Since you’re reading this magazine right now, you probably either consider yourself healthy, or you are looking to become healthy. It’s time for some hard truth. If you are taking drugs, whether it be one or sixteen, over the counter or prescription, for prevention or a major illness, YOU ARE NOT HEALTHY!

There is a great misconception in America (and in many other countries) that drugs have something to do with health. They do not. In most cases, drugs are used by people who are looking for a way to make themselves feel better without actually having to change any of their habits. You see this if you ever pay attention to drug commercials. For instance, in a recent commercial for a blood glucose monitor, they talk about how to make diabetes treatment fit into their lifestyle. What about changing your lifestyle?

If you truly want to be healthy, I mean vibrant, no aches and pains, never a headache, hardly ever yawning, etc., you will have to get off of any and all drugs. But please note, there are many prescription drugs that are so dangerous, so addictive, that if you quit cold turkey, and/or without the assistance of a doctor, you may hurt yourself or others. I’ve seen this before. In fact, if you follow scientology and the many headlines scientologists make, you see what happens when people who know very little about drugs try to “cure” someone of their need for prescription drugs. Drugs are dangerous and in many cases getting off of drugs can be even more dangerous.

This magazine is about education. I’m not telling you to “get off of prescription drugs”. But I am saying that you can’t reach a level of optimum health if you are taking drugs. Do your own research. Take steps, baby steps, one step at a time, and start cleaning up your lifestyle. Or not. But don’t kid yourself.

OLM: Can you tell us a little about the history of the companies that are making GMOs? Who are they? What did they do before they made GMO foods?

Mike Adams: Well, I think Monsanto is one of the most dangerous corporations in the world. I think it has a long history of oppressing the farmers and oppressing developing nations and their farmers. I think it has put profits before the people time and time again to such a degree that it really poses a threat to the sustainability of the human race. That’s about as bluntly as I can state it. [chuckle]

OLM: Are there other companies doing what Monsanto does with GMOs?

Mike Adams: There are smaller companies toying with genetics in the same way, but no one has dominance over the industry like Monsanto. It virtually holds a monopolistic control over seeds. I imagine Arthur Daniel Midland would be next in line in terms of culpability for destroying the food supply, but I don’t know if ADM has a GMO lab or not. That would be interesting to check out.

OLM: We hear that Monsanto bought many seed companies. The FTC didn’t take notice of this action?

Mike Adams: It’s very clear that the FTC is highly selective in its application of anti-trade action. It totally ignores some monopolies such as the pharmaceutical monopoly or the seed monopoly while attacking other things that are beneficial to consumers. For example, the FTC will attack a church that sells anti-cancer herbs. I actually documented one of those cases, so I’ve seen it
firsthand. But the FTC completely ignores these monopolies, which are the most dangerous to human beings. I think that the food supply and the pharmaceutical industries are two of the best examples.

OLM: How did these foods get approved without testing? Wasn’t it true that many FDA scientists took issue with the foods not being tested?

Mike Adams: GRAS – generally regarded as safe. It’s sad. It’s hilarious, but sad. You’re right; there was no testing done. No safety testing, at least not to the degree any reputable scientist would agree to be adequate. Basically, they just swept it under the rug and pushed it through the approval process. They declared it to be safe by decree, you know? Like, “The king declares this poison to be safe.”  It’s kind of like the aspartame story—you know where Donald Rumsfeld was pivotal in getting aspartame approved by the FDA despite all the tests showing it to be dangerous. It just proves that decisions about the food supply are political decisions. They do not have anything to do with the actual science, or real safety, or prioritizing the health of the people. They are purely political/commercial decisions. That’s the sad state of the FDA today.

Why aren’t GMO foods labeled?

Mike Adams: It is very clear that the reason they are not labeled is because the industry does not want the consumers to know. This is a censorship campaign to prevent people from being informed. It’s the same reason that irradiated foods are not labeled. The FDA is on the record as saying that they are afraid people might not understand what irradiated means. It’s a remarkable statement all by itself.

