Plant-Based Milk Draws “Misleading Label” Claims From Dairy Industry

The answer to an age-old question in advertising used to be simple. Got milk? Yes, America answered. But that is not our new reality. The question remains the same. The answer now? What kind of milk?

Milk is no longer something your local milkman drops off in a crate on your front porch. Milk comes in many different varieties. There are dairy versions like cow, goat, sheep, or buffalo (though the last two milks usually end up as cheeses). If you’re vegan or lactose-intolerant, there are options like almond milk, soy milk, coconut milk, rice milk, hemp milk, oat milk, pea milk…yeast milk? At this point, it’s safe to say milk is a both a universal and incredibly niche item. Cow milk is everywhere, but if you know where to look, the options magically open up.

Why on earth does this box of milk have almonds on it? This is sooooo confusing!

Protecting the People from Reading Labels

More than thirty congressional members have signed a letter to the Food and Drug Administration to ask that the FDA take “appropriate action” in regards to milk labels. While their idea of appropriate action is not specified in the letter, it’s clear that the dairy industry considers plant-based milk products a threat. Unfortunately for the current food establishment, this is not the first or last time customer demand will force them to adapt or die.

Americans are eating less meat. They’re more environmentally conscious. Allergies are also on the rise, and more people are beginning to see the correlation between what they eat and their overall health. Half of Americans consume non-dairy milk, and over one-third of them are open to plant-based eating in general. This is naturally going to open up the food market for healthy competition from alternatives to traditional meat and dairy. The “appropriate reactions” from big food companies so far have been to run to the FDA, claiming a product label like almond milk has the potential to fool customers into thinking they are buying dairy milk. Another example is Hellman’s Mayonnaise claiming consumers needed to be protected from vegan mayonnaise because it isn’t “real” mayonnaise.

Is This the System We Want?

Large corporations often handicap their competition while pretending to play the part of the consumer’s champion. Pay no attention to the fact that the vegan mayo behind the curtain is serving a growing population looking for healthier and more environmentally friendly options while egg costs have never been higher. You, the consumer, have been wronged by their confusing label. The language in the letter to the FDA from dairy state congressmen seems altruistic…until you realize they have claimed the consumer is not capable of reading a label. Why on earth does this box of milk have almonds on it? This is sooooo confusing!

Consumers have more access to information than ever before, and they’ve changed. Questioning the status quo is now the thing to do. Tactics like letters released and lawsuits filed over “misleading labels” are a system that believes people aren’t able to see the bias, and it’s also one of the reasons these industries are floundering right now. Consumers want healthier options and product accountability. Hellmann’s may have figured something out… their new vegan mayo line launched in 2016, 2 years after they tried to shut down Just Mayo.

Further Reading:
Sources:


CBD Oil is Legal in Certain States and Federally Illegal – Officially Schedule 1

Is cannabidiol (CBD) oil illegal? Well…what country do you live in? If you answered the United States, the answer is yes. CBD oil and any “extract containing one or more cannabinoids that have been derived from any plant of the genus Cannabis” has (as of December 14, 2016) been given a new controlled substance code by the DEA and firmly classified as a schedule I substance. So, illegal.

But wait! There’s another question, guys! What state do you live in? Obviously,  if you live in a state where marijuana is legalized in all forms or in a state with legalized medical marijuana, CBD oil is freely available. There are also 16 states that have passed laws specifically allowing the prescription (super illegal by federal standards) or the study of CBD oil in the case of patients experiencing seizures, muscle spasms, and epilepsy. This leaves about 6 states where marijuana is illegal in any form. Oh, but remember, even in the states where it is legal, it is illegal to possess it in any building or facility managed by the federal government.

Why Does It Have To Be So Confusing?

CBD is available with a prescription in Australia and Canada and the U.K. Oddly enough, CBD oil is listed in the cosmetic ingredient database in the E.U. In the U.S., it’s illegal to have or use CBD oil in Idaho, for example. But every surrounding state allows it. Get your head in the game, Idaho!

The U.S. federal policy on marijuana is nonsensical. Marijuana is not legal because of the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). CBD oil is not legal, even when tested to ensure the trace amounts of THC are below a certain threshold (which varies, although the smallest amount allowed seems to be .3%). Hemp is not legal according to the final rule released from the DEA in 2016, as it is in the genus Cannabis and classified as a schedule I like heroin (oxycontin is a schedule II drug, for reference). Not banned? A schedule III synthetic version of THC known as Dronabinol is currently accepted for medical use.

