Ron Paul Forums - Liberty Forest Forums

Ron Paul Forums - Liberty Forest Forums - Health Freedom http://www.ronpaulforums.com/ News, issues, action and discussion on matters relating to health freedom. en Tue, 21 May 2013 00:11:00 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/misc/rss.png Ron Paul Forums - Liberty Forest Forums - Health Freedom http://www.ronpaulforums.com/ Judge Nap: If Your Doctor Asks You About Guns, Do You Have to Answer? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?415027-Judge-Nap-If-Your-Doctor-Asks-You-About-Guns-Do-You-Have-to-Answer&goto=newpost Mon, 20 May 2013 18:03:50 GMT http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/05/20/if-your-doctor-asks-you-about-guns-do-you-have-answer Answer: No http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/05/20...ou-have-answer

Answer: No ]]> Health Freedom TaftFan http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?415027-Judge-Nap-If-Your-Doctor-Asks-You-About-Guns-Do-You-Have-to-Answer <![CDATA[FDA and Government: Ain't no conflicts of interest here]]> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?415011-FDA-and-Government-Ain-t-no-conflicts-of-interest-here&goto=newpost Mon, 20 May 2013 16:22:28 GMT FDA- A completely captured by industry agency • Ex-Monsanto Lawyer Clarence Thomas now an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United... FDA- A completely captured by industry agency

• Ex-Monsanto Lawyer Clarence Thomas now an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of Monsanto.
"Monsanto wins landmark patent case in Supreme Court"
http://rt.com/usa/patented-monsanto-court-patent-210/

• The FDA and Monsanto: A Love Story ►
http://www.realfarmacy.com/the-fda-a...o-a-love-story

- Taylor started off as a partner at the law firm that represented Monsanto on GBH issues (artificial growth hormones that make cows give more milk).

- Then, as the FDA’s deputy commissioner for policy, he wrote the FDA’s rBGH labelling guidelines – the ones that insisted there was no difference between rGBH and regular milk.

- He also deleted references to problems with GMO foods, over the objection of staff scientists.
Then he spent a few years working directly for Monsanto.

- And now? Barak Obama brought him back to the FDA to oversee Monsanto again, as his food safety issues czar!
http://redgreenandblue.org/2012/02/0...overnment-part

• Another example of the Government-industry revolving door is Margaret Miller, "In order for the FDA to determine if Monsanto's growth hormones were safe or not, Monsanto was required to submit a scientific report on that topic. Margaret Miller, one of Monsanto's researchers put the report together. Shortly before the report submission, Miller left Monsanto and was hired by the FDA [as deputy director of the Office of New Animal Drugs]. Her first job for the FDA was to determine whether or not to approve the report she wrote for Monsanto. In short, Monsanto approved its own report. Assisting Miller was another former Monsanto researcher, Susan Sechen" [http://www.organicconsumers.org/monlink.cfm] . Here [http://home.intekom.com/tm_info/rw91105.htm] you can read Robert Cohen's testimony before FDA on the subject of rBGH including the disclosure that, while at the FDA and in response to increasing sickness in cows on the stuff, Miller increased the amount of antibiotics that farmers can legally give cows by 100 times. See also [http://www.organicconsumers.org/text4.html]. "Remarkably the GAO determined in a 1994 investigation that these officials' former association with the Monsanto corporation did not pose a conflict of interest. But for those concerned about the health and environmental hazards of genetic engineering, the revolving door between the biotechnology industry and federal regulating agencies is a serious cause for concern"
http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9904b/monsantofda.html

• F.D.A. Blocked Suicide Warning for Anti-Depressants

Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor anti-depressants (S.S.R.I.'s) hit the market in 1988. Immediately, reports of intense suicidal thoughts and actions while taking these drugs began to flood into the F.D.A.. Despite the reports, and data indicating a higher rate of suicides from those using the drugs than from those using placebos, it took about twenty years for the F.D.A. to issue a warning about the risk.

The warning was considered a victory to many who had lost loved ones to S.S.R.I. drugs. Public perception was that the F.D.A. had stood up to Big Pharma and forced reluctant S.S.R.I. manufacturers to issue an appropriate warning. Thereby, solidifying the perception of the F.D.A.'s role as advocate for the public.

