Click on text below to see the vid

Test EVERY Cow in the Food Chain

Test EVERY Cow in the Food Chain
Like Other Countries Do

Wednesday, December 31, 2008

More on Joe Fitzgerald, NY Vet with CJD

More on Vet Medical Trials & Joe Fitzgerald, NY Vet with CJD

Aimee Fitzgerald took her 74-year-old husband Joe to the VA hospital in the Bronx last year for diagnosis and treatment after he suddenly started losing motor skills. He was immediately admitted to the hospital, underwent some tests and was told that if he enrolled in a clinical study of Alzheimer's study he could be diagnosed quicker. When he declined, Mrs. Fitzgerald says her husband was immediately dismissed from the hospital without a diagnosis or treatment.

Less than a month later, Mr. Fitzgerald died of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, the human form of mad cow disease.

Monday, December 29, 2008

Korean Courts rule in Favor of USDA, Against Korean People

USDA v. Korea

Editorial] Disappointing decision on U.S. beef petition

The Constitutional Court has ruled against a constitutional petition by 96,000 citizens claiming that the “process by which the Lee Myung-bak administration resumed imports of American beef by formalizing the move with an official announcement (gosi) in the daily government gazette (Gwanbo) was unconstitutional.” The Gwanbo is equivalent to the Federal Register in the United States. Its decision is a big disappointment for the Koreans who had hoped the court would stand in defense of the people’s safety and quarantine inspection sovereignty, because if the gosi was declared unconstitutional in accordance with the petition, which had more signatories than any in history, it would have been automatically invalidated and the Korean government would then have had the justification to renegotiate the beef deal with the United States.

The constitutional petition put before the Constitutional Court asserted that the administration’s move “significantly increases the possibility of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in humans and therefore infringes on constitutionally-guaranteed dignity and worth as humans, the right to pursue happiness, the right to life, and the right to health.” Negotiations with the United States on beef made it so that Korea accepts American beef without limits to age or parts, and that Korea cannot halt beef imports even if there is an outbreak of mad cow disease in the United States. Additional negotiations allowed for restrictions on beef from cows older than 30 months of age and on specified risk material, or SRM, but that was not a fundamental solution. It wrongly assumed that the United States had strengthened prohibitions on animal-based feed that had been relaxed, and another mistake was permitting the importation of some SRM, believing it to be parts that are safe.

Even the current head of the Ministry of Government Legislation said that the process was constitutionally flawed and that he, too, would have taken the issue to the Constitutional Court had he been in the opposition. He said that it is highly problematic, in a constitutional way, to implement something with a directive announcement (gosi) from the relevant Cabinet minister without legislation-drafting procedures, when the issue directly relates to the country’s health.

“While the gosi’s protection measures may not be perfect,” the court said it its decision, “one cannot conclude that this was wholly, or very much, an action that violated the state's constitutional duty to protect the safety of lives and bodies.” It is hard to understand how surrendering quarantine inspection sovereignty and exposing the country to the risk of mad cow disease cannot be concluded to be in inconsistent with or inadequate as far as the duty to the state. It is also disappointing that the court never even had an open oral debate that included expert testimony about a case that was the subject of intense national interest.

The mission of the Constitutional Court is to defend the basic rights of the people and weed out laws that are unconstitutional for violating those rights. The minority opinion was right in stating that the gosi “violates the petitioners’ basic rights because it inadequately carries out the state’s duty to protect basic rights regarding (the safety) of life and body.”

Please direct questions or comments to []

Sunday, December 28, 2008

Human Mad Cow; NY vet refused participation in study, discharged from vet hospital

Aug. 08
By Audrey Hudson

An Army veteran seeking treatment for his sudden loss of motor skills was turned away from a veterans hospital in the Bronx, N.Y., in May 2007 after he refused to participate in a human subject experiment on Alzheimer's disease.

Joe Fitzgerald, 74, died of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease - the human form of mad cow disease - less than a month after being dismissed without diagnosis from James J. Peters VA Medical Center.

His widow is demanding answers from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) as to whether human research testing is taking a priority over the health care of veterans at its hospitals.

"I want them to be held accountable for this, to prevent this from happening to someone else," Aimee Fitzgerald said. "Nothing could have saved Joe, but the care there was hateful and incompetent."

Mrs. Fitzgerald said the research study doctor, Christine Bergmann, told the family that her husband's participation in the study would enable researchers to make a quicker diagnosis of his condition.

But VA officials said Dr. Bergmann did not have the authority to offer a diagnosis.

"[The study] has very little to do with their diagnosis, and it is not consistent with what occurred," said MaryAnn Musumeci, director of the Bronx hospital.

"That's mind-boggling. That's not true," Mrs. Fitzgerald said. "Dr. Bergmann made it very clear to us that the benefit of signing up for the study would be that she would develop an individual profile of Joe that would help them to arrive at a diagnosis faster."

The VA made several officials available for comment, but not Dr. Bergmann.

VA officials and the Fitzgerald family also differ over the circumstances of Mr. Fitzgerald's discharge and whether the hospital provided care.

Miss Musumeci said Mr. Fitzgerald was admitted only for testing and clinical evaluation and that he was referred back to his physician at Castle Point VA Hospital for further care and testing.

"He was released because his work-up was complete. We did all the tests we could have done," Miss Musumeci said.

In an interview with The Washington Times, VA officials said they knew Mr. Fitzgerald was suffering from a rapidly debilitating disease.

Asked why the hospital released instead of treating the veteran, Miss Musumeci said, "He was in need of hospice care, and that is what Castle Point provides."

Castle Point VA Hospital, a part of the VA Hudson Valley Healthcare System in Dutchess County, N.Y., does not identify itself as a hospice facility and does not advertise its hospice care among its patient services.

Mrs. Fitzgerald said she was advised to keep future testing appointments with Castle Point and that the Bronx hospital never recommended hospice care or said they knew her husband's health was deteriorating.

Mr. Fitzgerald's discharge papers stated that he was in stable condition.

The Bronx VA hospital incident is the latest to raise questions about the ethics of human subject research experiments conducted at VA facilities nationwide.

A recent investigation of experiments conducted at an Arkansas veterans hospital uncovered rampant violations, including missing consent forms, secret HIV testing and failure to report more than 100 deaths of subjects participating in studies.

Moreover, Iraq war veteran James Elliott told a congressional committee in July that he sought treatment from the VA for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and instead was persuaded to join a smoking-cessation study. While taking a smoking-cessation drug, he suffered a psychotic episode.

Mr. Elliott said the first doctor he visited at the Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System in Little Rock to seek treatment for PTSD "wasn't concerned about my day-to-day life. ... He wasn't concerned with my wartime experiences. He wasn't concerned about if I was going to make it home safely after the appointment."

Arthur Caplan, one of the nation's premier medical ethicists and director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, said the first obligation of any caregiver is to treat the patient.

"It is only when there is no therapy, or the therapy that is available is of doubtful utility, that someone can be recruited to research," Mr. Caplan said.

"Every researcher and every institution that does research must be sure to make an accurate diagnosis of a patient, to then offer them whatever therapy is available at the institution, to give them all their options in terms of treatment anywhere else and then and only then to pursue the possibility of trying something new in a research study," Mr. Caplan said.

"No one should ever be penalized for failing to volunteer for a study, ever," Mr. Caplan said.

"The goal of any medical encounter must be first and foremost to provide the latest and best care when care is available," Mr. Caplan said. "The chance to participate as a subject in research has to take a secondary role to receiving care as a patient."

Miss Musumeci, director of the Bronx hospital and a registered nurse, said participation in the studies is routinely offered to patients seeking care at the VA facility, including healthy patients who may be admitted to studies as control subjects.

Mary Sano, the Bronx hospital's director of research, said that "the opportunity to participate in research is widespread" and does not interfere with clinical treatment.

"The research team is completely independent of the clinical team, and the clinical team has priority and determines if a person is approachable," Miss Sano said. "If they say no, the research team goes away."

Miss Musumeci said that many hospital patients welcome the opportunity to participate in studies because "they appreciate the opportunity to stay busy."

Mrs. Fitzgerald said the VA researchers wanted her husband to enroll in the Alzheimer's experiment to observe the natural and ravaging course of the disease and his eventual death.

Vera Sharav, president and founder of the Alliance for Human Research Protection, a patient-advocacy group, said the circumstances faced by the Fitzgerald family are "not unique."

"You come to a hospital in critical need and you want care, even if you are not cured, and instead they say they are going to observe the degeneration and death?"

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

New Version of Mad Cow Discovered

Hot News frum BBC (Big-Mouth Broad Casting)
Dec. 23, 2008

British medical researchers say they're concerned a new human version of mad cow disease has been detected, officials said.

While most cases of new variant Creutzfeld-Jakob disease (vCJD) in Britain have occurred in people with a

genetic profile carried by 42 percent of the population, the BBC reported that a young man with a different genetic profile appears to have the disabling disease.

The report said the diagnosis, which must be confirmed by biopsy, suggests at least 90 percent of Britain's population is susceptible to vCJD.

The Times of London said the prion protein that malfunctions to cause the disease comes in three versions. People with two copies of the amino acid methionine -- the MM genetic type-- have been thought to be most vulnerable to vCJD. The new case, however, is in a person with the MV genotype. It is unknown whether people with the VV genotype are vulnerable, the newspaper said.

Mexico Joins Canada in Opposition of US COOL Laws

Mexico joins Canada in opposing a new U.S. law on country-of-origin labeling for fresh beef and pork by filing a complaint with the World Trade Organization on Thursday.

A WTO official said the body received Mexico's official complaint, which starts a 60-day consultation period between Mexican and U.S. authorities. After that, Mexico can ask the WTO to set up an investigative panel. Such trade disputes can result in punitive sanctions, but usually after years of litigation.

The WTO official spoke on customary anonymity and copies of the complaint were not immediately available.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative in Washington could not immediately comment.

Canada's government filed its complaint earlier this month, saying it was concerned the U.S. rules were discriminating against Canadian agricultural exporters.

Under country-of-origin labeling, foreign cattle and pigs must be segregated in U.S. feedlots and packing plants, prompting some firms to only deal with American livestock. Foreign animals are also required to have more documentation about where they come from and, in the case of cattle, must have tags that indicate they are free of mad cow disease.

Canadian farm groups say a growing number of meat plants in the U.S. are refusing to accept Canadian cattle and hogs for processing since the Country Of Origin Labeling (COOL) law went into effect on Oct. 1.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

The Cost YOU Pay for Govt Cow-Killing

My inquiry to the USDA was this; What is the total amount of indemnifications our govt paid out this year for cattle that the USDA deemed had to be killed? Talk about "straight from the horses mouth,".....the Big-Whigs & Fat Cats at USDA have responded (below)

Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 3:51 PM
To: Reynnells, Richard
Cc: Gipson, Chester A; QARR
Subject: RE: Inquiry


Below is the answer you were seeking (and should be available at the
APHIS web site):

For Fiscal Year 2008 total indemnity costs were $ $33,211,819.

*Excuse me I flunked math miserably due to a 5th grade nun who beat my head on the blackboard when I couldnt find a solution to a division problem,.....I still have to do the "fingers and toes" thing when counting in multiples, but I think that the figure above translates into over THIRTY THREE MILLION DOLLARS worth of indemnification for one year (2008) Just think of the $$$ our good govt would save IF their was no meat-food animal mass production. Big Time Ranchers, Industrial Dairymen and other factory farmers,....Help America save $$$$$, cut down your herds which will in turn cut down these hefty payments shelled out to the factory farmers every year, in the name of.....what? Good Governmnet? Fairness? Business Eccumen? "Economic Stimulus" or "Bail-Out?" Can you spell C-O-R-P-O-R-A-T-E-W-E-L-F-A-R-E- or why is it in america these days that only small business are allowed to fail? Not enough political clout? Duh.'Nuther No Brainer.

. ----------------------------------------------------
Michael David, MS, VMD, MPH
National Center for Import and Export
Sanitary International Standards Team
Veterinary Services
4700 River Rd Unit 33
Riverdale, MD 20737

301-734-5324 (tel)
301-734-6402 (fax)

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Obama selects Tom Vilsack for Agriculture Secretary, Ken Salazar for Secretary of the Interior

Obama selects Tom Vilsack for Agriculture Secretary

by brownsox

Tue Dec 16, 2008 at 05:50:02 PM PST

CNN is reporting that the pick is in, and it is former Governor of Iowa (and former presidential candidate) Tom Vilsack.

CHICAGO, Illinois (CNN) — President-elect Barack Obama will name former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack as his secretary of agriculture at a news conference scheduled for Wednesday, according to an Obama transition aide and a separate Democratic source.

Vilsack was a high-profile supporter of Sen. Hillary Clinton during the presidential primaries after he briefly sought the Democratic presidential nomination.

At the same news conference, Obama will name U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar from Colorado as his choice for secretary of the interior, sources said.

Vilsack adds even more "star power" to a cabinet already loaded with it - Clinton, Salazar and Janet Napolitano being the most prominent.

His appointment almost certainly determines that Vilsack will not seek the U.S. Senate seat currently held by five-term Republican incumbent Chuck Grassley, who is up for reelection in 2010. It's rumored that even if Grassley doesn't retire, national Democrats will kick the tires on the Iowa race. Even if Vilsack hadn't taken the Cabinet position, there's certainly no guarantee he would have challenged Grassley.

If Grassley does retire, the race will become one of the biggest in the country - First District Rep. Bruce Braley will doubtless be the top choice for Democrats, Fourth District Rep. Tom Latham for the Republicans.

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Mad Cow Epidemic Here to Stay

Hot News frum Big-Mouth Broad Casting; Dec. 14, 2008

A new epidemic called Mad Cow struck England in the early 1980s. This disease killed 146 people in England and resulted in the slaughter of millions of cows, and almost decimated the cattle and dairy industries. The incubation period of Mad Cow Disease, or CJD, could be as long as 25 years. Mad Cow Disease, or CJD, is incurable and 100 percent fatal. The British government believes thy have contained the outbreak. However, new research shows that the disease organism, prions, which are protein chains, may have infected far more than just cattle. Humans can contract the disease from just going to the dentist, or having basic surgery, or putting on contaminated makeup. Drinking a glass of milk from infected cows could end your life. Protein supplements purchased in a health food store, or powered rose fertilizer made from cattle parts, or humane growth hormone, even insulin, may contain the disease. Although, the CDC claims there are no human deaths resulting from Mad Cow Disease in the United States, clusters of CJD victims are showing up across the nation. The CDC contends that these clusters are just sporadic CJD, or a naturally occurring medical phenomenon, at the rate of one in one million. New research shows evidence of the possibility that Mad Cow Disease is here to stay in the US, as a cow was discovered in Washington state that had Mad Cow Disease. Alzheimer’s disease may be a benign form of Mad Cow Disease resulting from the intake of too much beef. Also, individual amateur scientists may have uncovered a possible cover-up in the USDA and its affiliation with the Cattleman’s association. After all, the impact of consumers not eating beef, or drinking milk, would destroy this segment of the market.

During the 1950s, a young medical student named Carleton Gajdusek traveled to New Guinea to research an unusual disease that was killing members of a native tribe called the Fore. Gajdusek discovered that these tribe members were engaging in Endo-cannibalism, which is the practice of eating members of one’s own tribe. This unusual habit enabled tribe members to add much needed protein to their diet, after the victim had died of natural causes. Upon inspection of the victim’s brains, Gajdusek discovered holes in the brain tissue that resembled sponges. He coined the term transmissible spongiform encephalopathy. He discovered that once the tribe members stopped their cannibalistic ways, the disease went away. He wrote several papers on this new discovery, and things remained rather quiet on this subject until the mid-1980s, when the disease reared its ugly head in cattle in Great Britain.

Cattle are herbivores. For millennia, they have been grazing in grassy fields, consuming mostly hay, as cattle prefer grass to the more dense nutrients such as grain. In a realistic world, one would not expect to see cattle eating the corpses of other cattle. However, in an ironic twist, this is exactly what happened in Great Britain in April of 1985.1 Dr. Colin Whitaker, a veterinarian, received a phone call from a dairy client concerning a cow that was behaving strangely. Upon inspection of the cow, and its unruly, aggressive behavior, the cow was then monitored for several weeks, and when conditions worsened, the animal was eventually destroyed, and sent to the Knacker’s yard (a rendering plant in England). As more and more cows came down with similar symptoms, scientists could not identify the disease causing agent, and the media coined the term Mad Cow disease, named after the unruly, aggressive behavior exhibited by the sick, or downer, animals. In the early 1980s in Great Britain, the animal rendering industry took it upon themselves to introduce a new form of protein supplement made from dead cattle and sheep. In Britain, it was common to see trucks loaded with the heads and offal of cattle from a slaughterhouse traveling down the highway to rendering plants. When this new product, a thick soup of fatty dead animals, was mixed with cattle feed, it could significantly increase milk production in cows. This cooked paste was commonly referred to as meat-and-bone meal, and was fed to cattle to increase their protein consumption. Cattle that were vegetarians for thousands of years suddenly became cannibals due to the economic necessity to increase milk production and gain weight. Cows normally produce approximately 35 pounds of milk a day when fed a steady diet of alfalfa and other grain supplements. Cows eating alfalfa mixed with a high power protein supplement could now produce approximately 130 pounds of milk a day.3 The added expense of purchasing this protein feed was offset by the profit margins from the increased volume of milk production. If an individual farm was not using protein supplement, then they were going out of business.

As the disease began to spread throughout English farms, a committee was set up to investigate the disease organism. Scientists concluded that the disease was a spongiform encephalopathy, or a disease of the brain that left minute sponge-like holes in brain tissue. BSE, or Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy was the new buzzword for a new disease. The committee also determined that the possible cause of the BSE was food contamination, and immediately recommended a ban on feeding ruminant-derived protein to ruminants. Then the unthinkable occurred – the disease jumped from one species to another as two dairy farmers died of a form of spongiform encephalopathy known as CJD, Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease, a form of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy.4 Then, unexpectedly, a fifteen year old girl came down with a terrible disease that left her feeling weak and unsteady on her feet, similar to the unsteadiness exhibited by sick cattle. She was eventually diagnosed with CJD, or Mad Cow Disease. A physician investigator from the government visited her mother and warned her to keep quiet about the disease. He implored her to think about the consequences of the damage to the common market.5 All meat products in Great Britain, such as steaks and hamburger, as well as other associated meat products and milk products, could possibly contain the fatal CJD disease organism. An act as mundane as eating a hamburger could result in the 100 percent fatal affliction known as Mad Cow Disease.