OLM: Yeah, when in fact, the statement really means the opposite. They don’t want people to know. They don’t want us to understand.

Mike Adams: Industry is afraid of knowledge. It’s afraid of people being informed and having access to accurate knowledge about GMOs or irradiated foods, or even other toxic chemicals that are in the foods such as acrylamides. Essentially, the food industry supports a delabeling campaign. It wants to remove as much information as possible from the labels so consumers don’t have access to the information they need to make informed decisions.

OLM: Obviously there is an indirect link to the drug companies and the food industry. It seems as if they have made a deal to line each others’ pockets. It seems as though they’re working together.

Mike Adams: I think that’s a really great observation on your part. The food industry feeds the pharmaceutical industry in terms of profits. It’s the foods that make people sick; they cause chronic degenerative disease. So the foods create demand for the drugs, which are real profit centers. Of course these companies are making money off of foods as well, but GMOs fit into this picture in a very clever and insidious way. All the evidence so far shows that GMOs may pose a very real health threat to those who consume them. As you mention, that benefits the pharmaceutical industry by poisoning people, by creating patients who need pharmaceuticals or who can be diagnosed with diseases and sold pharmaceuticals whether they need them or not.

I think at the retail level Walgreens demonstrates it the best. Walgreens is a pharmacy, but it sells some of the most toxic processed junk food that you can find in America. In front of the store they sell foods that cause disease and in the back of the store they sell the drugs that they claim treat disease. It’s a system of toxicity. I have gone into the store to buy samples of processed
foods that I was sending to laboratories for testing. When I walk through the store I cannot believe the depth of the poisons that are in there: personal hair care products, fragrance, cosmetics, sodas, all the foods. Those stores should be completely shut down. They should be banned. They should be outlawed in this country. They are creating
a toxic America.

OLM: What was that quote about GMO consumers not being able to reproduce?

Mike Adams: What I talked about was that GMOs do damage to the ability to reproduce and as a result the future of the human race is going to be inherited by those who do not consume GMOs and who do not expose themselves to toxic chemicals like pharmaceuticals.

Along those lines I just want to clarify that especially in the natural health field, no one wishes death or suffering upon another human being. I’m not happy that unhealthy people die. But what I am pointing out is that they are making a choice. By consuming GMOs they are choosing not to have great- grandchildren. And that choice is given a label—it’s a Darwin Award [chuckle]. These people are all participating in this multi-generational or trans-generational Darwin award. And in the long term, it is probably a great benefit to the future of human civilization that the people who choose to consume poisons do not inherit the future of our race.

OLM: Is it true that executives from these companies are hired in top positions by the USDA and FDA?

Mike Adams: Yeah, definitely. That’s called the revolving door policy. You’ll see many examples of top managers or executives at drug and food companies who become top people at the FDA or the FTC or the USDA. They often go back and forth between the regulators and the industry several times.

OLM: And then they write the laws?

Mike Adams: Well, it’s not laws. They enforce regulations. Sometimes they write regulations. It’s important to distinguish between the two. Laws are passed only by the legislative branch, members of congress. But the USDA, the FDA and the FTC are essentially lawless regulatory agencies. They are not required to follow any law in their day-to-day decision making. They are above

the law. In fact they are violating the law. If you or I did what the FDA or the FTC did, we would be charged with felony crimes. We can’t just pick up an assault rifle and walk into a company that sells products we don’t like and seize all their computers and handcuff their people and march them off to prison. But that is what the FDA does on a regular basis. It’s a violation of law. It’s a violation of the constitution. So these are lawless organizations.

OLM: Does the president appoint the heads of the USDA and the FDA?

Mike Adams: Yes, the president does appoint the heads of those organizations without a public vote. That’s important to note. All that has to happen is that the senate confirms those appointments. The public is never given a chance to vote on them, so it’s bypassing the democratic system.

OLM: What do you think of Obama’s appointee for the Department of Agriculture?