Covering Your Ass, DEA-Style

More than half of Americans believe medical marijuana should be legal. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals took away the federal government’s ability to fund prosecution of people using medical marijuana according to state laws. In the words of former attorney general Eric Holder,

You know, we treat marijuana in the same way that we treat heroin now, and that clearly is not appropriate.”

With support for medical marijuana growing in the United States, why is the federal government dragging its heels?

The government claims there is not enough research to be sure that CBD and other cannabinoids have medicinal benefit, which is kind of a cop-out, as the research itself is illegal. The government ignores the countless stories and videos showing the amazing effect CBD oil has on people and children suffering from epilepsy, seizures, and neurological disorders. The denial of marijuana as medicine also directly contradicts the government’s Investigation of New Drugs (IND) program founded in 1978 (the program has since been closed to new patients). Under that program, there are still a tiny number of people (3) receiving medical marijuana from the federal government. So while the federal government has labeled marijuana a schedule I substance, they are also still legally dispensing marijuana to patients. But they still claim it can’t be legalized because they don’t have enough “research.”

If I’m Wrong, I Don’t Want to Know About it

So, to recap: CBD oil is banned federally due to the psychoactive compound THC (which it has in super small quantities if any) and a lack of research supporting medicinal claims, but a synthetic drug that is basically THC is legally available, and certain patients from an older (That’s where the research went!) government program have access to legal medical marijuana…from the government. Why? The current federal stance on marijuana (medicinal or otherwise) is about control of the medical marijuana market. If companies manufacturing medical marijuana extracts like CBD oil are able to control which products get through to market, they have the potential to create a monopoly. Once again, profits and market control are higher on the list of government priorities than providing medical relief to patients who truly need it.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Is Our Vaccine Schedule Killing Our Children?

Pro-vaccine rhetoric’s “science” supports today’s vaccines as well as the vaccine schedule. Anyone paying attention knows that far too many of today’s scientific studies reach the conclusions predetermined by the pharmaceutical companies or chemical companies who funded the study. Data is often withheld and manipulated. While results can easily be skewed, the infant mortality rate is a bit more difficult to falsify.

In the article, Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity? published in Human and Experimental Toxicology in September of 2011 a clear correlation between infant death and the countries’ respective vaccine schedules was shown.

An analysis was made of the 34 countries with the lowest infant mortality rate. The United States was number 34. (Yes, though we spend the most on medicine, 33 countries had a lower infant mortality than the United States in 2009.) Of these 34 countries, 5 of the nations with the lowest infant death rate required 12 vaccines (the fewest), while the United States required 26 (the highest).

When the results were charted the correlation was clear.  As the authors said,

These findings demonstrate a counter-intuitive relationship: nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates.”

Infant deaths that are a direct result of vaccine injury are sometimes labeled as such, but too often they are categorized as pneumonia, SIDS, suffocation, etc. In addition to deaths that occur within hours or days of vaccination, death may occur in the weeks or months after vaccination due to a weakened immune system.

The Unites States no longer holds the same rank. There are no longer 33 countries with a lower infant mortality rate than ours. Today, there are 56 countries with a lower infant mortality rate. The current U.S. schedule includes 32 vaccines for the first year.

Related Reading:
Sources:


Bacteria Resistant to All Available Antibiotics Has Claimed Its First Victim

The doomsday predictions about antibiotic resistant superbugs sound like the plot of a science fiction movie. The bacteria are coming! Who will save us when we don’t have any options left?

Conventional medicine has allowed us to put much of the onus of taking care of ourselves on someone or something else. Why take care of yourself and build your immune system naturally (it’s hard work!) when an antibiotic can knock an infection out with a snap of the fingers? The same principle has been applied to our food supply. Rather than raise animals in humane environments on a diet designed to keep them healthy (also hard work), our food system chooses the easy route and pumps cows, pigs, and sheep full of unnecessary antibiotics.

Now a Nevada woman has died. Her death from an antibiotic-resistant superbug, the bacteria New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase (NDM), is not notable on the surface. As of 2014, an estimated 23,000 people in the U.S. have died from bacteria like these, according to the CDC. The patient in question was a lady of 70, who had been in and out of hospitals for a two-year period in India with the last stay being in summer 2016. Not an unusual story, in and of itself. But here’s the worrying part. The CDC has determined that the NDM that the woman was infected with was untreatable by all available antimicrobial drugs in the U.S.