As of February 2004, the total cases of CJD, both dead and alive, stand at 146 in Great Britain. However, the number of people exposed to the disease could be in the millions, or possibly hundreds of millions.6 The disease could take as long as 30 years to incubate.

Many people who travel to the United States from Britain are not allowed to donate blood here in the US for fear of the transmission of the disease. Great Britain slaughtered over 3.7 million cattle and almost destroyed its entire cattle industry. The disease continues to haunt Great Britain and especially parts of Europe that received imports of cattle and cattle parts from Great Britain.

Could the disease be here in the United States? Many scientists believe the disease is already here, and amateur researchers, like Janet Skarbek of Cinnaninson, New Jersey, who uncovered the Cherry Hill cluster, believes that CJD clusters are forming all around the United States. In January of 2000, one of Janet’s friends, a woman named Carrie, came home from a party and exhibited one of the symptoms of the disease, characterized by unsteadiness in her walk. She was diagnosed with sporadic CJD, or Mad Cow Disease, and thereafter died. Sporadic CJD affects about one person per million in the United Sates.7 A few years went by and Janet recalls reading an obituary in her local newspaper and discovered that a few more people had died from CJD. She then began to search for more victims of CJD in the Lexis-Nexis database and discovered that all of the people who died had one thing in common - they visited and ate at the Garden State Race Track in New Jersey. Janet Skarbek tracked down twelve more people who died from CJD after visiting the Garden State Racetrack. In addition, she was able to take the CDC to task, and using basic probability theory, she was able to compute given a total of 1,100 people who had season passes at the racetrack, scientists should see one case every 909 years, based on the one in one million rate of sporadic CJD. 8 She proved, using probability theory, that a cluster of this size should never occur in one geographic region. This case was definitely a cluster, and most probably occurred by humans eating contaminated beef. The Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia, disputes Janet’s amateur scientific theory, and presented their own paper on their website, refuting her research and affirming their belief that all of the cases represent sporadic CJD.

Deborah Norville, a MSNBC anchor, had a show titled Deborah Norville Tonight. On the April 22, 2004 edition of the show, she discussed the Mad Cow Disease with the theme, could it happen in America. She reported that clusters of the disease in humans were showing up in Pennsylvania, Florida, Oregon, New York, Texas and New Jersey. One guest on the show explained her theory of why her son came down with CJD, and she believes it was the beef by-products in the protein supplements he was consuming to gain weight while weight training. Norville went on to report that countries like Japan, test all of their beef for BSE before it is sold to consumers, while the Unites States tests just a small fraction of beef before it is sent to consumers. Norville pointed out one specific case of a cattle ranch called Creekstone Farms in Kansas. This farm has invested more that $500, 000 into a Mad Cow testing laboratory so they can test all of their cattle before they are slaughtered. This would enable them to sell their cattle to Japan. However, the US Department of Agriculture will not allow the testing of individual cattle, and they even issued a statement to Creekstone Farms: “The use of the test as proposed by Creekstone would have implied a consumer safety aspect that is not scientifically warranted.” The show was then preempted by the Michael Jackson arrest in California. Many people speculated that the Cattleman’s Beef Association had something to do with the preemption. Deborah Norville left MSNBC a few weeks later and claimed she wanted to spend more time with her family. To date, Creekstone Farms has been in an ongoing legal battle with the USDA and has recently lost an appeal to test for BSE. As it stands now, according to Creekstone Farms’ website, Creekstone is barred from testing its cattle for BSE.

Another offshoot of BSE, is TSE, or Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy. This disease is appearing in the western states, has infected deer and elk, and is moving eastward. It is called CWD, or Chronic Wasting Disease. It first appeared in the Wildlife Research Facility in Fort Collins, Colorado in 1967.9 This disease is so contagious that nose-to-nose contact, or the simple act of a deer eating grass around an area that another infected deer urinated on, can spread the disease. Can the disease spread to humans? Most scientists agree that it is possible, and many cases have been reported of hunters, after eating venison, who have come down with CJD. One such case is Jay Dee Whitlock who died in 2000 after eating venison from the deer he shot while hunting.10 Most states that allow hunting will test the game for CWD, and if it is positive, the game officials then recommend discarding the carcass. They also warn, in their game publications, to be aware of the signs of CWD, and report such animals to their respective game officials.

In response to a question from reporters about the safety of the US beef supply, President George W. Bush responded that he eats beef everyday. Since the USDA does not want each individual cattle tested for Mad Cow Disease, and will bring suit to prevent such testing, a undercover investigation revealed a video of slaughterhouse workers kicking and shoving sick and crippled cows with all kinds of cruel devices at a slaughterhouse in Chino, California.11 These animals were then sent to slaughter. Most of the time government inspectors are so short staffed at slaughter houses that they must peer down from towers at thousands of cattle below them to identify ones that are sick, or downer cattle. This antemortem inspection is the only test required by the USDA before cattle are sent to slaughter. In some cases, such as the undercover video, government inspectors were not even present. These chronic shortages of staff invariably allow sick cattle to get through the inspectors and enter the food supply. The largest beef recall in history, 143 million pounds from a California meatpacker occurred because they allowed sick and downer cattle to enter the food supply.

The battle for safe beef consumption continues worldwide after Korea banned US beef in 2003 after a case of Mad Cow Disease was reported in the state of Washington. South Korea has since allowed beef imports from the US under certain conditions. One of these conditions is the importation of beef under 30 months of age. In 2006, South Korea has eased restrictions to allow some imports of boneless beef.12

Mad Cow Disease is here to stay in the United States. The conditions that lead to the emergence of BSE in Great Britain are present in the US. The rendering industry, allied with the cattle industry, must maximize profits by increasing the milk production of cows, and increasing the weight and muscular content of cattle, by rendering dead cows into protein, and then feeding this protein back to cows. This is cannibalism and has lead to the unsafe practices that gave birth to Mad Cow Disease and Chronic Wasting disease. Both of these diseases are incurable and 100 percent fatal. The South Koreans have also brought forth the issue of the age of the cattle in BSE. Since BSE is a slow moving disease, and can incubate for years, are US cattle being slaughtered before the disease can manifest itself to inspectors? Is this the standard operating procedure in the United States cattle industry – to kill the cattle before the disease can infect the beef? Is the USDA allied with the Cattleman’s Association to conceal one of the greatest epidemics of all time that is about to explode on the world stage? Why is the USDA preventing Creekstone farms from testing every individual cattle for BSE? What are they afraid of? Why does Creekstone want to test every individual cattle? Are they aware of the fact that most of the cattle are already infected with BSE, and slaughtering them at an early age, before the disease can manifest itself, is an immoral antidote to a serious epidemic that has blown itself out of control?

Rhodes, Richard. Deadly Feasts. New York. Simon & Schuster. 1997. P.171
ibid. P. 178.
Shell, Ellen Ruppel. “Could Mad-Cow Disease Happen Here?” The Atlantic Monthly September 1998: 4
ibid. P. 187
ibid. P. 188
Waldman, Dr. Murray & Lamb, Marjorie. Dying For a Hamburger. Ontario. McClelland & Stewart Ltd. 2004. P.121
Max, D.T. “The Case of The Cherry Hill Cluster.” The New York Times Magazine 28 March 2004: P. 2
ibid. P. 4
McComb, Brian. Deadly Venison? Field & Stream. February 2001
Flaccus, Gillian. Inspectors say meat safety is threatened.
Chang, Sue. “South Koreans Protest U.S. Beef as Unsafe.” MarketWatch. 10 May 2008.

I hold several degress from the Pennsylvania State University and I love to research what most people call conspiracies. For example, the JFK assassination and 911, and vCJD (Mad Cow disease), to name a few. I have come to realize that we in America do not live in a democracy, but a rule by a small corrupt majority which happens to be filthy rich - the same people who brought us the genocide of the Native Americans, slavery, and endless perpetual wars as part of a national energy strategy for the United States by the collusion of energy corporations and the US Military. My primary goal is to help expose these people who start all of the wars, become bloated with wealth, from the backs of the destitute poor soldiers, and try to make the world a better place for humanity by helping cure the sick, discovering new forms of energy, and to make warfare illegal on planet Earth. The human species has now evolved enough to know better, and we need leaders to show us the way, as we can have heaven here on Earth, not some form of a deranged idea of heaven in some parts of outer space, which extremists of all forms are dying to get into.

Japan suspends beef from Green Bay plant

Hot News frum Big-Mouth Broad Casting;

December 12, 2008

Japan suspends beef from Green Bay plant

Japan has suspended beef imports from a Green Bay plant owned by JBS SA.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service says the estimated six ton shipment to Japan was stopped because the beef may have come from cattle more than 20 months old.

American exporters must verify that beef products are from cattle under 20 months and do not contain materials that might be linked to mad cow disease.

The Green Bay Packerland plant had been owned by Smithfield Foods before it was purchased by JBS, the world's largest beef producer, in October.

JBS did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment.


Information from: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel,

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

South Dakota Stockgrowers Angered By USDA-APHIS Letter

Hot News frum Big-Mouth Broad Castin; Dec. 10, 2008

South Dakota Stockgrowers are extremely upset and angered by a correspondence received yesterday by most of South Dakota’s livestock producers, from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and their Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), stating the use of the USDA 840 tag is “your Passport to Compliance” for Country of Origin Labeling (COOL).

According to South Dakota Stockgrower Animal ID Chairman Bill Kluck, Mud Butte, “this is not only misleading to livestock producers, but is deceitful and coercive.” There is absolutely no need for this 15 digit number, or any other USDA controlled number in order to comply with COOL.

In fact language was written into the COOL law prohibiting the use of the 15 digit National Animal Identification Number (NAIS) from being used for COOL Compliance.

Kluck also said “the brochure is asking producers to “Step up to the 840 ID Solution” which USDA-APHIS describes as a “standardized 15-digit numbering system to create the official animal identification number (AIN). Again, according to the brochure sent to producers, the “AINs, along with your Premises Identification Number (PIN), may be used on official paperwork”

Bill states that the “passport to COOL compliance” phrase used in the brochure is a backdoor attempt to lead producers to believe they have to obtain a PIN and NAIS number even though USDA-APHIS has repeatedly stated that the PIN and NAIS are not mandatory.

Included with the brochure is a 2 page premises registration form to be filled out and sent to the South Dakota Animal Industry Board in Pierre, SD.

South Dakota Stockgrowers Association, along with Chairman Kluck wants the producers of South Dakota to understand that this brochure is misleading, the premises registration does not have to be sent, and that as USDA-APHIS has continually said “this is a voluntary program”.

Bill’s closing thought “I wonder what part of voluntary I don’t understand?”

For more information call the SD Stockgrowers Office at 605-342-0429.

Dead Cows, Gov't Reparation, and the Cost to US Taxpayers

Story Idea; I have read of at least one story where a cattle rancher had to euthanise his whole herd of over 6,000 cows due to bovine TB,of course, the USDA "repaired" the cattlemens losses at fair market value (approx $1,200 per cow) and of course that got me to wondering, just how much are the cattlemens sick & dead cows costing the taxpayers of America? The numbers would be staggering. Do I feel a FOIL request to the USDA coming on?

Scientists warn of a "second wave" of vCJD in Britain

Hot News frum Big-Mouth Broad Casting; 12/08/2008

British scientists said there could be a "second wave" of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease -- the human form of the mad cow disease -- after discovering that some people have a genetic predisposition to the disease. The scientists say a person's individual DNA could affect the length of time that the disease can remain in the body before symptoms develop. A total of 167 people have died from vCJD in Britain since the mid-1990s. Telegraph (London) (12/07)

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Crunch time for USDA pick

Hot News frum Big-Mouth Broad Casting; Dec. 9, 2008

Crunch time for USDA pick

Activists circulate last-minute petition to urge progressive farm-policy chief

Posted by Tom Philpott at 12:30 PM on 08 Dec 2008

The Obama transition team is reportedly going to announce the new USDA chief in the next few days.

If the short list of candidates now being circulated is any indication, the president-elect is feeling serious pressure to make an agribiz-friendly choice.

But just as pressure can be applied from above, it can also come from below. As I mentioned last week, a group of sustainable-ag activists and writers has sent a letter [PDF] to Obama urging him to make a progressive pick. Initial signees included Michael Pollan, Eric Schlosser, Wendell Berry, Bill McKibben, Anna Lappe, and Alice Waters. (Full disclosure: My Maverick Farms colleague Hillary Wilson and I signed as well.)

Now the group that initiated the letter -- Food Democracy Now! of Iowa -- is taking it public, urging all citizens to sign on. Normally I don't put much stock in online petitions. However, in this time of hope, who knows -- maybe such gestures can make a difference.

Meanwhile, for an example of just how much difference the next USDA chief could make, check out a brand-new report [PDF] (press release here) by the Iowa-based Campaign for Family Farms and the Environment. The report documents how one of the Farm Bill's main conservation programs, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), has largely become a sop to large concentrated animal feedlot operations (CAFOs). Money quote from the press release:

The report, entitled Industrial Livestock at the Taxpayer Trough, estimates that between 2003 and 2007, roughly 1,000 industrial hog and dairy operations have captured at least $35 million per year in taxpayer support through EQIP.
Ag policy expert Elanor Starmer, who blogs at Ethicurean authored the report. She tells me that the USDA leadership has plenty of say over how EQIP gets implemented. For example, the USDA could prohibit new or expanding CAFOs from grabbing EQIP cash.

Elanor also reminds me that Obama actually commented on the EQIP-as-sop-to-meat-industry problem in his campaign platform. His "Real Leadership for Rural America" [PDF] document had this to say:

Limit EQIP Funding for CAFOs: Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that we should help farmers find the resources to comply with environmental requirements. The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) provides important financial support to farmers seeking to improve the environmental quality of their operations. Unfortunately, the 2002 Farm Bill lifted the cap on the size of livestock operations that can receive EQIP funding, enabling large livestock operations to receive EQIP payments and subsidizing big CAFOs by as much as $450,000. Barack Obama and Joe Biden supports reinstating a strict cap on the size of the livestock operations that can receive EQIP funding so that the largest polluters have to pay for their own environmental clean up.
That message gives me hope that Obama will choose a progressive to head USDA.

Bovine TB: A More Imminent Danger than BSE?

Hot News frum Big-Mouth Broad Casting; Dec. 9, 2008

Bovine Tuberculosis
USDA Veterinary Services

August 2002

Tuberculosis (TB) is a contagious disease of both animals and humans. It is caused by three specific types of bacteria that are part of the Mycobacterium group: Mycobacterium bovis, M. avium, and M. tuberculosis.

Bovine TB, caused by M. bovis, can be transmitted from livestock to humans and other animals. No other TB organism has as great a host range as bovine TB, which can infect all warmblooded vertebrates. M. avium can affect all species of birds, as well as hogs and cattle. M. tuberculosis primarily affects humans but can also be transmitted to hogs, cattle, and dogs.

Bovine TB has affected animal and human health since antiquity. Once the most prevalent infectious disease of cattle and swine in the United States, bovine TB caused more losses among U.S. farm animals in the early part of this century than all other infectious diseases combined. Begun in 1917, the Cooperative State–Federal Tuberculosis Eradication Program, which is administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), State animal health agencies, and U.S. livestock producers, has nearly eradicated bovine TB from the Nation's livestock population. This disease's presence in humans has been reduced as a result of the eradication program, advances in sanitation and hygiene, the discovery of effective drugs, and pasteurization of milk.

The Disease

In general, disease-causing mycobacteria live only a few weeks outside a host's body because they cannot tolerate prolonged exposure to heat, direct sunlight, or dry conditions. Under cold, dark, and moist conditions, the organisms can survive longer.

Mycobacteria do not grow outside of a host except in cultured media, where they multiply approximately once every 20 hours. Because of this relatively slow rate of growth, the disease usually takes many months to develop. In some instances, the organisms lie dormant within the host's body for its lifetime, both in animals and in humans, without causing progressive disease.

Bovine TB is a chronic disease, seldom becoming apparent until it has reached an advanced stage in cattle, captive cervids, and swine. Some infected livestock seem to be in prime condition, showing no

evidence of infection until they are slaughtered, yet they may be found so seriously infected during slaughter inspection that their carcasses must be condemned.

TB Transmission

Bovine TB can be transmitted from animals to humans and vice versa. Although young animals and humans can contract the disease by drinking raw milk from infected dams, the most common means of transmission is through respiration. Invisible droplets (aerosols) containing TB bacteria may be exhaled or coughed out by infected animals and then inhaled by susceptible animals or humans. The risk of exposure is greatest in enclosed areas, such as barns. Inhalation of aerosols is the most common route of infection for farm and ranch workers and veterinarians who work with diseased livestock. Livestock also are more likely to infect each other when they share a common watering place contaminated with saliva and other discharges from infected animals. Calves, hogs, and humans can contract bovine TB when they drink unpasteurized milk from infected cows.


TB lesions may be found in any organ or body cavity of diseased animals. In early stages of the disease, these lesions are difficult to find, even during post mortem examination. But in later stages, the nodules or lumps caused by bovine TB become very evident in the lungs and associated lymph nodes and in the lymph nodes of the head and intestinal tract. Lesions may also appear in the abdominal organs, reproductive organs, nervous system, superficial body lymph nodes, and bones.

Humans and animals with TB develop an immune response, which can be detected by the tuberculin skin test. Tuberculin is a sterile laboratory product made by growing TB bacteria, killing them with heat, removing them from the substance on which they were grown, and properly diluting and preserving the remaining mixture. About 72 hours after tuberculin is injected into animals affected with TB, a characteristic swelling reaction appears at the point of injection. This reaction is a positive test result, indicating exposure to one type of mycobacteria.

Further diagnostic methods are necessary to confirm the presence of bovine TB. In humans, these tests include chest x rays and sputum cultures. For animals, the comparative cervical tuberculin test, serological tests, post mortem examinations, and other laboratory procedures are used.

The course of treatment for humans with bovine TB takes 6 to 9 months, and the success rate following treatment is more than 95 percent. In livestock, bovine TB can be controlled within an affected herd through regular testing and slaughter of any single animal that tests positive until the entire herd tests negative for this disease. However, because there is no method available to ensure that bovine TB has been eliminated from an affected herd, APHIS recommends herd depopulation.

Control and Eradication

The most effective way of handling the problem of bovine TB in humans is to eradicate it in livestock. At the start of the cooperative eradication program at the beginning of this century, all cattle herds were systematically tested, and all reactors were sent to slaughter. Federal and State agencies shared in the payment of indemnities. Premises were cleaned and disinfected after infected cattle were removed. As a result of this program, the reactor rate in cattle was reduced from about 5 percent to currently less than 0.02 percent. Consequently, the incidence of human TB caused by M. bovis also decreased significantly. The resurgence of human TB in recent years is attributable to M. tuberculosis.

Today, with a very low rate of bovine TB, the most efficient way of finding the disease is through a nationwide surveillance program in slaughter plants. State or Federal meat inspectors check the glands and organs of cattle for signs of TB. If these inspectors find lesions indicative of TB infection, tissue samples are sent to APHIS' National Veterinary Services Laboratories in Ames, IA, for confirmation. If the laboratory confirms that the lesions are the result of bovine TB, an exhaustive attempt is made to trace the infected livestock back through market channels to the originating herd, which is then tuberculin tested.

If the herd of origin is diagnosed with M. bovis, every effort is made to eliminate all animals in the herd. Indemnities, as available, are paid to help compensate owners for their losses. If the herd cannot be depopulated, it is held under quarantine and tested repeatedly until all evidence of infection is eliminated.

Veterinary epidemiologists also attempt to determine the date the herd was probably infected. They then undertake a concerted effort to trace all cattle that moved into or out of the affected herd to try to find out where the disease came from and where it might have gone.

Area Accreditation

For a State to be accredited free of bovine TB, there must have been no confirmed cases of the disease for at least 5 years, and the State must have a set of stringent laws and regulations governing livestock dealers. The State must also maintain surveillance of cattle in marketing channels and require that records be kept that would allow animal health officials to trace infected animals back to their source.

Herd Accreditation

Livestock owners may achieve accredited TB status for their individual herds by following the "Accredited Herd Plan." Details can be found in the publications, "Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication, Uniform Methods and Rules" (UM&R) and "Tuberculosis Eradication in Cervidae, UM&R."

For a herd to qualify as accredited, a negative finding on two annual TB tests must be attained for all cattle over 24 months of age and cattle of any age that are not natural additions to the herd. Deer and elk herds must test negative for 3 consecutive years. To qualify and continue as an accredited herd, livestock must be tested annually within 10 to 14 months of the anniversary of the original test. Livestock from any herd in an accredited free State may be added to an accredited herd without a qualifying test.

What You Can Do

As a livestock producer—dairy, beef, deer, or elk—there are certain things you can do to protect your animals from TB.

The first and most important is to be aware that TB is not gone! Too many farmers falsely believe that TB in cattle has already been eradicated. Remember that this chronic disease will continue to be a threat to animal health until the last infected animal has been eliminated.

So, to be safe, have your livestock tested for TB by an accredited veterinarian to make sure the disease isn't present in your herd. Other tips for preventing TB infection are as follows:

• One of the best ways to avoid TB—and other diseases, too—is to keep a closed herd. Doing so involves raising your own replacement stock. If this system isn't practical for you, demand that sellers give you historical health information about the herd of origin. It's best to buy from accredited TB-free herds.

• If you cannot obtain health histories, make sure any prospective livestock are tested before purchase. Isolate these animals and have them retested 60 days later by an accredited veterinarian.

• Maintain fences in good repair to keep your animals from mingling with neighboring animals.

• And, finally, cooperate with State and Federal animal health officials who are carrying out traceback investigations.
For more information about bovine TB or for copies of the UM&R's, contact:

USDA, APHIS, Veterinary Services
Animal Health Programs
4700 River Road, Unit 36
Riverdale, MD 20737–1231
Telephone (301) 734–6954

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326–W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250–9410 or call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

USDA to Hold Public Meetings Addressing Bovine TB Concerns

Hot News frum Big-Mouth Broad Casting; December 8, 2008

PA Farm News

USDA to Hold Public Meetings Addressing Bovine TB Concerns

WASHINGTON, DC —The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will hold a series of public meetings on its national bovine tuberculosis (TB) program. The meetings will take place this month in Michigan, Minnesota, Texas, California and Washington, D.C.

“We want to hear directly from producers and stakeholders on our TB program and are looking for innovative, realistic approaches to effectively addressing this disease in the United States,” said APHIS administrator Cindy Smith. “We can improve the TB program so that it can meet current challenges, but public participation is vital to reach that goal.”

APHIS will gather information and feedback from producers and stakeholders, and through these public meetings there will be an opportunity for group discussions. These discussions will explore approaches to reducing the risk of disease transmission from affected herds, disease mitigation measures for wildlife and whether the program’s objective should be eradication or control of TB in domestic livestock. Other topics include budget concerns, import issues and indemnities. Meeting participants have the opportunity to pose questions and offer written and oral comments.

The public meetings will be held from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. local time, with registration one hour prior to each meeting. The meetings will be held in the following locations: Monday, December 8: Holiday Inn South/Convention Center, 6820 South Cedar Street, Lansing, Michigan; Wednesday, December 10: Hilton Minneapolis, 1001 Marquette Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Thursday, December 11: Hilton Garden Inn Austin Downtown, 500 North IH 35, Austin, Texas; Friday, December 12: Sheraton Grand Sacramento Hotel, 1230 J Street, Sacramento, California; and Tuesday, December 16: Renaissance M Street Hotel, 1143 New Hampshire Avenue, NW, Washington, DC.

Additional information on the meetings can be found HERE.

Bovine TB is a contagious and infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium bovis. It affects cattle, bison, deer, elk, goats and other warm-blooded species and can be fatal. While USDA and the states have robust surveillance and control measures in place for TB, outbreaks of the disease are costly to both producers and the government. Since 2002, USDA has spent approximately $90 million on TB control activities and owner indemnification.

This action was published in the November 20 Federal Register.
Over the weekend - on Saturday, December 6 - the Associated Press reported that a cow with a TB lesion was found at a meat processing plant in Minnesota. The infected cow came from a beef cattle herd in southwestern North Dakota.


POSTED 081208_1200 ET

More On Proposed Cow "Gas Tax"

Hot News frum Big-Mouth Broad Casting;

Dec 8 2008 10:59PM

KXMBTV Bismarck
It's a complicated subject. And it's starting to create a stink in the livestock business

Sarah Gustin explains how it could affect our state and gets to the bottom of why the EPA wants to charge producer's for the gas their cows pass

It's just a natural behavior. And it's seems a little ridiculous-making farmers pay so thier cows can pass gas? Roger Johnson / ND Ag. Commissioner: "To the ultimate extreme it could even include humans, well I don't know if we are going to tax individuals for walking around and breathing, which is kind of what the livestock issue relates to." The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing that it regulate greenhouse gas emissions in all sectorsincluding each and every cow

But do dairy cows produce enough gas for the average North Dakota dairy farm to be charged more than 15-thousand dollars a year

And should the average beef producer be forced to cough up about 95-hundred dollars a year in permit fees? Roger Johnson / ND Ag. Commissioner: "This particular proposal, I just don't see any likely hood that it will go forward, it's controversial, it is silly, it would be extremely difficult to administer." This is how it breaks down. Keeping a dairy cow- $175. A beef cow would cost you $87.50. It would cost you a $20 bill per pig

Johnson says cement and coal plants produce more GHGs than livestock and he doesn't think this proposal will be going very far anytime soon

Roger Johnson / ND Ag. Commissioner: "I don't think using the cap and trade methodology on livestock is a wise way to do it. I think you use cap and trade methodology on the larger sectors that have fairly large point source emissions and then for other sectors,you have incentives or other kinds of public policy tools, that are used to induce people to reduce green house gas emissions." But where do we draw the line. Some producers are worried that the fee could be extended to chickens and other farm animals

Livestock producers aren't alone on this issue. Any field emitting more than 100 tons of carbon would also have to pay a permit fee. watch the video | save this article / add to your favorites

Monday, December 8, 2008

Pork Disappears from European Markets

Hot News from Big-Mouth Broad Casting;

Pork crisis 'could be as bad as BSE'

Consumers have been warned not to eat pig products from Northern Ireland or the Republic

Published Date: 08 December 2008
ULSTER'S multi-million pound pork industry may be facing a crisis as devastating as BSE, it has been warned.

Consumers were told yesterday not to eat pig products from Northern Ireland or the Republic after contaminated animal feed was found on both sides of the border.

Nine farms here were found using feed containing the same cancer-causing poisons that sparked a recall of all pork processed in the Republic.

A group of products from some farms across the border were found to contain between 80 and 200 times the recommended safe levels of dioxins – chemicals that cause a variety of cancers.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) advised customers not to eat sausages, bacon, salami or ham labelled from the Republic or Northern Ireland.

Officials stressed it was a precautionary recommendation while it investigated whether any contaminated produce had entered the UK market.

But Assembly member Edwin Poots last night warned that officials needed to tie up the probe as quickly as possible to avoid the type of panic that decimated the beef market after the outbreak of BSE in 1996.

"If not handled correctly by the Food Standards Agency, this has the potential to inflict similar damage to the industry as the BSE crisis," the Stormont Agriculture Department Committee member warned.

"It took the British beef industry 10 years to recover from export bans imposed after the outbreak of BSE was reported, and panic among consumers also hurt the industry.

"We cannot allow this to happen again in this tough economic climate."

The DUP MLA added it was vital the FSA took both farmers' livelihoods and public safety into account when conducting their investigation.

"It is important that while appropriate action is taken to safeguard consumer health, that those same steps are taken with consideration of the future of the industry," he said.

Sean Sherlock, Irish Labour spokesman on Agriculture and Food, also said the scare could be "Ireland's BSE or foot-and-mouth" crisis.

He added: "This announcement amounts to a threat to the overall viability of our food industry, as great as, if not greater than, the outbreaks of BSE and of foot and mouth."

Supermarkets across England, Scotland and Wales have already recalled all pork products from Ulster and the Republic.

The toxins which prompted shelves to be cleared were discovered in slaughtered pigs in the Republic.

All pork products made since September 1 across the border have been recalled after levels of dioxins 200 times above the safety limit were discovered in the animals.

Contaminated feed was used at a total of 37 Irish farms, of which 29 were pork farms and eight were beef.

Figures show that between April and July, the UK imported 15,000 tons of pork and bacon from Ireland, out of a total of 230,000 tons of imports.

The pig industry is Ireland's fourth-largest agricultural business, with £374million worth of pork products sold every year.

And in Northern Ireland, the Ulster Farmers' Union (UFU) said it was a multi-million pound business that would hit hundreds of farmers.

It is feared an extended ban on exports could cripple industries on both sides of the border which are expecting their busiest time of year with the Christmas rush for hams.

Thousands of pigs will be slaughtered and destroyed on 10 pig farms mostly in Munster. Another 38 beef farms will also be restricted but the stock will not be destroyed.

An FSA spokesman said they were advising there was a minimal risk to customers.

"From the information that we have at this time, we do not believe there is significant risk to UK consumers as adverse health effects from eating the affected products are only likely if people are exposed to relatively high levels of this contaminant for long periods," he added.

Agriculture Minister Michelle Gildernew yesterday confirmed nine farms in Northern Ireland were involved.

She has also spoken to Health Minister Michael McGimpsey to offer her advice and ensure he is fully informed of the information her department has received from counterparts in Dublin.

"There is obviously a large amount of north-south movement of these products in Ireland and we need to carefully consider the way ahead," she said.

The UFU demanded swift and decisive action to reassure consumers and help minimise any effect on the industry.

Union president Graham Furey said: "Hopefully this is a very containable situation. We now hope the Food Standards Agency in Northern Ireland will be able to give clear, fact-based, guidance to local consumers as quickly as possible.

"The situation needs to be dealt with vigorously and transparently so that consumers and the industry can return to normality in this busy pre-Christmas market."

And UFU spokesman Joe McDonald said he hoped it was nowhere near the next BSE or foot-and-mouth.

He added part of dealing with the problem was that there was no clear labelling of the country of origin on pork products.

"This makes it very hard for shoppers and retailers. It's something we have been calling for, for a long time."

The full article contains 854 words and appears in n/a newspaper.

'Yes We Can' Create a Sane Food Policy in the U.S.

Hot News from Big-Mouth Broad Casting Co.;

Two extensive reports released in April indicate that our current method of devising food policy is broken and that the current system is doing tremendous harm in many areas, including those that are of particular interest to President-elect Obama: human health, the environment, and global poverty.
The first of these reports, "Putting Meat on the Table: Industrial Farm Animal Production in America," was produced by the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production, a major project of the Pew Foundation and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. The Commission comprised 15 members, including ranchers and health-focused professors (e.g., Marion Nestle) as well as a former governor of Kansas (John Carlin), a former secretary of agriculture (Dan Glickman), a former assistant surgeon general/chief of staff to the surgeon general, and the president of the Western Montana Stockgrowers Association. After more than two years of research, which included heavy lobbying by the meat industries, the Commission released its report explicitly comparing the state of agriculture today to the "military industrial complex" feared by Dwight Eisenhower. Upon investigation, the Commission found what it calls an "agro-industrial complex--an alliance of agricultural commodity groups, scientists at academic institutions who are paid by the industry, and their friends on Capitol Hill."

One of the truisms of Washington politics is that agribusiness won't allow a sane food policy in the U.S. This sad fact is just as true of Democratic as of Republican administrations, as detailed by investigative journalist Eric Schlosser and the Center for Public Integrity (CPI). Both wrote their strongest exposés about the issue during the Clinton administration. And although I'm currently discussing the executive branch, the problem infects Congress as well--whether under Democratic or Republican control (as documented by the Pew Commission, Schlosser, and the CPI).

The results of the farmed-animal industry's self-governance have been disastrous. As the Commission explains, "Our diminishing land capacity for producing food animals, combined with dwindling freshwater supplies, escalating energy costs, nutrient overloading of soil, and increased antibiotic resistance, will result in a crisis unless new laws and regulations go into effect in a timely fashion. ... This process must begin immediately and be fully implemented within 10 years" [emphasis added]. In its executive summary, the Commission writes, "Commissioners have determined that the negative effects of the [factory animal farming] system are too great and the scientific evidence is too strong to ignore. Significant changes must be implemented and must start now."

A similar report ("CAFOs Uncovered: The Untold Costs of Confined Animal Feeding Operations") by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) was also released in April, reaching similar conclusions and making similar recommendations.

In addition to the other issues, the UCS report details the tens of billions of dollars the meat industry receives in taxpayer subsidies every year. Remarkably, factory farms are so economically inefficient that factory farm representatives claim the entire meat industry would cease to exist if forced to pay even a tiny fraction back in the form of meaningful clean-air legislation.

Sadly, but not surprisingly, not one of either reports' recommendations was included in either the House or Senate versions of the Farm Bill--or even meaningfully discussed.

In January--another Obama first--we will have a president who has shown a keen interest in the problem: The Obamas famously shop at Whole Foods and eat organic vegetables--so the president-elect has his personal house in order. Impressively, he also understands and cares about the broader implications of our food policy.

On August 1, at a forum in St. Petersburg, Florida, Obama discussed (video) the fact that funneling grains through animals is inefficient, which is contributing to food shortages and even food riots in the developing world. At home, he pointed out that agribusiness subsidies are vastly inefficient, that they neglect the healthiest foods, and that American health would benefit from a change in diet. He declared that we need "to reexamine our overall food policy ...."

The issue was still on his mind when he spoke with Joe Klein from Time magazine in October, when he brought up Michael Pollan's recent New York Times Magazine letter to the "farmer in chief." Obama discussed food policy like a pro, arguing that the U.S. needs--but doesn't have--a comprehensive policy approach. Obama explained that our lack of a sane and coherent food policy poses significant environmental, health, and national security problems.

Of course, understanding the problem and fixing it are two very different things.

First, Obama must pick a secretary of agriculture who does not have ties to agribusiness and who has not spent her or his career defending the status quo. Three names that are being discussed in the media--Charlie Stenholm, Colin Peterson, and John Salazar--would be horrible choices, as these men have supported the status quo consistently and would be very unlikely to support even the most modest of reforms. Even on noncontroversial animal welfare measures, they have gone against the will of the American people to support the worst policies imaginable--including horse slaughter and the sport-hunting of polar bears--even when the vast majority of Congress, including Sen. Obama, were going the other way.

Second, PETA is recommending the creation of a National Food Policy Council (NFPC) to coordinate food policy, which is currently far too disparate to be efficient or wise. We have the National Economic Council, now run by Larry Summers, that looks at interagency economic policy, with a focus on efficiency and sound policy. And we expect that Obama will follow the advice of John Podesta, who recommends a cabinet-level "Department of International Development" in his superb book, The Power of Progress. Similarly, we desperately need a food-policy council, which could include Rep. Rosa DeLauro's proposal for a food-safety agency but with a broader mission.

One specific policy initiative that the new NFPC should address is the placement of the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) in the USDA. The current situation represents a conflict of interest that is harming the health of our nation's young people. Because the USDA exists to promote U.S. agriculture--not to improve human health--the NSLP has become a dumping ground for the meat and dairy industries at the expense of children's health.

A similar issue exists regarding poverty alleviation. Currently, the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program provides women with up to 28 quarts of milk or 4 pounds of cheese per month, both of which are high in saturated fat and cholesterol. However, the program skimps on vegetables, allowing a monthly total of only 2 pounds of carrots (for breast-feeding women only) and 1 pound of beans--no other whole vegetables or fruits are allowed. The WIC program should be administered by the Department of Health and Human Services, not the USDA, for the same reasons that there should be a shift for the NSLP.

The president-elect has committed to implementing sweeping changes that will improve the nation's health, protect the global environment, and address the problems of domestic and global poverty. He should start by appointing an independent-minded secretary of agriculture who shares his concern for our nation's youth, our national health, global development, the environment, and animals, and he should create a National Food Policy Council and appoint a food-policy "czar" to oversee and coordinate a comprehensive and forward-thinking policy.

Obama Transition
Barack Obama

Warning: Contaminated Pork

The Food Standards Agency is advising people not to eat any pork products that originate from Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland.

The withdrawal of Irish pork is said to be a precautionary measure

There are fears that pork products sold in the last two months could have been contaminated.

The Food Standards Agency said it was making the precautionary recommendation while it continued to investigate whether any contaminated pork products had entered the UK market.

A statement said: "The Food Standards Agency is today advising consumers not to eat pork or pork products, such as sausages, bacon, salami and ham, which are labelled as being from the Irish Republic or Northern Ireland, while it continues to investigate whether any products contaminated with dioxins have been distributed in the UK.

"From the information that we have at this time, we do not believe there is significant risk to UK consumers as adverse health effects from eating the affected products are only likely if people are exposed to relatively high levels of this contaminant for long periods."

Bacon, ham, sausages, white pudding, and even pizzas with ham toppings, have been recalled after tests revealed products from nine Irish farms contained harmful dioxins.

The Food Safety Authority Ireland insisted the health risks to the public were minimal and the withdrawal was a precautionary measure.

Nine farms in Northern Ireland have used the same contaminated animal feed which has led to a recall of all pig products processed in the Republic, it has emerged.

This announcement amounts to a threat to the overall viability of our food industry, as great as, if not greater than, the outbreaks of BSE and of foot and mouth.

Sean Sherlock, Irish Labour spokesperson on Agriculture and Food

Animal feed tainted with dioxins was blamed for the crisis, which could cripple Ireland's multi-million euro pig farming industry.

The recall affects all products bought since September 1 including foods shipped abroad.

Europe Minister Dick Roche told Sky News' political editor Adam Boulton everything possible had been done to ensure no-one was harmed.

"Thankfully, the problem was identified and dealt with very rapidly. The food process involved has been shut down," he said.

He added: "Our intention is to deal with this very robustly and re-establish the reputation Ireland has as a quality food producer."

Health risk is reportedly very low

Ireland's Chief Medical Officer Dr Tony Holohan said anyone who had eaten pig meat did not need to seek medical help.

The dioxin, which can affect the liver and nervous system, is only dangerous if a person is exposed to it over a long period of time.

The contamination has been traced back to an ingredient in an animal feed which was used by one supplier in more than 40 farms.

Thousands of pigs are expected to be destroyed while restrictions have been placed on movements from the remaining sites affected.

Last Minute Rule-Making by Bush-USDA Threatens Organic Farmers

Hot News from Big-Mouth Broad Casting

Dec. 6, 2008

Last Minute Rule-Making by Bush-USDA Threatens Organic Farmers

Many media outlets, from the New York Times to the blogosphere, have tracked what has been dubbed the "corporate takeover" of organic farming. One of the hottest controversies in this rapidly growing $20 billion industry has been giant factory farms milking thousands of cows each in feedlots and masquerading as organic. Some of these industrial dairies are controlled by the nation's largest agribusinesses.

Since the organic community first appealed to the USDA for better clarification and enforcement of regulations requiring organic dairy producers to graze their cattle, nearly 9 years ago, the number of giant industrial dairy operations, with as many as 10,000 cows, has grown from two to approximately 15. After years of delay, the USDA has finally responded with a new proposed rule that they said would crack down on abuses.

New, major policies proposed by the USDA livestock/pasture rule (never reviewed or recommended by the National Organic Standards Board) include:

• Eliminating the fattening of beef cattle on grain, in feedlots, for the last few months of their lives. Although many might view this proposal as meritorious it would radically change the industry and could force some operators out of business. Full analysis and discussion by the organic community is vitally necessary.

• Requiring animals to be outside year-round, without exemptions for extreme weather conditions, would put the lives and well-being of livestock at risk and economically injure farmers.

• Setting aside part of a farmer's land in a "sacrifice" pasture for when weather conditions make grazing unsuitable. This might be a provision that some current operators cannot meet and might violate certain state and federal environmental standards. This may have positive application, but its overall impacts have never been fully analyzed.

• Classifying bees and fish as livestock will likely garner positive and negative response from that industry sector depending on its perceived present and future regulatory impact.

• The USDA draft rule ignores the NOSB recommendation to eliminate the "continual transition" of conventional cattle, brought onto organic dairy operations. The industry has universally agreed that all animals brought onto a farm, after its initial transition to organics, must be managed organically from the last third of gestation. Animals raised for meat already have to meet this higher standard. Many industry experts feel that the USDA has misinterpreted the law, for years, allowing giant factory farms to "burn out" their cattle and prematurely sending them to slaughter, then replace them with cheap conventional cattle on an ongoing basis. This new rulemaking proposes that the Department's "misinterpretations" become institutionalized as law.

"This 26-page document put forth by the USDA may so muddy the water that we could be facing years of additional delays until the widely agreed-upon provisions for dairy are enacted," said Kastel.

Certain industry players, including the dairy giant Dean Foods and Aurora Dairy, the nation's largest private-label producer of organic milk (Wal-Mart, Target, Costco, Safeway, etc.) have based their business model on exploiting the trust of the organic consumer and violating both the spirit and letter of the organic law (full documentation available).

The USDA's proposed pasture rule, along with the "alternative" proposal endorsed by organic farmers and consumers, can be viewed at:

"The birds have come home to roost," said Mark Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst for The Cornucopia Institute. The Wisconsin-based farm policy research group estimates there are 35,000 to 45,000 cows on giant CAFOs (concentrated animal feeding operations) operating in the United States producing as much as 40% of the nation's organic milk supply.

"These CAFOs are producing so much milk that they have depressed pricing and profit margins for organic family farmers, and now some are being forced out of business by this distressing situation," Kastel said. "Organics was supposed to be the antidote to family farmers being forced off the land."

The Cornucopia Institute has filed formal legal complaints with the USDA aimed at compelling the agency to enforce organic livestock and management rules. These actions have led to the shut down or penalizing of some of what they call "organic scofflaws." But many in the industry criticized the agency for failing to fully investigate many other alleged violations on giant farms, including several that supply milk to the nation's largest dairy processor, Dallas-based Dean Foods.

The new USDA rule proposal and its analysis total 26 pages, as published in the Federal Register. The draft rule complies with organic community requests to close specific loopholes being exploited by factory farms confining their cattle. But it also represents the broadest rewrite of federal organic regulations in the $20 billion industry's relatively short history.

Some farm advocates believe that the new rules, if enacted, would put out of business the majority of organic livestock farmers-including hundreds who are operating ethically.

"At first we were delighted that the USDA had stopped their delaying tactics and finally published a rule cracking down on the large factory farms that have been 'scamming' organic consumers and placing ethical family farmers at a competitive disadvantage," stated Bill Welch, former chairman of the National Organic Standards Board and an Iowa livestock producer. "Many in the industry have spent the past weeks carefully examining this dense document, and it has become painfully clear that it would not only crack down on certain factory farm abuses, but it's also so restrictive that it would likely put the majority of family farmers producing organic milk and meat out of business."

"It's inexcusable," noted Ronnie Cummins, Director of the Organic Consumers Association, "that the USDA's rule would allow conventional cattle to be brought onto organic farms, and milked, on a continuous basis," said Ronnie Cummins, Director of the Organic Consumers Association.

In response to the USDA's sweeping livestock/pasture proposal, a consortium of organizations representing organic family farmers has crafted an "alternative" rule proposal. Led by FOOD Farmers, with support from The Cornucopia Institute, organic certifiers, and other policy experts, the revisions they have drafted would carry out what is said to be the will of the organic community, farmers and consumers.

"You don't have to take the word of The Cornucopia Institute alone that the Department has 'Katrina-ed' the organic industry," Kastel stated. "The USDA rule proposal is just the latest salvo in this fight," added Kastel. He noted that audits by the American National Standard Institute (ANSI) and the Inspector General's office were both highly critical of the USDA's execution of its Congressional mandate to oversee the organic industry.

The community's alternative proposal, which is now being circulated among organic farmers and consumer groups, would require that all organic dairy, sheep, goat, and beef producers graze their animals for the entire grazing season and sets a minimum percentage of feed from pasture.

A growing body of scientific literature illustrates the nutritional superiority of milk and meat from organic animals that are grazed on fresh grass, including higher levels of antioxidants and beneficial fats, like omega-3 fatty acids, that protect against cancer and heart disease.

"The good news continues to be that the vast majority of all organic dairy brands available in the marketplace use milk produced by family farmers," observed Cummins. "These farmers truly uphold the high expectations that their customers have," Cummins said.

The Cornucopia Institute just updated their path-breaking research study of the organic dairy sector. The group's scorecard reveals that 85% of the nation's 110 organic dairy brands are meeting the letter and spirit of current organic federal law. "Out of 1800 organic dairy farms in this country, the very few factory farms are a bad aberration, although they are producing huge quantities of milk," explained Cornucopia's Kastel.

Because of the broad scope of the USDA's proposed rule making, Cornucopia, the Organic Consumers Association, and some the largest organic certifiers and other groups representing farmers and consumers are formally asking the USDA to extend the public comment period for an additional 30 days to January 23, 2009.

Stenholm Says USDA Needs to Focus More on Food Safety

Hot News from Big-Mouth Broad Casting


Stenholm Says USDA Needs to Focus More on Food Safety
(But that aint all hes saying! Remember this guy was a pro-slaughter "bought-and-paid-for" pirate politician turned pro-slaugher lobbiest who has engaged in a media blitz telling america the BIG FAT LIE that horse slaughter is a "necessary evil" and is now saying that the rebuilding of horse slaughter plants in america would boost the economy and provide jobs. GODS forbid that he should be appointed as new head of the USDA!)
Former Texas Rep. Charles Stenholm, whose name has been mentioned as a potential U.S. agriculture secretary, says he does not expect to be nominated for the job.

Stenholm told the Kansas Livestock Association Friday that he believes Colorado Democratic Rep. John Salazar is probably the top name on the list of potential appointees.

Salazar, one of the few farmers serving in Congress, would make an excellent agriculture secretary, Stenholm said.

Stenholm told reporters that he has not been contacted by the transition team that is picking the Cabinet positions.

"I make no bones about it, if the President calls I would accept it in a heartbeat," Stenholm said.

Stenholm said he was contacted Thursday by Obama representatives working on the Agriculture Department transition, who asked him to attend a meeting Monday for recommendations for other hiring decisions at the department. They also wanted to hear about the top priority agricultural issues.

