Big Pharma Blood Pressure Drugs Found Laced With Cancer-Causing Chemical

For years, we’ve warned that Big Pharma’s business model is a “repeat business” racket that profits from sickness and disease. We also know that cancer is a multi-billion-dollar industry that generates huge profits from the repeat business of cancer “therapies” such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Now comes news that a popular blood pressure drug sold by Novartis has been found to be laced with a cancer-causing chemical known as “dimethylformamide.”

“A pharmacy warned the Food and Drug Administration that it found a chemical believed to cause cancer in a widely used blood pressure medication, according to a filing from the federal agency,” reports CNBC.

The drugs are part of a popular class of prescription medications the FDA has been quietly recalling after finding them to be laced with cancer-causing chemicals. Those drugs reportedly include valsartan, losartan and irbesartan.

Even more astonishingly, this chemical contamination was discovered by Valisure, an online pharmacy that operates across America. Valisure is apparently running contamination tests on the various medications it sells, and it found that valsartan, the blood pressure medication manufactured by Novartis, contains DMF (dimethylformamide), a chemical known to cause cancer.

Depopulation by Inoculation: Motive and Intent

Vaccine-Child-Doctor-Flu-Needle-Pharmacy-DefenseBy the editor Natural News


For the past four years, I have researched the following question: Is there a deliberate attempt on the part of the global elite to eliminate a substantial portion of humanity through the use of a bioengineered diseases and viruses and the more deadly accompanying vaccines?

As with any murder plot, whether it be a single homicide, or mass genocide, the deadly plot contains the same essential elements: (1) motive, (2) intent, (3) means, and, (4) opportunity. In part one of this series, both motive and intent are examined by presenting the words of the globalists themselves.

An Historical Perspective on Deliberate Depopulation

Through my research, I have discovered that the notion of creating and implementing an intentional and systematic depopulation scheme was not a new phenomenon. The global elite have long advocated for draconian population reductions over the past several centuries. For example, Thomas Malthus argued that the population growth, by the poor, inevitably outstrips food production and leads to a massive retaliation from Mother Nature (i.e., Malthusian Controls). His infamous “Malthusian Controls” which are taught to every first year sociology student, has become a cornerstone belief for many modern day globalists who advocate population control by any means necessary. This radical and dangerous idea promotes the unproven notion that the poor deserve to die because there are too many of them for the Earth to adequately support. Malthus believed that higher wages and welfare should be withheld from the great unwashed because he believed that these two factors would allow the poor to survive and exponentially breed, thus compounding the overpopulation problem.

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, enthusiastically promoted the Malthusian philosophy in the United States as she stated “The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

Perhaps these were merely the musings of two twisted individuals which do not represent any type of central philosophical belief. Unfortunately the theories of Malthus, Sanger and other population control advocates did not die with them. As I discovered, this is a reoccurring theme contained within the personal words of several dozen global leaders.

Read the entire article here:

Farms Under Water – Crops Destroyed

$65 hay bales in Ohio and 31 MILLION unplanted acres of corn in the US are a testament: we are witnessing massive blows to modern agriculture. 80% Raspberry Crop Lost in Serbia to snow/hail. Media stories referencing the cooling are disappearing down the memory hole even as the FDA and EU change their definition of food expiration dates. Start building communities around resilient and regenerative agriculture NOW.

Why Organic Food Is More Sustainable

Sustainability and the environment are top of mind for many today. Issues like smog, rising global temperatures, water pollution, and oodles of plastic waste have many concerned. Many people also question how their food is grown whether through conventional or organic means —and if it’s grown sustainably or not. Organic food offers a more sustainable, long term solution for 4 main reasons:

  1. Organic farming rebuilds soil health and stops harmful chemicals from getting into our water supplies. Water and soil are two extremely important resources necessary for growing food.
  2. Organic farmers don’t rely on non-renewable oil-based fertilizers and pesticides we may not always have access to.
  3. Organic farming results in greater biodiversity
  4. Organic farming releases fewer greenhouse gas emissions

  5. Reason # 1: Less Soil and Water Pollution

    Soil and water pollution are two major problems today, and non-organic food production is surely a big part of this problem. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (UN FAO), about 1/3 or the world’s soil has already been degraded because of “chemical heavy” farming techniques, and deforestation, which increases erosion and global warming.