Mike Adams: I’ve been following that on the Organic Consumers Association. Ronnie Cummins there has reported on that appointment with a lot of good details. I think clearly Obama’s siding with big business. He is going to continue the policies of Monsanto and he is not going to speak up for the people, for the farmers, you know. I see a lot of this with the Obama administration which is kinda frustrating because he came in under a platform of change, you know, talking about protecting the people. And certainly, of course, none of us wanted to see the Bush policies continue, at least not on human rights, and war, and all that. But then with Obama in office, not just for agriculture, but for the treasury, and many other areas, the policies are quite disturbing. They show that the Obama administration, at least through its appointments so far, is largely continuing business as usual, at least in my opinion. I’m optimistic that maybe there will be some changes, but you know, I don’t see any big changes so far, other than a whole lot of money being handed out. And that’s not change. That’s just the same old scam.

OLM: Are you keeping up with the new laws they are trying to pass?

Mike Adams: Ronnie Cummins would have a lot more detail on this, but I keep up with some of it. The big picture is very clear. They are working at federal and state levels to destroy small family farms, to destroy even the definition of organic so that anything could be called organic. They are the enemies of anyone who believes in sustainable agriculture or true organic foods.

OLM: What’s going on with GMOs in Europe?

Mike Adams: GMOs had been banned in certain parts of the U.K. I think that issue has come to the surface again with codex and the harmonization of the European Union. They’re trying to keep GMOs in the food supply. But the thing is, GMO labeling is now mandatory in the U.K. At least that’s my understanding of it. And U.K. citizens are much better informed about this issue than U.S. citizens. And in the U.K. they are very vocal in their opposition to GMO foods, as they should be. And it is in America that people have this kind of bizarre acceptance of whatever the government tells them to do. It’s like America has been drugged into a state of complacency. Pharmaceuticals and fluoride maybe have something to do with that.

OLM: What’s your take on Monsanto’s claims that GMOs are a better way to grow food, that they produce better yields and can help stop world hunger?

Mike Adams: Sure, it’s all about short-term thinking versus long-term thinking. Of course, Monsanto and ADM and other such companies are really focused on short term thinking. In the short-term, it’s true that a single planting of a genetically modified crop can out-produce a non-GMO crop. You look at that season and you weigh how much corn came out of the field and so on. But in the long term, what risks are there to the viability of the food supply? How do GMO organisms affect honey bees, for example? We have colony collapse disorder, which is really threatening the global food supply. We had the issue of cross pollination, cross contamination, which is a huge threat to the food supply.

These long-term threats are never factored into the equations that are being decided by Monsanto or these other companies. So they ignore the long-term risks and they just highlight and focus on the short-term benefits. And it is this kind of short-term thinking that could very well spell the destruction of human civilization as we know it today. All it would take is one year of crops being wiped out around the world due to monoculture farming, and perhaps genetically, GM contamination. One season of the food disappearing and the human population collapses by maybe 70 to 80 percent.

That’s a loss of billions of lives. That’s what’s at risk here. These companies are essentially putting billions of lives at risk in order to obtain a short-term profit.

OLM: What are your favorite GMO information sources?

Mike Adams: Well, definitely the Organic Consumers Association is a top source on this issue, but there is also the Environmental Working Group which is doing great work, although they don’t post as much content as the OCA.

Recommended Supplements (These supplements help detoxify GMOs):

• Shillington’s Total Nutrition Formula
• FloraMend Prime Probiotic – Thorne Research
• Fundamental Sulfur Powder (MSM Powder) – Douglas Labs
• Shillington’s Intestinal Cleanse Formula
• Shillington’s Intestinal Detox

Further Reading:

• How to Avoid GMOs
• Foods That Are GMO
• The Difference Between Heirlooms, Hybrids, and GMOs
• The Unspoken Link Between GM-Foods and Cancer
• GMO-Bananas are Going Into Human Trials

One of the biggest controversies surrounding food in recent years is the entry of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into our food system. If you don’t know about GMOs by now, here’s the concept in a nutshell: Genetically modified foods have had their DNA changed through genetic engineering, using advanced techniques to insert foreign genes (from such varied sources as bacteria and viruses) in order to enhance or change certain characteristics of the organism. The most common modified foods are derived from plants such as soybean, corn, canola, and cotton, but the list of GMOs also includes hormones given to dairy cattle (rbGH). Now even the animals themselves are being genetically engineered.

Supporters of genetic engineering say that modification of organisms on a genetic level is safe, and is similar to how conventional plant breeding has taken place for thousands of years. They also state that in order to gain efficiency in food production to feed the world, GM foods are necessary. The producers of these GMOs maintain that they are as safe as any other food, and have no negative effect on the people consuming them or the environment.

Critics of GMOs (including me) point out that no true trials or testing have been undertaken in order to prove the safety of these foods. In fact, adverse effects from consuming GMOs have been recorded, and because it’s such a new practice, the full results of releasing these unnatural organisms into the environment still remain to be seen. Since science can measure only what it targets, and the sheer number of variables in our natural environment is enormous, the possibility is great that many unintended consequences will occur through the use and consumption of GMOs.

Unfortunately, due to the prevalence of GMOs and the intermingling of foods in our food system during harvest, storage, and processing, most U.S. consumers have been eating genetically modified foods for years. Even those of us who focus on eating all organic probably have been ingesting these foods if we eat out or dine at someone’s house who isn’t as strict as we are with their food purchases. Some 60 to 70% of the products in a grocery store contain some type of genetically engineered ingredient, with the biggest offenders being soy, corn, canola oil, and cottonseed oil.

So why do companies like Monsanto (the world leader in genetic modification) pursue genetic engineering?

One claimed benefit is that using GM seeds increases crop yields and decreases the use of pesticides and herbicides for food production (hence the claim that GMOs will help feed the world). However, contrary to the information coming from the supporters of genetic engineering, studies have shown that just as many pesticides and herbicides are being applied to GM crops as non-GM crops, and in some cases at even higher quantities. For crops modified to be resistant to herbicides, farmers can spray even heavier without damaging the plants, leading to increased use of herbicides worldwide. These herbicides end up in our groundwater, and may also be present in food even after harvest and processing. A recent study sponsored by the Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), published in Chemical Research in Toxicology journal, found that Roundup (glyphosate) diluted 105 times was toxic to three different human cell types. This level is significantly lower than the currently accepted residue levels. What this means is that every bite of GM food (modified to be tolerant of glyphosate application) will also have toxic residues which may be detrimental to your health.

Another reason given is the possible increase in nutrition from genetic modification (a higher vitamin content, such as vitamin A in so-called Golden Rice). Yet another is the production of pharmaceuticals from GM crops, which is touted as being able to increase the global availability of medicines and vaccines. Still another reason is the production of substances like spider silk in mass quantities (from genetically modified goats that can produce the silk protein in their Pesticides and GMOs milk).

The four major GM crops – soy, corn, canola, and cotton – are engineered to survive the applications of herbicides at levels which would otherwise kill the plants. Almost 70% of GM crops are engineered to be herbicide tolerant. Another trait of GM crops is a pesticide produced within the plant itself (Bt, or Bacillus thuringienses) in GM corn and cotton. Proponents claim that Bt is harmless, and is a natural bacteria, but some studies have shown an allergic reaction, a high immune response, and even damaged intestines.

If you aren’t OK with all of that, then you need to learn how to avoid GMOs in the food you buy. The best way to avoid them is to buy 100% certified organic food always (check the PLU number on the produce). Organic produce has a 5 digit PLU number, beginning with 9. Conventionally grown produce has a 4 digit PLU number. In theory, all GM produce has a 5 digit PLU number beginning with 8, but the critics say that because labeling is optional, not all GM produce will be labeled as such. If you eat meat, buy 100% grass-fed (pastured) beef and go for the certified organic meats. If you read labels carefully, you will find foods that have been labeled non-GMO or GMO-free. If it isn’t labeled as such, and the product contains non-organic soybeans, corn, canola, cottonseed oil, or dairy, you’re probably getting GM varieties in there.

For more info, be sure to bookmark Seeds of Deception and the Organic Consumers Association GM page.

I avoid GM food, and I wouldn’t feed it to my friends or family either. I highly recommend you become a careful label reader and keep it out of your diet as well.

Although typical deodorants and any antiperspirants are toxic to skin, antiperspirants are much more dangerous to women. Reports vary as to why; some link the increased risk to the fact that women shave their armpits and therefore cancer-causing substances in antiperspirants are absorbed through razor nicks. Other reports say that women sweat differently and not as effectively on the breast area as men do. The sweat has nowhere to go so it builds up into infectious lumps under the skin around the breasts. These lumps can and often do turn cancerous.

Many so called credible organizations such as the American Cancer Society say that there is no findings or evidence to support this claim. But we don’t really consider them credible, so… We prefer to use common sense. Your body releases much of its toxins through sweat. If you do not allow your body to sweat, where do the toxins go?

It is a little known fact that the very healthy do not have body odor. Believe it or not, your natural smell is a very good indicator of your overall health

Well, it’s getting to be that time of day (night 🙂 when I get to feeling I’ve had enough fun for one day and should be heading towards the ole sack, but I thought I’d leave y’all with this little true story that happened to me a few years back having to do with FrankenFoods.

At one time I was a promoter of Soy Protein Powder as a source of protein especially for some body builders I had as clients, and one day I was queried by one of them as to whether or not it was Genetically Engineered or not. GE had not been talked about very much up to that time and my knowledge on the subject was a bit scarce back then, but I thought I’d better investigate it. One of my friends had done some research on GE foods in general and the findings sent to me were shocking, outrageous, and downright scary.

To be on the safe side, I then decided to investigate this source that all my muscle builders were using, and proceeded to trace back the data trail as to how pervasive this GE thing was and whether or not there was any risk to my personal clients.

I went to our biggest local healthfood store in Clearwater called Nature’s Food Patch and asked the bulk food manager whether or not his Soy Protein Powder was GE or not. He emphatically told me that the Food Patch did NOT sell anything that was Genetically Modified. Absolutely Not! I then asked him what the name of the product was and who was its supplier. He told me it was called Supro 440 and they got it from NOW Foods. Wellllll, I thought this was a good start, as I do business with NOW (still do) as I feel they have the best Vitamin E and COQ10 on the planet at the best price (only a few of the products made by someone else that I am willing to trust and endorse which is why they are on my product and price list).

I then called NOW Foods and asked one of the technical advisors there if the Supro 440 that they were selling was Genetically Engineered. “Absolutely NOT! No way in hell would they sell anything that was GE. Ridiculous!” Welllllll, OK this sounded good so I asked him who the manufacturer was who supplied them with the stuff. He told me it was a company called Protein Technologies and readily gave me their number.

I’m feeling all right and making good headway here, so I next call up Protein Technologies and asked to speak to a technical supervisor there as I had some questions to put to him. I get him on the line and I ask, “Is your Supro 440 a Genetically Engineered product?”. —- Long pregnant pause, and then he returned with, “Well, what exactly do you mean by Genetically Engineered?”. All of a sudden, I wasn’t having a good day and I was starting to feel a little apprehensive. I returned with, “GE, you know, GMO, Genetically Modified Organism???”. He said, “One moment please, and I’ll let you speak to our Head Chemist”. After a wait of about 30 seconds (my apprehension is now building), the Lead Chemist from Protein Tech comes on the line and I ask my question again. He tells me proudly, “Wellllllll, yessss the Supro 440 is GE and most of our soy products are”. I’m feeling a little queasy at this stage and I ask, “do you have any Soy Protein Powder which is Organic and non-GMO?”. He then told me that they did but he had to confess that they used the same machines to process the Organic as they did the GE/GMO and that they did not clean the machines after each usage. The bottom of my stomach dropped about 40 feet but I had one more question, “Is Protein Technologies a solely owned company or is it a subsidiary?”

He said, “The parent company is Dupont.”!

I couldn’t talk for a bit and slowly just hung up the phone, I don’t even remember saying “goodbye” to the man.

I called back NOW Foods, and to their credit, they had the product off the shelf within a week. I then called back the Bulk Foods Manager at Nature’s Food Patch and told him the story. His response was, “Impossible, we sell NO GE/GMO foods in this store”.

Oh well, there are ostriches in this world and he never would believe me or even call up and verify it one way or the other. I then had the realization that one could lose many freedoms through complacency.

And the moral of this bed time story?

LOOK!!! DON’T LISTEN!!!

Yours in Knowledge, Health and Freedom,

Doc Shillington

PS. Since I originally wrote this article back in 2001, the amount of Genetically Engineered Soy products sold in the American marketplace has grown to more than 90%. It is also my conviction that the other 10% is contaminated.  The same goes for all corn products.  You and your family are far safer if you avoid all soy and corn products altogether.  Unless you grow it yourself, or unless you personally know the farmer who’s growing it, ALL SOY & CORN PRODUCTS AND BYPRODUCTS SHOULD BE SHUNNED!

Ian “Doc” Shillington N.D.

The Department of Agriculture clearly defines “natural” when applied to labeling. For meat and poultry, it means minimal processing, no artificial or synthetic ingredients, and no added hormones.

But the Food and Drug Administration says it has no plans to define natural or to restrict its use in labeling.

With no clear definition, confusion and controversy have been generated. Consumer groups are urging the FDA to restrict use of the word “natural” and they demand that food manufacturers stop freely using it until the government acts. This spring, one organization threatened legal action against a popular soft drink, “100% Natural” 7UP.

“Natural means nothing,” said Urvashi Rangan, a toxicologist and a senior scientist at Consumer Reports , which has urged government action. “You have to flip the box over and examine the ingredient list. You’ve got to do your homework. But there’s no requirement for what the ingredients have to be, to be considered natural.”

Courtesy of The Organic Consumers Association.

Keep in mind, while it’s very important to read ingredient labels, it’s even more important to consume whole, raw, fresh vegetables and fruits which, provided they are organic, are as “all natural” as it gets.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., well-known for his environmental activism, is also known for his staunch belief that the government has conspired to cover up the connection between vaccines and autism (as well as other neurological disorders). In his June 2005 article, Deadly Immunity, which was published on Salon.com and Rolling Stone.com, Kennedy reveals that leaders from the CDC, the FDA, the World Health Organization, and major pharmaceutical companies met in 2000 to discuss the correlation between the mercury-containing preservative thimerosal and the overwhelming rise in autism, a fifteen fold increase from one child in every 2500 to one in every 166.

Kennedy writes, “But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry’s bottom line.”

The original data from the study that sparked the meeting was, of course, lost and could not be replicated. And though the study was said to be slated for immediate publication, it was not released for three years. By then, the author had begun work for a pharmaceutical company. His published article no longer linked thimerosal and autism.

Kennedy’s article shows more than a cover-up; it reveals the on-going disregard for human life and health. Though American pharmaceutical companies began to phase out thimerosal, they continued to sell off their backlog of dangerous vaccines. In addition, the CDC and FDA bought vaccines, which included thimerosal, for export to developing countries and allowed the preservative to remain in some pediatric flu shots and  tetanus shots.

Click here for Kennedy’s full article, which also explores other avenues of political corruption regarding this issue. or listen to an audio version

In February of 2009, three rulings against parents seeking damages for vaccination injury were touted in the press as being the definitive answer to the vaccination and autism link. Kennedy and David Kirby wrote an article published in the Huffington Post refuting that claim. In their article they stated, “…an explosive investigation by CBS News has found that since 1988, the vaccine court has awarded money judgments, often in the millions of dollars, to thirteen hundred and twenty two families whose children suffered brain damage from vaccines. In many of these cases, the government paid out awards following a judicial finding that vaccine injury <sic> lead to the child’s autism spectrum disorder.”Click here for the full article.

In addition, Kennedy wrote a June 19, 2007 blog: Attack on Mothers regarding efforts by the government and the media to vilify mothers of autistic children who are fighting for vaccine awareness.

Also, be sure to these articles on vaccines.