Stenholm said he served on the 156-member committee that advised the Obama campaign on rural issues and had some input on the policies he adopted in his campaign.

Stenholm, now a lobbyist for a Washington law firm, said the Agriculture Department needs to be restructured so it is the only agency overseeing food safety.

"We don't have in place a system that can adequately deal with food safety," he said.

The new administration offers a perfect opportunity to transform the Agriculture Department, making it an example for all government agencies on how to do things to better serve the public, he said.

"If we can bring USDA into the 21st century with technology, we are going to be awesome," he said.

The agriculture industry also is interested in the selection of the new administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, amid concern over what impact stricter environmental regulations may have on agricultural operations such as feedyards.

"The selection of the EPA administrator may be more important to us in this room than the secretary of agriculture," Stenholm said.

Much of his talk to the Kansas livestock group focused on the unintended consequences the shutdown of the last three plants that slaughtered horses for human consumption in export markets. Horse owners are abandoning horses they no longer want or can afford to feed, creating problems for county governments and others who must deal with the animals.

Some states and Indian tribes are now considering possibly starting a horse slaughter facility to deal with the problem, which would also create jobs and bring in an industry, Stenholm said.

Fed. Grant Funds Illinois Mad Cow Prevention Efforts

Grant funds Illinois mad cow prevention efforts

Illinois can continue efforts to prevent mad cow disease in cattle with nearly $500,000 from the federal government.

The funding, announced this week, will help state regulators inspect farms and test cattle feed during the next two years. The Food and Drug Administration program enforces a ban on certain types of feed products.

Illinois expects to conduct 400 inspections and 1,000 feed tests with the money.

Scientists believe the brain-wasting disease spreads when farmers feed cattle recycled body parts from infected animals. The U.S. banned many such products from feed in 1997, following an epidemic in cattle in the United Kingdom. An expansion of the ban takes effect next year.

In humans, a rare form of the disease has been linked to eating meat from infected cattle.

Saturday, December 6, 2008

Proposed "Cow Gas" Tax Angers Farmers

Proposed "Cow Gas" Tax Angers Farmers

HotNews! Big-Mouth Broad BroadCasting

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — For farmers, this stinks: Belching and gaseous cows and hogs could start costing them money if the federal government decides to charge fees for air-polluting animals.

Farmers so far are turning their noses up at the notion, which they contend is a possible consequence of an Environmental Protection Agency report after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases from motor vehicles amounts to air pollution.

"This is one of the most ridiculous things the federal government has tried to do," said Alabama Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, an outspoken opponent of the fees.

EPA officials insisted Friday that the lengthy, highly technical report, which mostly focuses on other sources of air pollution, does not include a proposal to tax livestock.

But the American Farm Bureau Federation said, based on federal agriculture department figures, it would require farms or ranches with more than 25 dairy cows, 50 beef cattle or 200 hogs to pay an annual fee of about $175 for each dairy cow, $87.50 per head of beef cattle and $20 for each hog.

The executive vice president of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Ken Hamilton, estimated the fee would cost owners of a modest-sized cattle ranch $30,000 to $40,000 a year. He said he has talked to a number of livestock owners about the proposals, and "all have said if the fees were carried out, it would bankrupt them."

Sparks said Wednesday he's worried the fee could be extended to chickens and other farm animals and cause more meat to be imported.

"We'll let other countries put food on our tables like they are putting gas in our cars. Other countries don't have the health standards we have," Sparks said.

The farm groups say the fee would apply to farms with livestock operations that emit more than 100 tons of carbon emissions in a year and fall under federal Clean Air Act provisions.

EPA officials said the agency has not taken a position on any of the matters discussed in its response to the Supreme Court ruling. And John Millett, a spokesman for EPA's air and radiation division, said there has been an oversimplification of the EPA's document "to the point of distortion."

"EPA is not proposing any type of tax on livestock," he said.

The EPA briefly mentions "raising livestock" in its report on ways to regulate greehnouse gases under the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Paul Schlegel, director of public policy for the American Farm Bureau Federation, said it determined the possible fees that could be imposed by using Agriculture Department statistics on the amount of greenhouse gases that come from livestock and applied it to the EPA's permitting rules.

Farmers from across the country have expressed outrage over the EPA report, both on Internet sites and in opinions sent to EPA during a public comment period that ended last week. Many call it a "cow tax" and say the EPA proposed it.

"It's something that really has a very big potential adverse impact for the livestock industry," said Rick Krause, the senior director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation.

The fee would cover the cost of a permit for the livestock operations. While farmers say it would drive them out of business, an organization supporting the proposal hopes it forces the farms and ranches to switch to healthier crops.

"It makes perfect sense if you are looking for ways to cut down on meat consumption and recoup environmental losses," said Bruce Friedrich, a spokesman in Washington for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

"We certainly support making factory farms pay their fair share," he said.

U.S. Rep. Robert Aderholt, a Republican from Haleyville in northwest Alabama, said he has spoken with EPA officials and doesn't believe the cow tax is a serious proposal that will ever be adopted by the agency.

"Who comes up with this kind of stuff?" said Perry Mobley, director of the Alabama Farmers Federation's beef division. "It seems there is an ulterior motive, to destroy livestock farms. This would certainly put them out of business."

USDA "Food Police" Raid Ohio Farm

Sent: Friday, December 5, 2008 7:56:03 AM

HotNews! Big Mouth Broad Broadcasting Co.



Swat Team Conducts "Food Raid" in Rural Ohio

The USDA just released their plans to put a law into action that will put all small farmers out of business. Animals for the sale of meat or milk will only be allowed in commercial farms. December 3, 2008

If you read nothing else today please make it this article Click on title above for article;

We have been ranting and raving for years about the abuses of the USDA and the Federal Government against small farmers and people who would actually like to eat real healthy foods without all of the additives and commercially inflicted hormones and growth additives. Every piece of processed food you put into your family's body is allowed to be altered by the Government to make it more profitable for the large corporations. Most of these additives are horribly wrong for the human consumer . They induce more production in the animals, more fat, more steroids, more antibiotics and less actual nutrition. We are being slowly murdered and if not dying our brains are being affected by these additives. Our children are suffering from diseases that were unknown 30 years ago.

Their intelligence is being reduced ! Allergies , ADD, ADHD, and on and on. We are allowing the government to make Zombies out of us.

With the lack of healthy foods and the TV constantly keeping us entertained so we don't think about the very important things we should be thinking about we are slowly slinking into oblivion. A vast pit we will not be able to dig out of .

Just take a pill you will be ok?

Keep the Drug industry healthy !

Watch TV for only a few minutes and you will see dozens of ads for all kinds of cures ( not cures but only medications which will alleviate the symptoms of illnesses) mostly with side effects which are worse than the actual illness or disability.

Did you ever wonder why there are so many ads for Viagra? Could it be that the males in our world now are being sterilized and impotent on purpose? If a persons body has to have help to have Normal Sex then something is definitely wrong. From all of the ads you would think that Sex is the main reason to live? When did it become the most important factor in a relationship?

I can guarantee you that the small farmer, organic farmer and gardener that raises their own food does not have this problem. You won't see any Viagra on their night stand. Their only problem would be they are bone tired from actually working all day. They also don't need sleep aids to fall asleep at night.

Keep on feeding your babies formula, it is good for them and soooooooo easy. It also is made of mostly SOY which was prescribed for me during menapause to help my body make more estrogen? Now if it does that for my body why wouldn't it do the same in children? Males with low testerone means a society that is docile and easily controlled. Ever notice that it is the women who are actually getting out and fighting more so than the men now? ( I am not talking about the farmers who are not consuming vast amounts of Soy every day. Those men seem to have no problems being a male.) I am not putting all the blame on Soy but it could be a part of the problem. What ever happened to Mothers' milk? Goats milk? even the old baby formula your Grandmother made on the stove out of evaporated milk, water and a little plain Karo syrup?

How many effeminate Farmers have you seen ?

Google NAIS and join some of the many groups that are fighting for your food safety and their survival against the huge corporate organizations which are taking over the control of all of the food industry. It could mean your very life and certainly has the future of your family's health at stake.

Most of the diseases that afflict us today can be cured by simply eating the right foods, stopping the imput of chemicals into our bodies, and you will find that the food grown in your back yard or on a small farm tastes alltogether different from the canned variety out of the grocery stores. You may just develop a taste for real food. Food that will nourish your body not tear it down.

Find someone with a well and drink their water, people on wells will share it doesn't cost them a monthly bill to have chemicals put into their water to make it safe to drink? No Flouride, No clorox, but real minerals we all need every day in a form we can digest.

Join the small farmers and ranchers, refuse to eat the products from the huge feed lots and commercially poisoned farms.

And as always start storing up supplies for your family. The time will come and soon I am afraid that Food will be the weapon we will be totally controlled with.

He who controls the food supply has the power !

A manual on how to can and preserve your own food, plus plans for green houses for city folk.Recipes from the last Century that will sustain your family in times of crisis when there is no power, no freezers and canned foods at the grocery store.

Memories from the mountains with old time formulas for medications, salves and ointments needed to stay healthy without chemicals and drugs from corporate industries.

Original formula for:

"Tar Heel Black Drawing Salve"

A time proven product for infections, blisters, splinters, boils and any skin eruption.

Non GMO Seeds:

No Hybrids just the old fashioned species grown by your Grandmother