The FDA Does Not Care About You

1. FDA Sits Back as You Consume Mercury in Your Food

The FDA, despite having full access to the studies that were heavily publicized even on mainstream media websites, apparently feels that carcinogenic mercury tainting the food supply is nothing to worry about. Found to be present in over a third of 55 popular brand-name food and beverage products, research has shown that you are most likely consuming mercury if you consume processed food items or many beverage products. High-fructose corn syrup is a main carrier of the harmful element, which is especially concerning when you consider the fact that the average American consumed 37.8 pounds of high-fructose corn syrup in 2008!

Despite experts speaking out and calling on the FDA to come to the aid of the public, the FDA still does nothing.

“Mercury is toxic in all its forms. Given how much high-fructose corn syrup is consumed by children, it could be a significant additional source of mercury never before considered. We are calling for immediate changes by industry and the [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] to help stop this avoidable mercury contamination of the food supply,” the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy’s Dr. David Wallinga, a co-author of both studies, said in a prepared statement.

2. FDA Pushes Unlabeled, Genetically Modified Salmon

Back in 2011, Congress took legal action against the approval of genetically modified salmon via blocking the FDA from approving it due to health concerns. Calling for further research, Congress listened to the warnings given by experts over the potential dangers of the genetically modified creation. Known as AquAdvantage,
the creation process of the fish involves a combination of genomes taken from other fish. Using a gene from the pout fish to prevent freezing, and a growth gene from the Chinook salmon to bring forth faster growth, the engineered salmon is ‘enhanced’ to grow much faster.

One concern is that this genetically modified fish could escape from fish farms and threaten the very genetic code of salmon worldwide. What’s more, however, is that the FDA wouldn’t even require labeling of the GM salmon. This means you could be unknowingly consuming AquAdvantage salmon, thanks to the FDA completely ignoring the potential dangers and concerns of the public and experts alike.

3. FDA Allows Carcinogenic Aspartame to Invade Food Supply

The ubiquitous artificial sweetener aspartame is commonly found in gum products, diet sodas, and an increasingly large percentage of ‘sugar-free’ items. Aspartame has been found to wreak havoc on your body, with studies directly tying aspartame consumption to tumor growth.

One study in particular shed light on the cancer-causing effects of aspartame. Performed by researcher Victoria Innes-Brown, the study showed that of 48 rats experimented on, up to 67 percent of all female rats developed tumors roughly the size of golf balls or larger. The male population didn’t do too well either with 21 percent of the males developing similar cancerous growths. The FDA completely ignores this information and allows for aspartame to be consumed across the nation under the name of NutraSweet and Equal as well.

4. FDA Gives Monsanto Complete Freedom

Not only does the FDA give Monsanto unprecedented political power in shoving their genetically modified foods down your throat, but they have also been given the
greenlight to contaminate the United States dairy supply with their genetically engineered growth hormone known as rBGH. Linked to breast and gastrointestinal cancer, the substance has been banned in 27 countries. Unfortunately, it is estimated that around 1/3 of cows in the United States are injected with this synthetic hormone, which means that you have most likely been highly exposed to rBGH if you live in the U.S. or have eaten U.S. dairy products.

Perhaps this has to do with the fact that Monsanto employees have positioned themselves prominently within the FDA?

One example of many is Margaret Miller. Margaret Miller was in charge of preparing the report on rBGH following its approval at Monsanto, she was later the official in charge of reviewing her own report as Deputy Director of Human Safety and Consultative Services. How’s that for protecting and promoting public health?

This is but a very short list of ways in which the FDA has actually endangered public health – by not protecting it. The list could go on and on, discussing their numerous drug approvals that have resulted in deaths, severe side effects, and much more. Amazingly, a large percentage of US pharmaceuticals are actually created overseas in unregulated Chinese factories – many of which the FDA has never even inspected.


FDA Threat: Vitamins, Supplements, & Alternative Health Therapies

The FDA generously lends its approval to drugs that cause ghastly symptoms and untold damage. Many contain toxic contaminants from China. Vioxx is said to have claimed 70,000 lives. “Yet not one of them was taken off the market until the desired profits of the product manufacturer were realized and not once were criminal charges ever levied at a pharmaceutical company that decided profits were far more important than human lives.”

Consumer reports seek to demonize natural remedies with ambiguous statements like “thought to be linked” and “could be linked” because natural products are not patentable and there are barely any substantial reports of negative consequences. But this is not enough for the FDA to turn public interest against natural health products and close small supplement companies. So the next step involves twisting vitamins, supplements, and alternative health therapies into something “medicinal” to crack down on companies full force. But they never crack down on the real culprits of death and damage.

In the matter of independent testing for new drugs and vaccines, the FDA throws its hands up, “We don’t have the power!” When it comes to natural remedies it will be “Respect our power!”

~ Health Freedoms

Even as the FDA has for decades routinely given a seal of approval to toxic and deadly medications and vaccines, claiming they are safe, and as hundreds and thousands of people, if not millions, have died or have been permanently injured as a result of their incompetence and gross dereliction of duty, this agency continues its assault on natural remedies and aids claiming they need to be regulated by FDA.

While one toxic and deadly medication, such as Vioxx can claim 70,000 lives, the manufacturer is never shut down by the FDA. Merck Pharmaceuticals never pays any fines or penalties. While they may be sued in court for wrongful death, this is only AFTER they have sold enough of their toxin to exceed any long term risk assessment costs.

In other words: Merck knows its product is lethal. It weighs the long term risk. The questions are never those of public safety, possible harm or death from using their product, but rather:

    • Can we sell enough of Vioxx fast enough and at levels
    • High enough to offset what we estimate will be the costs of lawsuits for the people we killed or permanently injured and still make a hefty profit?

And every pharmaceutical company operates their business under this model which is nothing short of pre-meditated murder in my opinion. While state after state moves to criminalize the alternative therapies and the vitamin and supplement industry, not one state has moved to criminalize the use of toxic and deadly, FDA approved, medications. Not one state, and surely not those Republicans who are colluding state to state to criminalize alternative health practices, has ever suggested holding Merck or any other pharmaceutical company criminally responsible or criminally negligent for the people injured or killed in their respective states as a result of the use of long term risk assessments on the public, rather than safety.

Never in the history of natural and alternative therapies and health practices has any vitamin, mineral, supplement, herb or alternative therapy caused the death of 70,000 people. Not once. In fact, the reports of adverse reactions to natural remedies and health aids is so minimal, there virtually is no report of any consequence.

Because there is no evidence of large scale harm from the use of natural remedies and therapies, a skewed and fabricated report which was promoted by Consumer Reports, using terms such as “May be linked, Could be linked, might be, “is thought to be linked” and other evasive and non-conclusive statements to lead the reader to believe that there is a known and provable link to various diseases and health issues when no such evidence exists. Because these natural products are natural and not patentable and most have been used for centuries without harm, it is imperative to fictionalize some form of threat to justify handing them over to big pharma.

Consumer Reports also stated:

“The Food and Drug Administration has not made full use of even the meager authority granted it by the industry-friendly 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA).”

The FDA has actually stepped outside of its legal (not lawful) authority which is only concerned with labeling. Every effort has been made by FDA to create regulations and rules that would have no other effect than to expedite the closing of small supplement manufacturers as they move towards redefining nutritional supplements and dietary aids along with alternative health therapies as medicinal.The Consumer Report also states that of the supplements tested many were found to be contaminated with heavy metals and other toxins, including prescription medications. It also says that most of this contamination originates in China….just like the melamine contaminated products.

Did the FDA move to halt these products? No! Do they inspect any Chinese producers? No! Were any penalties levied against Chinese producers? No!

What FDA did do in the case of the melamine contamination was to establish an acceptable amount of melamine in Chinese imports. Melamine is highly toxic at any level.

The use of the words and phrases such as, may, could, might, thought to be, are the same vague words used to justify the use of toxic vaccines and medications. Any of these pharmaceuticals “may, might, could be or may be thought to be” useful in fighting disease, but no one seems able to provide any conclusive evidence that they do, although we do seem to bury a large number of people subjected to them and we have to deal with the long term care for those who survive these things but who are now permanently damaged.

As a result of their continuing protection of, and approval of, untested medications and vaccines producers, is it any wonder the FDA (Food & Drug Administration) is now openly referred to by the public as the “Federal Death Administration”?

This agency has given its approval to medications that have caused heart attacks, strokes, birth defects, autism, neurological disorders, seizures, coma, sudden infant death, infertility, cancer, leukemia, brain damage, dementia, amnesia, liver damage, muscle damage, high blood pressure, hemorrhages, blood clots, blindness, and so many other life threatening or life impairing conditions that it is impossible to list them all. The list of medications and vaccines that have been pulled from the market is extensive. Yet not one of them was taken off the market until the desired profits of the product manufacturer were realized and not once were criminal charges ever levied at a pharmaceutical company that decided profits were far more important than human lives.

This approval is given in lieu of money. It is given while accepting the intentionally skewed testing data provided by the same corporations seeking approval. The FDA rarely, if ever, actually does any independent testing of new drugs and vaccines. This is not a matter of the FDA not having enough authority; they have far more authority than they were ever intended to have.

The problem is that they are a privately owned federal corporation unlawfully empowered to write rules and regulations (law-making) by congress ceding its authority, and as such are autonomous. Nothing in the FDA mandates and guidelines requires them to act in the public interest. And the fact is; they don’t.

About the author

Marti Oakley is a political activist and former op-ed columnist for the St Cloud Times in Minnesota. She was a member of the Times Writer’s Group until she resigned in September of 07. She is neither Democrat nor Republican, since neither party is representative of the American people. She says what she thinks, means what she says, and is known for being outspoken. She is hopeful that the American public will wake up to what is happening to our beloved country . . . little of it is left. Her website is The PPJ Gazette


Why The Law (allegedly) Forbids The Medicinal Use of Natural Substances

According to the FDA’s legal definition, a drug is anything that diagnoses, cures, mitigates, treats, or prevents a disease.

The problem with this definition is that there are numerous substances, as readily available and benign as found on our spice racks, which have been proven by countless millennia of human experience to mitigate, prevent and in some cases cure disease, and which cannot be called drugs according to the FDA.

How can this be? Well, the FDA has assumed for itself Godlike power, requiring that its official approval be obtained before any substance can legally be used in the prevention and treatment of disease.

The FDA’s legal-regulatory control therefore is totalitarian and Napoleonic in construct; what it does not explicitly permit as a medicine is implicitly forbidden.

Historically the FDA has required new drugs undergo expensive and elaborate multi-phased clinical trials, which are out of the grasp of any ordinary interest who might want to demonstrate the efficacy of a non-patentable (and therefore unprofitable) herb, food or spice.

The average out-of-pocket cost for obtaining a new drug approval is US$ 802 million dollars,[1] and therefore an investor putting capital into bringing to market a
substance that does not lend itself to market exclusivity and therefore cannot produce a return on investment, is committing economic suicide, if not also breaking the law. The investor actually has a legally-binding fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders to make a profit. And therefore, capital will not flow into any would-be commodity that can be produced or obtained with ease, including most things that grow freely on this Earth.

It is an interesting footnote in history that shortly after the Declaration of Independence, Congress declared that natural substances, e.g. water or salt, were God’s gift to mankind and that therefore products of nature should be limited in their patent protection. While this was a noble declaration, it has actually been used against those whose rights it would protect. It has forced private interests to synthetically alter natural substances — for instance the burgeoning biotech field of recombinant DNA technology, i.e. genetically modified organisms (GMOs) — for the sole reason that it guarantees them ownership/patent rights.

In fact, a medical system that legally requires it make a profit threatens to destroy and/or incriminate itself if non-patented, non-profitable natural substances or therapies are employed. It also results in so much collateral damage to those it purports to serve that it could rightly be called a modern form of human sacrifice.

As a result, instead of choosing prospective medicines logically: because they work, are easily accessible, and safe, billions of dollars flow in the exact opposite direction, capitalizing only those substances which are unnatural, and therefore while proprietary are almost invariably unsafe, and whose access and administration can be intensively controlled.

Has The Attempt To Co-opt Medicine Through the Drug-Based Model Undone Itself? 

And yet, there is a silver lining to the story. Due to the fact that our bodies are ultimately constructed from the natural things (food, air and water), and obey very strict natural laws such as the well-known principle of chirality (handedness) the fact that all aminoacids in our body turn a beam of polarized light in the left-handed direction (L-lysine) and sugars to the right-handed direction (D-ribose)– one cannot simply create biologically active, synthetic drugs arbitrarily, as a mistake in handedness (or similar property) could be fatal. Nature, therefore, still provides an elegant biomolecular architecture of irreproducible intelligence and complexity, from which synthetic analogs are modeled and/or derivatives are spun.

As a result, billions of dollars of drug industry and government money (i.e. tax payer money) flow into finding lead compounds for drug development.  Nature is put on the rack, if you will, and her secrets teased from her through innumerable animal and test tube experiments, in order to find compounds that can then be converted into synthetic, patented drugs.

Inadvertently, some of the very same companies and interests which require that natural substances not receive the same drug-approval status as synthetic ones, are funding research that prove basic vitamins, foods and spices are as effective or more effective and usually much safer than the drugs  they are
developing to replace or supplant them.  

This means that tens of thousands of studies do exist showing that natural substances may prevent and/or treat disease, at least in the in vitro (test tube) and animal models. These results often confirm traditional uses in Ayurvedic, Chinese and other traditional systems of medicine, and therefore may be compelling enough for individuals or healthcare practitioners to use the information to inform their treatment decisions.

The Case For Curcumin In the Prevention and Treatment of Disease

The government biomedical and life sciences database known as Medline contains over 21 million published study citations, and is accessible to search through engines such as 2.6 million of them contain reference to cancer.  115,000 of them remain after applying the Complementary Medicine filter. 2,625 of them can be found indexed on the database, referencing 612 natural substances of potential value. Turmeric, and particularly its polyphenolic constituent known as curcumin, which gives the spice its golden hue, is one of the most extensively studied natural compounds of all time, with 4588 references to it on the National Library of Medicine’s bibliographic database known as Medline [as of 2.25.2012]. And yet, despite having been shown to have therapeutic value in over 500 disease states in animal and in vitro studies, it still has not been the subject of extensive human clinical research for the reasons stated above., an open source natural medicine database, has indexed curcumins anti-cancer properties in over 50 cancers, with the top 10 most cancers researched in association with curcumin listed below.

Cancer Number of Articles
Breast Cancer 58
Colorectal Cancer 23
Colon Cancer 51
Prostate Cancer 42
Pancreatic Cancer 24
Cancers: Drug Resistant 40
Lung Cancer 37
Liver Cancer 27
Cancer Metastasis 32
Skin Cancer 15


As one can see curcumin holds great promise. It has been repeatedly demonstrated to possess simultaneously both chemoprotective/chemosensitizing and radioprotective/ radiosensitizing properties, meaning it is capable of reducing the adverse effects on healthy cells caused by chemotherapy and radiotherapy, as well as enhance the cancer-killing properties of these conventional therapies. It also has an exceptionally high margin of safety, at least an order of magnitude greater than commonly used conventional chemotherapy agents such as 5-fluoruracil.[2] Given these facts curcumin, at the very least, should be considered an ideal candidate for use as an adjuvant in integrative cancer care, and perhaps as a first-line treatment alternative to conventional chemo-agents.

For additional information on the remarkable research supporting the use of Turmeric and Curcumin in medicine, watch the video below.  Join our Facebook research page on Turmeric for updates: Turmeric — What The Research Reveals

[2] Curcumin’s LD50 (lethal dose, 50%) in mice is at least 2,000 mg/kg, versus 5-fluorouracil 115 mg/kg, or


FDA Targets ‘Unproven’ New Supplements While Allowing Harmful GMOs

Natural Society

Why has the FDA ignored the fact that mercury, an element that is highly toxic in all forms, was found in a large number of brand-name processed foods? Specifically, the mercury content was found to be contained in high-fructose corn syrup, which also reportedly contains genetically modified ingredients. Instead of addressing this major public health concern, the FDA is focusing their time on crushing beneficial supplements through ridiculous NDI regulations that threaten the entire infrastructure of the nutraceuticals industry.

Researchers from two U.S. studies reported that about half of tested samples of high-fructose corn syrup contained mercury. Mercury was also found in nearly a third of 55 popular brand-name food and beverage products which listed high-fructose corn syrup as the first-or-second-highest labeled ingredient.

Following the report, organizations like the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy called on the FDA for immediate action:

“Mercury is toxic in all its forms. Given how much high-fructose corn syrup is consumed by children, it could be a significant additional source of mercury never before considered. We are calling for immediate changes by industry and the [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] to help stop this avoidable mercury contamination of the food supply,” the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy’s Dr. David Wallinga, a co-author of both studies, said in a prepared statement.

Americans Consumed Over 37 Pounds of Mercury-Laden HFCS in 2008

Mercury is toxic in any dosage, but the information becomes even more alarming when you consider the fact that the average American consumed 37.8 pounds of high-fructose corn syrup in 2008! If this is not explosive enough on its own, remember the fact that this is but one source of mercury exposure. CFL light bulbs, mercury-contaminated seafood, and some dental fillings are a few sources of mercury exposure that affect millions of individuals.

The ubiquitous nature of high-fructose corn syrup in processed food products makes it difficult to avoid if you are on a junk food diet that is devoid of essential nutrients. Unfortunately, a large number of people worldwide subscribe to this nutritional program while in the dark regarding the true effects that such a diet can have on the human body. Until the FDA decides to step in (which simply will not happen unless activists make enough noise), protecting yourself and your family against HFCS is your priority. If you eat 100% organic food items, or grow your own organic food, you will not have to worry about toxic high-fructose corn syrup.

It’s time to tell the FDA to focus on the real issues, like toxic elements in our food supply – not health-promoting supplements that have improved livesand boosted immune systems.

Natural Society
Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post
Fri, 23 Dec 2011 17:18 CST
Post date:

Sunday, February 26th 2012 at 7:00 pm by Sayer Ji

Marti Oakley
Health Freedoms
Fri, 06 May 2011 18:15 CDT