However, this perception has been shattered by a recent federal court ruling that exposed a dirty little secret that the F.D.A. likely hoped would never come to light. In Dobbs v. Wyeth Pharms., the court determined that the F.D.A. repeatedly prevented at least one S.S.R.I. manufacturer from issuing a suicide-related warning for fear that it might "reduce the use of anti-depressants and thereby undermine the benefit of their use in treating depression."

The ruling stems from a lawsuit brought by the widow of a man who was believed to have committed suicide as a result of taking Effexor. The lawsuit accused Wyeth Pharmaceuticals of failing to properly warn patients that Effexor may increase the risk of suicide.

In its defense, Wyeth presented evidence that it had, on three separate occasions, attempted to institute a more "extensive suicide warning", but the F.D.A. had refused to approve each proposed warning.
►http://worldtruth.tv/f-d-a-blocked-s...i-depressants/ ]]> Health Freedom libertyjam http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?415011-FDA-and-Government-Ain-t-no-conflicts-of-interest-here FDA Approves GMO Flu Vaccine http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?415009-FDA-Approves-GMO-Flu-Vaccine&goto=newpost Mon, 20 May 2013 16:01:33 GMT http://voices.yahoo.com/fda-approves-gmo-flu-vaccine-12012355.html?cat=5 FDA Approves GMO Flu Vaccine Madison Ogashi Madison Ogashi, Yahoo!... http://voices.yahoo.com/fda-approves...355.html?cat=5

FDA Approves GMO Flu Vaccine
Madison Ogashi
Madison Ogashi, Yahoo! Contributor Network
Feb 15, 2013 "Share your voice on Yahoo! websites. Start Here."
FlagPost a comment

Do you refuse, or are unwilling to eat GMO foods? There's more than one way to skin that cat, or so the government thinks. The FDA has approved a flu vaccine with GMO proteins and cells from insects.

Scientists have developed a flu vaccine called Flublok that has in it recombinant DNA technology combined with an insect virus called baculovirus. This is to help in the mass production of the vaccines.

On the vaccine paper insert, it state's it is a trivalent, which means it is made with the GMO protein of three different flu strains. Protein Sciences Corp is the manufacture of the vaccine, explains that Flublok is made by taking out the cells of a certain type of caterpillar, and altering them genetically to produce large amounts of hemagglutinin. This in turn, enables the flu virus to enter the body faster.

This also makes more money for the vaccine industry, as they now have a new way to mass produce them faster. But they also caution that this could lead to all kinds of side effects, including the nerve disease Guillain-Barre Syndrome, or GBS. According to the clinical data in the Flublok insert, there have been two deaths during the clinical trials. But PSC, the manufacture still says the vaccine is safe and effective for most all kinds of flu strains. The vaccine is said not to contain any preservatives, including thimerosal, which has mercury in it. It is also designed to guard against the H1N1, H3N2, both "A" strains and one of the "B" strain, and is approve for people from 18 to 49 years of age. The FDA also reported that it is effective 44.6 percent against all strains of flu.

In other flu vaccine news, in November 2012, the FDA approved another vaccine called Flucelvax, using the cells from dog kidneys. This is made by Novartis, a pharmaceutical giant in the industry. Flucelvax completely does away with the traditional "egg-cultures" of making vaccines. The faster procedure enables the companies to come up with the vaccines faster should an outbreak turn into a pandemic.

Both of these vaccines are made possible by a tax-payer grant of about $1 billion grant by the Dept. of Health and Human Services. Even now, there are more vaccines being developed using this new GMO protein technology, rather than the old way. The goal is to come up with millions of vaccines ready for the public, at a moment's notice. ]]> Health Freedom libertyjam http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?415009-FDA-Approves-GMO-Flu-Vaccine GMO Labeling Bill In NY - Please Help Support It! http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?415004-GMO-Labeling-Bill-In-NY-Please-Help-Support-It!&goto=newpost Mon, 20 May 2013 15:26:08 GMT Just wanted to pass the following email along. If we can support the states that are offering this legislation, more will follow. Vermont passed a... Just wanted to pass the following email along. If we can support the states that are offering this legislation,
more will follow. Vermont passed a GMO labeling bill.

http://gmofreeny.org/

We wanted to give everyone a "progress report" on where we stand with our GMO
Labeling Bills here in New York. It has helped the cause greatly that the
Vermont House passed a GMO Labeling Bill and a Bill was passed successfully out
of Committee in Connecticut. This momentum is helping New York legislators'
willingness to take on our bill.