The Last Resort…Has Failed

There are a few antimicrobial drugs of last resort. One of them is colistin, a powerful antimicrobial not regularly used due to its damaging effect on the kidneys. While select bacteria that contain the mcr-1 (mechanism of colistin resistance 1) gene are immune to another drug, colistin functioned as a cleaner of sorts for anything else. That worked because the bacteria were not exchanging the gene. That is no longer the case. Bacteria are now exchanging the mcr-1 gene, and cases, where colistin is ineffective, began showing up in the U.S. in summer 2016. If that wasn’t enough to cause a deep and profound uneasiness, the NDM bacteria resistant to all available antibiotics didn’t even have the mcr-1 gene. This bacteria didn’t even need the gene we’ve identified as the one resistant to powerful antibiotics.

The Tipping Point

Is this the point where we find that we can’t go back? Is worldwide health going to spiral out of control, chased by ever stronger and more evolved bacteria? Indigenous tribes of foragers give us a glance at what the first line of defense, our intestinal flora, used to be. In a comparison of the microbiome of a small group of Italians and a group of Hadza foragers from Tanzania, the Hadza’s lack of exposure to antibiotics and highly seasonal, largely plant-based,  diet resulted in a much greater and more diverse microbiome. Maybe they wouldn’t be able to fend off one of the new superbugs, but they likely would not have developed them in the first place. How do we get those microbes back? Can we get those microbes back? No one seems to have a good answer for that, but it’s clear that antibiotic resistant bacteria keep putting their star players in the game while the Western diet keeps yanking any and everybody out.

Eat Your Veggies

There is magic in a well maintained digestive system. Get your fiber may be a funny old people joke…until you haven’t pooped in a few days. A diet lacking in raw, organic plant matter is never going to provide the tools needed to move things through the digestive system, which gives harmful bacteria a greater chance to develop and take over. The Western diet in its current form provides them with the food they need to thrive. If the digestive system is compromised, bacteria takes advantage of that. In that system, antibiotics will be the answer at some point, making it that much harder to cultivate the natural defenses the immune system needs.

Antibiotic-resistant bugs are not only the health industry’s fault. Factory farms cannot be assigned all of the blame either. The decline of our natural bacteria and immunities has created the perfect hosts for the bacteria strong and adaptable enough to survive modern medicine and an increasingly unhealthy way of eating.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Trump Demurs When Asked About Vaccine Safety Commission Headed by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has released a statement revealing president-elect Donald J. Trump has appointed him to chair a commission on vaccine safety and scientific integrity in his new administration. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is the son of Robert Kennedy and an outspoken supporter of safe vaccines. While many health professionals have expressed dismay at the involvement of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the creation of this commission would be in line with some of the vaccine and autism concerns Trump expressed during his campaign. The media has been quick to cry anti-vaxxer, but both men are on record as being pro-vaccination, including Trump at a primary debate in 2015. “Autism has become an epidemic,” he said. “… It has gotten totally out of control. I am totally in favor of vaccines. But I want smaller doses over a longer period of time.”

Will unbiased vaccine science finally be available now that the leader of the country is willing to have this kind of discussion in a public forum? There are two factors that could help change these attitudes.

The First Factor

Even if you don’t agree with Robert F. Kennedy Jr, he is still a Kennedy. This comes with name brand recognition, political connections, money, and a legacy of a public service. As a Democrat, he also brings the potential to promote bipartisan agendas. Many movements succeed when they find the right spokesperson. Kennedy could be that person.

The Second Factor

The second factor here is Trump. Taking a position that calls anything about vaccines into question has massive negative repercussions. Most politicians’ reputations don’t recover. (Hi, Jill Stein!). It’s also proven difficult to predict what exactly Trump will do next and which of his many outlandish campaign promises he will uphold. It’s clear he has strong feelings on the subject of vaccinations, but who knows how serious he is about acting on them. According to Hope Hicks, the presidential transition national spokesperson, “The president-elect is exploring the possibility of forming a commission on autism, which affects so many families; however, no decisions have been made at this time…”

What’s Going to Happen?

The appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to a commission studying vaccine safety would be a huge comfort to people and their loved ones who are struggling with the aftermaths of bad vaccine reactions, whether neurological conditions, paralysis, or developmental disorders. It remains unclear, however, if this commission (if it does indeed happen) will be able to make a difference in vaccine safety. The pharmaceutical industry and the science they have provided is firmly entrenched in the government, medical establishment, and mainstream media. Robert F. Kennedy will have a daunting task ahead of him if he is to adjust these views in any way.

