Big Pharma prescriptions including painkillers, antidepressants plummeting as seniors turn to medical cannabis

Prescription-Legal-Weed-Pot-Marijuana(NaturalNews) Use of many prescription drugs has plummeted following the legalization of medical marijuana, according to a study conducted by researchers from the University of Georgia and published in the journal Health Affairs.

The researchers found that Medicare prescriptions fell for conditions that can be treated by cannabis, including anxiety, depression, pain, nausea, psychosis, seizures, sleep disorders and spasticity. Prescriptions for other types of drugs, such as blood-thinners, remained unchanged. This led the researchers to conclude that legalization led directly to the changing prescription habits.

The drop in prescriptions led to a measurable decrease in Medicare spending in those states.

Limits Big Pharma price gouging

The researchers found that medical marijuana reduced Medicare costs by $165 million in 2013. If medical marijuana had been legal and available nationwide, the savings would have been about $470 million.

“We wouldn’t say that saving money is the reason to adopt this. But it should be part of the discussion,” said study co-author W. David Bradford.

The researchers are also analyzing the effects of medical marijuana legalization on prescriptions paid by Medicaid, the federal-state insurance program for low-income people. Preliminary data from that study show an even larger drop in pharmaceutical prescription costs.

Much of the savings might come simply from the fact that insurance does not cover medical marijuana, which can cost a patient as much as $400 per month out of pocket.

“I have some trouble with the idea that this is a source of savings,” said Deepak D’Souza of Yale University, who has research medical marijuana but was not involved in the current study.

But Bradford believes that marijuana legalization does lower overall health spending, because marijuana is so much cheaper than many of the pharmaceuticals it displaces. This analysis is supported by Harvard Medical School emeritus professor Lester Grinspoon, who has written two books on the topic (but was not associated with the new study).
“There’s a limit to how high a price cannabis can be sold at as a medicine,” Grinspoon said.

Will DEA finally admit benefits of cannabis?

The lure of lowered health care spending may play an important role in an ongoing review by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which is considering reclassifying marijuana from Schedule I substance to a Schedule II.

A Schedule I drug is classified as having no medical benefits, and therefore doctors are prohibited from prescribing it and insurance will not cover it. Even in the 25 states (plus Washington, D.C.) where medical marijuana is legal, doctors can only write a referral to a dispensary.

Schedule II drugs (like narcotic painkillers) are permitted for medical uses. If marijuana were moved to this classification, insurance companies would be more likely to cover it.

The recent study suggests other major benefits that the DEA would also do well to consider. For example, many of the drugs replaced by medical marijuana use have dangerous side effects that are not a concern with cannabis. Perhaps foremost among these are opioid painkillers, which are relatively easy to lethally overdose on.
“That doesn’t happen with marijuana,” D’Souza said.

While marijuana can carry its own risks, increasing legalization would make it easier for scientists to carry out research that could guide responsible use.
But on a fundamental level, medical marijuana may simply challenge the medical-scientific model of health care by placing key decisions — and even production of the medicine in the hands of the patient.

“As physicians, we are used to prescribing a dose,” D’Souza said.
“Do you say, ‘Take two hits and call me in the morning?’ I have no idea.”

With natural medicine booming, hopefully more people will wake up to the fact that natural medicines, and foods, are in many ways superior to their lab-engineered alternatives. The health-supporting effects of fresh fruits, vegetables and all-natural superfoods simply cannot be beat.

Top Secret Khazarian Mafia Disposal Ops

georgia_guidestones-320x256Target: We The People

By Preston James

The Khazarian Mafia (KM) has a well developed specific set of Disposal Operations for American Soldiers, Middle East Islamics and KM mercenaries (described in previous related articles, Part I and Part II).

And they also have one specifically for We the People in America. They are rolling it out progressively in stages. And it is sinister and evil beyond imagination.

The KM has a grandiose final plan to deploy worldwide Disposal Operations targeting all humans, all over the whole world, and involves a progressive mass kill-off (induced mass-murder) to total about 90% of the human race.

This has been carved in stone in the KM’s Georgia Guidestones and various White Papers of their key Foundations and think-tanks.

During the period between 2016 and 2020, the Khazarian Mafia “Select Few” Top Chieftains plan to complete its worldwide kill-off plan. But first the KM believes it must progressively weaken, sicken, and kill off significant numbers of Americans and make as many as possible dependent on the state for basic sustenance.

The KM believes that it is necessary to disempower the American Masses so that they cannot resist in any significant way when the KM deploys its heavy-duty kill off beginning in 2020.

To disempower the American Masses, the KM enacted numerous Free trade Policies beginning with NAFTA and spreading to CAFTA, GATT and WTO, which has resulted in the massive export of most good American manufacturing jobs, leaving the best, high-paying jobs inside the Beltway, and in elected and appointed USG and State Government positions.

And now the KM is pushing hard for additional Free Trade policies like the TPP and TTIP which will export even more American jobs and lower the American standard of living even more.

These Free Trade Policies and the massive unrestricted immigration policies, including millions of unskilled immigrants as well as highly educated H1B1 immigrants granted Visas have reduced jobs for natural born adult Americans drastically.

And in order to weaken and disarm the American Populace the KM has now rolled out evil policies to spread corruption to every level of government including the new DHS, US Department of Justice and all Alphabets.

The KM plans to kill off the remaining numbers to total about 90% during the period of 2020 to 2030.

Read the entire article here: http://www.theeventchronicle.com/intel/top-secret-khazarian-mafia-disposal-ops-part-iii/

93 Percent of the World’s Seeds Have Been Lost in the Last 80 Years

seedsBy Dr. Mercola

Seeds represent the foundation of life. We depend on them for food, for medicine and for our very survival. In many ways, you can trace the underpinnings of any given culture through the heritage of their crops and seeds.

It wasn’t long ago when seeds were mostly the concern of farmers who, as the Worldwatch Institute put it, “were the seed producers and the guardians of societies’ crop heritage.” But this is no longer the case.

Once considered to be the property of all, like water or even air, seeds have become largely privatized, such that only a handful of companies now control the global food supply.

Agriculture has been around for 10,000 years, but the privatization of seeds has only occurred very recently. In that short time, seed diversity has been decimated, farmers have been put out of business due to rising seed costs… and the pesticide companies that control most seeds today have flourished.

According to Worldwatch:

“…by the early 1900s, the U.S. and Canadian governments began promoting the development of large export-oriented agriculture industries based on only a few crops and livestock species.

To maximize uniformity and yields, seed breeding moved off the farm and into centralized public research centers, such as U.S. land grant universities. Variety development became commodity-oriented.

Scientific advances in the 1970s and ’80s heralded a new era in agriculture. To boost flat sales, Monsanto and other agrichemical companies ventured into genetic engineering and transformed themselves into the biotechnology industry.

They bought out traditional seed companies and engineered their herbicide-resistant genes into the newly acquired seed lines.”

It’s been all downhill from there…

93 Percent of Seeds Have Been Lost in the Last 80 Years

If you were alive in 1903, you would have been able to choose from more than 500 varieties of cabbage, 400 varieties of peas and tomatoes, and 285 varieties of cucumbers.

Eighty years later in 1983, the varieties had dwindled sharply, to just 28 varieties of cabbage, 25 varieties of peas, 79 for tomatoes, and just 16 varieties of cucumbers.

In a comparison of seeds offered in commercial seed houses in the early 1900s to the seeds found in the National Seed Storage Laboratory in 1983, researchers found 93 percent of seeds were lost over eight decades.

The National Geographic infographic below shows just how many varieties of fruits and vegetables appear near extinction.  Even more concerning is the fact that the data is already more than 30 years old, and the problem may have gotten even worse since.

For the record, it’s not only fruits and vegetables that are disappearing. The Millennium Seed Bank Partnership estimates that 60,000 to 100,000 plant species are in danger of extinction.

Loss of Seed Diversity Coincides with the Consolidation of Seed Companies

Seeds have traditionally been saved and shared between farmers from one harvest season to the next. Farmers rarely ever had to buy new seed. Nature, when left alone, provides you with the means to propagate the next harvest in a never-ending cycle.

Now, however, farmers relying on patented seeds must buy them each year from pesticide companies like Monsanto. Saving such seeds is illegal because it is considered to be patent infringement.

Many farmers depend on Monsanto’s genetically modified (GM) (and patented) seeds. More than 90 percent of US soybeans and 80 percent of corn acreage is planted with Monsanto’s patented GM seeds.

