Sandra Finley

2004-11-13 Genetically modified: documentary by Bertram Verhaag “LIFE RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL; Gene Food and Designer Babies.” GM fish and pigs.

Genetically Modified, Salmon & Fish No Responses »

Nov 132004

Bertram from Germany writes “there was an interim injunction from Monsanto versus our film “LIFE RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL“.

(See future postings for updates.)

— – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

PRESS RELEASE, JULY 2004

Wednesday, July 14, 23:00 p.m.

The Documentary:

Life Running Out of Control – Gene Food and Designer Babies

A Film Produced by Bertram Verhaag and Gabriele Kröber

Editor: Dr. Gudrun Hanke-El Ghomri

Genetic technology is one of the most important topics of our century. The film made by Bertram Verhaag and Gabriele Kröber demonstrates that the risks and perils of gene manipulation have not been fully estimated up to now, neither with regard to plants, animals nor even humans.

In Canada, genetically modified canola and soya have been cultivated on a large scale for years. Percy Schmeiser was one of those Canadian farmers who cultivated canola in the traditional way – until a heavy storm blew genetically modified canola onto his fields during harvest time. Canola, which was patented by the US corporation Monsanto. Since then, Monsanto has been suing Schmeiser for illegal cultivation of its patented seed.

In India, many small farmers are faced with ruin because Monsanto’s genetically modified cotton, approved in 2002 for the first time, had produced a disastrous crop. Thousands of farmers see the only escape from debts in suicide. Vandana Shiva, author and environmental advocate, with a Ph.D. in physics, has dedicated herself to protecting the rights of India’s small farmers and preserving bio-diversity for more than 20 years. She collects traditional seeds and passes them on to farmers. Vandana Shiva is firmly opposed to patenting foodstuffs in any form. Fifteen years ago she founded the privately-funded experimental farm NAVDANYA.

“Aqua Bounty”, a Canadian company, is shortly expected to obtain market approval of its sterile, genetically modified giant salmon. Can the consumption of “gene food” cause chronic diseases and a weakening of the immune system? At least some scientists harbor this suspicion. Only a few scientists are doing independent – without the financial support of private industry – research on the impact of transgenic animals and plants on the environment and health, as for example, the Norwegian Terje Traavic.

Since the final sequencing of the human genome, a cure for illnesses such as multiple sclerosis, diabetes or Alzheimer’s appeared to be in the offing.

Genes for criminal behavior, depression or alcoholism were sought after.

The reproduction industry promotes the concept of the “perfect” child by means of genetic analysis.

In Iceland a large data bank has been created that is owned by a private company. Blood samples, DNA analyses and available data on all Icelandic patients are supposed to be collected here, thus enabling certain genes to be assigned to various hereditary and endemic diseases. The Swiss company F. Hoffmann-LaRoche has pledged $200 million – however, only after the data has been supplied – for the identification of genes that are responsible for certain diseases. The impact of gene technology on our lives is increasing. And we are often unaware of this.

Gene technology: a golden opportunity or a risky intervention into life processes? For Bertram Verhaag the answer is unequivocal: This is a gigantic human experiment without a control group.

= = = = = = = = = = == = = = = =

BACKGROUND FOR NEWCOMERS (Sandra speaking):

Last year while our network was battling Roundup Resistant Wheat, we worked with two different filmmakers who came from Germany to Saskatchewan – Manfred from German Public Television, and BERTRAM VERHAAG who is an independent documentary film maker.

If you mention a video “Blue Eyes, Brown Eyes” to educators in Canada, the United States and in many, many countries around the world, they will respond with enthusiasm. In 1995-6 Bertram and his crew made THAT DOCUMENTARY, which is about disempowerment – not disempowerment “in theory”, but by visceral demonstration using real people. The video is widely used internationally in the fight against racism.

We continue to work with Bertram and Manfred. On my part, it is not just a “work” relationship, but one of friends. I have great admiration and respect for the work they are doing.

Some of the footage and commentary for Bertram’s documentary “LIFE RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL” was obtained in Saskatchewan while he was here last year.

“LIFE RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL” takes you around the world on an exploration of what is happening in the universe of transgenics. You see pigs that are the product of Pig crossed with Human genes. Fish for commercial enterprise that are the product of fish genes crossed with growth genes from non-fishes to produce fish, that are at the end of a year, 6 times larger than the natural species. You see the problems that are created, but completely glossed over and not addressed … the (to me) frightening inability of scientists and Governments (PEOPLE!) TO THINK. Psychological denial – the same as in the email just circulated – “EPA to use poor kids as guinea pigs to test toxic chemicals”. Some huge failure created by people working in concert with each other, and individually perceiving no responsibility.

BERTRAM WRITES:

” … We are trying to do our part from good old Europe. As you maybe know already there was an interim injunction from Monsanto versus our film “LIFE RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL”. Last week was a discussion at the court and we found a way both sides can live with- and now the film is on the market again.

What Monsanto asked to change was the following: They (Monsanto) claimed that we had shown Percy Schmeiser only as a victim and not as “actively RoundUpReady Canola cultivating farmer”. Monsanto could ask for this because this is cited in the Supreme Court Ruling (even it is a mistake by the Supreme Court) so we had to change one sentence which fortunately didn’t at all change our film.

Second good news: we sold the film to SCN (Saskatchewan Networks) in Regina. They will air the film as North American Premiere in February, 10 th 2005 at 8:30pm. …

I hope you are well and healthy and have a good time in spite of all this surrounding problems.

Very best wishes- from Munich,

Bertram

—

DENKmal-Film GmbH

Schwindstrasse 2

80798 München

tel: +49-(0)89-52 66 01; fax: +49-(0)89-523 47 42; www.denkmal-film.com; mail AT denkmal-film.com

============================

(ME, SANDRA, WRITING:)

I have VHS copies of ”LIFE RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL” – the original pre-Monsanto version!! Please contact me if you wish to obtain. (UPDATE: all copies except one were passed along to other people to be used like a chain letter.)

We congratulated Bertram and his crew earlier for the accomplishment that “Life Running Out of Control” represents. It is easy enough to say “bravo! bravo!” to Bertram now, for his success in court against Monsanto, and I DO give him a warm embrace and a standing ovation! – it is just as important to remember the costs. I shudder at the cost and the determination it takes to make the documentary. The documentary is for the public good – information we need. The success of one documentary, Blue Eyes Brown Eyes, covers past costs and allowed Bertram to continue his work. I get angry that Monsanto can de-rail and add significant costs to this new production by taking the filmmaker to court. Lawyer costs, personal time away from productive work, the tension of the legal battle, uncertainty as to outcome – Monsanto piles this on top.

Bertram’s success in court is another victory – another wearing away of Monsanto. That win is for all of us. Thank-you to him for fighting it. We are indeed warriors around the world! Somehow it makes me feel kind of special that I have the good fortune to be able to join hands with all of you.

When you see the awards that “LIFE RUNNING OUT OF CONTROL” garners – “List of Festivals and Awards” you will be as happy as I am. A further contribution we all can make is to help ensure that people see the documentary.

Cheers!

2004-11-02 “The Insider”, “The Corporation”, & J K Galbraith’s “The Economics of Innocent Fraud”

Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Culture and Ethics, Why we flounder or do not flounder No Responses »

Nov 022004

Galbraith’s book “The Economics of Innocent Fraud” ( 2004-09-13) further reinforces the message behind Joel Bakan’s “The Corporation” and “The Insider“.

(1) THE INSIDER, movie, 1999, available on video

I just saw “The Insider“. It’s excellent – stay with it past the introductory portion which is at first confusing. It’s about the Tobacco Industry. Parallels to the Chem Industry.

This review will give you an idea:

http://www.greaterthings.com/Essays/all_fakes.htm “… a precursor to enable me to appreciate all the more the video I watched last night: “The Insider,” which was based on a true story in which a fortune 500 corporate tobacco executive, Jeffery Wigand (played by Russell Crowe), blew the whistle on the industry, and Lowell Bergman (played by Al Pacino), a producer from 60 Minutes quit his job because 60 Minutes balked under pressure to not air the interview — after the guy had risked everything to come forward, including death threats against his family, his wife leaving him and taking his two daughters. Bergman said of the movie that it was “the presentation of information that you’ll never see on network television news.” “Jeffrey Wigand became the first fiduciary officer of a Fortune 500 company to ever speak out of school on television.”

Paradoxically, the locating of the Unabomber happened just after the point of climax in this story. Bergman had this to say: “I would venture to guess that if you become one of those modern heroes of industrial America today and are worth more than a billion dollars, you are virtually immune from any negative enterprise reporting from any television network news organization.” He praised on his favorite lines from the movie: “You know, the press is free for those who own one.”

Where is the honor to make us a noble people?

The courage shown by Jeffery Wigand was almost single handedly responsible for finally bringing about the call to responsibility by the Tobacco industry for the many deaths and diminution of health that their product has caused — with their full awareness.

Great show, by the way. It’s a must see. Very sophisticated and very real.

We (those friends/business associates of mine) need someone like Bergman in the cause in which we are engaged. The question is, do we deserve him? Not if we can’t be as true to our word and faithful to integrity as Wigand was.

http://www.jeffreywigand.com/

“I did the right thing ….. As you can see we were all just ordinary people placed in extraordinary situations and did the right thing, as all should do.”

=====================================

(2) THE CORPORATION: THE PATHOLOGICAL PURSUIT OF POWER

by Joel Bakan.

The movie came out in 2003 (free on-line at http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+corporation+film&FORM=VIRE8#view=detail&mid=070C42F2F67A2C31C1C4070C42F2F67A2C31C1C4) . The publish date on the book is 2004.

If you have the opportunity, both are excellent – – they will help change the course of history.

http://www.alternet.org/story/17695

Corporations Are Insane

By Ross Crockford, AlterNet. Posted January 29, 2004.

A new film argues that our era’s dominant institution is a psychopath. Add up the symptoms, and the corporation starts to resemble Ted Bundy.

Enron. WorldCom. Bechtel. Halliburton. To the cheerleaders on MSNBC and in The Wall Street Journal, such deceitful, profiteering companies are a few “bad apples” in a healthy economic barrel, as rare as a murderer in a convent.

But a new documentary that premiered at the Sundance festival film last week argues that these rogue companies aren’t the exception, they’re the rule.

The controversial premise of The Corporation is that every company is legally programmed to act like a psychopath. And the bigger it gets, the worse it behaves.

“The corporation is a paradox,” says Mark Achbar, who co-directed and wrote the documentary with Vancouver filmmaker Jennifer Abbott and law professor Joel Bakan. “It generates tremendous wealth, but at tremendous social and environmental cost.”

Achbar, best-known for his 1992 documentary “Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media,” says that when he started working on the new film six years ago, it originally was about the anti-globalization movement. But he realized that the growing protests were really against corporate power — and despite the millions of news hours and pages devoted to mergers, acquisitions, marketing strategies and CEO profiles, no one had really examined the history and the character of the corporation itself.

An unlikely subject for a hit film, perhaps. But The Corporation’s entertaining mix of interviews, cartoons and old industrial films has already won three “people’s choice” prizes at film festivals, including Sundance’s World Cinema Documentary Audience Award (sponsored, ironically, by Coca-Cola). In Canada, where “The Corporation” has garnered rave reviews — one compared it to “the best issue of Harper’s magazine set to music” — it’s currently playing to sold-out theatres across the country.

“Everybody wants to buy their products from a socially responsible corporation, not from some horrible polluter,” Achbar says. “The question is, how are we going to resolve this dilemma?”

As the film spells out, corporations have often been regarded with suspicion. America’s founding fathers worried that enterprises like the Dutch West India Company, which controlled vast areas of the new world, would overwhelm their republic. (Thomas Jefferson wrote to a friend: “I hope we shall …crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”) So when the U.S. Government granted charters allowing new corporations to come into being, the terms were restricitve.

But corporations grew in size and power during the booming 19th century, and their owners wanted to expand their legal rights as well. Since owners or shareholders couldn’t be held personally liable, they argued, the corporation itself should be treated as a “person” — thus entitling it to all the protections of the Constitution. The argument was accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1886, in the case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railway Company. Consequently, a corporation today has the right to free speech, the right to own property, and the right to due process of law, just as a person does.

So what kind of person is it?

To answer that question, the film ingeniously compares notorious examples of bad corporate behavior to a list of psychiatric symptoms. Nike jumping from sweatshop to sweatshop in ever-poorer countries? That shows an “incapacity to maintain enduring relationships.”

Monsanto’s refusal to acknowledge the harm caused by Agent Orange? That’s an “incapacity to experience guilt.” Corporate directors are required by law to do only what’s best for the company, regardless of the consequences to anyone else — in other words, a corporation is motivated purely by self-interest. Add up the symptoms, as an FBI consultant does onscreen, and the corporation starts to resemble Ted Bundy.

Several of these points are scored in the film by Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, writer Naomi Klein and historian Howard Zinn. The filmmakers also interviewed CEOs — and discovered that many of them are equally troubled by corporate pathology. The perverse genius of the corporation is not just that it maximizes profit by offloading as many costs (employee education, environmental cleanup) as possible onto the public; it also enables owners and managers to simultaneously claim that each other are ultimately responsible for the company’s actions. Even to those at the top, the corporation seems like a monster beyond anyone’s control.

“Even though the perception is that you have absolute power to do what you want, the reality is that you don’t have that power,” says Sam Gibara, the former CEO of Goodyear, when asked in the film about the massive layoffs he oversaw in the late 1990s. “Sometimes, if you really had a free hand, if you really did what suited your personal priorities, you’d act differently. But as a CEO you cannot do that.”

Gibara’s not entirely correct; Ray Anderson, CEO of the carpetmaker Interface, emerges as the soft-spoken hero of the film, for pushing his company to embrace principles of environmental sustainability. But as “The Corporation” points out, such conversions are rare, because one-half of all stock in publicly traded U.S. companies is owned by the wealthiest one percent of the population.

If there’s any criticism to make of the film, it’s that the barrage of such facts is relentlessly depressing. It also tends to lose its focus in the latter half of its 145-minute run time, by detailing even more alarming case studies of corporate malfeasance, such as Fox News suppressing its own reporters’ investigations into Monsanto’s bovine growth hormone, or IBM’s collaboration with Nazi Germany, each of which deserve an entire documentary on its own.

But like a Hollywood blockbuster, “The Corporation” does manage to end on an upbeat note. Co-directors Achbar and Abbott turn their lens on citizens’ movements around the world that are discussing and protesting corporate power, and in some cases initiating petitions and court proceedings forcing governments to revoke the charters of particularly malevolent companies.

After all, as Nobel prize-winning economist Milton Friedman says onscreen, the corporation is merely a legal structure. And to filmmaker Abbott, that leaves room for hope. “We created the corporation, and we can change it,” she says. “We want people to emerge from the film feeling there are things we can do.”

Ross Crockford is a freelance writer who lives in Victoria, British Columbia.

2004-10-29 American Patriot Act overrides Canadian laws. B.C. Privacy Commissioner’s Report, 2004.

Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials) No Responses »

Oct 292004

By my reading of it, the B.C. Privacy Commissioner’s Report (2004) (below) establishes that the American Patriot Act overrides Canadian Law.

Under the Patriot Act, Lockheed Martin and all other American corporations and their subsidiaries in other countries including Canada, are legally required to hand requested data over to the U.S. government (the U.S. military).

The Canadian Government is NOT advised when there is such a handover of information on its individual citizens.

NOTE: I noticed a TD Bank (Toronto Dominion Band merged with Canada Trust) ad on American TV. The advertisement said that “TD Bank” is an American company.

The gun registry is run by an American corporation.

Earlier, unions in B.C. challenged the out-sourcing of their health records to an American company. It sparked the B.C. Privacy Commissioner’s enquiry into the Patriot Act (below). I don’t know the situation now with the B.C. health records.

There are many, many data bases with personal information of Canadians that are now contracted-out to American corporations.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 29, 2004

REPORT ON PRIVACY IMPLICATIONS OF THE USA PATRIOT ACT

Victoria—

In releasing the report, Loukidelis expressed his appreciation for the significant contribution to the report of his special legal adviser, The Hon. Gérard V. La Forest, C.C., Q.C., retired justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, “an eminent privacy expert and expert on international law”. Loukidelis added that, “Our report benefited greatly from his wisdom, especially in relation to privacy under the Charter and the implications of US law for compliance with BC’s privacy law.”

The OIPC’s report follows a ten weeks of research and analysis triggered earlier this year by a BC Government & Service Employees Union lawsuit that raised concerns about personal information in the custody of a US linked outsource provider located in Canada being vulnerable to secret disclosure to the FBI under the

The report concludes that outsourcing of public services to the private sector is not prohibited by the

These are examples of the report’s 16 recommendations:

• Legislation should be passed to make it an offence for a public body or a contractor to disclose personal information or send it outside Canada in response to a foreign court order, subpoena or warrant, with violation being punished by a fine of up to $1 million or a term of imprisonment, or both;

• Public bodies should be required to ensure that outsourcing contracts contain provisions designed to preclude control by a US company over records containing British Columbians’ personal information;

• The British Columbia government should adopt a litigation policy under which it will initiate or participate in legal proceedings abroad, including the US, to resist demands for personal information of British Columbians made by a US or other foreign court or agency;

PATRIOT ACT RELEASED Information and Privacy Commissioner David Loukidelis today released his office’s advisory report on the privacy implications of the USA Patriot Act. USA Patriot Act. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, but that, because there is a “reasonable possibility” of unauthorized disclosure of British Columbians’ personal information under the USA Patriot Act, “rigorous other measures must be put into place to mitigate against illegal and surreptitious access.” Loukidelis added that the report contains “significant recommendations for protecting British Columbians’ personal information in the possession of private contractors from disclosure to the FBI under the USA Patriot Act.” He noted that, “A number of our recommendations go beyond the measures the government recently introduced through Bill 73”, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Amendment Act, 2004. Mailing Address: PO Box 9038, Stn Prov Govt, Victoria B.C. V8W 9A4 Location: Third Floor, 756 Fort Street Telephone: (250) 387-5629 Facsimile: (250) 387-1696 Toll Free enquiries through

In releasing the report, Loukidelis said, “We have considered the complex issues with great care and tried to offer as responsible and effective a set of recommendations as we can.” He went on to say, “Our review of the

He also added, “We received more than 500 submissions and they forced us to go beyond the two questions I’d raised about the

“Privacy risks don’t come only from the US,” the Commissioner noted. “Canada’s laws contain powers similar to those in the USA Patriot Act. When government enacts strong national security measures, it needs to make sure that human rights—including privacy rights—continue to be protected. In Canada, we have to be sure that national security powers are not used for ordinary law enforcement purposes. We have to watch for blurring of the lines between national security and ordinary law enforcement powers. This is why the upcoming Parliamentary review of the Anti-terrorism Act must ensure that the law properly balances public safety with privacy rights.”

The full text of the report can be found through What’s New at www.oipc.bc.ca.

Enquiry BC at 1-800-663-7867 or 660-2421 (Vancouver) website: http//www.oipc.bc.ca 2 •

• There should be an immediate and comprehensive audit of interprovincial, national and transnational information sharing agreements affecting all public bodies in British Columbia;

• There should be an immediate and comprehensive audit of all operational and planned data mining activities by all public bodies in British Columbia;

• Legislated controls should be passed to deal with information sharing and data mining activities, in order to better protect privacy and ensure transparency around these activities.

