Truth in Media

This is from Dr. Mercola at mercola.com


Fox Fires Reporters for Telling the Truth About Milk

In 1997, a pair of reporters prepared a report for a Fox TV affiliate in Florida about the dangers of bovine growth hormone (BGH) in milk. Lawyers for Monsanto, a major advertiser with the network, sent letters promising "dire consequences" if the story aired.
After attempts by Fox to bribe the reporters to keep quiet failed, the station agreed to air a revised version of the report. An unheard of 83 edits later (including Monsanto insisting that the word "cancer" be replaced with the phrase "human health implications"), the report was shelved and the courts took over.
Although a lower court ruled in favor of the reporters for some $425,000, a Florida appeals court denied them whistleblower protection, claiming Fox, and the media in general, have no obligation to tell the truth, in effect, having the freedom to report what is fact and fiction as real news.

YouTube.com August 22, 2006

Dr. Mercola's Comment:
This is another dramatic example of how powerfully some corporations control the media. You have heard me rant and rave about the drug companies, but they are the fairy godmother compared to Monsanto.
I simply don't know of any organization on the planet with more sinister plans to destroy the health of your future. They are the central force behind genetically modified foods and have conspired to literally own all future food by unconstitutionally patenting every seed they can get their hands on.
I posted a report two years ago that Monsanto was slowing down sales of its bovine growth hormone (BGH), Posilac, which is put in much of the commercial milk sold in the United States.
That seems to have been a temporary measure for publicity, as Monsanto recently announced plans to start producing the product themselves at a plant in Augusta, GA, instead of licensing another company to do it, and they currently sell more than 33 million doses a year.
There could be no stronger proof than this story that the corporations do not care about your health, but only their profits, and that their paid stooges in the media, the sciences, and the government are only too happy to say whatever they are being given money to say. In the instances where people try to take a stand, like the reporters in this case, they are silenced by their bosses.
There's a reason that the FDA, largely financed by their corporate "partners" these days, declared BGH safe for humans after only a brief study on a few rats. The Canadian equivalent of the FDA came to vastly different conclusions about BGH.
These factors, more than anything else, are the reason the reports you hear about what is healthy and what is not are fatally skewed.
On the brighter side, however, there's been a strong push away from hormone-infested milk and toward raw milk. I do not recommend drinking pasteurized milk, however, even if it doesn't contain hormones, because pasteurization destroys enzymes, diminishes vitamin content, denatures fragile milk proteins, destroys vitamin B12, and vitamin B6, kills beneficial bacteria, promotes pathogens and is associated with allergies, increased tooth decay, colic in infants, growth problems in children, osteoporosis, arthritis, heart disease and cancer.
Raw milk, on the other hand, is one of the finest natural sources of calcium available. To find a raw milk source near you, visit the Real Milk Web site.
By the way, the video in the story above is from The Corporation. If you want to have a great video for your library I would recommend picking up a copy. I bought mine on Amazon.
Related Articles:
BGH: Monsanto and the Dairy Industry's Dirty Little Secret
Monsanto Pushes Hormones on School Kids in Their Milk
World's Largest Media Source Controlled by World's Largest Drug Compan

Food Pyramid contradictions

The USDA Contradicts its Food Pyramid Advice


A troubling disparity highlighted the awkward truth about the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA): What it advises people to eat to stay healthy does not exactly match what it pays farmers to grow ... to say the least.
For starters, the only reference to corn on the USDA's new food pyramid is a graphic of a bright-yellow ear of corn amid a sea of other vegetables; soybeans are not mentioned at all. Yet U.S. farmers receive $15 billion in subsidies to grow corn and soybeans that are largely used to feed livestock (with harmful chemicals and antibiotics often added).
What's worse, corn and soybeans are used to make artificial sweeteners and partially hydrogenated oils -- the very ingredients the food pyramid urges Americans to avoid. Comparatively so, fruit and vegetable farmers receive no subsidies whatsoever, though whole foods are supposed to make up the largest part of Americans' diets, per the pyramid's recommendations.
Discrepancies Noted
According to a former U.S. Congressman, farm policy has clearly been developed with little regard for the diets and health of Americans and instead is the result of a Depression-era program that was supposed to give temporary relief for low commodity prices. He further explained that those who attend hearings on domestic farm policies are largely lobbyists who protect the interests of a handful of crops, including:
Corn
Soybeans
Cotton
Rice
Wheat
Sugar
A nutrition professor at New York University said the USDA has fought with conflict of interest since its mission was expanded beyond farming to dietary advice and food assistance to the poor.
The result?
Lobbying from the food industry has historically influenced the agency's nutrition advice -- the composition of the new pyramid included.
Moreover, the alleged conflict between the agency's role in promoting both nutrition and agriculture even prompted former Sen. Peter Fitzgerald to compare the USDA, when it comes to farm subsidies, to a fox guarding the henhouse. He introduced legislation to move the nutrition program to the Department of Health and Human Services, but his legislation fizzled.
Farm subsidies are not the only USDA program that seems to contradict the advice of the food pyramid: The department also sponsors a variety of marketing initiatives that encourage consumers to eat more of everything.
Chicago Tribune May 2, 2005
Dr. Mercola's Comment:
You may be wondering why there is such a gigantic discrepancy between what corn and soybean farmers are being paid, compared to fruit and vegetable farmers. The reason, as usual, is money.
The USDA doesn't give $15 billion to just anyone. In this case, they are guaranteeing themselves continued support from the mega food corporations, who make billions themselves from the sale of numerous products made with the ingredients supplied by corn and soy.
By itself, corn is used in an untold amount of products. Everything from conventional cattle feed to high-fructose corn syrup to even some forms of vitamin C are made from corn.
Of course, products made with soy constituents are equally plentiful. Many experts tout soy as a health food, despite the evidence that it is not. Most soy is grown for its uses in livestock feed and in the hydrogenated fats used in making processed foods.
It's unfortunate that the government doesn't place the same emphasis on your health as it does on capitulating to corporate conflict of interest. The above study only serves as more confirmation that there is still a long battle ahead to turn the health of America's citizens into one of its highest priorities.