For 200 years, the patenting of life was prohibited, especially with respect to foods. But all of that changed in 1978 with the first patent of a living organism, an oil-eating microbe, which opened the proverbial floodgates.

Please read entire article here: http://www.theeventchronicle.com/media/informational/93-percent-of-the-worlds-seeds-have-been-lost-in-the-last-80-years/

SHOCK STUDY: Countries with highest vaccination rates have highest infant mortality rates, too

African-American-Infant-Mother-Doctor-Vaccine(NaturalNews) Wealthy countries that require the highest number of vaccines for children under the age of 1 also have the highest rates of death in that age group, according to a study conducted by an independent computer scientist and a researcher from the Think Twice Global Vaccine Institute, and published in the journal Human & Experimental Toxicology in 2011.

The study stemmed from the recognition that while the U.S. vaccine schedule calls for more vaccine doses than any other country, the United States still ranks 34th among nations in terms of infant mortality.

For the purposes of the study, the researchers defined a “vaccine dose” as “an exact amount of medicine or drug to be administered.” Thus, triple vaccines such as DTaP or MMR are each considered to be three vaccine doses, since three drugs are being given at the same time.
The U.S. vaccine schedule calls for 26 vaccine doses before age 1.

More vaccination, more infant death

The researchers collected infant mortality rates (IMRs) for the top 34 countries in the world. Four of the countries – Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco and San Marino – had so few infant deaths (fewer than five) that their IMRs were considered statistically unreliable, so these countries were excluded from the analysis.

For the remaining 30 countries, a higher number of required vaccine doses was associated with a higher IMR – refuting the argument that a higher number of vaccinations improves overall infant health.
In fact, most of the vaccines recommended for children under age 1 are not intended to prevent diseases that are dangerous in that age group. Instead, U.S. vaccine policy emphasizes vaccinating children at as young an age as possible, including against diseases that are only dangerous later in life.

The countries were then divided into five different groups, depending on how many vaccine doses they require for children under age 1: 12–14 doses, 15–17 doses, 18–20 doses, 21–23 doses and 24–26 doses. The researchers found that countries in the 12–14 dose group had significantly better (lower) IMRs than countries in the 21–23 or 24–26 groups.

What is causing these deaths?

The researchers noted that many factors contribute to IMR, which is considered one of a country’s most important public health indicators. Poor countries tend to have high IMRs because of the absence or poor distribution of basic health services and infrastructure, including sanitation. Infectious diseases tend to be more common in these countries, largely because of that same poor health infrastructure and poor nutrition.

In wealthier countries, however – such as those examined in the current study – the factors contributing to IMRs may be less clear. For example, the United States saw an increase in premature births between 1990 and 2006, but this increase is not sufficient to explain the country’s unusually high IMR for a wealthy nation.

“It appears that at a certain stage in nations’ movement up the socio-economic scale—after the basic necessities for infant survival (proper nutrition, sanitation, clean water, and access to health care) have been met—a counter-intuitive relationship occurs between the number of vaccines given to infants and infant mortality rates: nations with higher (worse) infant mortality rates give their infants, on average, more vaccine doses,” the researchers wrote.

“This … elicits an important inquiry: are some infant deaths associated with over-vaccination?”

Learn  more: http://www.naturalnews.com/054303_vaccination_infant_mortality_rates_vaccine_injury.html

FDA’s latest nutrition label ‘makeover’ warns consumers about calorie counts while ignoring GMOs and toxic chemical additives

Reading-Label(NaturalNews) When will the government of the United States of America ever actually help Americans get healthy, and duly inform consumers about all food ingredients by utilizing honest food labels instead of using trickery and deception? Every year, the FDA and the USDA approve more and more food toxins, while covering up the health detriment they cause, all while leading people down a dark corridor of poor health.

Does it really matter if you “count calories” if all those calories are empty ones, devoid of all nutrition? Will it be helpful to limit or eliminate your “fat” intake, if you only limit or eliminate all the good fats – the kind your body needs to function properly? Did your MD bother to educate you about the difference between good fats and molecularly-altered “bad” fats? Labels were first focused on how much fat you eat, but since the FDA doesn’t educate anyone on bad fat versus good fat, it never mattered.

What if you get excited about some new labels on food because you’re supposed to watch your cholesterol, only to find out that you need cholesterol and your medical doctor and the labels steered you completely wrong? And then there’s sugar – the sugar that comes from genetically modified corn, highly concentrated (HFCS) which contains bug-killer and weed-killer that leads directly to cancer and diabetes. What difference does it really make if you “moderate” your poison intake? It’s still poison. Will you brag to your friends that you’re regulating and “reducing” your own poison intake because some new food labels are helping you?

More ‘Big Food’ propaganda disguised as food label modifications

The FDA is actually announcing that serving sizes will be “less misleading.” How about not misleading at all? What if someone told you they would be less abusive to you – would you be excited about that? The size of the “calories” number will be much bigger and bolder. Now we are to “count calories” more easily, as if it matters whether you eat the whole can of toxic chili or half, or whether you eat six donuts or four, or you chomp down half the sack of hydrogenated-GM-oil-soaked chips or the whole bag.

Labels will give a new “percent daily value” for sugars, letting you know how much sugar is recommended for your “daily intake.” This is supposed to influence food manufacturers to put in less sugar at the factory. Does that mean they will simply insert more of those deadly chemical sweeteners in order to compensate for America’s sweet tooth, like aspartame, sucralose, sorbitol, saccharine and acesulfame potassium?

Basically each whole package of food will be a serving, so obese people feel less obese, and diabetics may feel less diabetic. No more guilt for eating that party-size bag of chips. That’s just one serving! Wait, you ate a whole box of cookies and drank a half-gallon of conventional milk? No problem. That was just a single serving.

The FDA is saying that, by law, serving sizes should be based on actual consumption habits and not ideal consumption, and since more than a third of Americans are obese, and half of the rest are overweight, that “Big Gulp” at 7/11 will become one serving. Are two double cheeseburgers and some super-sized fries just one helping? What’s next, a two-liter bottle of diet soda becoming one serving? Hey, look, no calories!

Most food companies are being given until July of 2018 to comply, or face government intervention. Smaller companies may get an extra year to comply. Michele Obama is leading the charge for these “new labels,” but her husband is the King of GMO and does whatever Monsanto tells him to do. These new food labels don’t “inform” us of anything, they misinform us on everything.

What’s hiding in U.S. foods are thousands of chemical agents approved by the FDA, genetically modified organisms that were never intended to be eaten, and chemical cleansing and preserving agents that lengthen food shelf-life while shortening human life. As Americans become more obese and more diabetic, fewer and fewer consumers are reading labels or even know what they’re reading if they do. It’s a tricky, corporate world of smoke and mirrors out there, and the only healthy Americans are ones who educate themselves about dangerous food ingredients and look to alternative health news for answers.

Want to learn how to read food labels and filter the disease-promoting ingredients? Stay tuned for the upcoming Health Ranger book that teaches you how to quickly and properly decode the labels and ingredients on not just food, but supplements, personal care products and medicines. There are new helpful rules for reading labels, but they’re not coming from the U.S. government or the U.S. regulatory agencies. Watch this space.

 

Tennessee Doctor Could Lose License After Announcing Office Will No Longer Vaccinate Due To Autism Concerns

not vaccinat3(NaturalNews) The announcement by a medical practice in Cool Springs, Tennessee, that it will stop administering vaccines out of concerns over autism could see the doctor at the heart of the scandal losing his license.

In a statement posted on the website of Cool Springs Family Medicine that has since been removed, the clinic’s only physician, Dr. Daniel Kalb, outlines eight points of contention, including links to autism and the dangerous ingredients found in vaccines such as aluminum, formaldehyde, and animal DNA that contains viruses. The statement also singles out Gardasil for being unsafe and possibly leading to neuroimmune disorders and cervical cancer.

Kalb wrote: “I’ve had 15 years experience in taking care of ASD kids. That’s a lot of vaccine injury stories from moms. Don’t tell me that they are making it up or they are just reaching for an explanation. All of those arguments are stupid.”

Dr. Kalb earned his medical degree at SUNY/Stony Brook and also holds a Master’s in Public Health. He is a fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics and is board-certified.

Doctor’s license could be at stake

While officials from the Tennessee Department of Health were not willing to comment specifically about the case, they voiced their support for the CDC’s recommendations regarding routine immunizations. When asked by the media if Dr. Kalb could lose his license over this, they refused to speculate on what action the Board of Medical Examiners might take.

It comes as no surprise that many parties are quick to speak out against the doctor’s brave stance. There have long been calls for doctors who are opposed to vaccines to lose their license. For example, in a hateful Forbes piece, Contributor Dr. Peter Lipson calls out several doctors who have gone on the record as being opposed to vaccines.

Lipson says that “doctors speaking out against vaccination in the midst of an ongoing outbreak should be investigated, warned, and censured. They should have their licenses suspended until undergoing 150 hours of continuing medical education on public health and infectious diseases…”

He closes by adding that a cardiologist who actively encourages people to avoid vaccines and says there is no need inject chemicals into children to boost their immune systems should lose his license outright.

A 2015 article in the Washington Post by medical ethics expert Arthur L. Caplan is even less kind. He said of doctors who are opposed to vaccines: “They shouldn’t be allowed near patients, let alone TV cameras.”

“Doctors who purvey views based on anecdote, myth, hearsay, rumor, ideology, fraud or some combination of all of these, particularly during an epidemic, should have their medical licenses revoked. Thankfully, states have the right tools to do so. It’s time to use them.”

He points out that many states’ licensing boards have provisions in place for the removal of a doctor’s license if he or she is deemed to be unprofessional or incompetent or to endanger public health.

Fox 17 News Nashville reported: “According to the Tennessee Department of Health’s website, Kalb has had no disciplinary actions taken against him. It is not clear if his stance on autism and vaccines will provoke to board to take any actions against him.”

Doctor’s concerns are backed by science

It is more than a little unsettling to think that a doctor could lose his license simply for raising concerns about the vaccines he must administer to patients. He raises some valid points. For example, the MMR vaccine has indeed been linked to autism and a host of other health problems. Gardasil has been linked with seizures, cervical cancer, autoimmune disorders, short-term memory loss, paralysis, and blindness. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen, and the list goes on.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/054398_vaccine_dangers_autism_doctors.html#ixzz4Fqv5moZD

Living With Electrohypersensitivity – A Survival Guide

gwen tower

                                    What is Electrohypersensitivity or EHS?

In addition to numerous other health problems, electromagnetic pollution has been associated with an increase in the number of individuals suffering from a condition known as electrohypersensitivity (EHS). EHS is defined by the World Health Organization as: “…a phenomenon where individuals experience adverse health effects while in the vicinity of devices emanating electric, magnetic, or electromagnetic fields.”

Human beings are bioelectrical systems. Our hearts and brains are regulated by internal bioelectrical signals. Environmental exposures to artificial EMFs can interact with fundamental biological processes in the human body.

We are living in an increasingly complex electrical environment and are inundated daily with electromagnetic frequencies ranging from less than 20 Hz (electric trains) to greater than 1 billion Hz (wireless telecommunication). Most of these frequencies are man-made and were not present until the invention and subsequent commercialization of electricity (early 1900s), radio (1920s), radar (1940s), television (1950s), computers (1970s), and cell phones (1980s). Whether, and at what intensities, these frequencies have biological effects has been a subject of scientific debate for decades.
Early recognition, avoidance of symptom-triggering agents, environmental control, treatments that may reduce residual toxins and recovery of normal biological processes are key to regaining health for people with sensitivities. Without mitigation of the incitant, people with environmental sensitivities may become severely debilitated.
Please read the entire informative article here:

Foods Gene-edited to Withstand Noxious Herbicides Are Being Labeled Non-GMO

GMO-DNA-Genes-Plate-SilverwareThe US Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently announced that it will not regulate the entire forthcoming generation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), allowing new genetically engineered (GE) foods to enter the food supply without any testing or permitting process. This “free pass” by the USDA will also allow these new GMOs to be legally marketed as “non-GMO,” including in states such as Vermont that have passed GMO labeling laws.

The technologies in question are part of a suite of techniques known (inaccurately) as “gene editing.” And foods made with “gene edited” ingredients are already being sold to consumers.

Calling it ‘non-GMO’ doesn’t make it true

Gene editing consists of using enzymes to splice out a strand of DNA at a targeted location, combined with another technique (such as insertion of a “DNA template”) to guide the DNA’s natural repair process to insert a preferred gene.

Gene editing techniques include clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR), zinc finger nucleases (ZFN), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs) and oligonucleotide directed mutagenesis (ODM). The latter technique consists of injecting synthetic DNA into cells, thereby triggering cells to mutate and mimic the synthetic DNA.

What none of these techniques involves is the old method of physically inserting a strand of DNA from a separate species. Thus, organisms produced by gene editing could not be accurately called “transgenic.” Yet, to deny that they are genetically modified flies in the face of both the plain and scientific meanings of the terms GE and GMO – and, notably, even the legal definitions of the European Union.

Nevertheless, the USDA recently announced that a new slow-browning variety of mushroom, produced via CRISPR, would not be regulated as a GMO, and could be sold to consumers without further testing or approval.

The implications of this are far-reaching, and not just because of the ongoing battle over whether a voluntary federal labeling standard will preempt laws in states such as Vermont. Almost 17 percent of the new food products sold in the United States in 2015 were labeled non-GMO, compared with only 3 percent just four years prior. And, according to a recent survey by market research firm Mintel, 52 percent of U.S. consumers seek out non-GMO products.

Canada has announced that foods made with “gene editing” will be regulated as “novel” products, just like transgenic GMOs. The European Union is still considering the question.

Products already at a store near you

Gene edited foods are already big business. A new herbicide-resistant canola variety engineered with gene editing is already making its way into oil sold to consumers. A soybean variety engineered to produce oil that can withstand higher heat is due to hit the market as early as 2018. Other “edited” GMOs in the works include a low-gluten wheat variety, and a potato that produces lower levels of acrylamide, a chemical linked with cancer (but found mostly in cigarettes and the breakdown products of industrial chemicals, including Roundup). Every major biotech company is investing heavily in gene editing research.

These companies are also investing in a propaganda blitz designed to convince regulators and consumers that gene editing is fundamentally different from “genetic engineering” – that it is safer, more precise and more accurate. All of these assertions are myths, says geneticist and virologist Jonathan Latham, executive director of the Bioscience Resource Project and editor of Independent Science News.

Doug Gurian-Sherman, director of sustainable agriculture at the Center for Food Safety, agrees. He says that the claims made about gene editing – namely, that it will solve problems such as disease and hunger – mirror the same false promises made about GMOs in the 1990s.

“This is largely unproven,” he said. “There’s a proclivity to believe we can develop new, useful technology that will answer tough problems.”

http://www.naturalnews.com/054719_gene_editing_GMOs_unlabeled_foods.html#ixzz4FN53HZRZ

Malta Fearlessly Prepares to Outlaw Glyphosate

Glyphosate-Red-Mask-HerbicideLeading by example, Malta is poised to become the first European Union nation to enact a complete ban on the carcinogenic herbicide glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller.

The move towards a complete ban in the country comes on the heels of the decision in June by the European Commission to grant an 18-month extension of the license for glyphosate.

In a meeting of member states in June, Malta was the only country that voted against the extension of the license. The Maltese government has now begun taking steps towards implementing a complete ban on glyphosate use, according to the Times of Malta.

Malta’s decision to impose an outright ban – after an earlier “disappointing compromise” vote in April by five of the country’s six MEPs to approve a seven-year extension of the license – was at least partly based on revelations regarding an alleged conflict of interest on the part of the chairman of the UN’s Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR).

Fraud, corruption and conflict of interest

In May, The Guardian published an article revealing the conflict of interest charges:

“It has emerged that an institute co-run by the chairman of the UN’s joint meeting on pesticide residues (JMPR) received a six-figure donation from Monsanto, which uses the substance as a core ingredient in its bestselling Roundup weedkiller.

“Professor Alan Boobis, who chaired the UN’s joint FAO/WHO meeting on glyphosate, also works as the vice-president of the International Life Science Institute (ILSI) Europe.”

In 2012, the ILSI accepted a $500,000 donation from Monsanto, according to documents which were released to the U.S. Right to Know campaign.

The organization has been tied to conflict of interest cases in the past, and is considered by many to be nothing more than an industry mouthpiece.

