The War on America Archives - Dr. Leonard Coldwell.com : Dr. Leonard Coldwell.com

RSSAll Entries in the "The War on America" Category

School-Located National Vaccination. Do You Consent?

vaccinationBy Rosanne Lindsay, ND

Dentists in Oregon, Pharmacists in all 50 states, and soon school nurses, can inject your children without your permission.

What makes it possible to deliver vaccines to children through the public schools? One reason is that the School-located vaccination (SLV) has a long history in the United States. In 1875, New York City schools delivered the small pox vaccine. In the 1950s, schools delivered the Salk polio vaccine. In the 1990s, schools conducted catch-up clinics for the Hep B vaccine. In 2009, schools injected the H1N1 vaccines. In 2012-13, an SLV project in rural Kentucky deployed the HPV vaccine, all to improve vaccination rates.

According to Goal #4 of the 2015-16 National Vaccine PlanHealth care providers must continue to improve access to and acceptance of vaccination providers in nontraditional healthcare settings. School-located vaccination (SLV) can augment other emerging alternative vaccination sites.

The SLV strategy is described in a position statement by the National Association for School Nurses which represents the government-accepted narrative. Their Journal of School Nursing reports:

School nurses are trusted professionals within the school and community settings and can play a pivotal role in the success of SLV. They are ideally placed to identify students who have missedvaccines.

This narrative is repeated in studies published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, a group claiming to be dedicated to the health of all children.  Their 2017 study suggests that “SLV is key for adolescents who have significantly lower rates of vaccination due to lower rates of office-based visits.”

Just because registered providers claim they can deploy “biologics” through a needle without parental permission, does not make it right. Just because the Nurses Associationclaims that “School nurses are well-versed in the importance of deterring and eradicating vaccine preventable diseases and the issues that are unique to their school community” does not qualify them to replace parents to decide what is best for each child.

The Journal of School Health (Shlay et al., 2015), writes:

The school is an ideal place to reach 52 million children from all cultures, socioeconomic groups, and age groups that attend each day; and the school is conveniently located in a familiar and trusted community environment. SLV also offers a convenient option for parents to have their children receive needed vaccinations without having to arrange for a healthcare provider visit or take off time from work.

The Healthy People 2020 Act plans for schools to “play a key role in the deterrence of vaccine preventable diseases” because high vaccination coverage is “an important public health objective.” SLV provides an important opportunity to immunize youth with limited access to healthcare services in the community at large. In advance of this Act, studies are evaluating whether state laws permit the implementation of standing orders programs (SOPs) to increase uptake of vaccines.

Question Everything

Pay attention to the language and question everything. First, there is no such thing as “vaccine preventable diseases” when vaccines cause the diseases for which they claim to prevent. See this breakdown.

Secondly, there is no such thing as “Public Health.” Public health is a term created by the Rockefeller Foundation in 1913. “Public health” is a trap. It does not exist outside of individuals who makes up the public. Likewise, Public Opinion, Public Safety, Public Body, and Public Perception are myths that political elites promote in order to manufacture consent to justify their right to power and to maintain the status quo. There is only individual opinion, individual safety, individual bodies, and individual perception.

The public school system is a planned conveyor belt for a Public Health agenda. If you understand the true definition of “public” by the authors who write the narrative, you can see how the language is used against the individual.

Before the vaccine was developed, the American Medical Association claimed that the measles are a benign childhood illness. Then, in 1967, the Public Health Service marketed the measles vaccine as a way to eradicate the measles virus through a mass vaccination campaign. Today, the AMA claims these mild diseases are highly contagiousand result in “illness, disability and death.

Measles Shots Aren’t Just For Kids

The CDC claims that as measles cases rise, adultswill need an MMR booster. The same CDC that says the killed measles vaccine available in 1963-1967 was not effective, now say:

“There’s no downside to getting a dose of measles vaccine,” says William Schaffner, a professor at Vanderbilt University and an infectious disease and vaccine expert. “If you’re [already] protected, it won’t help much, but it won’t harm you. And if you happen to be susceptible, it will give you over 90 percent protection.”

It is no coincidence that this narrative is growing louder to coincide with The Healthy People 2020 Act, which takes advice from an Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, to recommend 13 vaccinations for adults.

When individuals buy into a Public Health ideology, thinking stops. Suddenly, people begin to believe that benign childhood illnesses no longer exist and every infection, from flu to measles and Chicken pox can kill. They believe that CDC-approved shots can be ineffective one year but “safe and effective” the next. Yet, according to VAERS data and reports by the Vaccine Court no deaths today result from the measles infection, while many deaths have been attributed to the MMR (measles, mumps, Rubella) vaccine.

Ask yourself by what Authority do registered nurses, a school system, a Public Health Authority, or any group, claim power over parents, or you? Who certifies the certifier? If public schools only serve to indoctrinate, then it is time to go back to the Home School. Read 100 reasons to Home Schools Your Kids.  Nearly two million US children are homeschooled, and the homeschooling population is increasingly reflective of America’s diversity, and the need for self-directed learning.

Choice Cannot Be Legislated

To consent to Public Health dictates is to give up individual (inherent) rights in exchange for Public Rights. Public rights do not exist. They are merely attempts to legislate choice. When it comes to government overreach, the tool for individual re-empowerment is found in the Spirit of the Declaration of Independence:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government….to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Spirit of these words reflect inherent rights in each individual. Physical documents and words do not grant or deny rights. When you consent to Acts and laws, you consent to give up your freedoms. You disempower yourself. Alternatively, you can choose not to give consent. Choice is the power of the individual to say no. Choice means you can cease to participate is a system of coercion. Non-compliance is an option. You can ask, by what authority is your consciousness greater than mine? You can end the ruse of the Public Health authority.


Rosanne Lindsay is a Naturopathic doctor, writer, Earth keeper, Health Freedom advocate, and author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and  Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally. Find her on Facebook at Rosanne Lindsay and at her website at Natureofhealing. Consult with her (Skype or Zoom consults available) at natureofhealing.org. Subscribe to her blog at http://www.natureofhealing.org/blog/ and at her podcast Thursdays at 5 pm on Blog

Originally posted: https://www.naturalblaze.com/2019/06/school-located-national-vaccination-do-you-consent.html

Can You Fail A Drug Test After Taking CBD?

CBDCannabidiol, or CBD, is a non-psychoactive compound produced by the marijuana plant that seems to be everywhere these days. Maybe you’ve even been asked if you’d like it added to your morning cup of joe!