    • Soil is such an important resource for growing food, and the UN FAO reports that to generate just 3 centimetres of top soil takes 1000 years!
    • Our water, another extremely valuable farming resource, is also at risk. In a long-term study by the United States Geological Society, pesticide compounds were found in streams almost 100% of the time.

    Organically grown and produced food uses a lot less of the toxic fertilizers and pesticides that can deplete soils over time and pollute our water supplies. Organic farmers follow strict regulations and work to rebuild soil health naturally. The choice is simple!

    Reason # 2: Oil-Based Fertilizers and Pesticides

    For many people, whether or not something is sustainable depends on whether it could last for generations to come. Many agree oil isn’t something that’s going to last for generations to come, and the world will eventually face an end of the “oil era”. As the world moves away from oil, gas and coal and towards more renewable forms of energy, like wind and solar, many people are also looking food grown without the use of oil-based fertilizers and pesticides. Under organic production, synthetic, oil-based pesticides and fertilizers are not allowed. Rather, organic farmers produce food with natural fertilisers and less energy, and they must follow strict rules about what inputs can be used.

     Reason # 3: Greater Biodiversity

    It’s no secret that our wildlife is under threat because of chemical agricultural practices. A recent study found that birds in France, for example, have declined by a third in the past 15 years because of changes in agricultural practices, including pesticide use. Another study published last year also found that vast numbers of insects—including helpful pollinators like bees—are dying off.

    Organic farming is beneficial for wildlife: According to scholar John Reganold of Washington State University, organic agriculture results in greater biodiversity of plants, animals, insects and microbes. An analysis of 66 scientific studies showed that organic farms have 30% more species on average than non-organic ones.

     Reason # 4: Fewer Greenhouse Gas Emissions

    Climate change is a serious global threat—with agriculture and food production being major contributors to this threat and the release of greenhouse gases. Although estimates vary, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research reports that 1/3 of our greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture and food production, which agricultural production and growing food accounting for the “lion’s share” of emissions. The UN FAO reports that unless we make an effort to reduce these greenhouse gas emissions, they could increase greatly in the near future.

    Studies like this one here have found that organic farms release a lot less greenhouse gas emissions than non-organic farms. Healthy soils are a major source of carbon storage, and organic farming results in increased carbon sequestration. The U.K.’s Soil Association estimates that if all U.K. farming was converted to organic, at least 1.3 million tonnes of carbon would be taken up by the soil each year. That’s the equivalent of taking nearly 1 million cars off the road!

    The Choice is Clear

    Eating organic is eating sustainably! Organic food is a long-term solution resulting in less soil and water pollution, a decreased reliance on oil-based fertilizers and pesticides, greater biodiversity, and less greenhouse gas emissions.

The Historical Facts on Measles and the Measles Vaccine Censored by Mainstream Media

measles6By Barbara Loe Fisher
National Vaccine Information Center

This year, the fear mongering about measles has reached epidemic proportions in America. A day doesn’t go by without media outlets publishing angry articles and editorials spewing hatred toward a tiny minority of parents with unvaccinated children, who are being blamed for measles outbreaks.

The remedy is always a call to track down, persecute and punish any parent whose child is not vaccinated.

Some state and federal lawmakers are reacting to the relentless fear mongering by proposing to severely restrict the medical vaccine exemption and eliminate all religious and conscientious belief exemptions in state vaccine laws.

These exemptions, which help prevent vaccine injuries and deaths, also protect parental rights, civil liberties and the ethical principle of informed consent to medical risk taking

The U.S. government, the World Health Organization, medical trade associations, the pharmaceutical industry and multi-national communications corporations all agree that the measles virus is extremely dangerous, the MMR vaccine is very safe and effective, and all children must get two doses of MMR vaccine to meet the goal of eradicating measles from the world by 2020.