As it has done for years in the United States, Monsanto is also spending millions in Europe buying scientists in efforts to protect its multi-billion dollar glyphosate market.

In recent years, however, Monsanto has faced an increasingly uphill battle, as awareness of glyphosate’s dangers and opposition to its use have grown among citizens and governments, particularly in the European Union.

Increasing evidence of fraud and corruption on the part of Monsanto and its paid minions have begun to erode the biotech giant’s influence on policy-making in Europe.

When the license extension vote was cast in June, Malta was the only country opposed to the extension, but France, along with several other nations, abstained from the vote, meaning that a limited majority decision could not be reached.

Since then, France has changed its stance and opposed the extension; France is now reportedly considering its own national ban.

Setting an example for Europe to follow

Malta’s decision to ban glyphosate has been hailed as a courageous move, and may serve as an example for other countries to follow.

A spokesman for Friends of the Earth Malta said:
“The decision shows courage from government’s side as it chose to listen to the concerns of experts and individuals who have demanded that our fields, streets and gardens would be free from this risky weed killer.

“We also hope that other European countries grab this opportunity to make European farming safer and greener, which is what the public wants.”

The tide may be beginning to turn in the fight against glyphosate use and GM agriculture, but much remains to be done, particularly in the United States, where glyphosate is being used on a massive scale, while the EPA continues to raise the maximum allowable glyphosate levels.

http://www.naturalnews.com/054705_Malta_glyphosate_ban_herbicide.html#ixzz4FN38TG6E

Dozens of Teenage Girls From Japan Injured by HPV Vaccine

Vaccine-Syringe-Hand-Medical-HPVDozens of teenage girls from Japan injured by HPV vaccine file suit against government, drug makers; complaints of constant full-body pain.

News broke earlier this week that at least 64 women experiencing adverse health effects from cervical cancer vaccines, are filing damages lawsuits against the Japanese government and the drug makers who produced the vaccines in the first place.

Filing in four different district courts, the Tokyo District Court, the Nagoya District Court, the Osaka District Court and the Fukuoka District Court, each victim is demanding 15 million yen.

The average age of the women involved is 18 years old, with each receiving the vaccination between the ages of 11 and 16.

Cervical cancer vaccine causes adverse health reactions

Cervical cancer vaccines have been known to cause adverse health reactions, including nerve disorders and other alarming immune reactions.

According to Japan Times, “Cervical cancer vaccines were included in routine vaccination programs in April 2013.” After hearing numerous reports of women suffering strange, harmful side effects as a result of receiving the vaccine, the Japanese government stopped recommending cervical cancer vaccines two months later.

That changed in April of this year though, when the Japan Pediatric Society and other institutes recommended the issuance of the controversial vaccines, claiming “it is clear they are effective in preventing cervical cancer,” as reported by Japan Times.

Masumi Minaguchi, one of the lawyers representing the women filing the lawsuit, elaborated on his belief that the government and drug producers are responsible for the damages his clients have experienced. Claiming that the victims’ symptoms include pain all over the body, Minaguchi told Japan Times, “We aim to clarify the responsibilities of the government and the drugmakers through the lawsuits so that the victims can live without anxiety.”

This isn’t the first time people have voiced their concerns about cervical cancer vaccines. Nevertheless, the HPV vaccine – a method of treatment to prevent the contraction of the human papillomavirus, a known cause of the development of cervical cancer – has been strongly recommended by doctors across the U.S.

Growing concern surrounding HPV vaccine in U.S.

According to CBS News, “There’s a growing concern that more parents are stopping their children from receiving the shots because of unwarranted safety concerns.”

Between 2008 and 2010, the number of parents who refused to give their children the HPV vaccine specifically because of safety concerns nearly quadrupled, from 4.5 percent to 16 percent.

“I’m not sure what has gone into that increase,” Dr. Paul Darden, a pediatrician at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center in Oklahoma City said.

Perhaps it was the 12,424 cases of adverse health reactions, resulting in 32 deaths, that were reported in June 2006, as a result of the 23 million doses that had been administered up to that date.

Whatever it is, those suffering negative side effects associated with HPV vaccinations are not happy, and are seeking retribution.

http://www.naturalnews.com/054733_vaccine_injury_HPV_Japan.html#ixzz4FN1bbZab