Johnson did not accept the lower punitive damages, she would order a new trial for Monsanto.
Johnson’s lawyers said in a statement on Monday that the “reduction in punitive damages was unwarranted” and that his legal team, Baum Hedlund and the Miller Firm, was “weighing the options”.
They added, “The evidence presented to this jury was, quite frankly, overwhelming … Today is a triumph for our legal system. We care deeply for Lee and his family, and we are excited to share this important win with them and all those who supported this case.”
Monsanto may leave India after losing GMO cotton patent
Citing India’s Patents Act of 1970, the Delhi High Court said that plant varieties and seeds cannot be patented
EXCERPT: “What it means is effectively Monsanto has no patent on seeds in India and they have never had it. They have tried to hoodwink the seed companies and farmers for years claiming they have a patent and making huge amounts of money from that,” Diya Kapur, a lawyer for Nuziveedu Seeds, told Bloomberg.
Could Monsanto’s six-decade presence in India be coming to a halt?
On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court ruled that the biotech giant cannot claim patents for Bollgard and Bollgard II, its genetically modified cotton seeds, in the country.
Citing India’s Patents Act of 1970, the court said that plant varieties and seeds cannot be patented, thereby rejecting Monsanto’s attempt to block its Indian licensee, Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd., from selling the seeds.
“What it means is effectively Monsanto has no patent on seeds in India and they have never had it. They have tried to hoodwink the seed companies and farmers for years claiming they have a patent and making huge amounts of money from that,” Diya Kapur, a lawyer for Nuziveedu Seeds, told Bloomberg.
As Dilsher Dhillon wrote in Business Insider India, Wednesday’s verdict could prompt Monsanto to pull out of the country:
With the latest ruling, Monsanto’s claims against Nuziveedu for unpaid royalties have been waived because its patents are invalid. It will now have to settle for the rates decided by the government.
This is a significant blow for Monsanto, the world’s largest seed producer, as it currently licenses its seeds to nearly 50 domestic companies through its local joint venture with Mahyco Seeds Ltd. It could, in all probability, lead to the company’s complete exit from India.
Read more here: https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/18228
Fiery Ferments Cookbook review
Fiery Ferments Cookbook review
I’ve been making basic ferments like sauerkraut and pickles for many years now but decided to branch out this year. I got this book for Christmas last year and finally got to put it to good use this summer.
I’ve made five recipes so far and they have all been delicious. All the recipes except one calls for taking out the seeds of the hot peppers and between that and the fermenting the heat level is perfect. The recipes are all listed by heat level too so you can choose how hot to make your ferments.
There are also recipes in the back of the book to give you some ideas of what to use the ferments in. And because they’re fermented, most of the recipes will last up to a year in the fridge, although not sure if they’ll last that long around here.
Pictured from left: Spicy Mango Onion ferment – Sri-rawcha – Caribbean salsa – Zhug and last is Adzhika.
The first recipe I made was for Zhug, which is a classic Yemeni chili paste. It’s sort of like a spicy cilantro pesto and is delicious on roasted or steamed veggies. The recipe made a pint.
The second one was Adzhika, which is a Georgian Pepper relish. This is delicious on burgers. We mixed some with a bit of mayonnaise and it was the perfect burger topping. The recipe made a pint.
Third, I made the Caribbean Salsa. This recipe called for habaneros but as I didn’t have any I substituted aji sugar rush peach peppers which I got from our local farmers market. They are not quite as hot but still have the fruity flavor and they worked perfectly. You can switch up which peppers you use and many recipes give you a number of different choices. This is a very spicy but yummy salsa.
Next, I made the Srirawcha. This is a raw, fermented version of Sriacha sauce. It’s delicious and the recipe made a quart so we should have this for a while.
Last I made the Spicy Onion-Mango Ferment. This one reminds me of the spicy pickles you get at Indian restaurants. It has curry powder, and ginger – yum. This one is also a quart sized recipe.
There are a number of other recipes I want to try too, like the Spicy Carrot and Lime Salad and the Jamaican Jerk Sauce, just to name two.
A great book and highly recommended.
Link to buy the book on Amazon here:
It’s About Time!
It’s About Time!
This week a trial in California ended with a jury awarding 289 Million dollars to a groundskeeper who got cancer after using Roundup.
Dewayne Lee Johnson was heroic and we send him prayers and good energy for healing.