While most of the public conversation in the past two decades has been focused on children, who have suffered convulsions, encephalitis and encephalopathy after MMR vaccine reactions and become chronically ill and disabled,  there hasn’t been much discussion about measles vaccine effectiveness or what measles was like before and after the vaccine was licensed in the mid-20th century.

This is a special report on measles vaccine failures based on evidence published in the scientific and medical literature that is not being discussed in public conversations about measles vaccine policies and mandatory vaccination laws.

Please read the entire article here and you will see all the false information and propaganda we have been given and the truth that has been kept from us:

Tap Water In California Shown To Cause Cancer

indexBy Sara Middleton

Uranium. Radium. Arsenic. These chemicals are known to cause cancer. Now, thanks to a shocking study from the Environmental Working Group (EWG), we now know that these and other harmful contaminants are found in California’s public tap water.

The study was just published in the latest edition of the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health. EWG’s findings are also consistent with at least one other study out of North Carolina. The major takeaway? Consumption of this tap water is tied to a stunning number of cancer cases over the course of a typical generation.

Drinking contaminated tap water puts your health at risk, increases the chances of this major disease

In their study, the EWG team evaluated tap water samples from over 2,700 public water systems in California, which provide at least 98% of the west coast state’s drinking water. As mentioned, these samples contained harmful, carcinogenic chemicals, such as chloroform, tetrachloroethylene, and hexavalent chromium (in addition to the ones listed above).

The study’s authors were then were able to determine the risk of getting cancer as a result of drinking this contaminated water by taking yearly average contamination levels between the years of 2011 and 2015.

As the authors state: “This results in an estimated number of 221 annual cancer cases due to drinking water contaminants in California,” or about 15,500 cases of cancer over the course of about 70 years (the average lifetime).

You’re reading this right: 15,500+ cases of cancer in California directly caused by drinking contaminated tap water. It’s frightening.

The EWG also state that 495 public water systems in California are considered “high risk.”  What they mean by this is that the tap water from these areas will cause cancer in about 1 in 1,000 people over the course of a lifetime.

They also state that 43 public water systems have a relative cancer risk a high as 4 in 1,000. The EWG does not specify which communities are at highest risk, however they do indicate that they include “communities of less than a thousand residents and one water system serving a population of 19,000.”

The American Cancer Society estimates that as many as 40% of Americans will receive a cancer diagnosis at some point in their lifetime. Based on the recent revelations from the EWG, we can’t help but surmise that the chemicals in our public tap water has something to do with this sobering statistic.

Learn more:

Bayer Admits That Monsanto Had a Shady Agenda Toward ‘Influential’ People


By Sara Middleton

Ahhhh – there’s nothing like the smell of propaganda early in the morning. At least this must be what the higher-ups at the Bayer company think as they start their days trying to figure out how to spin pesticide data and influence the public.

Now, in breaking news, this Big Agra conglomerate – who in 2016 bought Monsanto for a cool $63 billion – is being forced to address some shady behavior exhibited by its newest acquisition. Turns out that Monsanto’s recently-revealed actions indicate a highly plausible attempt to inaccurately change the conversation about pesticide “safety.”

Pesticide secrets: A big company with nothing to hide wouldn’t do this – right?

A team of French prosecutors can be credited with blowing the lid open on a major snafu for the beleaguered Monsanto corporation and its parent company Bayer. Earlier this month, they filed a complaint alleging that Monsanto kept dossiers – let’s call them “cheat sheets” for people – on approximately 200 French journalists, lawmakers, and other folks deemed “influential” by the pesticide business.

These dossiers contained non-public information about private citizens!

Monsanto’s intent?  Simple: to access these people, influence their thoughts on pesticides, herbicides, and other chemicals of their ilk – and in turn change the global public’s view on these known harmful environmental toxins.

Sounds a bit desperate, right?  Think about it: the World Health Organization officially recognizes glyphosate (the prime ingredient in the weed killer Roundup, a Monsanto superstar) as a “probable carcinogenic.”  And, this happened four years ago.

Yet, despite this, Monsanto has still been trying to propagandize their enormously head-in-the-sand message that glyphosate has a “40-year history of safe use.”

