Friday, March 30, 2012

US FDA Subversion of Consumer Right to Know

FDA Deletes 1 Million Signatures for GMO Labeling Campaign
Mike Barrett
Activist Post
Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:27 CDT

While the Food and Drug Administration has seemingly reached the limit for unbelievable behavior, the company's decisions continue to astound and appall consumers and health activists alike.

In the agency's latest decision, undoubtedly amazing thousands of individuals yet again, the FDA virtually erased 1 million signatures and comments on the 'Just Label It' campaign calling for the labeling of genetically modified foods.

The 'Just Label It" campaign has gotten more signatures than any campaign in history for the labeling of genetically modified foods. Since October of 2011, the campaign has received over 900,000 signatures, with 55 politicians joining in on the movement. So what's the problem here?

Evidently, the FDA counts the amount of signatures not by how many people signed, but how many different individual letters are brought to it. To the FDA, even tens of thousands of signatures presented on a single petition are counted as - you guessed it - a single comment.

This is how, despite over a million supporters being gathered by the petition, the FDA concluded a count of only 394.
'This is an election year and there are more than a million people who say this is important to them. This petition has nothing to do with whether or genetically modified foods are dangerous. We don't label dangerous foods, we take them off the shelves. This petition is about a the citizens' right to know what they are eating and whether or not these foods represent a novel change.' said Andrew Kimbrell an attorney for the Center for Food Safety, one of the partner groups on the Just Label It campaign.
The argument as to whether genetically modified foods are dangerous is a whole discussion on its own, but for the FDA to completely sidestep away from the labeling of GM foods is completely and utterly irresponsible.

Consumers have every right to know what they are consuming. Needless to say, biotechnology giant Monsanto is against GMO labeling, claiming that it would mislead consumers since GMOs are 'perfectly safe'. Of course there is plenty of evidence proving that GMOs are not completely safe, and how they affect life in the long-term is questionable to say the least.

Either way, there is enough controversy surrounding the issue which is cause for alarm for millions of people, and Monsanto's opinion on GMOs safety is a sorry excuse for not labeling foods as GM. Is the FDA avoiding such an issue because so many ties exist between genetically modified makers like Monsanto and the agency?

The bottom line is that you have the right to know what is in your food, and what your food is. Denying that right, whether it be by the essential deletion of millions of signatures on a petition, or by ignoring the voices of thousands of people on the street, is stripping the rights of consumers.

Thursday, March 29, 2012

"Tough" Drug Laws Tough

The “‘tough’ drug laws” are all about protecting the market shelf space at retail outlets for cigarettes, alcohol and coffee-caffeine, from the market competitors of Cannabis, Coca Leaf and Opium products- all of which are safer substances.

Drug War Criminal Mercantilism-Pubic Health Disaster 101

That alcoholic beverages and Tobacco products are the only two class of consumables that governments fail to require the labeling of the ingredients confirms the morally and constitutionally in-validness of the various ‘Controlled/Dangerous Substances Acts’- all by legislative criminals who knew better:

Opponents of the drug war are guilty of gross understatement.

Saturday, March 24, 2012

Open Letter to David Boaz- CATO

Licit & Illicit Drugs, by Edward M. Brecher and Consumers Reports at page 230 showing upturns in cigarette use following the times of the 1906, 1914 and 1937 U.S. 'drug control laws'


Is CATO willing to demonstrate its independence by addressing certain issues, such as the Tobacco Mercantilistic nature of the drug war?

Drug War - Tobacco - Pharma Mercantilism

1906 Tobacco - Pharma Mercantilism Act

Pre-1906 Coca Products as Vin Mariani

Drug War Criminal Mercantilism Public Health Subversion

Drug War Infinitely Worse Than Acknowledged

USDA Feared Coca as a Tobacco Habit Cure

Tobacco-Alcohol Sweat-heart Exemption From Labeling the Ingredients

Does CATO support the sweat-heart exemption of Tobacco products and alcoholic beverages from retail product labeling laws?

Shall CATO continue to effectively sanctify the drug war by continually neglecting the issue of anti Coca, pro Tobacco Mercantilism, as does the Drug Policy Alliance?

Let's not forget that opposition to the drug war should NOT be limited to Marijuana, and must include the drug that was used as the hysteria-excuse during the 1980s -- cocaine -- which the drug warriors made into a drug problem (imagine snorting or smoking NoDoz instead of drinking Coffee or Tea), and which the failure to address by groups as CATO and the Drug Policy Foundation/Drug Policy Alliance, conveys the false message that cocaine must remain illegal.


Douglas Willinger
Freedom of Medicine and Diet

DPF COCA '95 Panel October 1995, moderated by Douglas Willinger

Friday, March 23, 2012

Pope B16 Calls for Continuing Cigarette-Pharma Mercantilism

from Drug War Rant:

Pope calls for more killing

The Pope landed in Mexico today and doubled down on the failed drug war.

“We must do whatever is possible to combat this destructive evil against humanity and our youth,” he told reporters, referring to the some 50,000 people killed since 2007 as rival drug trafficking cartels fight each other and the state.

“It is the responsibility of the Church to educate consciences, to teach moral responsibility and to unmask the evil, to unmask this idolatry of money which enslaves man, to unmask the false promises, the lies, the fraud that is behind drugs,” he said. [...]

The pope’s strong words on the drug menace should offer comfort to Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who has staked his reputation on beating down the cartels.

The fraud that is behind drugs? Drugs aren’t beheading people. As far as unmasking the idolatry of money, well, it wasn’t really masked.

Identifying the traffickers as evil doesn’t do anything. It isn’t even news. Calling for “whatever is possible to combat it” is exactly what got us in this mess.


Monday, March 19, 2012

Caswell Hazard & Co. Coca Wine

Broadway 24th Street Sixth Floor 39th Street New York and 212 Thames Street Newport, Rhode Island

Saturday, March 17, 2012

Drug War Cigarette-Pharma Criminal Mercantilism 101

FOX Bill O'Reilly 'Jesuitical Casuistry' Text Book Example

O' Reilly's Jesuitical Casuistry

Uses certain words as 'red flag' terms to induce fear:
His reporting on the death of singer Whitney Houston last month refers to Houston being on prescribed "legalized" "narcotics" - never mind that she was apparently not upon any such drug as commonly known; narcotics means sleep inducing -- which includes alcohol -- but is generally applied to opiates.

Yet xanex, which is dangerous to mix with alcohol, is simply a tranquilizer implying that it is relatively safe.

Bill O' Reilly is an evil man.

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Hypocritical Hillary Clinton

at 24:10-24:17
“Why extremists always focus on women remains a mystery to me,” she told an adoring crowd at the Women in the World Summit at Lincoln Center on Saturday. “But they all seem to. It doesn’t matter what country they’re in or what religion they claim. They want to control women. They want to control how we dress. They want to control how we act. They even want to control the decisions we make about our own health and bodies."
What a hypocrite.

The government already to a large degree control the decisions we[*] make about our own health and bodies" since the 1906 cigarette mercantilism act (Food and Drug Act) granting the United States Department of Agriculture - an entity dedicated to the health of business rather than people, dictatorial power to ban substances from interstate trade, other than Tobacco, and establishing a labeling requirement for cocaine that was not also applied to caffeine and nicotine, thus creating a false impression that the former were necessarily more dangerous than the other two in the context accepted for the latter two (oral infusions or smoke leaves).

Readers of this blog are already likely aware that the main market threat to Tobacco was Coca leaf, and that a U.S. government -- U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment -- commissioned report in 1993 "Coca Reduction Strategies" concluded to the contrary that Coca should be legalized.

Yet what happened with that report?

What did the Clinton Administration do with it?

They simply ignored it.

As does the standard "left-progressives" which remains strangely silent about the elephant in the living room of this murderous cigarette-pharma mercantilism responsible for a majority of not 2/3rds of all of the cases one may hear called in our "Courts."

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

GW and Otsuka Pharmaceuticals Fund Research of MJ for Epilepsy

so much for the US DEA myth of Medical Marijuana scam

Proceedings of the British Pharmacological Society at

Effects Of Cannabidiol And Cannabidivarin On Intrinsic Membrane Properties Of Hippocampal
CA1 Pyramidal Neurons

Charlotte L. Hill, Nicholas A. Jones, Andrew J. Hill, Benjamin J. Whalley, Claire M. Williams, Gary J. Stephens. University of Reading, Reading, Berkshire, UK.

Epilepsy is the most common chronic and disabling neurological condition in the UK and is thought to affect approximately 0.5-1% of the population (Bell & Sander, 2001). However, epilepsy remains refractory in about a third of epileptic patients despite optimal pharmacotherapy (Sander, 1993), demonstrating a clear need for the development of new, effective and well-tolerated antiepileptic drug treatments. Cannabidiol (CBD) and its propyl analogue, cannabidivarin (CBDV), are phytocannabinoids that have been shown to inhibit epileptiform activity in vitro and reduce seizure severity and mortality in vivo (Jones et al., 2010; Hill et al., 2010). Here, using in vitro electrophysiological methods, we have begun to investigate the mechanisms underlying the anticonvulsant effects of CBD and CBDV.

Acute, transverse hippocampal brain slices (300 μm) were obtained from adult, male, Wistar rats from which whole-cell patch clamp recordings were made using current clamp mode in visually identified CA1 pyramidal neurons. Slices were perfused with carboxygenated artificial CSF at room temperature.

A steady-state (at least 20 mins) was achieved and a control recording was made of intrinsic, postsynaptic membrane responses to hyperpolarising and depolarising current via the recording micropipette (-350 to 350 pA; 150 ms). Artificial CSF containing CBD or CBDV (both 10 μM; DMSO 0.1%) was then bath perfused and recordings made every 10 mins. The effects of CBD and CBDV reported here were assessed at 30 mins. Data are means ± SEM and statistical significance was determined using two-tailed, paired t-tests.

CBD (n = 6) significantly decreased membrane resistance from 105.0 ± 15.7 MΩ to 72.4 ± 6.2 MΩ (P<0.05), reduced mean spike count from 5.3 ± 0.4 to 3.1 ± 0.4 (P<0.001), decreased the instantaneous firing frequency between the second and third spikes from 40.6 ± 4.3 Hz to 22.6 ± 3.2 Hz (P<0.01) and increased spike width (1st spike, P<0.05; 2nd spike, P<0.001); CBD had no significant effect on spike amplitude when compared to control. In contrast, CBDV (n = 8) had no significant effect on membrane resistance, mean spike count, instantaneous firing frequency, spike width and spike amplitude when compared to control.

The results obtained for CBD on post-synaptic responses appear to be consistent with its anti-convulsant actions in vivo, which, therefore may be explained by CBD’s effects on intrinsic membrane properties. Although CBDV also shows anticonvulsant properties in vivo, it had no significant effect on the specific intrinsic, post-synaptic responses measured in this study. This suggests that the mechanism of action of CBDV may differ from that of CBD and is the subject of further current investigation.

Bell & Sander (2001) Seizure. 10; 306-316
Hill et al., (2010) Proc. Phys. Soc. 19
Jones et al., (2010) J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 332; 569-577
Sander (1993) Epilepsia. 34; 1007-1016.

Work funded, and phytocannabinoids provided, by GW Pharmaceuticals & Otsuka Pharmaceuticals