Archive for March, 2009

HR 2749 [HR875/S425]: Farm to Fork Food Fascism Comes to America

Monday, March 16th, 2009

Natural Solutions Foundation
www.GlobalhealthFreedom.org

We reproduce below, with permission, A Solemn Walk Through “Food Safety”.

Index
Introduction
A Solemn Walk
Natural Solutions White Paper

———————————————-

Introduction

Food is becoming a battle ground like no other: freedom, survival, fascistic take over of a once-free people (more or less, at least), corporate triumph over independent producers – it’s all happening around food. And the mechanism is simple: a set of bills ostensibly devoted to “food safety” and “food security”.

Urgent Action Item:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26714

Tell Congress that the Farm Bills MUST be defeated. Time is short and the issue is of immense importance.

In essence, these bills are a sneak attack implementation of Codex Alimentarius. The Natural Solutions Foundation has been warning that organic farming and home growing, clean food and food freedom were under heavy attack. Here is the Mother of All Food Fascism Assaults and we still have some time to defeat it.

Congress often comes up with bad ideas. This is not just a bad idea: it is a catastrophically bad idea for health and freedom. In fact, it is nothing short of food tyranny and will kill not only organic farming, but lots of people as well, along with the entire private farming sector. Your own gardens are at risk as well.

I cannot urge you strongly enough to take action NOW (we have only a few days to create the urgent push-back needed to fend off this disastrous legislation. These are bad, deceptive and extraordinarily dangerous bills which make the eternal link between fascism and food crystal clear. But the bills are written in neutral, even calming tones. Please go to the articles below to read a brilliantly annotated version of the bills and a summary and learn just how dangerous they are. My thanks to Sue Diederich and Linn Cohen-Cole for their tireless work on this vital issue.

Just as –

~ “homeland security” is anything but assured by the Department of Homeland Security’s destruction of our rights,
~ “health” is not served by a healthcare system devoted to propagating illness for profit,
~ “democracy” is not served by corrupt voting machines and “man in the middle programs”

so food security and safety are not served by agencies and laws which –

~ drive independent farmers out of business,
~ forbid seed saving,
~ destroy safe food production and organic farming,
~ propagate dangerous and destructive industrial farming practices,
~ guarantee the total control of the food system by industrial forces known for unsafe food production while destroying the capacity of independent farmers to survive a regulatory onslaught created specifically to destroy them,
~ put home food production in jeopardy,
~ “HARMonize food production with pro-industry, pro-WTO controlled, lowest common denominator practices of Codex Alimentarius.

These are tragically solemn times calling for solemn re-dedication of each of us to the fight to retain and restore freedom. Food is just about the best place possible to start. Killing HR 875, S 425 and all related bills is the best place to start.

Click here (http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26714) to tell Congress in no uncertain terms how imperative killing these dastardly bills is to you. Then tell everyone you know how important this push-back is.

Now think for a moment how important this information is to your life, your liberty and your society. Would you have had it without the Natural Solutions Foundation? We work very hard at being your health freedom advocates and we need your help. Please make regular donations, small or large, to the Natural Solutions Foundation – an astounding 100% of your donations goes directly to our work. People write to us to tell us that you need us and we certainly need you. Click here (http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?page_id=189) to make your tax deductible donation to the Natural Solutions Foundation.

This action, and this issue, cannot wait.

Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
www.ValleyoftheMoonCoffee.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org

Index ——————————————-
Solemn Walk Through HR 875
By Sue Diederich and Linn Cohen-Cole

Walk Index
First Walk: Myths and Misinformation
Second Walk: End of Organics
Third Walk: Meaning of the Bills
Fourth Walk: Conclusion

Introduction to the Walk

The Pennsylvania Sustainable Agriculture Association, PASA, sent out information about HR 875 which lists ‘facts’ to counter ‘myths’ and ‘rumors’ on the internet. It gives no specifics to back up its ‘facts,’ so the following close up view of the bill and accompanying commentary offers readers a chance to decide for themselves what is myth and what is fact. Neither of us are lawyers, but we both can read. Sue Diederich heads the Illinois Independent Consumers and Farmers Association, an organization formed to protect the rights of farmers and consumers to deal directly with each other without government interference.

PASA’s assertions are in regular lower case font, as are the inserted portions of the bill which have all been provided by Sue Diederich who also provides her own comments in italics usually. My comments are in bold face. [Note: these type faces have been altered from the original to permit publication in the program used to publish this blog which lacks color font options – Dr. Rima]

Occasionally, we feel something is essential for people to see and those comments are in CAPITAL LETTERS. (It should all be in CAPITAL LETTERS [font changed to allow publication in this program – Dr. Rima], really, since so few organizations appear to have read the bill or seem to know how to read the bill or have thought through its massive cumulative impact or been concerned at its endlessly broad reach and over incredibly vague things.)

People seem to expect the bill to be titled “The Criminalization of Organic Farming and the Take over of the US Food Supply,” and when they don’t see any words to that effect anywhere in the bill, they declare “this bill is fine” and those seeing dangers are “alarmists.” Do they think the industrial side is composed of fools? These are the same people who make cheery cereals with cartoon characters on the box when, inside, high fructose corn syrup is all over the cereal which comes from Bt-corn associated with diabetes. HFCS is, too, and there is an epidemic of diabetes here even among children. They know how to package. Why do people understand that industrial food inside a box can be a problem and yet are so innocent about looking at the bills, not realizing there is packaging there, too, or how much is at stake that the public and even legislators not see since this is about taking control. The industrial side isn’t stupid.

Understanding parts of the bill at times depends on smelling smoke as you read it. Here in the US, we still have only smoke … an Ohio state ag department SWAT team raid on an organic coop, Pennsylvania ag department raids on horse and buggy Mennonites, California setting coliform levels so low fresh milk dairy farmers would need cows that produced pasteurized milk right out the udder, arrest and handcuffing of a single mother in front of her children for selling goat milk, the USDA paying its agents bonuses for foreclosing on farms, … But in the EU where 60% of the Polish farmers are now gone because of identical bills enacted into law there, and 60 UK farmers have committed suicide, there is fire. And in Iraq, where they have been rendered helpless serfs by the theft of their country’s seeds and criminalization of farmers’ collection of their own seed, it is roaring. And in India where 182,000 farmers have committed suicide since the WTO and IMF got hold of agriculture and our Big Ag firms went in there, and 8 million farmers have left the land, it is out of control.

The WTO, run by the multinational meat packers and genetic engineering corporations, want HR 875, here. The bills are “harmonized” rules for globalization of food and lower food safety standards to allow for it. Those corporations are members of NIAA, a corporate consortium that brought NAIS, created by Anne Veneman, to the USDA to be made into law.

Walk Index
First Walk… Myths and Misinformation

We begin with PASA offering FWW’s take on the bills to its members:

Myths and Facts? H.R. 875 – The Food Safety Modernization Act

PASA members: The following information about a bill now before Congress, HR 875, was developed by our friends at Food and Water Watch, and forwarded to us by the National Sustainable Ag Coalition (NSAC), of which PASA is a member.

This Myth/Fact sheet was developed to help answer some of the rumors that are fairly rampant on the Internet right now. We will keep a close eye on the situation, and share further updates from NSAC as they become available. ?

MYTH: H.R. 875 “makes it illegal to grow your own garden” and would result in the “criminalization of the backyard gardner.”

FACT: There is no language in the bill that would regulate, penalize, or shut down backyard gardens. This bill is focused on ensuring the safety of foods sold in supermarkets.

Though private residences are not specifically included, nor are they specifically excluded. While this does not immediately affect home owners growing tomatoes in the backyard, entered testimony leaves the door open for just that in the future. Referring back to the Bio-Terrorism Act, in a discussion on this very topic and entered in the official record of debate on the interim rule, (bold/underline = mine), the same argument exists here and no new definitions or exclusions have been provided in HR 875 – and “reasonable” is a subjective term in theory as well as practice…

(13) FOOD ESTABLISHMENT-

(A) IN GENERAL- The term ‘food establishment’ means a

Slaughterhouse (except those regulated under the Federal Meat

Inspection Act or the Poultry Products Inspection Act), factory,

Warehouse, or facility owned or operated by a person located in

Any State that processes food or a facility that holds, stores,

Or transports food or food ingredients.

Now, every home in the country holds food after buying it from the

Grocery store. Will they be included too?

Hell, no. They’re going to be magnanimous and say that, while they could,

They won’t right now.

Excerpted from the same Interim Rule:

“(Response) FDA has concluded that private individual residences are
Not ”facilities” for purposes of the registration provision of the
Bioterrorism Act. Under the Bioterrorism Act, the term ”facility”
Includes ”any factory, warehouse, or establishment.” Congress did not Specify any definition for these terms.

Under their common meanings,
The terms can include private residences. For example, according to Webster’s II New Riverside University Dictionary (1994), the most
Relevant definition of ”establishment” is ”a business firm, club,
Institution, or residence, including its possessions and employees.”
However, ”[I]n determining whether Congress has specifically addressed

The question at issue, the court should not confine itself to examining
A particular statutory provision in isolation * * *.

It is a fundamental canon of statutory construction that the words of a
Statute must be read in their context and with a view to their place in
The overall statutory scheme.”’ FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco
Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 121 (2000).

Other parts of the registration Provisions in section 415 of the FD&C Act indicate that Congress only Intended businesses to register, and raise a question as to whether Congress intended that private individual residences, even though food Is manufactured/processed, packed, or held at such residences, be Considered facilities.

For instance, a registrant is required to submit”the name and address of each facility at which, and all trade names Under which, the registrant conducts business * * * ” (21 U.S.C.
350d(a)(2)).

Thus it is unclear whether Congress intended all Individual private residences at which food is manufactured/processed, Packed, or held to be included in the term ”facility.” Furthermore, The requirement that a facility submit its ”name” as well as its ”trade names” raises a question as to whether Congress intended ”facility” to include private individual residences since it is Unlikely that a home would have a name or a trade name.

Where the words Of the statute are ambiguous, an agency may make a reasonable Interpretation of the statute. Chevron, USA, Inc. V. NRDC, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842-843 (1984); Brown & Williamson, supra, at 132.

Consistent with the language of section 415(a)(2) discussed
Previously, the agency concludes that interpreting the term
”facility” to exclude private individual residences is a reasonable
Construction for purposes of registration.

This interpretation, However, does not necessarily preclude a reasonable construction of Other provisions of the FD&C Act to include such residences.”
[I do get that residences are easily included.]

MYTH: H.R. 875 would mean a “goodbye to farmers markets” because the bill would “require such a burdensome complexity of rules, inspections, licensing, fees, and penalties for each farmer who wishes to sell locally – a fruit stand, at a farmers market.” ?

FACT: There is no language in the bill that would result in farmers markets being regulated, penalized any fines, or shut down. Farmers markets would be able to continue to flourish under the bill. In fact, the bill would insist that imported foods meet strict safety standards to ensure that unsafe imported foods are not competing with locally-grown foods.

SECTION 406 CLEARLY STATES ALL FOOD OFFERED FOR SALE WILL BE VIEWED AS BEING IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE AND SUBJECT TOT HE PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL.

C. 406. PRESUMPTION.

In any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction shall be presumed to exist

8) CATEGORY 4 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term ‘category 4 food establishment’ means a food establishment that processes all other categories of food products not described in paragraphs (5) through (7).

(9) CATEGORY 5 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term ‘category 5 food establishment’ means a food establishment that stores, holds, or transports food products prior to delivery for retail sale.

14) FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITY- The term ‘food production facility’ means any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation.

[SUE, say it again and again, “this applies to farms and can apply to homes.” It certainly looks to me that families baking cookies for bake sales could easily be included.]

SEC. 206. FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITIES.

(a) Authorities- In carrying out the duties of the Administrator and the purposes of this Act, the Administrator shall have the authority, with respect to food production facilities, to–

(1) visit and inspect food production facilities in the United States and in foreign countries to determine if they are operating in compliance with the requirements of the food safety law;

(2) review food safety records as required to be kept by the Administrator under section 210 and for other food safety purposes;

(3) set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety;

(4) conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate; and

(5) collect and maintain information relevant to public health and farm practices.

(b) Inspection of Records- A food production facility shall permit the Administrator upon presentation of appropriate credentials and at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, to have access to and ability to copy all records maintained by or on behalf of such food production establishment in any format (including paper or electronic) and at any location, that are necessary to assist the Administrator–

(1) to determine whether the food is contaminated, adulterated, or otherwise not in compliance with the food safety law; or

(2) to track the food in commerce.

(c) Regulations- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture and representatives of State departments of agriculture, shall promulgate regulations to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production of food by food production facilities. Such regulations shall–

(1) consider all relevant hazards, including those occurring naturally, and those that may be unintentionally or intentionally introduced;

(2) require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;

(3) include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water;

THEY NEVER MENTION SEEDS BUT THIS IS PRECISELY HOW THEY WILL CRIMINALIZE SEED BANKING AND ALL HOLDINGS OF SEEDS.

[Notice they mention harvesting, sorting and storage operations, then watch below.

To follow how this will be done, you must understand that:

1. there is a small list inside the FDA called “sources of seed contamination”
2. in which they have now defined “seed” as food,
3. so seeds can be controlled under “food safety.”
Those seeds (so far) include:

seeds eaten raw such as flax, poppy sesame, etc.;
sprouting seeds such as wheat, beans, alfalfa, most greens, etc.;
seeds pressed into oils such as corn, sunflower, canola, etc.;
seeds used as animal feed such as soy ….

That is most seeds. Seeds are essential to life and thus to freedom.

The “sources of seed contamination” include six little items:

agricultural water
manure (but NOT chemical pesticides or fertilizers)
harvesting, transporting and seed cleaning equipment
seed storage facilities

What you must realize is that seed cleaning equipment is THE single most critical piece of equipment for sustainable agriculture. It is how we save organic seed. It is the machinery used after plants “go to seed” to separate out (sort) the seeds from the plant material so the farmer can collect (harvest) and then save (put in storage) seed for the next year at little cost. With his own seed, the farmer stays free of patented, genetically engineered, corporately privatized seeds.

You must also understand that Monsanto is getting rid of the people who do the seed cleaning and many other means of our having access to seed .

This year, 2009, seed cleaning equipment is now illegal in some parts of the country which tips us off to both the intent to control seeds in this way and to how they could do things under this bill.

How can they make such vital equipment illegal? Quietly, and by saying it contaminates food.

“Contaminate” is their favorite word since the public fears the deadly contamination that industry itself – not farmers – has caused. Scare the public and thus push for “food safety standards” to be set.

And to eliminate seed cleaning equipment, they haven now set the standards so seed cleaning (the simple separation of seed from plant) will now require a million to a million and a half dollar building and/or equipment … per line of seed.

So, a farmer who has been seed cleaning flax for 40 years with a hand made seed cleaner can’t sell flax on the market anymore, though there are NO instances of anyone ever having gotten sick from seed cleaning equipment. A farmer who has been cleaning wheat, corn and soy each year with the same perfectly fine equipment would now need three to four and half million dollars for three pieces of equipment to continue.

(The FDA isn’t so bar-setting when it comes to other things like melamine in baby formula, though it is proven to sicken and kill infants), initially denying the melamine was in our baby formula and then quickly inventing a “foods safety” standard to okay it.)

Organic farmers are not aware of this happening, perhaps because the left is being treated with kid gloves until HR 875 and related bills are/were passed. Meanwhile, the FDA and USDA have been tromping on traditional (many of them farming organically, by the way) farmers for years. The organic community is disconnected from them so hasn’t been aware of what is happening to them. Indie farmers have a history of no one listening to them, which is too bad because it is they who are the ones bringing the warning that these bills are deadly. The organic community, measuring against its own seeming safety, hasn’t heard or understood.

NOTICE, THOUGH, THAT BECAUSE A SINGLE “FOODS SAFETY” BAR HAS BEEN RAISED, IN TIME ON ONE WILL BE ABLE TO GET ORGANIC SEEDS IN ANY NUMBER BECAUSE IT WILL BE ILLEGAL FOR ALL FARMERS TO SELL THEM TO ANYONE.

Now, look at the last item on the list – seed storage facilities.

They would be careful not to ban them all outright given the extreme reaction they would get. But now the method is more clear. “Food safety” is the weapon and public fear is the driver and they only need to set the bar at the level that is impossible to meet.

Farmers, gardeners, seed saving exchanges, seed companies, scientific seed projects, and seed banks, all require “seed storage facilities.” All are working overtime to protect biodiversity that is rapidly disappearing because of … genetic engineering.

Set the standard for “food safety” and certification high enough that no one can afford it and punish anyone who tries to save seed in a multitude of ways that have worked fine for thousands of years, and PRESTO, YOU HAVE JUST CRIMINALIZED SEED BANKING.

The penalties, I will assume, will be tremendous, the better to protect us from nothing dangerous whatever, but to make monopoly over seed more absolute. One is left with control over farmers, and end to seed exchanges, to organic seed companies, to university programs developing nice normal hybrids.

When you know that Monsanto with the help of the US government plundered ancient and rare seed banks in Iraq that held seeds with a genetic heritage (a biohistory belonging to all of us) going back 1000s of years and then made it a crime for farmers there to collect or use their own normal and non-patented seeds off their own land, you see how extreme the intent to control is.

Now, perhaps it is possible to see how the identical thing is being done here, only it comes in a heavily, heavily disguised way – through “food safety” that isn’t at all – and in only one tiny little paragraph within a very large bill.

The Iraqis are now abjectly dependent on Monsanto and the US for survival itself and will have to pay whatever prices are set for food. They cannot just grow their own and be free. So, no matter what form of government they may have, they are now slaves because the control over them is that extreme. Kissinger was right – control food and you control people.

    WE ARE INCHES FROM THIS OURSELVES. THE LEFT NEEDS TO WAKE UP.

This trick of setting bars above any ability to be in the game, is similar to how blacks had been treated. Click here. This trick of setting bars above any ability to be in the game while imposing fines that destroy people who fail to meet that standard, is sadistic. Then, taking the land as confiscatory payment, is theft by government become totalitarian and colonizing its own people.

There are other items of the list which surely will be controlled as well. In toto, that little list is the deconstruction of farming itself and given the inclusion of manure, especially of organic farming.]

(4) include, with respect to animals raised for food, minimum standards related to the animal’s health, feed, and environment which bear on the safety of food for human consumption;

(5) provide a reasonable period of time for compliance, taking into account the needs of small businesses for additional time to comply;

(6) provide for coordination of education and enforcement activities by State and local officials, as designated by the Governors of the respective States; and

(7) include a description of the variance process under subsection (d) and the types of permissible variances which the Administrator may grant under such process.