Now Bayer has to act like the chagrined parent playing clean-up in the wake of this PR nightmare. We’ll at least give them some credit for owning up to the reality of these dossiers’ existence, as well as acknowledging that these are probably just the tip of the iceberg.

Bayer’s very own head of public affairs and sustainability, Matthias Berninger, made this eyebrow-raising statement to journalists: “It’s safe to say that other countries in Europe were affected by lists…I assume that all [European Union] member states could potentially be affected.”

He went on to indicate that while there weren’t signs of overt illegal activity, Monsanto was likely guilty of unfair access and use of private data.  Even so, French public-sector research institutes including Inra and CNRS are reportedly planning to file criminal complaints regarding mishandling of their employees’ personal data.

As if questionably obtained and disseminated private data about public citizens wasn’t bad enough, there’s even more damning evidence against Monsanto coming out:

The company alleged paid off well-known cancer researcher, Sir Richard Doll, for over two decades. The bribery alleged included a “consultancy fee” of $1,500 per day back in the mid-1980s – right around the time when Sir Doll miraculously concluded that Monsanto’s “Agent Orange” chemical didn’t cause cancer. Hmmm.

This despite the fact that the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) both report that Agent Orange contains chemicals known to be cancer-causing.

That this scientist and researcher failed to disclose this financial information is damnable. But even more damnable is the fact that Monsanto allowed for (encouraged) this kind of biased research – something which has likely contributed to the harm, ill-health, and death of thousands of people.

Here’s the takeaway: major companies will go to extreme lengths to protect their profits and reputation. Beware of the hype and propaganda.

Catastrophic Season for U.S. & Australian Farmers

Wet_Field_Public_DomainBy Ice Age Farmer

It’s Official: Catastrophic Season for US / Australia Starts Importing Wheat

USDA data confirms a record poor planting of corn, as Australia imports wheat for the first time in 12 years, Italy declares natural disasters due to flooding, and Switzerland encounters frosts later than in 70 years. As crop losses intensify, food prices are rising, and you must start growing your own food!

“The worst ever that we’ve seen” – Wettest Since 1895 – Grand Solar Minimum

An inflection point has been reached with respect to the collapse of modern agriculture as we enter the Grand Solar Minimum and the climate changes — and the system is responding by clamping down on truth. As the US experiences its worst planting on record, China is facing a one-two punch from African Swine Fever and Armyworm. Food prices are rising. Canada officially reports a 14-year high of arctic sea ice levels. Will ASF come to US, and inspire forced vaccines for livestock?

Start growing your own food today.

TECHNO-DICTATORSHIP: APPLE Bans Publishing Climate Truth Instead of Carbon Lies

Satellite-Gps-Space-Earth-Planet-1By Mike Adams

Apple now disallows all dissenting views that collide with whatever lies the quack science pushers are floating on any given day, including all the transgender lies that now routinely claim that men can give birth. (Seriously, that’s now a thing in the main stream media.) Attempting to educate people about the benefits of carbon dioxide is now a “crime” in the Apple-verse.

As part of the accelerating techno-dictatorship sweeping across the online world, Apple News has banned Natural News for expressing views which Apple claims are “rejected by the scientific community.”

This ban was received shortly after Natural News published a rebuttal to the junk science climate change narrative which falsely claims that carbon dioxide is a poison that will destroy the planet. (Only someone who is scientifically illiterate or completely brainwashed could believe such a falsehood.)

Natural News dares to state the simple scientific fact — now confirmed by NASA — that carbon dioxide boosts the growth of green plants all across the Earth. This is not allowed by the techno-fascists of the Left who run Apple and insist that CO2 is somehow a poison that’s responsible for “climate change.”

Here’s the world map showing the increase in reforestation and greening, as cited by NASA and published the journal Nature: Climate Change:

Note that this image shows an increase in “greening” across every continent, which NASA confirms is due to rising carbon dioxide, a fertilizer for plants.

Apple censors disagree with scientific reality and ban anyone who speaks the truth

Even though NASA has also admitted that CO2 is greening the Earth, Apple says that Natural News stories are diverging from the “scientific community,” somehow justifying Apple’s censorship of all news from Natural News, including the hundreds of articles each month that cite scientific journals.

Learn more: