Written by Bernie Smith Jill Hennessy, the health minister for Victoria in Australia, has done it yet again. She has opened herself up to a large liability claim once again. She stated that “there are no risks in vaccinating your children” earlier in the year. She then came out with “tweets “ of “vile anti-vaxxers” tin an attempt to show she had been attacked, which have since been debunked in this article.… Read the rest
Protecting The Big Pharma Monopoly: Anti-Marijuana ‘Experts’ Work For Drug Makers If you ever wonder why nothing ever seems to get done, you can just use the old adage and “follow the money.” Nine times out of ten, the things that never seem to change remain that way because it is to the benefit of someone with the deep pockets to make sure it stays that way.… Read the rest
But if you’re waiting for charges to come down on officials at Halliburton or thinking you might see Dick Cheney hauled away on a perp-walk, don’t hold your breath. While the documents reveal the depths of corruption in the global oil industry, the other thing the show is how entrenched in every level of government and business such practices are.
Champagne Jacuzzis and all-expense paid trips for NHS officials—Courtesy of Big Pharma Advisory boards or bribery boards? UK National Health Service (NHS) doctors in trouble over Big Pharma ties In a world increasingly infiltrated by corporate money at every conceivable level, it’s safer to assume that someone somewhere has been paid off in any given situation. The greasing of palms and the bestowing of favors is of course an age-old tradition, and it’s probably not going away anytime soon, But every now and then the greed on the part of those receiving the bribes and the sloppiness of those giving the bribes just becomes too much for the public to stomach, despite the institutionalized nature of the practice.… Read the rest
Bayer AG sold HIV-tainted drugs to Argentina, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, and Singapore, knowing full well that it had already created a heating process that would prevent the transmission of HIV through the product for more fortunate first world children. And worst of all, this was no accident, or just some corporate malfeasance that can be prosecuted. Our taxpayer funded FDA approved this sale, signing off on this odious deal. And while no officials at Bayer or at the FDA have ever been prosecuted for these crimes against humanity, officials on the receiving end of Bayer’s largesse have.
Monsanto states on its website: “There is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans.” No value, indeed, if you are a giant multi-billion dollar conglomerate bent on taking over the world’s food supply so you can profit from it. But in reality the SAFE Act is not even about the well-known dangers of eating GMO foods, nor the dangers of allowing the biotech companies to continue to run roughshod across the entire planet, spreading their poison and lies. No. This bill answers a simple question: do we have a right to know what we are putting into our bodies? Fourteen senators answered in the negative.
Why is CAS even pretending to any kind of academic neutrality, or scientific objectivity? The goals are clear: continue flogging the misleading and misguided science pumped out by the pro-GMO corporations, using their cash to indoctrinate a new generation of true believers, who will continue to send us down the road to a poisoned, unlivable planet incapable of sustaining natural life as it has done for countless millennia.
A company spokesperson said, “Monsanto does not consider either version of the bill, with respect to the effect on preemption, to be a ‘gift.’” Really? Just what would Monsanto consider a gift? Perhaps granting unlabled “substantial equivalent” status to its dangerous genetic-altering GMOs and nearly unlimited tolerance for its dangerous herbicide, RoundUp® (glyphosate)?
Dow had planned to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, confident that the high court’s consistent 5-4 split (with Scalia’s considerable weight favoring business and other conservative causes regardless of the precedent or even logic involved) would play out in their favor. Upon news of the famously hard line conservative judge’s death, however, Dow quickly did an about face and decided to accept a slightly lower settlement of $835 million and be done with it, rather than take their chances with a tie in the Supreme Court, which would by default uphold the lower court’s ruling.