Interestingly, the chemical structure of CBD is very similar to THC, which is the marijuana-derived compound responsible for getting people high and the one screened for by drug tests.

CLICK HERE for organically-grown, lab-tested CBD products

This structural similarity begs the question: Could using CBD make you fail a drug test? In this episode of Reactions, we break down the chemistry behind the possibilities:

Reactions is a video series produced by the American Chemical Society and PBS Digital Studios. Subscribe to Reactions at http://bit.ly/ACSReactions, and follow us on Twitter @ACSreactions.

Originally posted: https://www.naturalblaze.com/2019/06/can-you-fail-a-drug-test-after-taking-cbd.html

 

The Fascinating History Of Supplements!

By Neenah Payne

Note: This article is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider.

Note: Natural Blaze does not receive commissions from sales related to any products or services mentioned in this article; they are strictly presented only as personal recommendations from this article’s author.

In 2014, Jonathan Hunsaker produced The Truth About Cancer docuseries (which may have pioneered that format which is so popular now) and founded the Organixx supplement company in 2016. TeriAnn Trevenen was the CEO of The Truth About Cancer and is the Organixx CEO. Jonathan and TeriAnn interviewed Dr. Daniel Nuzum in the Organixx podcast Episode 1 The History of Supplements.

Dr. Nuzum is the author of Detox for Life: How to Minimize Toxins and Maximize Your Body’s Ability to Heal and is the lead formulator of Organixx supplements. He is an NMD, a naturopathic physician, mechanotherapist, naprapath, medical massage practitioner, tui na practitioner and Native American healing practitioner. Dr. Nuzum has been formulating supplements for more than 17 years and is one of the leading researchers of fulvic and humic acid. His website is at: https://www.drnuzum.com.

Dr. Nuzum discusses the huge shift now as people recover the information, foods, and supplements we need to take our power back and heal ourselves. The podcast shows how radically The Flexner Report changed American medicine in the 20thcentury by allowing the drug companies to control medical education. The report restricted our access to herbal, holistic, homeopathic, and natural remedies for almost 100 years as the focus of American medicine shift solely to drugs and surgeries.

However, that era is coming to an end now as more people take responsibility for their health through lifestyle changes that include good nutrition, exercise, sleep, supplements, and detoxification which are among the Organixx INSPIRED “8 Pillars of Health.”

History of Medicine in Europe, Asia, and America

Dr. Nuzum explains that herbal remedies were the medicine used around the world for thousands of years. Marco Polo followed the spice trade routes from Europe to Asia in search of the valuable herbs. They were not just culinary spices – but also remedies. Columbus was on route to India in search of the legendary “wealth of the Indies.” Some of the herbs were literally worth their weight in gold!

Dr. Nuzum discusses the “Eclectics” in the 1700s in America who used herbal remedies that were based in large part on Native American medicine and did some surgery. That approach was maintained until the 1950s. One of those natural medicines is now called “Essiac Tea” – a remedy of the First Peoples of Manitoba, Canada. The tribes consuming that tea never had cancer, diabetes, heart disease, etc.

Herbs, spices, and other remedies were used for 4,000 years because they worked. Dr. Nuzum explains that every doctor had iodine in his bag and used it for many things – topically and internally. Cannabis was 70% of the medicine used along with cocaine, heroin, morphine, chloroform, methamphetamine, and mercury!Pharmaceuticals were 30% of the medicine used – but 20% of that was herbal and 10% was synthetic drugs. TeriAnn points out that today the tables of are turned with most of the medicine dispensed today being 80% synthetic drugs and 20% herbal remedies!

After The Flexner Report

Dr. Nuzum discusses the impact of The Flexner Report — a study of medical education in the United States and Canada written by Abraham Flexner and published in 1910 by the Carnegie Foundation. Many aspects of today’s American medical profession stem from The Flexner Report.

After The Flexner Report, the focus shifted from things that help you heal naturally like exercise, good sleep, and good nutrition. Instead, the focus was on drugs and surgeries. Until the report, most of the medical schools taught homeopathy. However, the report ended the homeopathic movement because the funding of medical institutions that weren’t teaching the use of drugs and surgery was stopped. So, 40-50 medical institutions closed. Within five years, only two of the 17 naturopathic medical schools were left. A similar thing happened to osteopathic schools and chiropractic schools.

Funding was cut for anything that was not drugs. There was no more funding for herbal remedies. Cannabis and other remedies became demonized. Drug companies threw supplements out the door. The drug companies funded the medical schools and got positions on the boards. So, the drug companies were able to slowly push out what had been standard medicine – which is now called “alternative medicine.” They presented their drugs as the only solution.

The Cleveland Clinic in Ohio was originally a homeopathic university and hospital. However, after The Flexner Report, the word “homeopathy” couldn’t even be used in the clinic! Fortunately, that is changing now! The Cleveland Clinic For Functional Medicine is part of the growing reversal of the trend begun by The Flexner Report!

The site says: “Cleveland Clinic’s Center for Functional Medicine is a collaboration between Cleveland Clinic and the Institute for Functional Medicine (IFM), led by Mark Hyman, MD, Chairman of IFM, founder of The UltraWellness Center, and New York Times best-selling author.”

In the 2017 video Two Years In: What’s Happening at Cleveland Clinic’s Center for Functional Medicine Dr. Hyman explains how the collaboration began and is accelerating across the country now.

The Founding Father of the Modern Supplement Industry

The modern movement focuses on healing our bodies through lifestyle changes and taking supplements we need rather than relying only on drugs and surgeries. Dr. Nuzum explains that Dr. Royal Lee, the pioneer of whole-food based supplements, is considered the “Father of Holistic Nutrition.” Dr. Lee founded Standard Process Laboratories (SPL), a division of Vitamin Products Company (VPC), in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in the 1930s.

The Story of Dr. Royal Lee is an 11-page ebook.

The ebook points out:

Catalyn, a unique, complex supplement made from natural sources, was produced by Dr. Royal Lee in 1929. Supplying multiple vitamins and naturally occurring minerals for complete, complex nutritional supplementation, Catalyn was designed to help bridge nutritional gaps in the diet. In 1929, Dr. Lee started Vitamins Products Co., and Catalyn began to be sold in local pharmacies and health food stores.

Dr. Lee received so much support from consumers that he decided to distribute Catalyn nationally. Catalyn is still the key product for Standard Process, a testament to Dr. Lee’s legacy. Soon after Catalyn was introduced, the League of Nations issued a statement calling for improved nutritional education and a need for dietary standards….

Dr. Lee dedicated his life to finding solutions for all sorts of challenges, but his greatest passion was improving the nation’s health by providing high-quality nutritional supplements made with whole food and other ingredients and educating others about them. He was respected by many health care professionals and made an impact on the health of patients across the country.

Dr. Lee’s site points out:

The primary cause of disease is not germs, genes, or toxins. It is malnutrition.” It adds: “When Dr. Royal Lee died in 1967, he was hailed as the greatest nutritionist of the twentieth century. Yet, today his name and work go largely unknown. This is no coincidence. Dr. Lee’s basic message — that the ultimate cause of most modern disease is malnutrition brought on by industrially produced foods — threatened some of our country’s mightiest institutions. These powers actively suppressed Dr. Lee’s message and decades of early nutrition research supporting it.

Dr. Lee would spend his life fighting this suppression, all the while demonstrating the validity of his holistic nutritional philosophy through that most rare and precious form of proof — practical results. Dr. Lee’s legacy is inextricably linked with the story of early nutrition science and its unpublicized suppression.

Dr. Lee’s views put him at odds not just with organized medicine and the FDA but also with the food manufacturing industry. Lee’s work threatened the security of these commercial interests, and at their behest, government agencies were assigned to discredit him. Throughout his life, Dr. Lee would endure perpetual legal prosecution and shameless character assassination at the hands of these agencies.

It is small wonder that Alan Nittler, MD, in his 1972 book A New Breed of Doctor, would describe Dr. Lee as “the best informed person on nutrition in America and perhaps even the world.” Yet, all the research, case studies, and patient testimonials were not enough to thwart the powers aligned against Dr. Lee, and after three decades of ceaseless persecution and prosecution by the government, he lost a lawsuit with the FDA in 1962 by which he was ordered to stop accompanying his food supplements with literature describing their therapeutic value and to destroy all literature produced by his companies that the government deemed “misleading.”

Sadly, within five years, at age 72, Dr. Lee would be dead from a stress-induced stroke, his work and reputation tragically buried with him, left to a later generation to fairly evaluate. His wife and partner, Evelyn, survived until 105 years old, carrying on his mission to show the American people the importance of whole food nutrition through the Lee Foundation and the other companies he founded.

The Standard Process Whole Food Nutrient Solutions ebook is 156-pages.

Jonathan points out that modern medicine is wonderful for dealing with trauma — like broken bones, but the pendulum has swung so far in one direction that a correction is happening now although drug companies are fighting it. He says that we need to find the balance between drugs and supplements.

Dr. Nuzum explains that the supplement industry grew because health food stores carried nutritional products. The drug companies ignored supplements since they can’t be patented because they are food. Big Pharma focused instead of chemical drugs that can make them a lot of money.

TeriAnn points out that the health food movement has surged just in the last 10 years and is now massive. Dr. Nuzum agrees that people are regaining their power, the power to heal their own bodies. Jonathan says that more people are taking responsibility now for their health.

Dr. Nuzum explains that typically fruits, vegetables, herbs, and spices — each plant — has about 300 phytochemicals. Today, there is a lot of research on the components of plants and mushrooms. Dr. Nuzum says that the same plant at different stages has different uses. For example, coriander is the early phase of cilantro – and they have very different effects.

Dr. Nuzum points out that 70-100 years ago, herbal remedies people were using were based on long-standing tradition, what people had been using for thousands of years. Now, the understanding of their uses is evolving with more knowledge about their chemistry.

Why We Need Supplements Today

Dr. Nuzum says we all need good supplements today for the following two reasons:

  1. Soil Depletion: Around 100 years ago, the US had 3-4 feet of topsoil. Now, the US has just 4-8 inches of top soil! Since plants extract nutrition from the topsoil, even organic plants cannot provide the nutrition we need because the nutrients aren’t concentrated enough in the soil.
  2. Nutrient Deficiencies: The Standard American Diet (SAD) now supplies only trace amounts of only 17 of the 73-90 essential nutrients the body needs every day. Dr. Nuzum says, for that reason, 20% of American children now suffer from an autoimmune disorder.

Quality of Supplements

Dr. Nuzum explains that not all supplements are created equal. He discusses the difference between synthetic and whole food supplements. The body knows the difference between food and synthetic chemicals. Initially, the body will accept the synthetic and try to use it, but will eventually reject it. Dr. Nuzum says that at the low end of supplements, vitamins are synthesized and minerals are extracted from petroleum products. Most ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) is extracted from GMO corn rather than from oranges or other citrus fruits! So, it may be necessary to take 8,000 mg of that ascorbic acid to get a therapeutic benefit. At the same time, you are consuming a concentrated toxin!

Why Good Supplements Are So Important links to a video in which Jonathan explains the levels of effectiveness of supplements.

However, when Vitamin C is extracted from a lemon, it has the bioflavonoids which are some of the most potent antioxidants. So, 20 mg may have the same effect as 5,000mg of the synthetic Vitamin C. Dr. Nuzum recommends that people go to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a toxicology watchdog, to understand ingredients in supplements.

Episode 2 of the Organixx podcasts is Synthetic vs. Whole Food Supplements & Delivery Systems.
Episode 3 is Nutraceutical vs. Pharmaceuticals & Why Organic Matters.
Episode 25 explains the Top 5 Things to Demand in Your Supplements.

Originally posted: https://www.naturalblaze.com/2019/06/the-fascinating-history-of-supplements.html
Author: Neenah Payne

Big Pharma Paid Millions In Secret Settlements After Antidepressants Linked To Mass Murder

mass murderBy Rachel Blevins

Every time there are reports of a mass shooting, there are a number of people who automatically question whether the suspect had mental health issues or was taking prescription medications such as antidepressants.

While history has shown that the most notorious mass shooters in this century were taking antidepressants or Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) before they carried out the deadly rampages, there are a number of killings that have been linked directly to the dangerous drugs. In fact, the pharmaceutical companies behind the most popular SSRI’s have paid hundreds of millions of dollars in damages:

Eli Lilly Paid Secret Settlements to Survivors After Man on Prozac Went on Shooting Rampage in 1989

Joseph T. Wesbecker, 47, carried out a mass shooting in which he shot 20 workers at Standard Gravure Corp. in Kentucky, in September 1989. Eight of the victims were fatally wounded, and Wesbecker ended the rampage by shooting and killing himself.

Just one month earlier, Wesbecker had started taking the antidepressant Prozac, which included side effects such as “obsession with suicide and dangerously violent behavior,” according to an article in the American Journal of Psychiatry.

When the survivors of the shooting filed a lawsuit against Eli Lilly arguing that it had known about the propensity of Prozac to cause violent outbursts and suicidal tendencies, the company convinced the victims to agree to secret settlements outside of court.

GlaxoSmithKline Paid $6.4 Million to the Family of a Man Who Murdered Three Family Members Hours After Taking Paxil in 1998

Donald Schell, 60, was prescribed the antidepressant Paxil to treat depression in Wyoming in February 1998. Within hours of taking the first dosage, he burst into a fit of rage and fatally shot his wife, Rita; their daughter, Deborah Tobin; and their 9-month-old granddaughter, Alyssa.

Schell then shot and killed himself. His remaining family members filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the pharmaceutical company behind Paxil, and they were awarded $6.4 million based on “the company’s failure to sufficiently warn doctors and patients that the effects of the drug could include agitation and violence.”

GlaxoSmithKline Also Paid $3 Million to the Widow of a Man Who Committed Suicide After Taking Paxil in 2010

Stewart Dolin, 57, was working as a corporate attorney in Illinois when he was prescribed the generic version of the antidepressant Paxil for depression and anxiety. While taking the drug, he committed suicide by jumping in front of a Chicago Transit Authority train.

His widow, Wendy Dolin, filed a lawsuit against GlaxoSmithKline, arguing that the company failed to warn her husband’s doctor that the drug he was being prescribed would increase his risk of suicidal behavior, which led to his death.

“This for me has not just been about the money. This has always been about awareness to a health issue, and the public has to be aware of this,” Wendy Dolin told the Chicago Tribune after she was awarded $3 million in compensation.

While the cases mentioned above are notable because they received significant media attention, there is still an overwhelming number of lawsuits that stemmed from cases in which pharmaceutical companies paid millions of dollars for failing to warn doctors that the antidepressants they were prescribing could drive patients to kill themselves and others.

According to reports, the first lawsuit involving a Paxil suicide case went to trial in 2001, and since then, GlaxoSmithKline has paid more than $390 million in settlements or verdicts for Paxil-related cases. If that is the price they are willing to pay, then the profit they are making off of the controversial drug must be incredible.

Rachel Blevins is an independent journalist from Texas, who aspires to break the false left/right paradigm in media and politics by pursuing truth and questioning existing narratives. Follow Rachel on FacebookTwitterYouTubeSteemit and Patreon. This article first appeared at The Free Thought Project.

Tech giants now pushing ANTI-knowledge to keep humanity dumbed down and trapped in mental prisons

Far from helping people access knowledge and facts, search engines like Google now push anti-knowledge — the opposite of knowledge — in order to keep people dumbed down.

knowledgeThe evil tech giants are now systematically de-platforming all channels and sources of real human knowledge, awakening and truth. For the topics that really matter, the only information that’s allowed to be found on Google, Wikipedia, iPhone apps, YouTube or Twitter is anti-knowledge, or “false facts” that defy reality and indoctrinate the masses to believe in delusions rather than see what’s really happening in the world around them.

In other words, on every topic that matters — science, medicine, vaccines, climate, history, politics, biology, culture and more — Big Tech systematically suppresses useful knowledge that might empower humans and replaces it with anti-knowledge that keeps people dumbed-down and trapped in mental prisons.

We are now living in the Age of Anti-Knowledge that’s pretending to be the Age of Information. But the information is controlled, shaped, twisted and engineered to dumb you down and keep you easily controlled with false narratives and fake facts. Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Wikipedia, Pinterest and Snapchat are all enemies of human awakening, which makes them enemies of humanity.

Because truth is treason in an age of deceit.

See my full video here for more details:

Brighteon.com/6042840694001

Stay informed. Read NaturalNews.com for a daily dose of useful, practical knowledge that keeps you healthy and aware. Find over a hundred thousand free speech videos at Brighteon.com, the YouTube alternative for free speech.

Originally posted: https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-05-31-tech-giants-now-pushing-anti-knowledge-to-keep-humanity-dumbed-down.html
Author:  

Liars, Ghostwriters and Whistleblowers: How Bayer Made the Worst Deal in History

bayerBy Joseph Mercola, DO

Bayer acquired Monsanto in 2018 for $63 billion, a purchase Bayer CEO Werner Baumann said would further their goal of creating a leading agriculture company.1 Bayer is now the largest seed and pesticide company in the world, but it might not stay that way for long, as lawsuits mount against the chemical giant over Roundup herbicide’s cancer link.

At least 13,400 lawsuits have been filed from people who claim exposure to their glyphosate-containing Roundup caused them health problems, including cancer. The first three lawsuits have already ended in favor of the plaintiffs, leaving Bayer saddled with billions in damages — and that’s only the beginning.

Now some experts are calling Bayer’s acquisition of Monsanto “the worst deal ever,”2 and the company is scrambling to appeal and trying to convince courts to toss out the lawsuits because U.S. regulatory agencies continue to side with industry and assert glyphosate is safe.3

RELATED:

Bayer Zero for 3 in First Series of Roundup Lawsuits

In August 2018, a jury ruled in favor of plaintiff Dewayne Johnson in a truly historic case against Monsanto. Johnson — the first of the cases pending against the chemical company — claimed Roundup caused his Non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and the court agreed, ordering Monsanto to pay $289 million in damages to Johnson, an amount that was later reduced to $78 million.

Bayer asked the court to throw out the judgment in April 2019 and reverse the damages awarded because Johnson is near death.4 In the second case, a judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering Bayer to pay more than $80 million.

The jury agreed that Edwin Hardeman’s repeated exposures to Roundup, which he used to kill weeds on his 56-acre property, not only played a role in his cancer diagnosis but also that the company did not warn consumers that the product carried a cancer risk.5

The case was particularly noteworthy because it was split into two phases, with jurors first finding the chemical to have caused the cancer on purely scientific grounds and the next phase finding that Bayer is liable for damages.6Ultimately, Hardeman was awarded $75 million in punitive damages, $5.6 million in compensatory damages and $200,000 for medical expenses.7

RELATED:

The third case involved a married couple, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, who claimed they both developed Non-Hodgkin lymphoma after regular use of Roundup. The pair had been using Roundup since the 1970s, stopping only a few years ago.

The jury heard 17 days of testimony and deliberated for less than two days before deciding in the Pilliods’ favor and ordering Bayer to pay $2 billion in punitive and compensatory damages.8 As for what compelled the possibly-disastrous Monsanto acquisition in the first place, The Telegraph’s deputy business editor Ben Marlow states it was part arrogance and greed:9

“On one side was Bayer’s uber-ambitious new boss Werner Baumann, who seemed determined to start his promotion to the top job with an almighty bang, unveiling Germany’s biggest ever takeover, a mere four weeks into the job.

Meanwhile, his opposite number at Monsanto, Hugh Grant, had a mind-boggling $226m (£173m) in shares and severance pay resting on the merger. Perhaps that explains why the boards of both companies were prepared to overlook the financial and legal risks of the tie-up.

Bayer Argues Lawsuits Should Be Thrown Out Because of Industry-Friendly US Regulators

The likelihood that Bayer will ultimately have to offer a settlement to the tens of thousands of people who say Roundup caused their cancer grows ever stronger — and the company is no stranger to settlements. Bayer and Johnson & Johnson recently agreed to settle more than 25,000 U.S. lawsuits alleging their blood thinner drug Xareltocauses uncontrollable bleeding, severe injury and death for $775 million.10

In the case of the glyphosate lawsuits, however, Bayer is not going down without a fight. Their latest argument is that the $2 billion jury award, along with pending lawsuits, should be thrown out because of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) favorable stance toward glyphosate.11

In their latest review of glyphosate, the EPA released a draft conclusion April 30, 2019, stating the chemical poses potential risks to mammals and birds that eat treated leaves, as well as risks to plants,12 but poses “no risks of concern” for people and “is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.”13

Reuters quoted one of Bayer’s lawyers, William Hoffman, who stated, “We have very strong arguments that the claims here are preempted … and the recent EPA registration decision is an important aspect of that defense.”

The news outlet continued, “Preemption is generally regarded as a ‘silver bullet defense’ because it stops claims across the board, said Adam Zimmerman, a law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.”14

In stark contrast, in March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) determined glyphosate to be a “probable carcinogen” based on evidence showing the popular weed-killing chemical can cause Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and lung cancer in humans, along with “convincing evidence” it can also cause cancer in animals.

RELATED:

EPA Doesn’t Protect Anything but the Chemical Industry

In 2015, following IARC’s glyphosate cancer ruling, the EPA, rather than taking immediate steps to protect Americans from this probable cancer-causing agent, decided to reassess its position on the chemical and, after doing so, released a paper in October 2015 stating that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.15

In April 2016, the EPA posted the report online briefly, before pulling it and claiming it was not yet final and posted by mistake. The paper was signed by Jess Rowland (among other EPA officials), who at the time was the EPA’s deputy division director of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and chair of the Cancer Assessment Review Committee (CARC).

Email correspondence showed Rowland, who at the time was the EPA’s deputy division director of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and chair of the Cancer Assessment Review Committee (CARC), helped stop a glyphosate investigation by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), which is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), on Monsanto’s behalf.

In an email, Monsanto regulatory affairs manager Dan Jenkins recounts a conversation he’d had with Rowland, in which Rowland said, “If I can kill this I should get a medal,”16 referring to the ATSDR investigation, which was put off for years. The final draft conclusion is the report that was finally released in April 2019, stating the chemical “is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.”17

RELATED STORY:

EPA Inspector General Launched Investigation Into Collusion Accusations, but Where Are the Findings?

Another internal email between Rowland and the late Marion Copley, a former EPA toxicologist, suggests Rowland colluded with Monsanto to find glyphosate noncarcinogenic.

In Marion’s correspondence to Rowland, she cites more than a dozen reasons why she believes glyphosate to be carcinogenic, and states “it is essentially certain that glyphosate causes cancer” and “the CARC category should be changed to ‘probable human carcinogen.”18

She then pleads with Rowland to “for once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus,” continuing:19

“You and Anna Lowit [science advisor in the EPA’s Office of Pesticides] intimidated staff on CARC and changed HIARC [Hazard Identification Assessment Review Committee] and HASPOC [Hazard and Science Policy Committee] final reports to favor industry.

Chelators [which glyphosate was originally designed to be] clearly disrupt calcium signaling, a key signaling pathway in all cells and mediates tumor progression.

Greg Ackerman [Branch Chief, Office of Pesticide Programs] is supposed to be our expert on mechanisms, but he never mentioned any of these concepts at CARC and when I tried to discuss it with him he put me off. Is Greg playing your political games as well, incompetent or does he have some conflict of interest of some kind?”

As the evidence of potential collusion between an EPA agency staffer and Monsanto grew, Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., requested that an investigation be conducted into whether such collusion took place. The inspector general responded in 2017, stating that he asked the EPA’s Office of Investigations (OIG) to “conduct an inquiry into several agency review-related matters.”20

RELATED:

The question now, two years later, is what were the findings from the investigation? The EPA’s OIG shows no mention of such a report on their news releases and inspector general statements page.21 Back in 2017, Bart Staes, a Belgian member of parliament, told HuffPost of increasing evidence relating to Monsanto’s manipulation of science and regulatory agencies:22

“We are now getting some written proof of collusion between scientists and Monsanto, which has these scientists like puppets on a string … More and more, the debate is about corporations controlling the science, and then this science is used by the regulators.”

Another example occurred in 2015, when Henry Miller, who was outed as a Monsanto shill during the 2012 Proposition 37 GMO labeling campaign in California, published a paper in Forbes Magazine attacking IARC’s findings after it classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen. Later it was revealed that Miller’s work was in fact ghostwritten by Monsanto.

RELATED:

Bayer Investors Give Vote of No Confidence

At Bayer’s annual general meeting in Bonn, Germany, 55.5% of shareholders voted against ratifying the management’s actions, in large part due to the Monsanto acquisition.23 Marlow called the move “a rare act of defiance in conservative Germany,” even though the vote was symbolic in nature only and won’t legally change anything.24

“But having forced through the Monsanto takeover without a vote,” Marlow added, “Bayer has already made it quite clear what it thinks of shareholders. Salvaging something from this ruinous deal will take a heroic act.”25

The next Bayer Roundup case will go to trial in August 2019. The plaintiff is Sharlean Gordon, who used Roundup for 15 years and was diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2006. The trial will take place in St. Louis, Missouri, just miles from Monsanto’s former world headquarters.

One of Gordon’s attorneys, Eric Holland, said that not only has the human toll been tremendous in this case, but Monsanto’s behavior is also atrocious. “This evidence against them, their conduct, is the most outrageous I’ve seen in my 30 years of doing this,” Holland said. “The things that have gone on here, I want St. Louis juries to hear this stuff.”26

If you’re curious how much glyphosate is in your body, the Health Research Institute (HRI) in Iowa developed the glyphosate urine test kit, which will allow you to determine your own exposure to this toxic herbicide. In order to avoid this chemical as much as possible, choose organic or biodynamic foods, and install a filter on your drinking water.

By Joseph Mercola, DO

*Article originally appeared at Mercola. Reposted with permission.

Widespread Contamination Of Antibiotics Found In Rivers Around The World

antibioticsConcentrations of antibiotics found in some of the world’s rivers exceed ‘safe’ levels by up to 300 times, the first ever global study has discovered.

Researchers looked for 14 commonly used antibiotics in rivers in 72 countries across six continents and found antibiotics at 65% of the sites monitored.

Metronidazole, which is used to treat bacterial infections including skin and mouth infections, exceeded safe levels by the biggest margin, with concentrations at one site in Bangladesh 300 times greater than the ‘safe’ level.

In the River Thames and one of its tributaries in London, the researchers detected a maximum total antibiotic concentration of 233 nanograms per liter (ng/l), whereas in Bangladesh the concentration was 170 times higher.

Trimethoprim

The most prevalent antibiotic was trimethoprim, which was detected at 307 of the 711 sites tested and is primarily used to treat urinary tract infections.

The research team compared the monitoring data with ‘safe’ levels recently established by the AMR Industry Alliance which, depending on the antibiotic, range from 20-32,000 ng/l.

Ciprofloxacin, which is used to treat a number of bacterial infections, was the compound that most frequently exceeded safe levels, surpassing the safety threshold in 51 places.

Global problem

The team said that the ‘safe’ limits were most frequently exceeded in Asia and Africa, but sites in Europe, North America, and South America also had levels of concern showing that antibiotic contamination was a “global problem.”

Sites, where antibiotics exceeded ‘safe’ levels by the greatest degree, were in Bangladesh, Kenya, Ghana, Pakistan, and Nigeria, while a site in Austria was ranked the highest of the European sites monitored.

The study revealed that high-risk sites were typically adjacent to wastewater treatment systems, waste or sewage dumps and in some areas of political turmoil, including the Israeli and Palestinian border.

Monitoring

The project, which was led by the University of York, was a huge logistical challenge – with 92 sampling kits flown out to partners across the world who were asked to take samples from locations along their local river system.

Samples were then frozen and couriered back to the University of York for testing. Some of the world’s most iconic rivers were sampled, including the Chao Phraya, Danube, Mekong, Seine, Thames, Tiber, and Tigris.

Dr John Wilkinson, from the Department of Environment and Geography, who co-ordinated the monitoring work said no other study had been done on this scale.

He said: “Until now, the majority of environmental monitoring work for antibiotics has been done in Europe, N. America, and China. Often on only a handful of antibiotics. We know very little about the scale of the problem globally.

“Our study helps fill this key knowledge gap with data being generated for countries that had never been monitored before.”

Antimicrobial resistance

Professor Alistair Boxall, Theme Leader of the York Environmental Sustainability Institute, said: “The results are quite eye-opening and worrying, demonstrating the widespread contamination of river systems around the world with antibiotic compounds.

“Many scientists and policymakers now recognize the role of the natural environment in the antimicrobial resistance problem. Our data show that antibiotic contamination of rivers could be an important contributor.”

“Solving the problem is going to be a mammoth challenge and will need investment in infrastructure for waste and wastewater treatment, tighter regulation and the cleaning up of already contaminated sites.”

Article by the University of York. Image from Pixabay

New study confirms: Junk food takes YEARS off your life

junk foodIt’s hard to keep track of all the ways that the wrong foods can compromise your health. For example, eating nitrates is linked to colorectal cancer, but how can you tell which foods contain these chemicals? Sugar is bad no matter how you look at it, but aren’t artificial sweeteners even worse? You can’t bring a stack of nutrition journals with you every time you head to the grocery store, so a recent study makes it very clear: junk food takes years off of your life, plain and simple.

In a study that you’ll want to keep in mind the next time you catch yourself trying to rationalize eating junk food, French researchers looked at nearly 45,000 healthy middle-aged people to determine the risks of consuming junk food. They measured their intake of more the 3,000 foods categorized into four groups according to how processed they were.

They found that those who ate more ultra-processed food had a higher risk of death. Specifically, they found that an increase of 10 percent in the amount of junk food a person consumes is associated with a 14 percent increase in their risk of death from a non-communicable disease within eight years. They found that this link still existed even after accounting for factors such as age, gender, smoking, physical activity levels, educational background and obesity. Their findings were published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

What makes ultra-processed foods so bad?

Ultra-processed foods like ready soups, deli meats, packaged cookies, chips and other snacks are generally high in sugar and saturated fat. Many of them also contain additives that may be legal but are quite controversial, such as sodium nitrate. The industrial processes they are subjected to are also responsible for the formation of dangerous toxins. For example, when some foods are processed, carcinogenic compounds such as acrylamide and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are formed – and then you eat them.

The power of the elements: Discover Colloidal Silver Mouthwash with quality, natural ingredients like Sangre de Drago sap, black walnut hulls, menthol crystals and more. Zero artificial sweeteners, colors or alcohol. Learn more at the Health Ranger Storeand help support this news site.

Some snack foods also contain artificial sweeteners, which can change your gut bacteria and raise your risk of diabetes and other illnesses that cause premature mortality. On top of that, the packaging often contains hormone disruptors like bisphenol A, which can cause diabetes, obesity and cancer.

It’s not just what these foods contain that makes them so unhealthy – it’s also what they lack. For example, many of them are very low in fiber, which has been shown to reduce your risk of several illnesses. Plus, every time you  reach for a bag of nutrient-devoid chips, you’re passing up the chance to eat fruit or vegetables and all the vitamins and minerals they contain.