At this point, the legislative staffs are finishing up a legal review of the bill
and developing amendments that are designed to strengthen the bill against any
legal challenges. This process should be completed in the next week or so.
Things are looking somewhat optimistic on the Assembly side relative to our
chances. The Senate will be more of a challenge.

Here's where we could use your help:

1. We need to increase the awareness of the bill and our group. If you could ask
all of your friends/relatives to "become members" at our website www.GMOFreeNY.ORG , they will receive " call to action"
updates. (Please assure them we do not share our mailing lists, and any updates they receive will be very limited.)

2. You can also use your Facebook account to ask friends to "like" our Facebook
page. www.Facebook.com/GMOFreeNY ; (That will also keep them
updated.)

3. Ask friends to sign our GMO Labeling Petition. You can send them this link (or
paste it on a Facebook update.) http://www.thepetitionsite.com/309/1...one-else-does/

Here's
where we could use your help:

1.
We need to increase the awareness of the bill and our group. If you could ask
all of your friends/relatives to "become members" at our website www.GMOFreeNY.ORG , they will receive " call to action"
updates. (Please assure them we do not share our mailing lists, and any updates
they receive will be very limited. )

2.
You can also use your Facebook account to ask friends to "like" our Facebook
page. www.Facebook.com/GMOFreeNY ; (That will also keep them
updated.)

3.
Ask friends to sign our GMO Labeling Petition. You can send them this link (or
paste it on a Facebook update.) http://www.thepetitionsite.com/309/1...one-else-does/

4.
Last, and most importantly, we need your help to make telephone calls. The most
effective calls you can make are to your individual Senator and Assemblymember.
We need calls made beginning TODAY, (Monday, May 20th), as Legislators are now
back in Albany, to ask them to support (and consider co-sponsoring) the GMO
labeling bills. (A3525 and S3835) Legislators do take calls, and listen to their
constituents. If you are willing to take an extra step, we also need help with
calls (and/or e-mails) to members of the Senate committee that will be
considering the bill. The contact names and numbers for the Senate committee
members are listed below. (Our priority for calls is to Committee Chair Lee
Zeldin's office.) After our meetings in Albany, we have found that legislators
either a.) Are not aware of the GMO issue or b.) Don't feel it is important to a
large number of their constituents. Every call makes a difference!

Thanks
again for your interest and support. We will keep you posted as we approach some
critical deadlines and may need your help with a final push at the committee
levels.

"We
have a right to know what's in our food"!

Tom,
Mary, and the GMOFreeNY.ORG Team

MEMBERS
OF THE SENATE "CONSUMER PROTECTION" COMMITTEE THAT NEED CALLS:

Lee
M. Zeldin (Chair)
zeldin@nysenate.gov
518-455-3570
| 631-585-0608

Phil
Boyle
pboyle@nysenate.gov
518-455-3411
| 631-669-9200

Charles
J. Fuschillo Jr.
fuschill@nysenate.gov
518-455-3341
| 516-882-0630
Terry
Gipson
gipson@nysenate.gov
518-455-2303
| 845-463-0840
Brad
Hoylman
hoylman@nysenate.gov
518-455-2451
| 212-633-8052

George
Latimer
latimer@nysenate.gov
518-455-2031
| 914-934-5250

Betty
Little
little@nysenate.gov
518-455-2811
| 518-743-0968

Kathleen
A. Marchione
marchione@nysenate.gov
518-455-2381

George
D. Maziarz
maziarz@nysenate.gov
518-455-2024
| 716 434-0680

Diane
J. Savino
savino@senate.state.ny.us
518-455-2437
| 718-727-9406

José
M. Serrano
serrano@senate.state.ny.us
518-455-2795
| 212-828-5829 ]]> Health Freedom libertygrl http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?415004-GMO-Labeling-Bill-In-NY-Please-Help-Support-It! This App is supposed to help you avoid GMOs http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414983-This-App-is-supposed-to-help-you-avoid-GMOs&goto=newpost Mon, 20 May 2013 06:30:29 GMT https://twitter.com/tweetAmiracle/status/336367790221033473 http://t.co/l52wtliBsF apparently it tells you other stuff you may or may not care... https://twitter.com/tweetAmiracle/st...67790221033473

http://t.co/l52wtliBsF

apparently it tells you other stuff you may or may not care to know, too. Not sure if you can just pick the parts you want. ]]> Health Freedom sailingaway http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414983-This-App-is-supposed-to-help-you-avoid-GMOs Video: My Speech to City Council re. Medical Marijuana Issue http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414980-Video-My-Speech-to-City-Council-re-Medical-Marijuana-Issue&goto=newpost Mon, 20 May 2013 06:05:00 GMT The City of Garden Grove banned medical marijuana dispensaries back in 2008, but suspended the ban pending direction from the courts. On May 6th... The City of Garden Grove banned medical marijuana dispensaries back in 2008, but suspended the ban pending direction from the courts. On May 6th 2013, the California Supreme Court ruled that cities have the power to legally ban medical marijuana dispensaries. Immediately following the ruling, Garden Grove began enforcing their ban, giving dispensary owners one week to close their doors.

I went to speak at the next City Council meeting to address the Mayor Bruce Broadwater and the rest of the City Council, with the goal of educating them about the truth about cannabis.

The portion of the court ruling by DEA Administrative Law Judge Francis L. Young that I talk about in my remarks can be found here: http://www.ccguide.org/young88.php

The entire ruling by DEA Judge Francis L. Young can be found here:
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/...ung/index.html

The Council has not reversed its decision to ban medical marijuana dispensaries, and I didn't expect them to. Mainly I wanted to plant the seed of truth, and encourage them to start researching the lies the Federal government has been telling us for decades now about cannabis.

I didn't get a chance to say everything I wanted, because I was limited to five minutes (and the council actually gave me slightly longer than that). I had to talk fast!

To clarify a few of my remarks: Judge Young's ruling applied only to cannabis. It had nothing to do with PCP; I was merely pointing out that Schedule I is the most restrictive schedule on the Controlled Substances Act, and was trying to suggest how ridiculous and blatant of a lie it is to put marijuana in the same category as PCP.

And, of course I don't favor any drug prohibition, but I couldn't exactly say that to these entrenched statists--not if I expected them to actually hear anything else I had to say about cannabis.

I hope everyone here can understand the audience I was speaking to and not criticize me too heavily for some of my remarks that were obviously not consistent with proper libertarianism. Hit an ant hill with a flood, and all you get is dead ants. Nobody learns to swim.

Likewise, the reason I stated "I don't want kids using it" is because a few of the citizens who spoke before me referenced some studies on young brain development and cannabis use, and correlations between grades and cannabis use, etc., and besides all that I don't want anyone sending CPS after me. So I couldn't exactly say to them that I hope my son does cannabis and never touches alcohol, knowing he most likely will try drugs no matter what I do!

Also, a point of correction: my wife reminded me later that I had it wrong; the doctor first put her on Paxil, and when that made her crazy then they switched her to Prozac. It was on Prozac that she started having the homicidal and suicidal visions and urges. Today she is completely drug free, happy, and healthy. (My memory failed me and a previous speaker had just mentioned Zoloft and their troubles with it, which I guess is why I said Zoloft.)

I'm posting this here in the hopes of inspiring others to get involved and speak up when there are issues in your community, and you have a chance to spread a little bit of truth. I may not have accomplished anything politically, but I know I planted some seeds of knowledge that will cause others to do their own research, and seek out the truth. ]]> Health Freedom WhistlinDave http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414980-Video-My-Speech-to-City-Council-re-Medical-Marijuana-Issue <![CDATA[Man has Prostate Removed After Tests Reveal 'Jolie' Gene Flaw]]> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414931-Man-has-Prostate-Removed-After-Tests-Reveal-Jolie-Gene-Flaw&goto=newpost Sun, 19 May 2013 18:20:06 GMT Some wondered how long it would be in this thread. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414336-Angelina-Jolie-has-both-breasts-removed ... Some wondered how long it would be in this thread.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...reasts-removed

Quote:

A 53-year-old British father has become the first man to have his prostate removed because tests revealed he was carrying a "faulty" cancer gene.

A clinical trial at London's Institute of Cancer Research revealed that he carried the BRCA2 gene, which research shows is associated with a high risk of developing prostate cancer.

Several of the man's family had suffered from breast or prostate cancer, which is why he took part in the study.

The closely associated BRCA1 gene has been known for some time to have links with breast cancer, and last week actress Angelina Jolie revealed that she had undergone a double mastectomy when tests revealed that she carried the gene.

After receiving the news the man asked doctors to remove his prostate, which tests had shown to be healthy.

Surgeons were initially reluctant, since the potential side effects of the operation include infertility, incontinence and sexual dysfunction.

MRI scans and a prostate-specific antigen, or PSA tests, did not show the presence of malignant cells, but microscopic examination revealed cell changes associated with cancer, prompting the surgeons to act.

Surgeon Roger Kirby told the Sunday Times: "The relatively low level of cancerous cells we found in this man's prostate before the operation would these days not normally prompt immediate surgery to remove the gland, but given what we now know about the nature of BRCA2, it was definitely the right thing for this patient."

After the gland was removed, tests revealed previously undetected cancers.

"This patient is now absolutely fine. A number of these BRCA families have now been identified, and knowing you are a carrier is like having the sword of Damocles hanging over you. You are living in a state of constant fear. I am sure more male BRCA carriers will now follow suit."

Doctors believe that other men who know they carry the rogue gene may now opt for a similar procedure.

Prostate cancer is the most common form of male cancer in the UK. It affects about one in eight men, and kills approximately 10,000 each year.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/46...lina-jolie.htm ]]> Health Freedom green73 http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414931-Man-has-Prostate-Removed-After-Tests-Reveal-Jolie-Gene-Flaw Detox picture from twitter http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414902-Detox-picture-from-twitter&goto=newpost Sun, 19 May 2013 08:05:16 GMT which is to say I have no idea about any of this, so let me know if it is wrong: Image: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BKnQndeCcAEmcdI.jpg:large which is to say I have no idea about any of this, so let me know if it is wrong:

]]> Health Freedom sailingaway http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414902-Detox-picture-from-twitter <![CDATA[another 'GMO - Not-GMO' list from twitter]]> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414900-another-GMO-Not-GMO-list-from-twitter&goto=newpost Sun, 19 May 2013 07:48:08 GMT short though Image: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BKnMMjnCMAArJRh.jpg:large short though

]]> Health Freedom sailingaway http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414900-another-GMO-Not-GMO-list-from-twitter FDA to Put Aspartame In All Milk - We Only Have 3 Days Left To Fight This! http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414828-FDA-to-Put-Aspartame-In-All-Milk-We-Only-Have-3-Days-Left-To-Fight-This!&goto=newpost Sat, 18 May 2013 11:43:16 GMT I just received this email and wanted to pass it along: *Big Pharma Petitions FDA To Put Aspartame In Milk* We only have until May 21st to... I just received this email and wanted to pass it along:

Big Pharma Petitions FDA To Put Aspartame In Milk

We only have until May 21st to submit a formal comment to the FDA!
Only 192 people in the entire US have submitted comments? This surely
means that we WILL be having Aspartame in our milk in the future! We need a
bigger backlash than 192 people! Lets get moving on this or give up on
drinking milk forever!

Make your complaint here: https://www.federalregister.gov/arti...dairy-products

Dairy Associations Lobby The FDA To Alter The Definition Of “Milk” To Include Aspartame

It’s not quite as bad as some have reported – cancer-causing artificial sweetening additives such as as aspartame likely would still need to be listed in tiny letters as ingredients. But the milk could otherwise be packaged, marketed, and sold as just “milk.” The stated goal is to reverse the trend of lagging dairy consumption by children, particularly in school. From the U.S. government’s Federal Register:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) have filed a petition requesting that the Agency amend the standard of identity for milk and 17 other dairy products to provide for the use of any safe and suitable sweetener as an optional ingredient.

IDFA and NMPF request their proposed amendments to the milk standard of identity to allow optional characterizing flavoring ingredients used in milk to be sweetened with any safe and suitable sweetener—including non-nutritive sweeteners such as aspartame. IDFA and NMPF state that lower-calorie flavored milk would particularly benefit school children who, according to IDFA and NMPF, are more inclined to drink flavored milk than unflavored milk at school.

http://fracturedparadigm.com/2013/05...ude-aspartame/ ]]> Health Freedom libertygrl http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414828-FDA-to-Put-Aspartame-In-All-Milk-We-Only-Have-3-Days-Left-To-Fight-This! <![CDATA[Sen. Paul Introduces Legislation to Prevent 'Milk Cliff']]> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414797-Sen-Paul-Introduces-Legislation-to-Prevent-Milk-Cliff&goto=newpost Sat, 18 May 2013 02:38:53 GMT http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=802

I introduced a bill on Wednesday that would permanently suspend the application of agricultural price support authority to certain commodities, such as milk. In the absence of a Farm Bill, my legislation would prevent the federal milk program from reverting back to the Agricultural Act of 1949 statute, also known as the "milk cliff."

"In the upcoming weeks, the Senate will be pressured to yet again pass a Farm Bill in an effort to avoid another ‘cliff'. With my legislation, we can avoid passing bills contingent upon ‘cliffs' and scare tactics," Sen. Paul said. "Instead of rushing to pass laws in order to avert public panic, we can focus on making bills better."

If you don't know, this drives up the price of groceries.

The bill is here:
http://www.paul.senate.gov/files/documents/WEI13005.pdf

-t ]]> Health Freedom tangent4ronpaul http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414797-Sen-Paul-Introduces-Legislation-to-Prevent-Milk-Cliff <![CDATA[How Monsanto Is Using Cronies in Congress to Take Away States' Rights to Label Genetically]]> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414794-How-Monsanto-Is-Using-Cronies-in-Congress-to-Take-Away-States-Rights-to-Label-Genetically&goto=newpost Sat, 18 May 2013 02:18:24 GMT How Monsanto Is Using Cronies in Congress to Take Away States' Rights to Label Genetically Modified Foods
http://www.alternet.org/food/how-mon...modified-foods

Sources report that Monsanto has begun secretly lobbying its Congressional allies to attach amendments to the Farm Bill that would preempt or prohibit states from requiring labels on GE foods.

May 16, 2013 |

Reliable sources in Washington D.C. have informed the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) that Monsanto has begun secretly lobbying its Congressional allies to attach one or more “Monsanto Riders” or amendments to the 2013 Farm Bill that would preempt or prohibit states from requiring labels on genetically engineered (GE) foods.

In response to this blatant violation of states’ rights to legislate, and consumers’ right to know, the OCA and a nationwide alliance have launched a petition to put every member of Congress on notice: If you support any Farm Bill amendment that would nullify states’ rights to label genetically modified organisms (GMOs), we’ll vote – or throw – you out of office.

On Wednesday, May 15, an amendment (the King Amendment) to the House version of the Farm Bill, inserted under the guise of protecting interstate commerce, passed out of the House Agricultural Committee. If the King Amendment makes it into the final Farm Bill, it would take away states’ rights to pass laws governing the production or manufacture of any agricultural product, including food and animals raised for food, that is involved in interstate commerce. The amendment was proposed by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), largely in response to a California law stating that by 2015, California will allow only eggs to be sold from hens housed in cages specified by California. But policy analysts emphasize that the amendment, broadly and ambiguously written, could be used to prohibit or preempt any state GMO labeling or food safety law.

Will the King Amendment survive the Senate? No one can be sure, say analysts. However few doubt that Monsanto will give up. We can expect that more amendments and riders will be introduced into the Farm Bill--even if the King Amendment fails—over the next month in an attempt to stop the wave of state GMO labeling laws and initiatives moving forward in states like Washington, Vermont, Maine, Connecticut and others.

Monsanto and the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) have admitted privately that they’ve “lost the battle” to stop GE food labeling at the state level, now that states are aggressively moving forward on labeling laws. On May 14, Maine’s House Ag Committee passed a GMO labeling law. On May 10, the Vermont House passed a labeling bill, 99-42, despite massive lobbying by Monsanto and threats to sue the state. And though Monsanto won a razor-thin victory (51 percent to 49 percent) in a costly, hard fought California GMO labeling ballot initiative last November, biotech and Big Food now realize that Washington State voters will likely pass I-522, an upcoming ballot initiative to label GE foods, on November 5.

If Monsanto can’t stop states from passing laws, then the next step is a national preemptive measure. And all signs point to just such a power grab. Earlier this year, Monsanto slipped its extremely unpopular “Monsanto Protection Act,” an act that gives biotech immunity from federal prosecution for planting illegally approved GE crops, into the 2013 Federal Appropriations Bill. During the June 2012 Farm Bill debate, 73 U.S. Senators voted against the right of states to pass mandatory GE food labeling laws. Emboldened by these votes, and now the House Ag Committee’s vote on the King Amendment, Monsanto has every reason to believe Congress would support a potential nullification of states’ rights to label.