Also, see Robert Kennedy Jr. Accepts Trumps Appointment to Chair Vaccine Committee from the previous day.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Robert Kennedy Jr. Accepts Trumps Appointment to Chair Vaccine Committee

After meeting with president-elect Donald Trump, Robert Kennedy Jr. has agreed to chair a commission on “vaccination safety and scientific integrity.”

Kennedy, an environmental activist, an environmental attorney, an author, and a former U.S. senator, is an outspoken critic of vaccine safety and the government cover-up of the vaccine/autism connection. Trump, who has had personal knowledge of vaccine injured children, is following through with his pledge to move toward a safer vaccine schedule and administration. He claims to be an advocate of vaccination, but he wants to see smaller doses spread out over time. His tweets do not mention toxic contents.

Kennedy also says he is pro-vaccine. His goal is vaccine safety. He wants the American people to be assured that vaccines are as safe as possible. He was very outspoken about thimerasol in vaccines and may well have been instrumental in it being removed from most of our children’s vaccines.

Mainstream media continues to denounce the vaccine/autism connection as they make this announcement. There is, of course, no mention that the government has paid out 3 billion dollars for vaccine injuries (including autism) while protecting the pharmaceutical companies from litigation. Nor is there mention of the high infant mortality rate in the U.S. that is statistically linked to the ever growing vaccine schedule.

Hopefully, the commission will illuminate the work of the many doctors and scientists who have voiced concern about vaccine safety and efficacy.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Pentavalent Vaccines – When Did Vaccines Adopt the Bulk Model?

Vaccines designed to provide immunity to three diseases in one shot, like the MMR and DTP, have become the industry standard. It’s incredibly difficult to find single doses of these vaccines. The development and availability of five-in-one vaccines are more likely to make single dose vaccines even more of a rarity. Welcome to the age of pentavalent vaccines.

What’s the Skinny?

The Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisations (GAVI) introduced pentavalent vaccines in 2001 (although pharmaceutical giant Sanofi Pasteur first licensed a pentavalent vaccine in 1993). The most commonly used pentavalent vaccines combine the DTP (diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis) with vaccines designed to provide immunity for Hepatitis B and Haemophilus Influenza type-B (Hib), the bacteria that causes meningitis, pneumonia, and otitis. A typical vaccine schedule for pentavalent vaccines calls for the child to receive shots at 6, 10, and 14 weeks.

GAVI has been a big supporter of pentavalent vaccines and currently supplies 73 of the world’s poorest countries with these vaccines. These countries are primarily in Africa and across Asia, with Albania, Moldova, and Guyana also included in the list. In the 15 years since the introduction of pentavalent vaccines, their coverage has grown from 1% to 68% of people vaccinated in supported countries.

The Belle of the Ball

Why wouldn’t these vaccines be a priority? From the medical and pharmaceutical community’s viewpoint, a 5 in 1 vaccine provides many benefits. It’s easier to administer, creates less syringe waste, can be produced more quickly, and is cheaper to ship.

Pentavalent vaccines also increase coverage. Prior to the GAVI in 2000, fewer than 10% of low-income countries were giving the hepatitis B vaccine and even fewer were immunizing for Haemophilus Influenza type-B. The numbers vaccinated were minuscule in comparison to the 68% of people covered in these countries 15 years after the introduction of the pentavalent program.

Not Without Issues

The GAVI pentavalent vaccine program has been a success, although there have been bumps along the road. Quinvaxem, the most commonly used pentavalent vaccine, was suspended in Vietnam after nine children died post-vaccination in 2013. While Quinvaxem was reinstated within the same year in Vietnam, other countries in the region like Sri Lanka, India, and Bhutan also expressed safety concerns.

Breaking Out of the Bubble

Will pentavalent vaccines become the standard in all vaccine schedules the way the MMR and DTP replaced single vaccines? If you don’t think so, consider how difficult it is to find a mumps, measles, or rubella vaccine in any developed nation except Japan. Outside of Japan, they are no longer offered as separate vaccines. Since 2012, GAVI only supports Hep B and HiB as part of the pentavalent vaccine, making a similar restrictive availability more likely to become the standard for the rest of the world.

Further Reading:
Sources: