Instead of letting the Government and big corporations control how we live, how about thinking for ourselves and taking control of our own lives
By David Noble~ DefendFreedom~ Time to make a stand
Many people now realise that the majority of our politicians are nothing more than puppets for the global Elite and big corporations like Big Pharma and Monsanto. It is also clear to many of us that the main stream media cannot be trusted. As our economy is being destroyed by design, our health is suffering due to the unhealthy food that is being pushed on us and we are having less and less say in the running of our own lives, the question is what can we do about it?
Mahatma Gandhi said: “Be the change you want to see in the world”. To me this is the best way in which we can fight back against what is happening. We have to stop supporting these big corporations. Take Monsanto for example, we give them power by buying their products. While buying organic and non GM products might cost a bit more it would defiantly hurt Monsanto if the majority started boycotting their products. While I realise that money is tight for most people, is it not worthwhile spending that bit extra when it can not only help safeguard your family’s future but also improve their health. If we cannot stop the likes of Monsanto getting a monopoly on the food we eat then that bit extra you have to pay to buy organic will seem like peanuts compared to what Monsanto will make us pay in both money and our health when they have that monopoly.
If you want to learn the truth about Monsanto then I would recommend watching the documentary “The World According To Monsanto” by clicking here
It is the same principle when you look at the amount of jobs that have been lost in our country because corporations find it cheaper to use sweatshops in poor countries. The question is have we really benefited from the use of sweatshops? While it helps corporations manufacture their products cheaply, on the other hand it damages the economy by taking away jobs from our own country. This has led to high unemployment figures and an increase in poverty. There is also the moral issue of whether it is right that these corporations are allowed make a profit on the backs of human suffering as is the case with those who have to endure working in these sweatshops.
What would happen if the majority started boycotting these corporations that use sweatshops? I am sure that once they realise that we are no longer putting up with their greed and immoral practices they would soon be forced to change the way they operate. It would also mean unfortunately that we would have to do without the designer gear and gadgets that many would not be willing to live without despite the grim future we are facing.
By changing the way we live and think we can make an impact on what’s happening today. Everything that is happening today has happened because we have let it happen. Too many people live in ignorance happy to let others deal with the problems we are facing. While the majority continue to live in this manner things are only going to get worse. We cannot rely on our political system to fix the economy and all the other problems we are facing. But we can make a change through our own actions. By educating ourselves on what is healthy to eat instead of relying on what corporations and our government tell us, we can start to take control of our own lives. This can be achieved through visiting sites like natural news and by learning what really is going on in the food industry. By doing this I am sure that what you learn will not only shock and alarm you but also convince you to change your diet.
By supporting local organic farms and shops that supply organic products we can make sure that the likes of Monsanto will always have competition and we will have a choice in what we eat and a say in our own health.
It is also important to be educated on the real facts behind the pharmaceutical industry who are also trying to get rid of any competition. A recent leaked letter from a UK academic, Professor Elizabeth Williamson (a pharmacist from Reading University), to the UK Health Minister reveals how they are going about this. In the letter the academic complains that the UK medicines agency isn’t cracking down on botanical food supplements. She appears to take the position of the large phytopharmaceutical companies who have got licenses and want competition from food supplements removed.
Because of the EU herb directive we have already seen many natural alternatives to prescription drugs being taken of the shelves in Europe due to safety concerns. Considering that about 10,000 people each year die in the UK from bad reactions to prescription drugs whereas very few have died from taking food supplements or herbal remedies, this makes no sense.
We are constantly fed disinformation so that these corporations and the people behind them can have total control over us. By seeing through their lies we can take the first steps to gaining back control of our lives.
Unfortunately while the majority still believe what they are told by the main stream media and our traitorous government things will only get worse. I believe real change is coming as more people are being forced to wake up to the truth, but the real question is how much more suffering will we have to endure before the majority decide that they have had enough?
Read the letter from Professor Elizabeth Williamson, to the UK Health Minister here
Read Dr Robert Verkerk’s response to Professor Williamson here
and also Dr Robert Verkerk and Adam Smith’s clarification to Andrew Lansley MP here
I agree with much of what you advocate but I have one major problem and that is ignoring the necessity of no longer being part of the system that simply wants to drain all our tax money as though this is a corporate right based on their position of control and power. Right now corporations are forcing one trade agreement after another to exploit federal—-state—-and local taxes seen as just another market to be seized. These trade agreements make it illegal for government contracts to benefit domestic businesses and jobs. Even small business are being targeted for elimination. I believe a tax movement should be considered.
Further to your comments regarding Professor Elizabeth Williamson, I recently wrote to this extremely professional lady asking for clarification of her comments, and it seems the points she was making have been completely misconstrued by Mr. Noble, or whoever wrote the transcript.
Her stance is quite clear, stating that she has no wish to stop people buying herbal medicines either; her only concern is that herbal products which are not foods (and never have been), and which people buy because they are unwell in some way, should be of proven quality and not passed off as food supplements for the following reasons:
Food supplements are not required to prove that they are of good quality, nor to put warnings on the label, nor contain patient information leaflets giving advice, and this is where problems can happen, for instance if a person is on a medicine which can be made ineffective when taken alongside a herbal medicine. This is not speculation, it has happened many times.
My other consideration is that if very low doses of medicinal herbs are used in herbal products, that medicine won’t be effective, and this will not help the reputation of herbal medicines at all.
I thank her for the clarification, which is quite logical and seemingly parallel to the views of we laypeople with regard to GMO’s.
“Professor Elizabeth Williamson says her stance is quite clear, stating that she has no wish to stop people buying herbal medicines.”
But along with her colleagues she does want to control which ones we can buy. It is also interesting that many of these herbal remedies can only now be prescribed by a registered ND. My wife is currently studying to be an ND and has found out to her dismay that without ridicules amount of traveling and costs that very few can afford it will be nearly impossible for her to achieve her goals. Soon there will no longer be any NDs and big Pharma will get what they want, No Competition.
Here is an email I have sent to David Martin MEP among others on this subject which I hope will make my point.
Dear Mr. Martin
Thanks for answering my email. Unfortunately I cannot see how this level of regulations can be justified as a simple internet search shows that very few people have died or even gotten ill from taking traditional herbal medicines or natural food supplements. Surely a health warning on the packaging would have been sufficient, as is the case with tobacco products.
Yet try the same search with pharmaceutical prescribed treatments and it is a different story with more than 10,000 people dying every year from bad reactions to prescribed treatments according to sky News and other sources. Please take time to read all the articles as you will see that they are relevant to proving the point I am making.
http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16004688
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/datablog/2011/nov/30/prescription-drug-use-survey
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/mar/18/behaviour-drugs-four-year-olds
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2002856/Harry-Hucknall-10-killed-taking-Ritalin.html
Also take into consideration how many lives are ruined or ended through the alcohol and tobacco industries selling products that are known to be dangerous. In fact Tobacco, alcohol and prescribed medications are 3 of the biggest killers on the market. It is obvious that what we have here is double standards.
While I do get your point about quality control of these products I would like to point out some facts about cigarettes.
Cigarette smoke contains about 4,000 different chemicals which can damage the cells and systems of the human body. These include at least 80 chemicals that can cause cancer (including tar, arsenic, benzene, cadmium and formaldehyde) nicotine (a highly addictive chemical which hooks a smoker into their habit) and hundreds of other poisons such as cyanide, carbon monoxide and ammonia.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/physical_health/conditions/smoking_health_effects.shtml
Should the tobacco industry not be forced to remove these harmful chemicals from their products? This would save far more lives than the Traditional Herbal Medicinal products Directive ever will and would greatly reduce the cases of cancer.
What I am asking for is not the lame reasons behind the Traditional Herbal Medicinal products Directive but answers on how it can be justified.
Looking forward to your response,
David Noble
What most people are missing in this EU herb directive is that the directive compels manufacturers of herbal medicines to register any products intended for sale in the UK under the Traditional Herbal Registration (THR) Scheme. To achieve THR, a product must demonstrate a history of traditional use of at least 30 years, on-going evidence of safety,
This means that herbal remedies that have been taken safely for centuries with no health concerns are no longer available. But don’t worry you can still buy the two biggest killers on the market, Tobacco and alcohol which despite the dangers being well recognized do not receive the same kind of regulations as herbal remedies and food supplements. Go figure!
Here is the letter in question
http://www.anh-europe.org/files/111104_Letter_to_Secr_of_State_for_Health_Elizabeth_Williamson.pdf
Also read this taken from the above letter
“However, the THMPD was established purely because this proof is lacking, because the clinical trials have not been carried out. The reason for that is quite simple: their expense, which cannot be recouped by patenting the medicine.”
The above statement makes this clear in my mind that this is not about safety concerns but about money and also clearly backs up what I have wrote in my article.
Whilst accepting your points concerning the high probability that further EU directives will almost certainly only benefit BigPharma at the expense of the peasant taxpayer, this has no obvious reflection on Professor Williams’ letter, which clearly only advocates clear labelling based on truthful, factual and unbiased records, which currently does not apply and urgently needs addressing.
BigPharma’s stated intention to regulate all forms of Alternative medicine is now out in the open, and surprise surprise the Professor is also fearful of it, for the same reasons the rest of us are.
I am aware that taking her comments out of context and simultaneously not discussing the matter firstly, or advising her of your publication and intention to go ‘viral’, is somewhat underhand, and potentially hurtful, but is also shooting yourself in the foot by alienating a hitherto influential ally.
In my humble opinion, such emotive comments and misrepresentations border on the same standard of journalism from the underworld that the dirty digger dwells in, and it is a shame the Alternative News is bordering on the same standards as the gutterpress.
Did you even read the letter. In the letter Professor Williams is not against this directive but for it. Where have i took her words out of context. You need to educate yourself on what this directive really means. It is not the labelling that is the problem, I am all for clear labelling. If Professor Williams is really fearful of BigPharma’s stated intention to regulate all forms of Alternative medicine why is she strongly supporting a directive that does just that.
http://www.anh-europe.org/news/anh-leaks-exposes-academic-letter-and-responds-openly-on-eu-herb-directive?utm_source=The+Alliance+for+Natural+Health&utm_campaign=84116d1989-111118_ANH_Intl_e_Alert_No_7111_18_2011&utm_medium=email
I have read the letter five times. And asked her to clarify her points.
I still maintain your article represents no more than a classic example of emotive journalism.
Perhaps you should take a page from Ms Burgermeister’s book and go for something more substantial than mistaken interpretation.
The letter has now been included at the bottom of the article so readers can find it easier. I am more than happy to let the readers make up their own minds. I stand by what I have written but you are entitled to your opinion.
I am.
I am also entitled to object to indiscriminate trashing based on out of context interpretation.
And I do.
As you can see this was already viral before i wrote my article and also that Professor Williamson’s was contacted by the ANH who released the leaked letter.
Academic cries wolf
We were so concerned by the content of Professor Williamson’s letter that we felt we had no option but to respond publicly both to the Professor and to the Minister. We believe that Professor Williamson has enormously misrepresented the scope and intentions of the THMPD legislation, and its implications for the UK herbal products sector. In doing so, she has inexplicably adopted the position taken by the largest phytopharmaceutical companies, who have gained a big commercial advantage over their competitors by registering many of their products under the THMPD, in the hope — it seems — that the competition from botanical food supplements will be removed.
It is a great surprise to us that Professor Williamson has acted in this manner. With over 30 years’ experience, she has written and edited books on herbal medicine, Ayurvedic herbs and alternative and complementary medicine. Given such a wealth of knowledge, it seems out of character that Professor Williamson has so misrepresented the THMPD, its scope and implications, as well as the accompanying case law from the ECJ.
Mistaking solutions for problems
Whereas Professor Williamson portrays the ECJ as being part of the problem, it has in fact been trying to clarify the incredibly confused food/medicine borderline. The Professor makes no bones about the fact that she thinks all herbal products should be regarded as medicines, and that’s why she has a problem with the ECJ. The Court has ruled in several separate cases that all properties of an herb or herbal product, including the dosage of active constituents, must be considered before it can be declared a medicine. This allows herbs that may have specific medicinal uses to be sold as food supplements when active ingredients are present in lower amounts, as they often are in many complex polyherbal products that are typical of the great Asian traditions, such as Ayurveda and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). Rather than criticising these rulings, Professor Williams should be applauding them, especially Case C-27/08 involving the Ayurvedic anti-inflammatory herb, Boswellia serrata.
Heading off a deceitful campaign
In the face of an ongoing campaign by certain phytopharmaceutical companies to portray herbal food supplements as a danger to public health and in need of yet more regulation – including questions in both Houses of the UK Parliament – Professor Williamson’s intervention was at risk of wielding a dangerous level of influence. Accordingly, we felt compelled to do something about this, exposing what might have otherwise been kept behind closed doors.
We strongly believe that an open debate on these important issues is sorely needed, and hope that today’s open letters will kick-start that process.
Professor Williamson, Mr Lansley: we eagerly await your replies.
Taken From http://www.anh-europe.org/news/anh-leaks-exposes-academic-letter-and-responds-openly-on-eu-herb-directive?utm_source=The+Alliance+for+Natural+Health&utm_campaign=84116d1989-111118_ANH_Intl_e_Alert_No_7111_18_2011&utm_medium=email
EU herb law is hurting us — says online retailer
Is This About Safety and Quality?
This Directive purports to protect consumer safety. It does nothing of the sort. In the short term, it is causing consumers extreme stress and upset. In the long term, in our opinion, nothing less than the health of the nation is at stake. It is a truly backward step for health and wellbeing.
Customers will be forced to buy from outside the EU in many cases (a ludicrous situation in the current economic climate). They may no longer have the assurance of, for example, good manufacturing practice (GMP) standards. Some may resort to growing their own where possible; but garden centres aren’t noted for providing contraindications or correct dosage on seedlings. The burden on the NHS will be worsened as more minor self-limiting ailments present at GP surgeries. More and more safe, gentle and effective herbs will simply disappear from the market. And those herbs that do remain are starting to look more like processed junk foods in terms of their ingredients.
We’re not talking about unknown, dangerous “black market” quantities here. But instead, thousands of years of collective wisdom; plants that have been enjoyed throughout history, and, overall, with an impeccable safety record, one that surpasses food itself by a long way. ALL people should have access to this vital knowledge if they so choose, not some watered down or manipulated version. And all consumers should be able to choose the brand and quality they prefer. A tiny selection from an oligopoly marketplace is simply not right.
Isn’t freedom of choice an absolute fundamental in this country, or did we miss something?
Read the full article here…
http://www.anh-europe.org/news/eu-herb-law-is-hurting-us-%E2%80%94-says-online-retailer
It’s not what you do, it’s the way that you do it.
You and the ANH have a captive audience, and being (presumably) a professional journalist (aka sensationalist/reputation trasher), it is now well established how you people get coverage.
If you wish to be regarded in the same category as Mr. Murdoch’s low end bottom feeders, then it is my opinion you have achieved your aim. WELL DONE!
It is easy to trash someone, and like so many in this world incapable of creating anything positive, you slither along looking for an easy target to jump on. But this issue smacks of something personal, which is of no interest to me or anyone else.
I have made my point and leave you to slither.
Please read the article below to see the impact the EU herb directive is having
EU herbal directive forces predictable price rises and customer discontent
http://www.anh-europe.org/news/eu-herbal-directive-forces-predictable-price-rises-and-customer-discontent
I would ask that anybody who reads the letter from Professor Elizabeth Williamson, to the UK Health Minister to also read Dr Robert Verkerk’s response. As it spells out what is wrong with her letter for anybody who has not read the directive.