The British Columbia government and government of Canada should seek assurances from relevant US officials that they will not attempt to access, under the USA Patriot Act, personal information of British Columbians located in British Columbia; USA Patriot Act and the outsourcing of public services in British Columbia has caused us to confront the most challenging and important privacy issues my office has faced since I took this job just over five years ago,” the Commissioner stated. USA Patriot Act and government outsourcing. This is why some of our recommendations tackle wider issues, for example, information sharing between Canadian authorities and other governments.” For further information contact:

Judy Durrance, Review Officer/Coordinator, Intake

Phone: 250 387-5629

Fax at 250-387-1696

Email: info@oipc.bc.ca

2004-10-27 The disease side of the equation

Health No Responses »

Oct 272004

You have received the “chemical” half of the story. (Pesticides: Biggest battle in Canada is in Saskatoon – 36% of industry sales, etc.)

This is the disease side, circulated prior, repeated for newcomers.

====================

– Furdale is a very small hamlet south of Saskatoon. 3 teenage friends from Furdale have died from cancer and a fourth is now diagnosed.

– my hometown of Luseland: small population, high incidence of cancer, MS and Parkinsons (details below)

– most rural people go to City hospitals for treatment. Their deaths are recorded by StatsCan as having occurred in the City (where the expense was incurred). The system masks what is happening.

– Dr. Stuart Houston, retired radiologist arranged for me to meet a radiologist who worked one year in Regina and the next in Saskatoon. In her opinion there is an epidemic of cancer coming, among farm men in particular.

– A Health Canada scientist in Regina has finished the first phase of a study of drinking water in the Province. It is not published. 13% of the drinking water samples contain chemical pesticides. The work is meeting resistance. The guy is just a scientist doing his work.

I have communicated this information, except for the last item, to the City of Saskatoon and to the Province. In July.

================================

July, 2004 EXCERPTS FROM COMMUNICATIONS TO MUNICIPAL AND PROVINCIAL GOVTS

What is happening in Saskatchewan

(1) Recently a memoriam for a teen-age daughter appeared in the Star Phoenix. The parents explained:

“It is very sad that as of last week another one of my daughter’s friends has been diagnosed with cancer. This makes 4 childhood friends who grew up together at our home south of Saskatoon.”

This is not a comprehensive list of the disease in this small community, just the cases of 4 friends. I am told of a young woman from the community who drowned herself after being diagnosed with cancer, rather than go through the ordeal of treatment, only to die anyway.

The area draws its water from the South Saskatchewan River after it has flowed through miles of agricultural land. Some residents don’t have sophisticated water treatment, nor an appreciation of what is in the water.

Chemical pesticides are used on the 4 golf courses in the area, and on the farm fields that run to the edge of the town. There are also high voltage transmission lines from the QE Power Station across the River. It is likely that the cause of the cancers (“bizarre forms”) is a combination of inputs.

(Note: The Town of Hudson, Quebec banned the cosmetic use of pesticides after a young boy appealed to the citizens: he lived adjacent to the Golf Course. There is enough evidence linking golf course pesticide use to cancers that the Town banned cosmetic use. Riding Mountain National Park Golf Course has not used pesticides for years now, out of concern for employees and golfers. There are obviously alternative horticultural practices that work.)

So common sense dictates that we should not be dumping more poisons, like vaporooter (chemical mixture used to dissolve tree roots in sewer lines) into our water supplies until we at least know what is happening.

This community of Furdale is not alone.

(2) My home town’s population is 650 residents plus farms. At Christmas over kitchen-table talk I was horrified by the recent cancer fatalities.

1. Farmer (XXJoe – surnames are deleted XX), died Dec. 17, age 63, cancerous brain tumor,cancer widespread, diagnosed in late summer.

2. Farmer (XXDon XX), prostate cancer metastasized to the bones, age about 68, diagnosed in December, dead in September.

3. Farmer XXLeland XX), funeral Oct/Nov, age 63, prostate cancer metastasized.

4. Farmer (XXHans XX), died Dec.27, age 86, lung to brain cancer, diagnosed in Sept.

5. Resident (XXFrank XX), bowel cancer, funeral in Sept.

6. Resident (XXDavid XX), age 38, treated for extensive bowel cancer.

7. Resident (XXRoxanne XX), malignant brain cancer, late 30’s or early 40’s, undergoing treatment, fighting for her life.

8. Resident (XXBetty XX), age 65 to 70, sinus cancer, on-going treatment, fighting for her life.

We listed these 8 people, all recent – it does not account for people who have moved away from the community, nor would we have known all the incidents.

As well, too many people in the community have died or suffer from MS and Parkinsons disease.

These facts support what I heard from a medical doctor.

(3) Dr. Stuart Houston arranged for me to meet a radiologist. Radiologists see diagnostic x-rays, ultra-sounds, scans, etc. from all departments of the hospital. The radiologist described how they inadvertently discover slow-acting, lethal cancer when they are examining, e.g. an x-ray for a broken leg. The cancers take 10 to 15 years to kill the host organism. In her opinion, there is an epidemic of cancer coming. (The epidemic may already have arrived (my home-town experience?).

(4) That there is definitely a problem is also substantiated by an article in The Montreal Gazette, one week ago:

“According to the Canadian Institute of Child Health statistics, cancer in Canadian children under age 15 increased by 25 per cent during the past 25 years.”

The report of this Institute also notes that Saskatchewan’s performance is among the worst of all Canada’s provinces.

Saskatchewan buys 36% of the pesticides sold in Canada.

It is not progressive to use vaporooter (chemical mixture used to dissolve tree roots in sewer lines). There is an alternative: augering.

Cost-benefit analysis do not address health effects. There is a relationship between cancers and accumulated pesticides. Cancer drugs and treatment are very expensive. The estimated average cost of treating a child with the type of cancer experienced by the daughter in the memoriam is $1 million dollars. Our medicare system is reliant on drug therapy, so a large portion of this million dollars for one child goes to the pharmaceutical companies, which own the chemical companies. The second highest cost in Medicare is for drugs. The child died in spite of the expenditure. In fact, these 3 children alone are dead in spite of the expenditures.

SO WHAT IS BEING DONE?

(1) Government of Quebec and Municipalities, 11 million people protected

The Governments stone wall when it comes to chemicals, with one exception.

The Government of Quebec has legislated a ban on the cosmetic use of pesticides. The ban is province-wide. Because the Federal and other Provincial Governments refuse to act, municipalities such as Toronto, Halifax, and Vancouver, have legislated their own by-laws to protect the health of citizens.

The number of municipal pesticide by-laws has increased to a total of 66 across Canada. When the current regulations and by-laws come into full effect the total number of Canadians protected from unwanted exposure to synthetic lawn and garden pesticides will be close to 11 million or approximately 35% of Canada’s population.

The bylaws will help to lessen the amount of chemicals that enter water supplies in Canada.

(2) Rural deaths are recorded as having occurred in urban centres

Getting back to the communities here in Saskatchewan: the disease rate in these communities is alarming. You are asking, “how can the evidence be ignored?”.

If a person from a rural community dies from cancer in Saskatoon or Regina, which is what happens (most patients come to the Cities for treatment) Statistics Canada records the death as having occurred in Saskatoon or Regina. That is an incredible distortion which masks what is happening.

(3) “Senior” Government won’t act. Empowerment of Municipalities.

The Government is not going to act. The chemical industry has a great deal of money and influence.

Communities are, of course, not without power, as evidenced by the number of bylaws that have been passed. The failure to assume responsibility when it is your own children, relatives and friends who will suffer from inaction, is a sign of great decay in the society.

(4) The inane idea that it is okay to “get” the diseases, we’ll find a cure for you.

Why should Saskatonians know about the situation in rural communities?

One reason is that we all pay for healthcare costs which continue to escalate faster than Government revenues. We MUST REMOVE the CAUSES of disease before we run out of money for education. THE INANE IDEA that it is okay to “get” the diseases because we will find a cure to fix you, is extremely inhumane, especially when it is children who are the most vulnerable.

Pesticides contribute to developmental disorders, problems with cognitive functioning, etc. It is all well documented. The costs are not only to the medicare system; the educational and justice systems are impacted. The cost to families is very high.

Some of you are men. The rest of you have fathers or husbands. Sperm counts in males in industrialized countries are down by 40% since the 1950’

s. This is well-known in Europe, not so well-publicized here. The Dept of Fisheries and Oceans finally conducted research in Canada which was released in January 2003. They concluded that fish downstream from sewage treatment plants are “feminized”. It’s from the drugs that enter the water through urine, birth control pills, insulin, anti-depressants, who knows what, PLUS chemicals. Hormone disruptors. Saskatoon City Staff said there was no detectable vapo-rooter in the water coming out of the sewage treatment plant. Feminized fish and sterile men tell you that there are many contaminants in the water that are not detected.

===========================

(SENT TO PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT)

Thank you for your response on behalf of the Government to my communication of July 18th (copy below).

To seek yet more information is a recipe for inaction at a time when action is dictated by circumstances. So thanks, but I decline the Government’s suggestion to contact the Cancer Agency (copy below).

Further to the dumping of more chemicals into the water supply, I submitted additional information to the City of Saskatoon. The related TABLE OF CONTENTS is appended.

Taken in its entirety, the information is a condemnation of the chemical and pharmaceutical industries and those who collaborate with them. The issue is one of “in whose interests?”, whether we are talking about continued unnecessary use of chemicals or pharmacare.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS: The material documents the unacceptable conflicts between the interests of the chemical industry (which is largely the same ownership as the pharmaceutical and transgenic industries), and the Governments (through such agencies as the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA)). The consequence of the conflicts-in-interest is that the common good upon which we are all dependent for health (air, water, soil), is not being served or protected.

The material also documents the corrupt behaviour of the chemical and pharmaceutical industries.

REQUEST: Because of the compelling information, I call on you to allocate the new money for Medicare to the prevention of disease. The inanity, inhumanity and self-serving nature of the existing attitude, “it’s okay to get the disease, we’ll cure you” ensures a large and growing clientele for the medicare system. Also for the pharmaceutical industry. At tax-payers’ expense (both financially and in health).

The objective of healthcare should be healthy people. The indicators should therefore measure HEALTH, not a waiting list, or people’s “satisfaction“, or the number and kind of facilities. Those reflect how much money you spend, and the effectiveness of your advertising campaign (the spin doctors). They do not tell you whether the expenditures are effective – – what is needed.

Trends like a declining number of people with asthma or diabetes or migraine headaches, or childhood cancer, etc. will tell you whether dollars have been effectively allocated. The goals are achieved in the long term. If the medical profession in concert with the Government is incapable of reducing the trend whereby every year there is a 1% increase in the number of children with asthma, or with cancer, then they should be relieved of their responsibilities and their pay. They are not getting the “health care” job done.

The TABLE OF CONTENTS appended provides the broad picture.

Thank-you for your time and consideration. I will appreciate a response to questions:

1) Will new monies for medicare be allocated to the prevention of disease?

(There is the issue of cosmetic use of pesticides and others. I note that the Minister of Education in Ontario is mandating the removal of junk foods from schools. The President of Uganda will not attend meetings or conferences where alcohol is served as a matter of setting a role model (Addiction is behind large amounts of medicare spending.). Etc.)

2) What are the specifics of your agenda in this regard?

3) Will the Government implement yardsticks by which we can measure the actual effectiveness of dollars spent on the care of health? (We have the yardsticks: the number of children with asthma and cancer has increased by 1% every year over the last 25 years, the number of people with diabetes, etc. – but you don’t use them to evaluate your effectiveness, which enables you to perpetuate a system in which the amount of sickness increases. Someone is benefitting and it is not citizens. I urge REMOVAL OF CAUSE, especially if I’m expected to pay for the system.)

Yours truly,

Sandra Finley

============================

NOTE: should you wish copies of the documentation related to the effectiveness of the regulatory system (PMRA), the corruptness of the chemical/pharmaceutical industry, etc. please contact me. I am happy to supply. The sources of information are public documents.

============================

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO MY LETTER OF JULY 19:

(Typed from hard copy)

September 1, 2004

File: 04-14725

cc: John Nilson, Minister Health, Pat Atkinson, MLA Saskatoon Nutana

Peter Prebble, Minister for SaskWater, David Forbes, Minister Environment

Lily Stonehouse, Deputy Sask Environment Jon Tonita, Sask Cancer Society

Dear Ms. Finley:

John Nilson, Minister of Health, has asked me to respond in follow-up to your correspondence with Ms. Lily Stonehouse, Deputy Minister of Sask Environment, regarding pesticides and their possible link to disease rates.

I am in receipt of your e-mail of July 18, 2004, to Ms. Stonehouse and her letter to you of August 4, 2004.

The Sask Cancer Agency has information on the incidence of various forms of cancer in the province. You can direct your inquiry to Mr. Jon Tonita, Director, Program Evaluation and Surveillance, Sask Cancer Agency (address) if you would like more information on the available data. Mr. Tonita would also be able to province you with information on the challenges of interpreting disease rates in small population groupings.

Sincerely,

John Wright

Deputy Minister of Health

2004-10-24 Our greatest fear is of our own power

Empowerment No Responses »

Oct 242004

“Our Greatest Fear” has been incorrectly attributed to Nelson Mandela in his inaugural speech of 1994.
Alice Walker said it this way: The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don’t have any.

Our Greatest Fear

Marianne Williamson from her book A Return to Love

Our greatest fear is not that we are inadequate,

but that we are powerful beyond measure.

It is our light, not our darkness, that frightens us.

We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant,

gorgeous, handsome, talented and fabulous?

Actually, who are you not to be?

You are a child of God.

Your playing small does not serve the world.

There is nothing enlightened about shrinking

so that other people won’t feel insecure around you.

We were born to make manifest the glory of God within us.

It is not just in some; it is in everyone.

And, as we let our own light shine, we consciously give

other people permission to do the same.

As we are liberated from our fear,

our presence automatically liberates others.

2004-09-28 RR Wheat: Monsanto prods South American nations on soy royalties, Reuters

Genetically Modified No Responses »

Sep 282004

Thanks to Elaine:

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/27378/story.htm

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina – Monsanto Co. (MON.N: Quote, Profile, Research) , a company that has pioneered the development of bioengineered crops, is pushing hard to recover millions of dollars in lost revenue in three South American countries where farmers have sown its wonder seeds without paying royalties.

But, despite a determined lobbying drive in Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay – the three top soybean exporters after the United States – these nations are unlikely to act quickly enough to satisfy the St. Louis-based agricultural giant, which would like reforms in place now, with the 2004/2005 planting season just beginning.

A bill that could legalize biotech crops in Brazil, one of the only remaining holdouts among major soy-producing countries, has stalled in Congress, delaying the day when Monsanto could counter widespread sales of its seeds on the black market.

In Argentina, the government won’t finalize a royalties fund proposal until December – and then the bill will go to Congress. Meanwhile, in neighboring Paraguay, peasant protests may delay an accord on such fees in that country.

“This is definitely a region of particular interest to the company, because that is where soybean production is growing the fastest,” said Todd Duvick, a food analyst at Banc of America Securities in Charlotte, North Carolina.

As soy production has surged in South America, particularly in Brazil, U.S. farmers paying stiff technology fees to Monsanto have decried the competitive advantage enjoyed by Latin American farmers using pirated Roundup Ready seeds, which will produce soy plants resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup Ready herbicide.

“We believe it is reasonable that he who uses a technology and gains benefits by using it, also pays for it,” Monsanto spokeswoman Lori Fisher told Reuters.

“Both Argentina and Brazil are important to worldwide agriculture and to any company who wishes to be compensated for the innovations they are bringing to agriculture,” Fisher said.

For years farmers in Brazil and Paraguay – where genetically modified crops are illegal – have planted pirated Roundup Ready soy seeds.

Roundup Ready soy, engineered to withstand the effects of Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicide, is popular with farmers because it makes soy cultivation cheaper and easier.

Roundup Ready soy is legal and is widely used in Argentina. Royalty fees are built into seed prices, but because soybean seeds are widely traded on the black market, Monsanto is demanding another mechanism.

The company stopped selling soy seeds in Argentina last year, saying it could not make back its investments. Now it threatens to collect royalties on soy shipments from Argentina to countries where Roundup Ready is patented, if they are found to carry unlicensed Monsanto product.

“This would be a worst-case scenario. It would give rise to conflicts and individual arrangements,” said Alberto Rodriguez, director of Argentina’s Center for Grain Exporters.

“The price for soy would no longer be transparent, because some buyers would have to factor in that cost, depending on the destination for their soy,” he added.

Argentine farmers often sow saved seeds that they have culled from plants in the prior growing season, which is legal. But they also cull seeds to sell on the black market.

Monsanto’s renewed push in Argentina comes after the government in February dropped an antidumping complaint against Chinese-made glyphosate herbicide.

“They’re going after (royalties) a bit more aggressively now than perhaps they had in the past because they realize they may be losing some business on their chemical side,” said Frank Mitsch, an analyst at Fulcrum Global Partners in New York.

SIX YEARS AND COUNTING

Brazil is one of the only remaining major agricultural exporters to ban the commercial use of genetically modified crops, although many of its soybean farmers have ignored the ban over the past six years and planted black-market biotech soybeans.

Brazil’s president said on Thursday he may issue a decree granting amnesty to producers of genetically modified soybeans for a third growing season, while a biosafety bill that would make the crops legal makes its way through Congress.

Farmers in Brazil’s Rio Grande do Sul, one of the country’s leading soy states, agreed in January to pay 10 reais ($3.50) per tonne to Monsanto whenever they deliver 2003/2004 beans to grain elevators. Congress has yet to set a national standard.

Monsanto’s Fisher said the royalty collection system in this state and neighboring Santa Catarina is being expanded to other soy-producing regions as the 2004/2005 season begins.

“We’re very pleased to see Monsanto has been able to start collections at any amount, because we’ve been placed at an unfair competitive advantage of paying for technology that was pirated in Brazil,” said Ron Heck, president of the American Soy Association. U.S. growers aren’t the only ones pleased.

“This accord is a success for our producers, because it means Monsanto and other companies can trust them and will be willing to market here new GMO products that are being developed,” said Irmfried Schmied, trade director for Cotrijal Cooperative in Rio Grande do Sul.

In Paraguay, where biotech crops are in a legal vacuum, some 40 percent to 50 percent of soybeans are genetically modified.

“Monsanto has no right to charge royalties. As of now, none of its varieties is legally sanctioned,” said Rosa Oviedo, a member of Paraguay’s biosafety commission.

A Paraguayan soy producer participating in talks on royalty charges told Reuters on condition of anonymity that the government is likely to delay a decree legalizing biotech crops because of objections by peasants.

So while these three South American nations appear closer to striking a deal with Monsanto, the company’s drive to install a broad royalties scheme in each is unlikely to see immediate results.

(Additional reporting by Reese Ewing in Sao Paulo; Mariel Cristaldo and Daniela Desantis in Asuncion) Story by Hilary Burke Story Date: 28/9/2004

Check out Planet Ark on the web at www.planetark.com

2004-09-22 RR Wheat: Fresh fears over GM crops, UK

Genetically Modified No Responses »

Sep 222004

Thanks to Elaine:

This is LONDON

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13323695?source=Evening%20Standard

22/09/04 – News and city section

Fresh fears over GM crops

By Mark Prigg , Evening Standard Science Correspondent Dramatic new claims about the dangers of GM crops emerged today.

Scientists have found that pollen from genetically modified plants is capable of contaminating crops more than 12 miles away.

That is more than double all previous estimates of its ability to travel.

The news will reignite the debate over GM crop safety by suggesting the contamination risk from the farming method has been seriously underestimated. Former environment minister Michael Meacher said the research was “extremely significant”.

He added: “What this means is that Britain is too small an island to ever grow GM crops.

“We would need to have exclusion-zones of around 12 miles for every farm. It just isn’t practical.”

The study was carried out by the American environmental protection agency, a US government body, and studied how far GM grass seeds were carried over nearby fields.

Seeds from wild grasses growing around the experimental plots were analysed for traces of GM.

The team found extensive gene contamination within 1.2 miles downwind of the experimental plots. But some contaminated grass seeds turned up across an area of 193 square miles, with the most distant discovery 13 miles away.

It is the first time GM crops have been proved to travel such large distances, and the suspicion is that pollen from many crops could actually travel hundreds of miles.

Mr Meacher today called for the Government to outlaw GM crop farming in light of the research.

He said: “Logically this should end the debate – it shows that any GM crop would contaminate traditional crops over such a huge distance that it would effectively wipe out organic methods.

“However, the Government seems determined to find a way around this, so I think the whole thing will go on. But it is particularly important that this research has come from America, where there are several examples of contamination already.”

The National Farmers’ Union said the effects of GM in Britain could be different from the American results but agreed the report was a matter of concern.

Dr Helen Serrier of the National Farmers’ Union said: “This research was on a particular type of grass seed. In the UK we would grow different crops but this is definitely an area we need to look at more, and we are currently working with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on just this.”

The department is discussing GM contamination and hopes to reach a conclusion later this year on safe separation distances between GM and non-GM crops.

A spokesman said: “We are currently working on co- existence, which includes separation distance. We hope to publish the results before the end of the autumn, and plan to have any co-existence measures in place before any commercial GM crops are grown in the UK.”

Find this story at http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13323695?version=1

2004-04-19 Monsanto seeks approval for GM Alfalfa in Canada

Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Food, Genetically Modified No Responses »

Sep 192004

Hi folks,

Here is something we really do not want to see.

Cathy

– – – – – – –

Notice of Submission for Approval of Novel Food, Livestock Feed and Environmental Safety for Alfalfa Genetically Modified For Herbicide Tolerance from Monsanto Canada Inc.

Date Posted: September 7, 2004

“http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/subs/subnote.shtml”

“http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/subs/subliste.shtml”

Background

The CFIA and Health Canada (HC) have received a submission from Monsanto Canada Inc. seeking environmental safety approval, and livestock feed and food use approvals of alfalfa designated as Events J101 and J163, which have been genetically modified for glyphosate herbicide tolerance. These events are not intended for commercial planting or seed production purposes. The submission received is in accordance with CFIA guidelines for assessment of plants with novel traits (PNTs) for unconfined release, CFIA guidelines for assessment of novel feeds from PNTs, and HC guidelines for assessment of novel foods.

(Remainder deleted. Out-of-date.)

2004-09-17 RR Wheat: Did Canada give approval to GM corn? Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Genetically Modified No Responses »

Sep 172004

From the article below “Monsanto said the corn had been given full approval by authorities in the U.S., Canada and Japan..”.

I did not know that Canada had given approval to GM corn?

/Sandra

================================

Thanks to Elaine:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1201452.htm

NEWS ANALYSIS

GM corn safety study overlooked, critics Anna Salleh ABC Science Online

Friday, 17 September 2004

French scientists were concerned about a type of GM corn based on the findings of a rat study (Image: iStockphoto) Genetically modified (GM) corn has been approved as a food ingredient without Australia and New Zealand’s safety regulator considering a study showing adverse effects in rats, critics say.

The Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) and environmental organisations are now calling for imports of Monsanto’s GM corn, known as MON863, to be suspended pending independent review.

Last October, Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) found the GM corn safe for human consumption.

But critics are concerned that the assessment did not consider Monsanto’s 90-day rat study. This had been submitted earlier to European authorities and had led to France’s genetic engineering commission, the CGB, to advise against the corn.

“In its report, CGB concluded it was not able to show the absence of health risks to animals with regard to MON863 corn,” Dr Judy Carman of the PHAA told ABC Science Online, citing an article in French newspaper La Monde.

Although the European Food Safety Authority had subsequently given the corn the all clear in April this year, the Le Monde reported the CGB remained concerned about the Monsanto study, which found blood and kidney irregularities in rats fed the corn.

“The feeding study was made available to CGB in June 2003,” said Carman. “Therefore the document existed and was circulating before FSANZ made its decision on this corn four months later in October 2003.

“So FSANZ should have been aware of this study. FSANZ should have made sure it got a copy of the raw data in the document and it should have made sure that it took the results of those studies into account in its assessment,” she said.

Carman said the PHAA wanted imports of the GM corn suspended pending review by an independent body such as the National Health and Medical Research Council or the PHAA. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand and Greenpeace have made similar calls.

FSANZ said a Monsanto study found chickens fed the corn grew just as rapidly as if they had been fed conventional corn (Image: iStockphoto) Rat study not necessary, says FSANZ

FSANZ said while Monsanto had supplied it with a chicken feeding study, no studies on rats were provided while the agency was assessing the corn’s safety. And that at the time no further data was thought necessary or requested.

FSANZ said the New Zealand Greens had informed it earlier this month of the rat study. The agency said it contacted Monsanto the same day for further information, which it would evaluate once it had received the full package of raw data.

But on the data it had received so far, FSANZ believed there were no concerns for human health.

FSANZ said that it was aware that CGB had raised some concerns about the rat study but noted that the European Food Safety Authority had examined the study, along with other data Monsanto had provided, and concluded that the corn was “unlikely to have an adverse effect on human and animal health or the environment”.

The corn, which may appear unlabelled in processed foods in Australia and New Zealand, has been engineered to produce an insecticidal protein normally produced by the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt).

FSANZ said for such foods, studies where the GM plant food as a whole is fed to the animal added little to safety information.

Toxicity studies

Instead, the agency said it relied more on toxicity studies, in which high levels of the purified protein, in this case Bt toxin, were produced by a bacterium and given directly to the animal.

“FSANZ does not require feeding studies in animals, such as this 90-day feeding study in rats, to be submitted as part of an application to FSANZ for a GM food,” it said in the statement.

Carman, from the PHAA, criticised this approach, arguing it assumed that the GM plant would only produce the new proteins it was designed to produce, nothing else.

“That’s a huge assumption,” she said. “Because one of the question marks is whether the GM crop, because of the way it’s made, is going to throw up novel substances.”

She said toxicity studies also assumed the protein bacteria produced had the same structure and function as the protein as it appeared in the plant.

“The protein as it appears in the plant is not tested,” she said. “And plants can do things to proteins once they’re made, to change their structure and their function, that bacteria can’t. So it’s a big assumption it’s going to be exactly the same.”

She also criticised the short-term nature of toxicity studies.

Corn cleared by other agencies

Monsanto said that given the European Food Safety Authority concluded there were no concerns over the corn’s safety, claims that the rat study showed adverse effects were misleading.

A spokesman said the study, which was first forwarded to European authorities in August 2002, was not given to FSANZ because the agency did not require it.

“Different countries ask for different studies to be done. So this study was one that was requested in Europe,” he said. “It’s not something the Australian regulators asked for. Hence it wasn’t provided to them.”

Monsanto said the corn had been given full approval by authorities in the U.S., Canada and Japan. It also said that no expert committee in Europe or in France, apart from the CGB, expressed concerns relating to the study. While it had received the “final scientific sign-off” in Europe, politicians had yet to approve it, Monsanto said.

2004-09-15 Racketeering charges against Monsanto re Aspartame. Rumsfeld. Artifical sweeteners.

Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Genetically Modified No Responses »

Sep 152004

An earlier email re aspartame included explanation of Monsanto’s connection. Update.

From Al:

Greetings;

Here is more evidence (see below) that the institutions that are supposed to be protecting the public health are failing. In this case it is aspartame in the U.S. but we have similar problems in Canada.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) not banning the feeding of animal products to ruminants. Yet they were warned over three years ago that allowing animal wastes, especially brains and spinal cords, to be incorporated into ruminant feed, was a guarantee to spread BSE. And spread it did.

Vioxx, like aspartame, was approved by Health Canada for widespread use. Now Vioxx, after only an 18 month study is being pulled from the market because the testing was inadequate and now heart problems show up.

Mecoprop, an ingredient in 98 herbicide products, has been deregistered because of health and environmental problems, yet the Federal Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) is allowing it to be used until 2009.

Our Sask. health department won’t do anything about removing Mecoprop from the market, even though they agree, “most of the concern is about the potential for long term toxicity, whether it be neurotoxicity, teratogenicity or carcenogenicity. Among the issues related to it are that it acts slowly (over a couple of weeks) and that it can be fairly persistent in the environment (weeks).” If that isn’t reason for our health department to order the removal of products containing Mecoprop, I guess nothing is.

All of these cases point out that the institutions set up to protect the public health and the environment are more interested in the economic health of the industries they regulate than they are in protecting the public health and the environment.

Seems to me some good investigative journalism would expose these deficiencies. Their mandates need to change so our institutions do what we pay them to do. Protect our food supply, the public health and the environment.

Thanks for listening to me. I hope to soon see and hear something in the news.

Take care.

Allan S. Taylor

Regina, Sask.

———————————————————————————–

“To sin by silence, when they should protest,

makes cowards of men.” Abraham Lincoln

==================================================

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 15, 2004 National Press Conference, Thursday 9/16 11:00 A.M.

Sheraton Grand Hotel 1230 J Street Sacramento, CA

Racketeering Charges Filed Against NutraSweet Co., American Diabetes Association, Monsanto & Dr Robert H.

Moser for Manufacturing and Marketing Toxic Aspartame

San Francisco, CA:

A RACKETEER INFLUENCED & CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS [RICO] complaint has been filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The suit, filed by a member of The National Justice League, charges the defendants with manufacturing and marketing a deadly neurotoxin unfit for human consumption, while they assured the pubic that aspartame (also known as

NutraSweet/Equal) contaminated products are safe and healthful, even for children and pregnant women.

Present Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is mentioned throughout the lawsuit.

As evidence, an explosive affidavit from a former employee of the G.D. Searle Co – the developer of aspartame – will be made public at a National Press Conference on Thursday, September 16 at 11:00 a.m. at the Sheraton Grand Sacramento Hotel, 1230 J Street, Sacramento, California 95814, phone (916) 447-1700.

For 16 years, the FDA denied approval of aspartame because of compelling evidence of its contributing to brain tumors and other serious disabilities. Donald Rumsfeld, present Secretary of Defense in the Bush Administration, left President Ford’s administration as Chief of Staff to become the CEO of aspartame producer G D Searle Co. in 1981. Shortly after, Rumsfeld became the CEO, and the day after President Reagan took office, aspartame was quickly approved by FDA Commissioner Arthur Hayes over the objections of the FDA’s Public Board of Inquiry. Hayes had been recently appointed by the Reagan Administration.

Shortly after aspartame’s approval by the FDA, Hayes joined NutraSweet’s public relations firm under a ten year contract at $1,000 a day.

Aspartame/NutraSweet was the product of the G. D. Searle Co. In January 1977, the FDA wrote a 33 page letter to U.S. Justice Department Attorney Sam Skinner: “We request that your office convene a Grand Jury investigation into apparent violations of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.” Skinner allowed the Statute of Limitations to run.

Three FDA Commissioners and eight other officers and Skinner took jobs in the aspartame industry shortly after it was approved in 1982.

The Food and Drug Administration once listed 92 adverse reactions from 10,000 consumer complaints and sent the list to all inquirers. In 1996 the FDA stopped taking complaints and now denies existence of the report. Seizures, blindness, sexual dysfunction, obesity, testicular, mammary and brain tumors and death, plus dozens of other dread diseases named in the suit arise from the consumption of this neurotoxin.

Defendant Moser, past CEO of NutraSweet, is cited for misrepresenting facts to public and commercial users with full knowledge of the deceptions. The toxin is sold to Bayer, Con Agra Foods, Dannon, Smucker, Kellogg, Wrigley, PepsiCo, Kraft Foods (Crystal Light), Conopco (Slim-Fast), Coke, Pfizer, Wal-Mart and Wyeth (to name a few), who use it in some of their products, including children’s vitamins. The National Justice League currently has suits filed against these companies in California courts.

Defendant American Diabetes Association’s mission is to care for diabetics. A 35 year ADA member, world famous diabetic specialist H.J.Roberts, M.D., discovered aspartame can precipitate diabetes and reacts harmfully with insulin. ADA rejected his report which was then published in a prestigious medical journal.

The seven count indictment includes charges for violation of California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Fraud, violations of California Civil Code §1780-1784 and Injunctive Relief: that Defendants be enjoined from future use/sale of aspartame.

For more information or to request an interview,

contact:

Britt Groom, Attorney at Law

2205 Hilltop Drive #2022

Redding, CA 96002

Message or fax request to (530) 248-3483 Or email: info@nationaljusticeleague.net

Website: ~~http://www.nationaljusticeleague.com~~

Click to see lawsuit as filed: ~~http://www.wnho.net/nutrasweet_company_lawsuit.htm~~

Click to see video: Rumsfeld/Aspartame ~~http://www.soundandfury.tv/Pages/Rumsfeld2.html~~

“Where many people go wrong in trying to reach their goals is in constantly looking for the big hit, the home run, the magic answer that suddenly transforms their dreams into reality. The problem is that the big hit never comes without a great deal of little hits first. Success in most things comes not from some gigantic stroke of fate, but from simple, incremental progress.”

— Andrew Wood

Older Entries Newer Entries