A different study with 105,000 participants looked at how processed food affects your cancer risk in particular. After ranking people according to the proportion of ultra-processed food they consumed, they discovered that the top quarter – those whose diet was composed of 32 percent ultra processed food on average – had a 23 percent greater chance of developing cancer of any variety in the five years after the study than those who were in bottom quarter (consuming a diet of just 8 percent ultra-processed food). The researchers revealed that a 10 percent rise in the proportion of ultra-processed food in one’s diet raised their risk of all cancers by 10 percent.

It’s no secret that junk food is bad for you, but these studies show just how unhealthy it truly is. You can try to justify it as a question of convenience, but the truth is that grabbing an apple requires an equal amount of effort as grabbing a muffin. Opening up a bag of raw almonds is just as easy as opening up a bag of chips, so it’s time to stop eating poison and start making better choices that will protect your health in the long term.

Sources for this article include:

DailyMail.co.uk

Mirror.co.uk

NaturalNews.com

Originally posted: https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-05-22-new-study-confirms-junk-food-takes-years-off-your-life.html

At least 10% of Airbnb rentals found to have hidden video cameras

airbnb The popular vacation rental platform Airbnb is planning to go public later this year, hailing incredible success from its innovative community-sharing model. But there may still be a few more kinks that need to be ironed out before then, including the problem of some Airbnb hosts installing hidden cameras without notifying their guests.

While it’s considered permissible for Airbnb hosts to install surveillance cameras outside of their properties, or even indoors in common areas like kitchens and living rooms if they feel the need, under no circumstances should hidden cameras ever be installed in bedrooms or bathrooms – though this may be happening at a very small percentage of properties.

According to a recent survey conducted by IPX 1031, 11 percent of the 2,023 Americans surveyed by the group who say they’ve stayed at an Airbnb at least once claim that they’ve discovered hidden cameras inside Airbnb rentals – though they didn’t indicate where these cameras were found.

In today’s growing surveillance society, hidden cameras are popping up all over the place, which means their presence at some Airbnb rentals isn’t necessarily out of the ordinary. But since Airbnb guests have no way to know whether or not the properties they’re staying at have them, there are concerns among some that spying might be taking place.

Based on the findings of the IPX 1031 survey, more than half, or 58 percent of respondents, say they’re worried about the presence of hidden cameras inside Airbnb rentals. More than 75 percent say they’re okay with said cameras being in common areas, but obviously none of them want there to be hidden cameras anywhere else.

Get more news like this without being censored: Get the Natural News app for your mobile devices. Enjoy uncensored news, lab test results, videos, podcasts and more. Bypass all the unfair censorship by Google, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. Get your daily news and videos directly from the source! Download here.

While there’s not much Airbnb can do about this other than to simply inform its hosts and “Superhosts” about the proper guidelines for cameras and surveillance, it remains a point of contention for some potential Airbnb guests who might be leery, or perhaps borderline paranoid, that they might be getting surveilled while traveling – and who may choose to stay at a hotel instead.

It’s important to keep in mind, however, that hidden cameras could be in motels and hotels, too. This is the world we live in, after all – an expanding police state where cameras are appearing in public on light posts, traffic lights, building exteriors, and really anywhere else they can be at least somewhat discreetly placed.

Most Airbnb guests still say they’ve had positive experiences, and have never encountered hidden cameras where they shouldn’t be

The other thing that’s also noted in the survey is that the vast majority of Airbnb guests are happy with their experiences, and haven’t ever encountered anything shady like hidden cameras in bedrooms or bathrooms. In fact, most Airbnb guests say they actually prefer not to meet Airbnb hosts in person, and are already able to gather the information they need prior to booking in order to feel safe and secure.

“According to our survey, only 30% feel it’s necessary to meet their host,” says IPX 1031. “A majority would rather communicate virtually or over the phone and be able to access the property through a lockbox or keypad. And while most respondents said they trust their Airbnb host (83%), more than half are still leery about the host having access to the property (and their belongings) 24/7.”

“Superhost” status is another important thing to many potential Airbnb guests, as maintaining this coveted status as an Airbnb host is considered a valid indication of trustworthiness.

“According to respondents, first impressions and trustworthiness certainly go hand in hand when it comes to renting an Airbnb,” IPX 1031 further states about its survey findings.

For related news, be sure to check out Surveillance.news.

Sources for this article include:

ZeroHedge.com

IPX1031.com

NaturalNews.com

Originally posted: https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-05-22-airbnb-rentals-found-to-have-hidden-video-cameras.html
Author: 

BOMBSHELL: Bayer discovers “black ops” division run by Monsanto, shuts it down, initiates internal investigation as law enforcement prepares criminal charges against the chemical giant

monsantoFor over a decade, Monsanto has been engaged in building and maintaining “hit lists” of journalists, lawmakers and regulators to be taken out if they opposed the evil agenda of GMOs and toxic glyphosate weed killer chemicals that now inundate the world food supply. Any influential person who opposed the Monsanto agenda was subjected to one or more of the following:

  • Attempted bribery
  • Death threats and intimidation
  • Character assassination through well-funded “negative P.R.” campaigns
  • Defamation via coordinated Wikipedia attacks, run by Monsanto operatives
  • Career destruction, such as getting scientists blacklisted from science journals
  • Being doxxed, having their home addresses publicized and their families and co-workers threatened

In other words, Monsanto has been running a “black ops” division for over ten years, spending perhaps $100 million or more on efforts to silence, destroy or assassinate anyone who interfered with the agricultural giant’s market dominance.

Now, the criminal mafia activity that Monsanto has carried out for years is finally being exposed as law enforcement closes in on the crimes of this evil agricultural giant now owned by Bayer, a corporation that appears to be making an effort to “clean house” and end the Monsanto crimes that targeted journalists, lawmakers and regulators with intimidation and bribery campaigns.

Law enforcement preparing criminal charges against Monsanto division operatives

“French prosecutors said on Friday they had opened an inquiry after newspaper Le Monde filed a complaint alleging that Monsanto – acquired by Bayer for $63 billion last year – had kept a file of 200 names, including journalists and lawmakers in hopes of influencing positions on pesticides,” reports Reuters.

100% organic essential oil sets now available for your home and personal care, including Rosemary, Oregano, Eucalyptus, Tea Tree, Clary Sage and more, all 100% organic and laboratory tested for safety. A multitude of uses, from stress reduction to topical first aid. See the complete listing here, and help support this news site.

This “hit list” of journalists and lawmakers was directly translated into action to intimidate, threaten or bribe these individuals, just as happens in the United States. In fact, a Monsanto spokesperson now confirms the Monsanto mafia used the list to take out anyone standing in the way of the Monsanto agenda. “There have been a number of cases where – as they would say in football – not the ball was played but the man, or woman, was tackled,” admitted Matthias Berninger to Reuters. Berninger is the “head of public affairs and sustainability” of Monsanto.

Further into the statement, Berninger admits Monsanto collected “non-publicly available data about individuals” and then issued an apology from Bayer for the activity. “Following an initial review, we understand that this initiative has raised concerns and criticism,” said Bayer in a May 12th public statement. “This is not the way Bayer seeks dialogue with society and stakeholders. We apologize for this behavior.”

What Natural News can reveal is that Monsanto hired black ops teams and private investigators to dig up the personal locations of individuals and their families, then engaged in activities to threaten and intimidate those individuals while publicly smearing them online through coordinated, well-funded character assassination campaigns.

This author believes that, over the last decade, I have been personally hunted by Monsanto-funded black ops teams who intended to destroy my credibility and physically harm my person in order to silence my public criticism of Monsanto and end the publishing of MonsantoMafia.comGMO.newsGlyphosate.news and the dozens of other websites that Monsanto did not want to see published.

See my full video here, which explains more:

Brighteon.com/6037094491001

Health Ranger: I am willing to share details with Bayer’s investigation team in exchange for a public apology and a retraction of the smears

I am willing to consider the possibility that Bayer is genuine in its attempts to clean up the “Monsanto mafia” mess that it has inherited. It is possible that the culture of Bayer is not nearly as evil and corrupt as the culture of Monsanto, which is why I am willing to sit down with Bayer’s internal investigators and privately detail the illegal tactics that have been used against myself and others who spoke out against the multiple criminal activities carried out by Monsanto’s “black ops” teams.

I will do this in exchange for a public apology from Bayer that specifically names myself, the Food Babe, Jeffrey Smith and other individuals in the independent media (there are about twenty) who have been specifically targeted, smeared and threatened by Monsanto operatives over the years. Bayer may contact my legal team for more details of what we are requesting.

This is a rare opportunity for Bayer to hear directly from the victims of the Monsanto “black ops” division that Bayer likely was not aware it was acquiring when it purchased Monsanto, since the entire division operated in secret and relied on internal corporate money laundering to obfuscate its operations.

Bayer’s attorneys may reach out to Natural News through our public contact page. Our attorneys are also initiating contact with Bayer’s legal team to initiate discussions.

Bayer says it will support criminal indictments of Monsanto operatives

If you read the Bayer announcement that went public on May 12, you’ll find that Bayer is openly supporting the criminal indictment of Monsanto operatives who ran its black ops division. “Bayer will fully support the public prosecutor’s office in France in its investigation,” says the statement.

That same statement also explains:

As an immediate measure, we have decided to suspend our cooperation with the involved external service providers for the time being. The responsible Monsanto manager left the company shortly after the acquisition.

The “external service providers” were, Natural News has learned:

  • Negative P.R. firms hired to engage in online character assassination.
  • Rogue private investigators tasked with geo-locating targeted individuals.
  • “Wet work” intimidation / assassination teams that were directed to threaten violence and / or carry out direct violence against “enemies” of Monsanto, including the targeting of innocent family members.

Bayer goes on to explain, “We are also currently investigating further appropriate consequences both internally and with regard to external parties. Bayer stands for openness and fair dealings with all interest groups. We do not tolerate unethical behavior in our company.”

If true, this would stand in great contrast to Monsanto itself, which was run like a criminal mafia organization, complete with “hit men” and terror campaigns that focused on critics of the biotech company.

Perhaps Bayer is hoping to clean up the Monsanto nightmare and initiate a new era of operations where public debate replaces the intimidation, threats and murder campaigns run by former Monsanto operatives. As someone who has been routinely targeted, threatened and smeared by Monsanto, I am willing to entertain the possibility that Bayer is looking to right past wrongs. Even though I may never agree with the widespread use of herbicides and pharmaceuticals across society, I don’t go out of my way to criticize corporations unless they are engaged in acts of extreme evil.

McDonald’s for example, sells all sorts of garbage food products that are unhealthy for society, but McDonald’s doesn’t hire hit teams to hunt down and try to assassinate critics, for example. McDonald’s just runs ads and tries to get the public to focus on social happiness instead of the chemical pesticides found in their products. And for the most part, it works. Nobody goes to McDonald’s expecting an all-organic diet in the first place. McDonald’s is a “voluntary compromise” where a consumer is obtaining convenience and low cost in exchange for surrendering a bit of their own long-term health. But no one from McDonald’s puts a gun to their head and demands, “EAT HERE OR DIE MUTHA F##KA,” which is essentially the way Monsanto was run for over a decade.

Investigating “the project Monsanto commissioned”

Finally, I want to draw your attention to one more line in the Bayer press release. It refers to “the project Monsanto commissioned” and promises to “evaluate the allegations.”

I can report to you that this “project” is the black ops unit of Monsanto. It was commissioned by angry, evil Monsanto managers whose personal hatred and violence is only exceeded by the violence of the Monsanto corporation itself, which unleashed Agent Orange on the world, along with a long list of other deadly chemicals that were used against innocent civilians as weapons of war.

Monsanto was run by some of the most evil, criminal-minded people in the history of the world. These people, I believe, are directly responsible for acts of extreme violence — both online and offline — that specifically targeted Monsanto critics like myself. They belong behind bars, and it looks like Bayer may actually be willing to help put them there.

It’s time for Bayer to close the chapter on this Monsanto era of disinformation, destruction and death. Otherwise, the anger against Monsanto that is well deserved and widely publicized across the activist community will continue to reflect on Bayer and its share price. Monsanto has committed acts of tremendous evil against innocent, well-meaning individuals who only advocated a cleaner food supply and honest labeling. If Bayer does not open a dialogue with these activists and help resolve some of these issues, Bayer will continue to pay the price for crimes that it inherited through its acquisition of Monsanto, which has already proved disastrous from a financial point of view.

I believe the only way Bayer can resolve this is to talk to those of us who suffered through these malicious attacks and still somehow made it out alive. Bayer needs to publicly apologize, set the record straight, admit the crimes of the Monsanto black ops managers, and retract all the smear articles and Wikipedia entries it funded.

It’s time for Bayer to come clean.

Source: https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-05-15-bayer-discovers-black-ops-monsanto-internal-investigation-law-enforcement-criminal-charges.html