The million-strong OCA and its allies in the organic and natural health movement are warning incumbent Senators and House members, Democrats and Republicans alike, that thousands of health and environmental-minded constituents in their Congressional districts or states will work to recall them or drive them out of office if they fail to heed the will of the people and to respect the time-honored traditions of shared state sovereignty over food labels, food safety laws, and consumers’ right to know.

Trouble in Monsanto Nation

Over the past 20 years Monsanto and the biotech industry, aided and abetted by indentured politicians and corporate agribusiness, have begun seizing control over the global food and farming system, including the legislative, patent, trade, judicial and regulatory bodies that are supposed to safeguard the public interest.

In the U.S., despite mounting evidence of the damage GE crops inflict on human health and the environment, approximately 170 million acres of GE crops, including corn, soybeans, cotton, canola, sugar beets, alfalfa, papaya, and squash, are currently under cultivation. These crops, untested and unlabeled, comprise 41 percent of all cultivated cropland, or 17 percent of all cropland and pastureland combined. According to the GMA, at least 70 percent of non-organic grocery store processed foods contain GMOs. And GE grains and mill byproducts now supply the overwhelming majority of animal feed on the factory farms that supply 90 percent to 95 percent of the meat, eggs and dairy products that Americans consume.

Yet despite their marketplace dominance, record profits and enormous political clout in Washington D.C., Monsanto and the biotech industry are in deep trouble. A new peer-reviewed study in the journal Entropy reports that Monstanto’s top-selling herbicide, Roundup, is a deadly poison, destroying important human gut bacteria and likely contributing to the rapid increase of food allergies and serious human diseases including cancer, autism, neurological disorders, Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD), dementia, Alzheimer’s, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Those most susceptible to poisoning by Monsanto’s Roundup are children and the elderly.

Scientists aren’t the only ones raising new questions about Roundup. Farmers are complaining that they’re being forced to spray more and more chemicals on crops increasingly under siege from a growing army of herbicide-resistant weeds. The situation is so bad that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) just raised the limits of Roundup residue allowed on grains and vegetables to even more dangerous levels. But just in case the EPA someday stops raising the limits, Monsanto, Dow and the biotech industry are working on a new “solution” to the onslaught of herbicide-resistant Superweeds: They’ve applied for approval of a new and highly controversial generation of super toxic herbicide-resistant GE crops, including “Agent Orange” (2,4-D and dicamba-resistant) corn, soybeans and cotton.

As a recent widely-circulated article points out:

The use of 2,4-D is not new; it’s actually one of the most widely used herbicides in the world. What is new is that farmers will now ‘carpet bomb’ staple food crops like soy and corn with this chemical at a previously unprecedented scale—just the way glyphosate has been indiscriminately applied as a result of Roundup Ready crops. In fact, if 2,4-D resistant crops receive approval and eventually come to replace Monsanto's failing Roundup-resistant crops as Dow intends, it is likely that billions of pounds will be needed, on top of the already insane levels of Roundup being used (1.6 billion lbs were used in 2007 in the US alone).

In addition to these Agent Orange crops, an expanded menu of genetically engineered organisms are awaiting approval. Next on the menu? GE apples, trees, and salmon.

State Labeling Laws: The ‘skull and crossbones’ that terrify Monsanto

Monsanto’s greatest fear isn’t a federal government charged with protecting the health and safety of its citizens. Congress and the White House seem only too happy to oblige the biotech industry’s unquenchable thirst for growth, power and dominance. No, it’s the massive, unstoppable (so far) grassroots movement of Millions Against Monsanto that strikes fear in the heart of the Biotech Bully. U.S. citizens are waking up. They’re demanding labels on genetically engineered foods, similar to those already required in the European Union. They’re calling for serious independent safety-testing of GE crops and animals, both those already approved (especially Monsanto’s Roundup-resistant crops) and those awaiting approval.
(cont)
http://www.alternet.org/food/how-mon...modified-foods

Petition is here:
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/con...l&r_by=5382364