Mom
Here are some of the stories in the news:
Historic Ruling Against Monsanto Finds Company Acted with “Malice” Against Groundskeeper with Cancer
California jurors have awarded $289 million in a historic verdict against Monsanto in the case of a school groundskeeper who developed cancer after using its weed killer, Roundup. We speak with Brent Wisner, the lead trial counsel for Dewayne Lee Johnson, who has non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Doctors say he is unlikely to live past 2020. Johnson’s was the first lawsuit to go to trial alleging glyphosate causes cancer. Filed in 2016, it was fast-tracked for trial due to the severity of his illness.
Read/watch more here:
https://www.democracynow.org/2018/8/14/historic_ruling_against_monsanto_finds_company
One man’s suffering exposed Monsanto’s secrets to the world
Company’s own records revealed damning truth of glyphosate-based herbicides’ link to cancer
It was a verdict heard around the world. In a stunning blow to one of the world’s largest seed and chemical companies, jurors in San Francisco have told Monsanto it must pay $289m in damages to a man dying of cancer which he claims was caused by exposure to its herbicides.
Monsanto, which became a unit of Bayer AG in June, has spent decades convincing consumers, farmers, politicians and regulators to ignore mounting evidence linking its glyphosate-based herbicides to cancer and other health problems. The company has employed a range of tactics – some drawn from the same playbook used by the tobacco industry in defending the safety of cigarettes – to suppress and manipulate scientific literature, harass journalists and scientists who did not parrot the company’s propaganda, and arm-twist and collude with regulators. Indeed, one of Monsanto’s lead defense attorneys in the San Francisco case was George Lombardi, whose resumé boasts of his work defending big tobacco.
Now, in this one case, through the suffering of one man, Monsanto’s secretive strategies have been laid bare for the world to see. Monsanto was undone by the words of its own scientists, the damning truth illuminated through the company’s emails, internal strategy reports and other communications.
The jury’s verdict found not only that Monsanto’s Roundup and related glyphosate-based brands presented a substantial danger to people using them, but that there was “clear and convincing evidence” that Monsanto’s officials acted with “malice or oppression” in failing to adequately warn of the risks.
Read more here:
Monsanto to Pay $289.2M in Landmark Roundup Lawsuit Verdict
A San Francisco jury returned a verdict today in the case of a former groundskeeper with terminal cancer against Monsanto Company, ordering the agrochemical giant to pay $39.2 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages for failing to warn consumers that exposure to Roundup weed killer causes cancer.
Dewayne “Lee” Johnson filed the lawsuit (case no. CGC-16-550128) against St. Louis-based Monsanto Co. on Jan. 28, 2016, alleging exposure to the Roundup herbicide he sprayed while working as a groundskeeper for the Benicia Unified School District caused him to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).
On June 18, 2018, his case was assigned to Judge Suzanne Ramos Bolanos for the Superior Court of San Francisco, California. Johnson’s case was the first of its kind to proceed to trial due to his terminal diagnosis.
After eight weeks of trial proceedings, the jury found unanimously that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup weed killer caused Mr. Johnson to develop NHL, and that Monsanto failed to warn of this severe health hazard. Importantly, the jury also found that Monsanto acted with malice, oppression or fraud and should be punished for its conduct.
Monsanto Co. continues to refuse to warn consumers of the dangers of its multi-billion-dollar product Roundup despite the world’s foremost authority on cancer—the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)—listing glyphosate as a probable carcinogen in 2015.
Lee Johnson is one of more than 4,000 people from across the country to file suit against Monsanto in state and federal courts based on allegations linking Roundup to cancer.
He was represented at trial by Brent Wisner of Baum, Hedlund, Aristei and Goldman, David Dickens of the Miller Firm and Mark Burton of Audet & Partners LLP.
Co-lead trial counsel Brent Wisner said today’s verdict was a result of newly-revealed, confidential company documents.
“We were finally able to show the jury the secret, internal Monsanto documents proving that Monsanto has known for decades that glyphosate and specifically Roundup could cause cancer,” Wisner said. “Despite the Environmental Protection Agency’s failure to require labeling, we are proud that an independent jury followed the evidence and used its voice to send a message to Monsanto that its years of deception regarding Roundup is over and that they should put consumer safety first over profits.”
For years Monsanto has claimed that there is no evidence that Roundup causes cancer, yet a mountain of testimony and documents was admitted during the trial. Johnson’s attorneys proved through testimony from Monsanto’s witnesses that company employees “ghostwrote” scientific articles and paid outside scientists to publish the articles in their name.
Internal documents revealed that a scientific advisor hired by Monsanto told the company that past testing for Roundup was insufficient because glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, was tested in isolation without the other chemical ingredients that make up the Roundup formulation.
“Many of these confidential Monsanto documents were unsealed for the first time,” co-lead counsel David Dickens said. “They show that Monsanto knew that its testing was insufficient and that there was a synergistic effect when glyphosate is combined with surfactants which help the glyphosate penetrate both plant and animal cell walls.”
Read more here:
https://www.organicconsumers.org/blog/monsanto-roundup-trial-verdict
How Monsanto Plants Stories, Suppresses Science & Silences Dissent to Sell a Cancer-Linked Chemical
As Monsanto comes under scrutiny for allegedly hiding the dangers of its weed killer, Roundup, we talk to a reporter who says the company attempted to censor and discredit her when she published stories on their product that contradicted their business interests. Carey Gillam is a veteran investigative journalist and author of “Whitewash–The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer and the Corruption of Science.”
Watch interview here: https://www.democracynow.org/2018/8/14/how_monsanto_plants_stories_suppresses_science
Monsanto Trial: Toxicologist Explains to Jury How Monsanto Colluded With EPA
Thanks to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. for providing a recap of the fourth and fifth day in court in the Dewayne Johnson vs. Monsanto Co. trial. Proceedings began in San Francisco Superior Court on July 9. The plaintiff, Dewayne Johnson, a 46-year-old former school groundskeeper who was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma four years ago, claims Monsanto hid evidence that the active ingredient in its Roundup herbicide, glyphosate, caused his cancer. This is the first case to go to trial among hundreds of lawsuits alleging Roundup caused non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The trial is expected to last about a month. (Read recap of day six).
Throughout Monday afternoon and Tuesday morning, July 16 and July 17, Monsanto’s attorney, Kirby Griffiths, continued his ambuscade of Plaintiff’s epidemiologist/toxicologist, Dr. Christopher Portier, probing for weaknesses in Portier’s assessment that glyphosate and Roundup are human carcinogens. Dr. Portier yielded nothing; the studies evaluating glyphosate’s carcinogenicity were performed correctly, he said, properly examined and interpreted accurately by the International Agency for Cancer Research, which determined that “glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen.” Watching Griffiths try to get a grapple hold on Dr. Portier had the aspect of a man trying to climb a greased pole. Griffiths never got his feet off the ground.
Following Griffiths’ cross, my co-counsel, Brent Wisner of Baum Hedlund Law, conducted redirect of Dr. Portier and the jury heard its first mention of Jess Rowland, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) corrupt Office of Pesticide Programs chief. Rowland orchestrated the exoneration of Roundup based principally on studies ginned up or ghostwritten by Monsanto and its army of biostitutes (After Dr. Portier stepped down, we heard additional videotaped testimony from Monsanto official, Dr. William Heydens, admitting that he had recommended “ghostwriting” EPA’s key study then edited it himself).
Under Wisner’s questioning, Dr. Portier inventoried the substantive flaws in the federal EPA’s glyphosate and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma studies. He showed how the EPA, with Monsanto holding its coat, cherry-picked glyphosate-friendly studies to support its ruling in Monsanto’s favor. Wisner closed his redirect with Portier denouncing the Andreotti Study (2018) as fatally flawed. That study, the backbone of Monsanto’s case, concluded, with Trumponian chutzpah, that glyphosate actually protects humans against non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Portier showed, that, raw data buried in that study, showed a statistically significant elevated risk of T-cell lymphomas, the exact type of cancer diagnosed in our Plaintiff, Dwayne Johnson.
Our principle weakness in this case is the conclusion of the EPA’s Jess Rowland and his Office of Pesticide Programs that glyphosate is not a human carcinogen. The jury will never learn that in the 1980s, the EPA concluded that glyphosate was a carcinogen. Monsanto responded by engaging in a series of contacts with the EPA designed to intimidate the agency to withdraw those damaging findings.
Internal documents show that Monsanto recruited a paid scientist who reexamined the EPA’s mouse data and claimed to find that one key mouse study showing carcinogenicity failed to account for an unreported tumor in an unexposed mouse in the control group. As it turns out, Monsanto’s documents show that the company’s mercenary pathologist agreed to “find” the elusive cancer before he actually saw any slides. Although the EPA’s internal scientists refuted Monsanto’s hired gun, Monsanto stacked the advisory review presentations with Monsanto agents, leading to Roundup’s reclassification.
Read more here: https://www.organicconsumers.org/blog/kennedy-monsanto-trial-epa-roundup-cancer