(d) Variances- States and foreign countries that export produce intended for consumption in the United States may request from the Administrator variances from the requirements of the regulations under subsection (c). A request shall–

(1) be in writing;

(2) describe the reasons the variance is necessary;

(3) describe the procedures, processes, and practices that will be followed under the variance to ensure produce is not adulterated; and

(4) contain any other information required by the Administrator.

(e) Approval or Disapproval of Variances- If the Administrator determines after review of a request under subsection (d) that the requested variance provides equivalent protections to those promulgated under subsection (c), the Administrator may approve the request. The Administrator shall deny a request if it is–

(1) not sufficiently detailed to permit a determination;

(2) fails to cite sufficient grounds for allowing a variance; or

(3) does not provide reasonable assurances that the produce will not be adulterated.

(f) Enforcement- The Administrator may coordinate with the agency or department designated by the Governor of each State to perform activities to ensure compliance with this section.

(g) Imported Produce- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations to ensure that raw agricultural commodities and minimally processed produce imported into the United States can meet standards for food safety, inspection, labeling, and consumer protection that are at least equal to standards applicable to such commodities and produce produced in the United States.

Administrator shall have authority to grant exclusions to foreign producers.

[While it may be obvious to us that this is onerous beyond any capability of coping with it, it needs to be said and described in some detail what it would actually mean for farmers or for us. Here in story form is a taste of it, so anyone could feel the insanity of it:

SEC. 201. ADMINISTRATION OF NATIONAL PROGRAM.

(a) In General- The Administrator shall–

(1) develop, administer, and annually update a national food safety program (referred to in this section as the ‘program’) to protect public health; and

(2) ensure that persons who produce, process, or distribute food meet their responsibility to prevent or minimize food safety hazards related to their products.

[This is where I think it would be very helpful if you explained how astoundingly onerous that long list is and what its impact would be on any farmer who previously only needed to load up his goods and bringing them to a farmers market – though that in itself is a time consuming, physically effortful job that often begins pre-dawn on those mornings and ends late in the day, all of it separate from growing the food and boxing it up to bring.

A small farm is not an industry with staff to fill out paperwork, handle licensing, manage all the industrial bureaucracy that is being loaded on here, but is most often a couple who is also taking care of a family in addition to growing crops and raising animals. These are precisely the people who we need most as part of our food system and how will clearly be crushed by the grossly inappropriate application of such rules to small farms.]

· MYTH: H.R. 875 would result in the “death of organic farming.”

FACT: There is no language in the bill that would stop organic farming. The National Organic Program (NOP) is under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The Food Safety Modernization Act only addresses food safety issues under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
[Of course, they are not going to come straight out and say it. But breaking this down to what is actually involved, you find that:]

The administrator is charged with developing minimum standards, not maximum limits on feed, fertilizers, nutrients etc- right here goes organics.

Secondly, this act creates a new agency, and the FDA becomes the Federal Drug and Device Agency. It combines offices currently under FDA and Commerce Department (National Marine Fisheries).

Third, FSA is to cooperate with the USDA in “promulgating rules and orders” which will have the bearing and impact of law.
To refer back to the previous “Myth”

[The one about foreign food having to meet our standard, right?]

– Alaska, Hawaii, US territories and foreign countries may apply for variances, so… NO… Imported foods do NOT necessarily have to meet the same standards. In fact, many countries have had to lower their standards due to WTO rules and trade agreements, and Australia had to further lower their regulatory standards when they instituted the NLIS program (their version of NAIS). There is no reason to think we would not have to do the same.

Walk Index
Second Walk… The End of Organic Farming

[NOW, COMES THE RESPONSE TO WHETHER THE BILLS WILL MEAN THE END OF ORGANIC FARMING.]

I’m going to format this differently to accentuate your points, Sue. This section should be a major education for people in how things have been working. This is in response to the myth that the bills will not affect organic farming, right?]

Animal health has traditionally meant medication and hormones, petroleum-based fly sprays and all sorts of other goodies.

Feed can be anything (GMO SOY OR CORN, ANYONE?),

environment can mean PESTICIDES, HERBICIDES USED ON PASTURES (IF pasturing is deemed “healthy” – internationally this is NOT so for poultry, in fact in many countries there is NO outdoor poultry anymore – by law).

Nutrients are not necessarily whole food based, many are produced SYNTHETICally, and again, PETROLEUM BASED …

Animal encroachment prevention can be anything from a scarecrow or plastic owl to POISON BATES AND BULLETS. Not one of these things is specified, yet there is no place for real public opinion in the decision making process provided. I will grant that there is usually a public comment period for federal register entries, for whatever that has been worth in the past.
[Meaning, it has been worth little to nothing. And obviously, the public is left having to respond ad infinitum to one issue after another. Someone compared the numbers of things being thrown at us to try to stop, to carpet bombing so you can’t comment on everything, even if it helped which is clearly often doesn’t.]

SEC. 206. FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITIES.

(a) AUTHORITIES.—In carrying out the duties of the Administrator and the purposes of this Act, the Administrator shall have the authority, with respect to food production facilities, to

(1) visit and inspect food production facilities in the United States and in foreign countries to determine if they are operating in compliance with the requirements of the food safety law;

(2) review food safety records as required to be kept by the Administrator under section 210 and for other food safety purposes;

(3) SET GOOD PRACTICE STANDARDS to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety;
[This is where words that sound so friendly and innocuous and even good are code words for international rules set by the WTO that actually define industrial requirements which do not fit real farming in the least, much less organic farming, would be applied.

[This is where insane, anti-nature, anti-farming rules like “animals and crops can’t exist on the same farm” come into play. Where wild animals aren’t ever supposed to be near crops so the government has been poisoning deer and frogs. The list of such manufacturing rules for farming is long, and each very much “efficiency manager comes and wrecks the farm.”]

(4) conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate; and
[Please, those of you who find the idea of NSA-spying intolerable, look carefully at those words. Now, imagine it were your farm, your home on that farm, and realize that the USDA and FDA have been run by and the new agency will be run by Monsanto, Cargill, Tysons, ADM. Their interest in helping consumers have safer food is nil The bills are meant to eliminate farmers as is now rapidly occurring in the EU with identical (“harmonized”) bills, now law there.

(5) collect and maintain information relevant to public health and farm practices.
[There needs to be a pause here to consider the implications of each of those on someone’s home – their family’s farm. This is quite different from applying them to industrial sites where no one lives, and beyond that, these powers are so broad and vague, they are dangerous if only in that.

Those things listed open the door to total control, warrantless entry and perpetual surveillance. Notice how innocuous they have made it appear, even beneficial – always about public health. Yet, the insincerity of this is boggling – the USDA and Big Ag have worked to prevent inspections to the point where farmers have had to actully sue to get them done , even after offering to pay for them.]

(b) INSPECTION OF RECORDS.—A food production facility shall permit the Administrator upon presentation of appropriate credentials and at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner
[Who defines “reasonable”? Does a farmer have to go to court each time there is an “unreasonable” manner and time? How wide open do we push the door to Big Ag-corrupted government control over farmers – the people creating the only safe food?

Look carefully and realize the USDA right now is countenancing state ag departments conducting terrorizing raids on non-corporate farms across the country. Imagine it were your home and USDA agents banging on your door to demand paper work and if you don’t have it, facing fines that would bankrupt you in a moment and lose you your land and home.]

, to have access to and ability to copy all records maintained by or on behalf of such food production establishment in any format (including paper or electronic) and at any location, that are necessary to assist the Administrator—
[Imagine again.]

(1) to determine whether the food is contaminated, adulterated, or otherwise not in compliance with the food safety law; or
[Be aware that in Pennsylvania where there has been an aggressive effort to destroy fresh milk dairy farmers, the tests by the states repeatedly do not match those of independent testers but the harm to farmers from such false tests and reporting of them is done and can’t be undone. Be aware that the USDA has a record of creating test results damaging to small farmers while it refuses to inspect even when farmers ask to pay.]

(2) to track the food in commerce.
[This could mean farmers bringing food to markets with USDA agents surveilling.]

(c) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture and representatives of State departments of agriculture, shall promulgate regulations to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production of food by food production facilities. Such regulations shall—
[Everything in this bill is being left to be filled in however the “Food Safety Tsar” – “the Administrator” decides? Right now, to give people pause and to wake them up a bit to how this is not a wise idea but in fact absurd, it appears that person could be Michael Taylor, a Monsanto lawyer infamous for approving rBGH – the first genetically engineered product ever approved – over the objections of doctors, scientists who said the numbers were being rigged, and the public.

How can anyone leave a bill so utterly vague in the hands of anyone to decide later what it all means? Do we not make laws here with specific meaning anymore? Or do we simply let totalitarian rules be applied by industry against non-industrial entities like farms and homes in any way they wish and with immense police power behind what they, for their own interests, decide?]

(1) consider all relevant hazards, including those occurring naturally, and those that may be unintentionally or intentionally introduced;
[GOODBY RAW MILK.]

(2) require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;

(3) include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, NUTRIENTS, HYGIENE, PACKAGING, TEMPERATURE CONTROLS, ANIMAL ENCROACHMENT, AND WATER;

[GOODBYE ORGANIC FARMING.]

(4) include, with respect to animals raised for food, MINIMUM STANDARDS related to the animal’s HEALTH, FEED AND ENVIRONMENT which bear on the safety of food for human consumption;
[GOODBYE ORGANIC FARMING AND GRASS FED ANIMALS.]

(5) provide a reasonable period of time for compliance, taking into account the needs of small businesses for additional time to comply;
[Oh, heavens, this looks like padding to throw in the word “reasonable” again but it has no explicit meaning whatever and so no safety for a soul.]

(6) provide for coordination of education and enforcement activities by State and local officials, as designated by the Governors of the respective States; and

[This appears to be where Homeland Security works with the USDA for such things as “depopulation of animals” – for which 6 meetings are already scheduled in June and into which livestock owners are not allowed though foreigners are.

These “depopulation” plans look like what is happening in Asia where animal disease caused by industry (and worth a fortune to the pharmaceutical industry ) are then used by industry to wipe out its competition in heritage breeds of animals on small farms and to substitute genetically engineered animals that are patented by industry and thus owned by industry.

(7) include a description of the variance process under subsection (d) and the types of permissible variances which the Administrator may grant under such process.

(d) VARIANCES.—

    States and foreign countries that export produce intended for consumption in the United States may request from the Administrator variances from the requirements of the regulations under subsection (c)

.
[This is where the “fact” that foreign countries must meet our food safety requirements collapses by simply reading the bill.]

MYTH: The bill would implement a national animal ID system.?

FACT: There is no language in the bill that would implement a national animal ID system. Animal identification issues are under the jurisdiction of the USDA. The Food Safety Modernization Act addresses issues under the jurisdiction of the FDA.

This bill mandates NAIS BY claiming that it is already law,

then contradicts itself by citing COOL, which specifically prohibits mandatory tracking.

It justifies NAIS by claiming that the AHPA gives authority – but this is a bill (and supposedly a program) concerning interstate commerce (though any item of food for sale is “presumed” to be in interstate commerce, whether it is in reality or not.) and AHPA does not regulate interstate commerce.

How many contradictions in a single section do we need before red flags go up?
[YES, AND PUT UP RED FLAGS FOR WHOLE BILLS IF THIS CENTRAL PART IS SO CORRUPTLY BEING PUSHED.]

Below in CAPITALS [fonts altered – Dr. Rima] , Sue answers the absurd claim that NAIS is not mandatory. FWW has gotten this and many other items wrong. That would be fine if the whole organic movement and all our farms and freedom were not riding on our seeing these very real threats and stopping those bills completely – not compromising on them but demanding their complete withdrawal.]

(a) IN GENERAL – THE ADMINISTRATOR, IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SHALL ESTABLISH A NATIONAL TRACEABILITY SYSTEM THAT ENABLES THE ADMINISTRATOR TO RETRIEVE THE HISTORY, USE AND LOCATION OF AN ARTICLE OF FOOD THROUGH ALL STAGES OF ITSPRODUCTION, PROCESSIN, AND DISTRIBUTION.

(b) APPLICABILITY – TRACEABILITY REQUIREMENTS UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL APPLY TO FOOD FROM FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITIES, FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS, AND FOREIGN FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS.

(c) REQUIREMENTS-

(1) STANDARDS- THE ADMINISTRATOR SHALL ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR THE TYPE OF INFORMATION, FORMAT, AND TIMEFRAME FOR FOOD PRODUCTION FACILTITIES AND FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS TO SUBMIT RECORDS TO AID THE ADMINISTRATOR IN EFFECTIVELY RETRIEVING THE HISTORY, USE AND LOCATION OF AN ITEM OF FOOD.

(2) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring the Administrator to prescribe a specific technology for the maintenance of records or labeling of food to carry out the requirements of this section.

(3) AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS FOR INSPECTION- Any records that are required by the Administrator under this section shall be available for inspection by the Administrator upon oral or written request.

(4) DEMONSTRATION OF ABILITY- The Administrator, during any inspection, may require a food establishment to demonstrate its ability to trace an item of food and submit the information in the format and time frame required under paragraph (1).

(d) Relationship to Other Requirements-

(1) CONSISTENCY WITH EXISTING STATUTES AND REGULATIONS- To the extent possible, the Administrator should establish the national traceability system under this section to be consistent with existing statutes and regulations that require recordkeeping or labeling for identifying the origin or history of food or food animals.

[Does this mean consistent with international laws under the WTO? Is this a means of locking everything together into Smart Grid or NAFTA or CAFTA or GATT and even, the worst of all,

    CODEX

?]

(2) EXISTING LAWS- For purposes of this subsection, the Administrator should review the following:

(A) Country of origin labeling requirements of subtitle D of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1638 et seq.).

(B) The Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act of 1930 (7 U.S.C. 499a-t).

(C) Country of origin labeling requirements of section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1340).

(D) The National Animal Identification System as authorized by the Animal Health Protection Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.).

EC. 210. TRACEBACK REQUIREMENTS.

MYTH: The bill is supported by the large agribusiness industry.?

FACT: No large agribusiness companies have expressed support for this bill.

This bill is being supported by several Members of Congress who have strong progressive records on issues involving farmers markets, organic farming, and locally-grown foods.

[Who almost certainly have not read the bills or can’t interpret how it will work to destroy farmers, organic food, seed banking, and all of us.]

Also, H.R. 875 is the only food safety legislation that has been supported by all the major consumer and food safety groups, including:

[Perhaps others know details on each organization and why they might be supporting a bill that is so threatening to real food safety and to the survival of our farms and organic farming.]

?– Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention

?– Center for Science in the Public Interest

?– Consumer Federation of America

The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) is a long-standing consumer organization based in Washington, DC. However, it has accepted funding from the ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION to “develop an optimum regulatory regime” for genetically engineered food.

?– Consumers Union?– Food & Water Watch

[Food and Water Watch just put out a description of the bill in which it is apparent they do not understand what is in it and what it will do. With that as their starting point, they support it.]

?– The Pew Charitable Trusts

[They are also connected to the ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION, and involved with them in mandatory vaccinations programs around the world and issues of reducing population.]

?– Safe Tables Our Priority ?– Trust for America’s Health

[There is no list here of groups opposing this bill, which include the people whose lives are most at risk from it and who know its dangers the best and who should have been the first people consulted. Instead, they have been shut out and when they have tried to report extreme dangers, they have ignored, dismissed, marginalized. Perhaps the other organizations listed here are as unfamiliar with the bill’s contents and ramifications as FWW.]

If you consider that not only is Rosa DeLauro married to Stanley Greenberg, who boasts Monsanto as one of his clients, but also that she receives the largest donations from agribusiness PAC’s of just about anyone in Congress, does industry NEED to come out and say they support this particular bill? If cash to the sponsor doesn’t count, and if formal positions supporting various specific aspects of the bill do not count, then what does? Would there not be massive public backlash against it if industry DID take a formal stand on every bill they want to see passed?

By the same token, I’ve not seen a single industrial ag company come out and oppose this bill, either. They have all been conspicuously silent. I seem to remember that they threw up quite a fuss over COOL, and caused enforcement to fall behind by more than 7 years… Not to mention the garbage with loopholes we’ve had to deal with since enforcement began. (What good does a “Canada, US, Mexico” label do for anybody? Especially with BSE in Canada and TB coming in daily from Mexico?) Where’s the hoot and holler over this?

MYTH: The bill will pass the Congress next week without amendments or debate.?

FACT: Food safety legislation has yet to be considered by any Congressional committee.?

I can’t speak to the time frame. [Note from NSF: our sources “on the Hill” told us they believed these bills had been “fast tracked” to be passed during President Obama’s “First 100 Days”]

[It came from those who first discovered the bills were there, inserted only one week after Vilsack had said the USDA wasn’t even considering centralizing the FDA and USDA at this time, so people saw how similar the bills were, knew who fast other things were being shoved through Congress without even reading those bills, and estimated how fast this could happen.

Perhaps with people alerted now, these bogus “food safety” bills can be stopped by the organic community once it realizes they will utterly destroy it.]

However, since I did have the luxury of listening to the farce taking place on the floor of the House of Representatives on March 11 concerning HR1105 (which FUNDS NAIS among its hundreds of other projects) while awaiting the Livestock, Dairy and Poultry subcommittee hearing on NAIS – I have no doubt that this bill will move quickly now that 1105 has passed and since it has so many co-sponsors.

Especially since the Representatives were honest enough to admit that though the Senators claimed everybill in the Omnibus Act had been heard and passed in the previous session, when in actuality, some 100 of the 170 bills in the package had NOT.

But this is my personal opinion.

The “ominous Omnibus Act” as several Representatives called it, went from introduction to the President in less than 13 working days.

I really have to question just who’s side those groups are really on that are in support of this bill…..

And finally,

Walk Index
Third Walk… Meaning of the Bills

WHAT THE NEW “FOOD SAFETY” BILLS MEAN TO YOU
by Gail Combs

Our food safety system was trashed in 1995 by Sec of Ag Ann Veneman (Board member of Monsanto). She appointed Dan Amstutz (VP of Cargill) who wrote the World Trade Organization Agreement on Agriculture (WTO AoA). Unlike GATT, WTO has major clout from trade sanctions and control of 90% of the international trade. http://www.publiceyeonscience.ch/images/the_wto_and_the_politics_of_gmo.doc

“Aims to ensure that governments do not use quarantine and food safety requirements as Unjustified trade barriers.. It provides Member countries with a right to implement traceability {NAIS} as an SPS measure.” WTO

In other words the WTO did away with “quarantine and food safety requirements” that gave us “the safest food in the world” and is graciously going to allow Farmers to track AND COUNT the world’s livestock for them instead. Now HR 875 and an FDA release indicate All food will be tracked and all food producers will have Food inspections and the threat of fines up to $1,000,000 a day will eliminate all the independent farms that have acted as a check on Corporate AG.

The FDA wants

to implement a more effective trace-back process, using technologies to rapidly and precisely track the origin and destination of contaminated foods, feed and ingredients

Nanotech in Food can make it happen “California’s Oxonica makes Nanobarcodes from nano-particles that contain silver and gold stripes varying in width, length and amount, such that billions of combinations can be created to tag individual products. The barcodes have been primarily used to assure brand and authenticity in pharmaceuticals, but applications could be forthcoming in tracing food batches”.

In regard to pets:

HR 875 uses “animals” and then “animals raised for food” and there are no exclusions. The Animal Welfare Act had exclusions for livestock, pets and people raising three or less litters of puppies a year. Therefore pets are not excluded.

“set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety”

“conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate”

“with respect to animals raised for food, minimum standards related to the animal’s health, feed, and environment which bear on the safety of food for human consumption;

In regard to gardens:

The Feds Already have plans for controlling food “FROM FARM TO FORK” including home preparation since September of 1995 (WTO ratified in 1995)
HR 875

“require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;”

“include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water”

“include, with respect to animals raised for food, minimum standards related to the animal’s health, feed, and environment which bear on the safety of food for human consumption;”

“set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety”

“..facility owned or operated by a person located in any State that processes food or a facility that holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients.”

Notice it does not say a person SELLING food, it says a person holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients. The bill specifically states it covers commerce with in state but again there is no exclusion for food raised for home use. The fact you are growing veggies for your and friends and not selling them does not exclude you.

“in any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST.”

Under Ag Sec. Veneman …

in September, 1995, the USDA’s Food Safety & Inspection Service presented a 600-page document “Farm-To-Table” intended to control of every step in the food chain from production to home preparation.
This is a real life example of what has already occurred and what people may have in store:

Today a state Ag inspector and two county officials show up and scare the bee-jesus out of me. First they accuse me of selling products and milk, then explain that even “giving milk products away” is illegal in California. Now everything is pasteurized, but it is illegal to share milk products in any form! They explained it was even ILLEGAL to give it to my own children if they did not live under my roof! I can’t even take a lasagna dish to my grown sons home without risk of being fined, arrested and or jailed! This is OUTRAGEOUS!!!!…..” Donna Tue Aug 12, 2008 http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Americans_Against_NAIS/message/26452

More stories on Feds raiding farms and co-ops

Walk Index
Last Walk… Conclusion

The related package of “food safety” bills are totalitarian. There are no two ways about it.

They allow government warrantless intrusion into and extreme, detailed, surveilled control over every aspect of farmers’ land and home, straight-jacketing them into a bureaucratic nightmare which precludes their even functioning as farmers. And yet for real food safety and for food security, it is exactly farmers we need.

We need the real food they produce and the farmland they spare and protect from industrialization and the heritage animals and seeds they raise and their knowledge about nature and animals, and we need the way of life they represent. Free. How interesting that to have real and clean and wholesome food, it requires that farmers have freedom.

These bills which claim to be about “food safety” but are proven in the EU already to be about the destruction of farmers, are so frighteningly broad, they allow the government to take over our lives, too. They allow the government to use rules written by multinational corporations within the WTO, to control whether we can garden or how, whether we chip our pets, even what happens inside our homes in our kitchens.

These controls all all for mandating things that make money for corporations just as we are all trying to get off the corporate grid of power, fuel, food, … Now it is easy to appreciate people’ resistance to mandated vaccines (and they keep adding more kinds).

There is point at which we must say stop. Our lives are our own, our property is our own, our decisions on what to eat and how to heal ourselves are our own. We must protect our own freedom and now it is apparent how intimately tied it is those who have been providing for us for ever – our farmers.

HR 875, SR 425, HR 814, HR 759 and all related bills must be withdrawn immediately and then trashed.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/A-solemn-walk-through-HR-8-by-Linn-Cohen-Cole-090314-67.html

Walk Index

Index ———————————-

Further information linking Codex Alimentarius (the World Food Code) and the (sic) Food (sic) Safety bills, see:

A Natural Solutions Foundation White Paper
Regarding U.S. Codex Office and Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) for
Adoption of Codex Committee Policies by the U.S. Codex Delegation and FSIS
in Harmony with the Dietary Substances Health and Education Act (DSHEA),
19 USC 3512 (the Anti-Harmonization Statute) and other Statutory and Case Law

http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=2394

Natural Solutions Statement to National Vaccine Advisory Committee

Saturday, March 14th, 2009

Copy of Statement Submitted to National Vaccine Advisory Committee

Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
“Health Freedom is Our First Freedom!”

March 14, 2009

National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC)
Washington, D.C.
Via Internet: nvpo@hhs.gov

VACCINATION CLAIMS RESEARCH STATEMENT

Introduction

1.0. Overview:

The Natural Solutions Foundation, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “the Foundation”) and all those who hereafter join in, bring to the attention of the Committee the need for scientific research regarding the often repeated, but unsubstantiated claims made in the Advertising and Promotion of Vaccinations to the professional community and lay public. Both health professionals and the Public are lead to believe that Vaccines are both “safe and effective” through many millions of dollars in annual advertising expenditures and publications, without adequate substantiating immunological, sociological or epidemiological research. Under current inadequate standards, pharmaceutical companies do not have to prove that any particular vaccination actually produces immunity to a particular disease organism, rather, all that is currently required is to demonstrate that there is some anti-body production after vaccination, justifying the use of the vaccine. The link between the production of these antibodies and their effectiveness in disease prevention, and the demonstration that the vaccine is safe on either a long or short term basis, alone or in combination with other vaccines or factors, is not required. This is clearly inadequate to demonstrate that any vaccine is “safe and effective” to protect against disease.

The Foundation is a nongovernmental organization (NGO) incorporated in the State of Nevada and recognized as exempt under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The mission of the Foundation includes educating decision-makers with regard to natural solutions to health care needs and challenges. The Foundation has about 200,000 citizens on its opt-in Health Freedom eAlert System.

1.1. This Statement is submitted in response to the Committee “seeking public input into the scientific research agenda being developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Immunization Safety Office (ISO)…” see: Draft Agenda Recommendations, April 11, 2008, http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/00_pdf/draft_agenda_recommendations_080404.pdf

We make this Statement with regard to providing the Public truthful and not misleading information about both Mandated and Voluntary Vaccinations through Vaccination Advertising, Vaccination Information and Vaccination Labeling provided to physicians, patients, parents, and guardians.

1.2. We resolve and state that there is neither significant scientific agreement nor sufficient reliable and competent scientific evidence from reliable, independent and unbiased sources to allow the conclusion that individual and/or multiple vaccinations, particularly of young children, provide any measurable public health care benefit. This is true whether the vaccinations are mandated or voluntary.

Further, there is a large body of evidence which shows that repeated single and multiple vaccinations, especially in young children, can cause or precipitate, and has in fact caused and/or precipitated, devastating and irreparable harm to hundreds of thousands of the most vulnerable citizens: our children. Vaccination is an un-insurable medical risk which has never been demonstrated with convincing scientific rigor to be either safe or effective. For that reason, vaccination must never be mandated or offered on a voluntary basis without provisions for the broadest medical, philosophical, and religious exemptions. In addition, vaccination must only be offered under any circumstances upon fully informed voluntary consent.

1.3. Billions of dollars of special vaccine-dose assessment and tax funds have already been paid to families of vaccine-injured children under the auspices of the Federal Government’s National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP} which was created by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-660) in part to “establish and maintain an accessible and efficient forum for individuals found to be injured by certain vaccines.” In fact, vaccine injuries are so common that the VICP was established to deal with the devastating consequences of vaccination, of which parents and patients were not and are not informed. See: http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/ The VICP is a “no-fault” alternative to the traditional tort system for resolving vaccine injury claims that provides compensation to people found to be injured by certain vaccines. The U. S. Court of Federal Claims decides who will be paid.

1.4. The current vaccination injury compensation structure is at: http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/table.htm

1.5. Serious negative vaccine consequences are so common that the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) catalogs tens of thousands of vaccine- related injuries and deaths. See: http://www.whale.to/vaccines/vaers.html; New England Journal of Medicine, 2007; 357: 1275-9. It is of major significance to note that the CDC, FDA and other agencies estimate that only 1 to 10% of vaccine adverse events actually occurring are reported, so the actual magnitude of the problem is unknown and , according to the US Government’s own estimates, is highly likely to be substantially greater than current documentation of reported events suggests. (e.g., a National Vaccine Information Center survey of NY pediatricians found that only 2.5% report adverse events).

1.6. If the frightening facts reported in VAERS are considered, no reasonable regulator can permit the current system to continue. It must be halted immediately in order to stop the irreparable harm we demonstrate here and which full properly designed and implemented scientific research would amply confirm.

1.7. Further examples of both potential and actual harm to the Public abound and are very evident with many current Vaccination advertising practices.

1.8. For one example, a report cited on the Internet indicated, “Only after filing a lawsuit against the FDA was Judicial Watch able to uncover New FDA Records Detailing an additional 8 deaths among an additional1,824 Adverse Reaction Reports Related to Gardasil, Merck’s Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine between May 10, 2007 and Sept. 7, 2007. The death reports include 12 and 13 year old girls.” This brings the known total for this one vaccination to 3,461 adverse reactions, including 11 deaths, since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the vaccine; see: http://ahrp.blogspot,com/2007/10/8-more-deaths-liked-to-gardasil-hpv.html

1.9. Current Vaccination Advertising and Labeling do not adequately warn the Public of the significant, but un-insurable, medical risks inherent in vaccinations, the complete lack of proven clinical efficacy in disease prevention inherent in the procedure which makes it, at best, experimental, nor do they disclose to the public their exemption rights. Full discussion of the risks and possible unproven benefits and informed consent waivers are not provided by physicians concerning the pros and cons of vaccination. Instead, like the students at the University of Maine campus, in December of 2007, who were vaccinated under duress, on pain of being locked out of their dormitories, eating halls, classrooms, libraries and all other University facilities unless vaccinated – or revaccinated – , patients, parents and guardians are not fully informed. No discussion of dangers, potential adverse events and other considerations pertaining to personal choice in the face of an un-insurable risk took place in Maine, nor was any discussion about personal exemptions, as established by law, permitted. The same is true in physicians offices, hospital emergency rooms and other vaccination sites across the United States.

1.10. The same was also true on November 17, 2007, when 2,300 children were vaccinated, literally at gunpoint, with the presence of police dogs, in the Prince George’s County Courthouse, Prince George’s County, Maryland, under the watchful eye of a Maryland Judge. The parents, mostly minority, poor and many unable to read, were threatened with jail and fines if they refused vaccination in a state which provides for exemptions were never discussed with the parents. It is important to note that the Maryland States’ Attorney, Mr. Genn Ivey, told our Foundation representative privately, and repeated during an international radio broadcast, that he had learned these vaccines were so dangerous that he availed himself of the exemption and did not allow his own children to receive the vaccines.

1.11. Thus the impact of misleading advertising, backed by coercion, was used to force 2,300 schoolchildren to be vaccinated; many against their parents’ will, in the absence of either due process or full disclosure. Many children were re-vaccinated with all vaccines because, as the Prince George’s County School District admitted, it had lost the children’s immunization records. These children were put at an increased risk by this process because the neurological and other related damage following vaccination is directly proportional to the total body burden of toxins introduced by vaccination. This fact is not disclosed to parents and was not disclosed to the parents of the Prince George’s County children. Instead, advertising, including unproven and scientifically flawed, weak professional documentation is used to portray vaccination as safe and effective in preventing diseases, creating an untruthful and misleading perception. All such advertising should stop until adequate warnings and disclosures can be approved and implemented and compelling scientific validation for these claims can be provided.

1.12. And by way of final example, the public media reported in late February and March, 2009 on the alleged “accidental” contamination of season flu vaccines delivered to 18 countries with live, infective human Avian Flu Virus. Had this contamination not been discovered in time, a world-wide Avian Flu Pandemic could have been triggered by mass vaccination. There is less than no proof that Avian Flu Vaccine is either safe or effective since the pandemic version of the disease does not yet exist. Although FDA approval to some versions of Avian Flu Vaccine has already been given in the absence of human testing, there is absolutely no evidence that any of these vaccines will protect against, either safely or otherwise, the development or severity of Avian Flu in human. Any claims for, or advertising of, these products must be halted until acceptable scientific proof can be provided. See: http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=2191

II. Actions Requested

2.0. We urge the Committee to take the following actions (hereinafter, the Statement Action Requests):

2.1. Issuance of an immediate Recommendation to suspend advertising of vaccinations by the manufacturer, public health agency or any other entity or person whether protected from liability under such Federal Laws as Title 42, Chapter 6A, Subchapter XIX, Part 2, Subpart A, Section 300aa-16, Limitations of Actions, or not until all reasonable scientific research shows that any particular vaccine is safe and effective.

2.2. Issuance of an immediate Recommendation to halt Interstate Commerce regarding vaccines and vaccine related goods, until all reasonable scientific research shows that each particular vaccine is safe and effective. At that time, Interstate Commerce of that vaccine may resume.

2.3. Issuance of a Recommendation that any practitioner or entity administering vaccines should be required to notify patients, parents or guardians in their own language that vaccines are currently the subject of scrutiny because of their lack of proven protection in communicable disease and their dangers to persons receiving them. Patients, parents or guardians wishing to proceed with vaccination should have a waiver form explaining the dangers, uncertainties, un-insurability, presented to them and State and or Federal exemption opportunities provided to them. Signing such an explicit waiver is the minimum required for truly informed consent under the terms of the Declaration of Helsinki, 1964, http://www.wma.net/e/policy/b3.htm – which constitutes part of the Law of Nations under the United States Constitution.

2.4. Issuance of a Recommendation that all appropriate Federal Agency rules ensure the public that the un-insurable medical risk of vaccination injury will not be mandated over the medical, philosophical and religious exemption rights of Citizens. States which threaten to withhold services such as schooling from unvaccinated children, forbid admission of unvaccinated students to universities and colleges or access to facilities and services after tuition or its equivalent has been paid, and similar coercive activities based on inaccurate and misleading advertising of vaccine efficacy and safety should be denied all Federal scientific research or other funds.

2.5. The Foundation expresses carefully considered doubt that the involved Federal Agencies have exercised prudent judgment in the face of abundant scientific, empirical and other information, supported by adverse event reporting, in permitting the production, shipment, sale and injection of vaccines. Scrutiny should focus on all ingredients in vaccines: active, inert, intended, adventitious, unintended, trace and adjunctive; since all ingredients, alone or in combination with each other or constitutional, environmental, pharmaceutical or other factors, may cause responses in the body leading to harm. Squalene, for example, is an adjuvant used to enhance immune response which may be safe when ingested or used as a topical agent, but is the cause of serious auto-immune disorders when injected. Many new generation vaccines contain Squalene as an adjuvant.

2.6. The Foundation urges that the Committee Recommend that all future Vaccination Advertising and Labeling contain, at a minimum, the following Warning and Disclosure –

“WARNING: The safety and efficacy of vaccination has not been demonstrated by reliable, independent, unbiased, and competent scientific or clinical evidence. DISCLOSURE: You or your children may have a right under law to a medical, philosophical or religious exemption from this vaccination.”

2.7. Vaccination remains an experimental modality. Under the Declaration of Helsinki, it is imperative to assure that all recipients or their parents or guardians are fully informed about the dangers they may face if they allow themselves or their charges to be vaccinated. A waiver must be required from patients, parents or guardians indicating that pros and cons of vaccination were fully discussed with, and understood by, them and that all exemption rights were also fully discussed and understood. The waiver must state clearly that the recipient, parent or guardian fully understands that manufacturers of vaccines have no liability for any damage which they may cause, including death and that the risks in vaccination are un-insurable.

2.8. At a minimum, to meet international standards regarding medical experimentation, such as the Declaration of Helsinki, a physician, upon appropriate consultation, must be permitted provide a valid medical excuse from current and future vaccinations recommended by any Federal Agency for any child who has suffered a reaction of any type to any previous vaccination. The child’s medical history, as reported by the parent, shall be taken to provide conclusive evidence of such reaction. No child shall be subjected to any vaccination unless the physician administering the vaccination shall have certified in writing that it is both safe and necessary that the particular child is vaccinated against that particular disease or diseases and why such vaccination is necessary. Physicians who find no justification for vaccination shall not be liable to censure, discipline and/or harassment by their state medical boards of jurisdiction or other professional organizations including, but not limited to, the American Medical Association (AMA), American Association of Pediatric Physicians (AAPP), and State Medical Associations.

2.9. As an executive agency advisory committee, the NVAC must “Take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” (Article II, Section3, United States Constitution)

2.10. Further, the Committee should consider medical ethics as set forth in the AMA Code of Ethics, The Hippocratic Oath, the Oath of Maimonides, the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the Declaration of Helsinki. The Foundation urges the Commission to consider the overriding importance of the injunction to “…first do no harm…”

III. Statement in Support of Statement Requested Actions

3.0. When the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recently recommended that infants and toddlers be subjected to the flu vaccine, the States began the process of mandating the vaccination before the child could be admitted to pre or public school. New Jersey became the first state to mandate the flu vaccination for children, publishing the final rule on January 7, 2008, effective January 2009. Such mandates condition the acceptance of a public benefit (“free public education”) or a private one (attendance at preschool) upon submission to a questionable, experimental and potentially dangerous medical procedure.

3.1. This is particularly troubling since those doses of flu vaccine supposedly manufactured without mercury continues to contain “trace” amounts of mercury since even the allegedly “mercury free” versions use mercury in the manufacturing process, adding a “trace” amount to the administered dose. There have been no safety studies done on Thimerasol (manufactured by Eli Lilly) since the 1929 study done by K.C. Smithburn on patients dying from meningitis. All patients to whom Thimerosal was administered died but Smithburn concluded that Thimerosal was safe since the patients would have died from other causes anyway. AllMSDS for Thimerosal states, “Exposure to mercury in utero and in children can cause mild to severe motor coordination impairment.” Eli Lilly MSDS June 13, 1991. None the less, this toxic component is being offered to patients, including pregnant women and children, increasingly as a mandated vaccination. Other components of vaccines are also highly troubling for similar reasons: the science establishing their safety is either non-existent, absurd or deeply flawed.

3.2. The Foundation, asking how much mercury is enough to cause harm, submits the following: “Most worryingly, exposure levels were not particularly high, Hair concentrations in the [Japanese] villagers averaged 4 micrograms of mercury per gram of hair. This is just a tenth of the level considered dangerous for adults by the World Health Organization, and not much higher than that found in many countries. In the US and Japan, for instance, the average mercury concentration in hair is around 1 and 2 micrograms per gram respectively.” This tends to show that the CDC’s claimed “trace” levels of mercury remaining in vaccines may very well be dangerous. See: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-06/ns-esmo61103.php

3.3. According to the New York Times on April 5, 2003, “The Food and Drug Administration has begun using the Environmental Protection Agency’s much lower safe level for mercury in the human body, an official of the food and drug agency said this week, ‘Before the change, the F.D.A. guidelines set a safe level that was four times as high as that of ..environmental agency.. standard.’” See: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9507EFDD1538F936A35757\C0A9659C8B63

3.4. Therefore, a question for scientific research becomes: “Is there a ‘trace’ amount of Mercury or other toxins in the recently recommended flu vaccination?” How much of a “trace” is needed in any vaccination to cause harm.

3.5. According to Centers for Disease Control (CDC), “Thimerosal still may be used in the early stages of making certain vaccines. However, it is removed through a purification process.” leaving a “trace” amount of “less than 0.3 mcg” in the final dose. See: http://www.ageofautism.com/2007/12/emails-from-cdc.html Additional research is necessary regarding the direct and cumulative effects of such trace dosages.

3.6. The existence of any trace amount of mercury is very troubling, especially as the “trace” amounts add up and accumulate over repeated vaccinations. Recent analysis shows that contrary to earlier reports, there is a measurable relationship between autism and mercury toxicity. See: http://mcs-america.org/January2008pg17.htm – citation: J Child Neurol. 2007 Nov; 22(11); 1308-1311. In this context we note the mushrooming autism rate appears to be in direct correlation with introduction of new vaccines (e.g., MMR), and we further note the conspicuous absence of autism in religious and other populations that do not vaccinate. This contradicts various authorities’ assertions that vaccines do not cause autism. On November 9, 2007 the Federal government’s lawyers conceded a Court of Federal Claims case involving autism caused by vaccines; there are 4900 other pending autism-vaccine injury cases before the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html Other more recent cases seem to hold otherwise and the parents of injured children still believe they are not being treated fairly.

3.7. The Natural Solutions Foundation, however, does not limit its concern to mercury adulterated vaccinations. Even if vaccines become truly mercury free, they would still (a) lack proven effectiveness and (b) continue to contain other ingredients, such as Squalene, which assault healthy immune systems. The Foundation continues to object strongly to any mandated or voluntary vaccination which may cause harm to individuals either through its component or synergistic parts or through the impact of single or multiple vaccines on the immune system. These impacts are anything but trivial: although they can be immeasurable, extremely worrisome, troubling, debilitating and/or lethal. Despite deceptive advertising to the contrary, there are safe and effective alternatives to dangerous vaccinations that can, in a modern society with proper hygiene, prevent the spread of infectious disease. The Foundation reminds the NVAC that many diseases for which vaccinations are administered are self limiting and pose little or no human health threat. If not confronted successfully by the immune system, these diseases can be well treated using modern medical methods.

3.8. It is a serious affront to basic, inalienable human rights to force or mislead individuals, especially parents and guardians of minor children, to accept invasive medical treatments without fully informed, voluntary consent. See the discussion below regarding the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki in this regard; see: http://www.wma.net/e/policy/b3.htm

IV. Legal Authorities in Support of the Statement

4.0. This Statement is grounded in fundamental principles of inalienable right, law and equity.

4.1. The primary legal basis for submitting this Statement to the Commission is the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States: “Congress shall make no law… abridging… the right of the people… to statement the Government for a redress of grievances.”

4.2. We also cite the World Medical Association 1964 Declaration of Helsinki; see: http://www.wma.net/e/policy/b3.htm This Declaration has the force of International Law and it clearly forbids experimental medication or medication without fully informed consent.

4.3. The Acts establishing the authority of the Federal Agency under which the Committee deliberates are also a legal basis for the Statement. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) exists solely to protect the Public, within the limits established by the Constitution of the United States of America. Among the principles established by the Laws and Regulations, long the explicit policy of the Federal Government, is that all commercial advertising must be “truthful and not misleading.”

4.4. The statute in the derogation of the common law and Constitutional limitations, establishing exemptions from liability of Vaccine Injuries, 42 USC 300aa-16 (and the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, there under) is further cited as a law that must be strictly construed in favor of patients, guardians, parents and children, and strictly construed against the economic interests of the pharmaceutical industry and other exempt persons.

4.5. Basic common law principles prohibiting forced acquiescence under duress and limited or intentionally distorted information, as exemplified by the United States Supreme Court decision in the case of Thompson v Western States Medical Centers – 535 U.S. 357 (2002), as further described below.

4.6. Additionally, the Statutes authorizing the Federal Agency contain general provisions that support the actions requested in this statement. Federal Law includes provisions that grant the responsible persons in the Federal Agency broad authority to promulgate rules and regulations “necessary to carry out the Act[s].”

4.7. The United States Supreme Court has spoken forcefully, enforcing the consumers’ right OR consumers’ rights to truthful information about healthcare issues. See: Thompson v Western States Medical Centers, 535 U.S. 357, where Justice O’Connor wrote, “If the First Amendment means anything, it means that regulating speech must be a last-not first-resort. . . We have previously rejected the notion that the Government has an interest in preventing the dissemination of truthful commercial information in order to prevent members of the public from making bad decisions with the information. . . Even if the Government did argue that it had an interest in preventing misleading advertisements, this interest could be satisfied by the far less restrictive alternative of requiring . . . a warning that . . . its risks were unknown.”

4.8. The basic rule, announced by the case, to determine constitutionality permitted government restrictions on Commercial Speech (speech that makes or is about an offer for a transaction, such as the sale of Dietary Supplements or vaccinations) is a two prong test: the first prong is to ask two questions: (1) is the speech in question about unlawful activity and (2) is the speech misleading. If “no” to both, the speech is entitled to protection unless the Government can carry its burden and prove (1) the governmental interest involved is “substantial”, (2) the regulation must “directly advance “the governmental interest and (3) the regulation of Commercial Speech cannot be “more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest” (quoting Central Hudson v Public Service, 447 US 557, at 566).

4.9. The Federal Government, through the Federal Trade Commission, has stated its general rule for the advertising of products that are alleged to have health benefits, to ensure that such advertising is “truthful and not misleading.”

4.10. In this context, it is useful to recall the 1996 comments of then FTC Commissioner Starek, at the National Infomercial Marketing Association (comments the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) maintains on its web site). He explained the issue to which the Supreme Court alluded in Thompson – preventing misleading advertisements: “As many of you know, the FTC is charged with protecting consumers from unfair or deceptive acts or practices. In advertising and marketing, the law requires that objective claims be truthful and substantiated. The FTC does not pursue subjective claims or puffery—claims like ‘this is the best hairspray in the world.’ But if there is an objective component to the claim—such as ‘more consumers prefer our hairspray to any other’ or ‘our hairspray lasts longer than the most popular brands’—then you need to be sure that the claim is not deceptive and that you have adequate substantiation before you make the claim. These requirements apply both to explicit or express claims and to implied claims. Also, a statement that is literally true can have a deceptive implication when considered in the context of the whole advertisement, even if that implication is not the only possible interpretation.

“The substantiation requirement exists because every time an advertiser makes an objective claim, the advertiser also implies that there is a reasonable basis for the claim. This reasonable basis is substantiation. What constitutes a reasonable basis for a particular claim can vary, depending upon the nature of the claim, the product, the consequences of a false claim, the benefits of a truthful claim, the cost of developing substantiation for the claim, and the amount of substantiation that experts in the field believe is reasonable. Health and safety claims generally require competent and reliable scientific evidence. And if a marketer makes a representation that a claim has a particular level of support—for example, ‘clinical studies prove…’– the law requires at least that level of substantiation.”

4.11. The required level of substantiation for alleged claims about medical products such as vaccines is “significant scientific agreement.” In the case of vaccines, there is no significant scientific agreement by unbiased sources regarding the vaccines and manufacturers’ claims for the safety and efficacy of the product which satisfies the rule against false advertising; especially where and when the public is misled by not being warned of either the dangers of the product or of any right of members of the public to refuse vaccination on religious, medical or philosophical grounds. We urge the Committee to consider that the advertising of vaccinations is clearly a case where “requiring… a warning that… its risks were unknown…” (Thompson v Western States, supra.) is the minimum required by Law to protect the public, and especially the most vulnerable among us, our children. No scientific research agenda which does not warn the Public of the unknown risks is a legally responsible agenda.

III. Conclusion

Due to the urgent and potentially cataclysmic results of unproven vaccinations on significant numbers of patients, extreme caution is necessary before these experimental treatments are advertised as either safe or effective. The scientific research agenda needs to address this critical issue. The emergent nature of the risk of unscientific pseudo-justifications for vaccination claims means that the lives of patients, including innocent children and adolescents is at stake and hangs in the balance, The Foundation urges the Committee to act immediately to Recommend appropriate Warning and Disclosure language, such as that suggested herein, be required, covering all vaccination-related communication to assure the Public that a proper scientific agenda has been adopted for vaccination research. Scientific research is needed regarding the cumulative effect of multiple vaccinations which continue to contain “trace” or larger amounts of mercury and other toxins. Populations which do not vaccinate, such as the Amish, need to be studied since it appears that such populations have not experienced horrific elevation of autism rates and other deleterious effects of vaccinations.

Vaccination remains an unproven, experimental medical procedure subject to the restrictions of the Declaration of Helsinki. Absent stringent, high quality research to document that vaccination is both safe and effective, any communication to the contrary is both false and misleading.

Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org

Maj. Gen. Albert N. Stubblebine, III (U.S. Army, Ret.)
President & Trustee
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director & Trustee
Ralph Fucetola, JD.
Vice President, Trustee and Counsel

Natural Solutions Green Portal

Friday, March 13th, 2009

A Special Message to All HealthFreedomUSA.org Supporters:
To Join: www.NaturalSolutionsGreenPortal.net

Dr. Laibow’s video: http://www.youtube.com/v/A52DcIG4qYI

You know that Natural Solutions Foundation is "More than just words…"

Natural Solutions Green Portal

We look for solutions to social problems that support the natural environment. That’s why we’re pleased to introduce an exciting new way you can SAVE MONEY and get SIGNIFICANT CASH BACK on all your purchases at over 600 of the biggest online stores, including Wal-Mart, Target, Safeway, Best Buy, Home Depot, OfficeMax, eBay … the list goes on and on! We know you make environmentally friendly choices when you buy what you need. Now you can exercise those choices on-line, reducing your impact on the world while showing big retailers, through your choices (your "dollar votes") that you want them to serve consumer needs.

Additionally, you should also be able to save valuable time and gas (better for the environment) by shopping online at your very own personal savings "Green Portal" AND help support Natural Solutions Foundation in its continuing fight against "Big Agra," "Big Chema," and "Big Pharma" to protect the safety and quality of our food supply! Non-profit organizations like Natural Solutions that sponsor green portals receive donations from the retailers based on your savings!

Best of all, this Program is FREE to all our Members and Supporters, and by extension, to all their friends and families … and so on! That’s why we’re offering it to you as a simple "no-brainer" way to help yourself and others you know survive these tough economic times, while also helping NSF continue to raise the funds we so desperately need!

So we invite you to "Go Green" and "Go Viral" with this Program by clicking on the link below, viewing the 3-minute video, and signing up TODAY to start saving:

http://www.NaturalSolutionsGreenPortal.net

Then cut and paste the body of the suggested email below into a new "personalized" email and send it out ASAP to everyone you know and care about.

Please be creative and unique with your subject line to minimize the risk of your email getting blocked as "spam" by the internet service providers.

Happy Savings!

Natural Solutions Trustees

SUGGESTED EMAIL LETTER
(to send out to all your friends and family):

Dear Friends and Family —

I just wanted to let you know that I’ve found a great new way to save money and get significant c*a*s*h-back on all my purchases at over 600 of the biggest online stores, including Wal-Mart, Target, Safeway, Home Depot, Office Max, Best Buy, eBay, etc… the list goes on and on!

Additionally, I’m also saving valuable time and energy (better for the planet) by shopping online at my very own "savings portal" AND helping to protect the safety and quality of our food supply which is currently under assault (please see food safety alert at the bottom of this email)!

Best of all, the program is F*R*E*E to join with no "strings" attached! That’s why I’m passing it on to you as a simple "no-brainer" way to help yourself and others you know survive these tough economic times, while also helping to protect and defend our endangered health freedom!

So I invite you to "Go Green" and "Go Viral" with this program by clicking on the link below, viewing the video, and signing up TODAY to start saving! Then cut and paste the body of this email into a new personalized email and send it out to everyone you know and care about.

Please be creative and unique with your subject line to minimize the risk of your email getting blocked as "spam" by the internet service providers.

Together, we can all help each other AND make a real difference to protect our food safety and health freedom … so please pass this on!

Happy Savings,

{your name}

* Your Food Safety and Health Freedom is currently under attack and may soon be taken away from you … UNLESS YOU ACT NOW to stop it. Please watch this video: Nutricide – Criminalizing Natural Health, Vitamins, and Herbs (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5266884912495233634&hl=en) to understand why. Then visit www.HealthFreedomUSA.org to learn how you can take quick and immediate action to protect your rights!

Congress Fast-Tracks New Food Bureaucracy Bill: Petition to Congress

Saturday, March 7th, 2009

Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org

Action Item:

Here is the Action Item:http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26714

The new food safety agency bills pending before Congress contain language that may threaten organic and natural food and small farms and ranches, as well as dietary supplements. While large-scale industrialized agriculture may pose a threat to public safety, applying highly restrictive rules appropriate to large-scale agri business to these alternative producers will cause serious harm to them, while not increasing public safety.

Therefore, while we do support Divesting the FDA of food authority, we do not believe these bills are the way to do that. However, if Congress insists upon adopting this course of action, we seek an protective amendment to these bills similar to the amendment that was added to the 2007 FDA law, protecting dietary supplements.

This bill is being “fast-tracked” for passage during the “honeymoon” period of the new administration when its harmful potential will not be noticed unless we take action now!

Here is the text of the Petition to Congress:

PETITION

To Amend the Food Safety Modernization Act
H.R. 875 [and Substitutes]

By the Addition of the
Natural and Family Food and Farming Exclusion Amendment

To: The Members of the Congress of the United States of America:

Whereas the proposed Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services should focus its activities on the significant public administration issues involving the capacity of large scale, industrialized agriculture to threaten public safety,

Whereas organic and natural agriculture, family farms and ranches, and natural or organic food products, including dietary supplements are not a significant part of the food safety problem, and

Whereas Congress previously provided for an exemption for natural food dietary supplements from the increased agency authority granted by the FDA Modernization Act of 2007, through a rule of interpretation, added as section 1011 of that Act, and has on numerous occasions exempted small and family farms from the same level of regulation as has been deemed necessary in the case of industrialized agriculture,

The citizens ascribing to this Petition therefore hereby request that the Food Safety Modernization Act be defeated, or that it, or any substitute for it, such as H.R. 759, be amended to exclude organic and natural agriculture, family farms and ranches, and natural or organic food products, including dietary supplements, through a rule of interpretation, as follows:

“Rule of Interpretation

“No provision of this act shall be deemed to apply (a) to any home, home-business, homestead, small farm organic or natural agricultural activity, (b) to any family farm or ranch, or (c) to any natural or organic food product, including dietary supplements regulated under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994.”

We also note the language of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 USC sec 203 (s) (2) which provides, “(2) Any establishment that has as its only regular employees the owner thereof or the parent, spouse, child, or other member of the immediate family of such owner shall not be considered to be an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce or a part of such an enterprise…” Language such as this would be helpful to allay our concerns.

If the FDA Center for Food Safety is to be moved into a new Food Safety Agency, then Dietary Supplements, regulated as foods under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) should be included in such agency, with the proviso that such substances, as foods, are deemed safe when used as directed.

Furthermore, the ascribing citizens Petition the Congress of the United States to declare it the public policy of the United States that organic and natural agriculture, family farms and ranches, and natural or organic food products, including dietary supplements shall be at all times free from suit, vexation, trouble, penalty, or loss of their goods, for the inestimable values they confer upon the public.

————————-
Here is the Action Item:http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26714

—————–

More information on this issue:
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=2128

————————-
[March 7, 2009 – This Petition was prepared by Ralph Fucetola JD, a Trustee of the Natural Solutions Foundation, for educational purposes – www.HealthFreedomUSA.org]

Pandemic Flu Risk Petition to President, Congress

Saturday, March 7th, 2009

Natural Solutions Foundation
www.Health Freedom USA.org

Action Item:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26830

This is the Open Letter to the President and Congress regarding the alleged “accidental” contamination of vaccines with live Avian Flu virus.

You can read more about the incident at:
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=2220

—————
Dear President Obama and Members of Congress,

I am writing because of the horrible incident last month where Baxter Pharmaceutical “accidentally” contaminated vaccines with live Avian Flu virus. This contaminated vaccine could trigger a world-wide pandemic. I urge Congress and the Executive Branch to investigate this incident and assure the public that this was not an attempt to weaponize the Avian Flu.

Further, I PETITION the Congress of the United States to immediately adopt a civil rights act protecting each person’s right to refuse vaccination or any medical procedure.

The time has come for government to respect our right to Health Freedom as Our First Freedom (without it, no other freedom is effectively exercisable). That right was defined in President Obama’s Briefing Book on Change.gov as:

“Health Freedom means the right to control what happens to your body, choosing your own health path, making your own health choices as you see fit”

This is an urgent matter that needs immediate action to protect our rights.

—-end of letter–

More information:
March 2009 Update: http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=2220

Please support Natural Solutions Foundation with your tax deductible donations, so we can continue to educate the President, Congress and other decision makers about how Health Freedom is Our First Freedom.

http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?page_id=189