-t ]]> Health Freedom tangent4ronpaul http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414794-How-Monsanto-Is-Using-Cronies-in-Congress-to-Take-Away-States-Rights-to-Label-Genetically <![CDATA[INVENTOR OF ADHD'S DEATHBED CONFESSION: "ADHD IS A FICTITIOUS DISEASE"]]> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414784-INVENTOR-OF-ADHD-S-DEATHBED-CONFESSION-quot-ADHD-IS-A-FICTITIOUS-DISEASE-quot&goto=newpost Fri, 17 May 2013 23:10:18 GMT INVENTOR OF ADHD'S DEATHBED CONFESSION: "ADHD IS A FICTITIOUS DISEASE"

Wednesday, March 27th 2013
By Moritz Nestor, Current Concerns

Fortunately, the Swiss National Advisory Commission on Biomedical Ethics (NEK, President: Otfried Höffe) critically commented on the use of the ADHD drug Ritalin in its opinion of 22 November 2011 titled Human enhancement by means of pharmacological agents: The consumption of pharmacological agents altered the child’s behavior without any contribution on his or her part.

That amounted to interference in the child’s freedom and personal rights, because pharmacological agents induced behavioral changes but failed to educate the child on how to achieve these behavioral changes independently. The child was thus deprived of an essential learning experience to act autonomously and emphatically which “considerably curtails children’s freedom and impairs their personality development”, the NEK criticized.

The alarmed critics of the Ritalin disaster are now getting support from an entirely different side. The German weekly Der Spiegel quoted in its cover story on 2 February 2012 the US American psychiatrist Leon Eisenberg, born in 1922 as the son of Russian Jewish immigrants, who was the “scientific father of ADHD” and who said at the age of 87, seven months before his death in his last interview: “ADHD is a prime example of a fictitious disease”

Since 1968, however, some 40 years, Leon Eisenberg’s “disease” haunted the diagnostic and statistical manuals, first as “hyperkinetic reaction of childhood”, now called “ADHD”. The use of ADHD medications in Germany rose in only eighteen years from 34 kg (in 1993) to a record of no less than 1760 kg (in 2011) – which is a 51-fold increase in sales! In the United States every tenth boy among ten year-olds already swallows an ADHD medication on a daily basis. With an increasing tendency.

When it comes to the proven repertoire of Edward Bernays, the father of propaganda, to sell the First World War to his people with the help of his uncle’s psychoanalysis and to distort science and the faith in science to increase profits of the industry – what about investigating on whose behalf the “scientific father of ADHD” conducted science? His career was remarkably steep, and his “fictitious disease” led to the best sales increases. And after all, he served in the “Committee for DSM V and ICD XII, American Psychiatric Association” from 2006 to 2009. After all, Leon Eisenberg received “the Ruane Prize for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Research. He has been a leader in child psychiatry for more than 40 years through his work in pharmacological trials, research, teaching, and social policy and for his theories of autism and social medicine”.

And after all, Eisenberg was a member of the “Organizing Committee for Women and Medicine Conference, Bahamas, November 29 – December 3, 2006, Josiah Macy Foundation (2006)”. The Josiah Macy Foundation organized conferences with intelligence agents of the OSS, later CIA, such as Gregory Bateson and Heinz von Foerster during and long after World War II. Have such groups marketed the diagnosis of ADHD in the service of the pharmaceutical market and tailor-made for him with a lot of propaganda and public relations? It is this issue that the American psychologist Lisa Cosgrove and others investigated in their study Financial Ties between DSM-IV Panel Members and the Pharmaceutical Industry7. They found that “Of the 170 DSM panel members 95 (56%) had one or more financial associations with companies in the pharmaceutical industry. One hundred percent of the members of the panels on ‘Mood Disorders’ and ‘Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders’ had financial ties to drug companies. The connections are especially strong in those diagnostic areas where drugs are the first line of treatment for mental disorders.” In the next edition of the manual, the situation is unchanged. “Of the 137 DSM-V panel members who have posted disclosure statements, 56% have reported industry ties – no improvement over the percent of DSM-IV members.” “The very vocabulary of psychiatry is now defined at all levels by the pharmaceutical industry,” said Dr Irwin Savodnik, an assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California at Los Angeles.

This is well paid. Just one example: The Assistant Director of the Pediatric Psychopharmacology Unit at Massachusetts General Hospital and Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School received “$1 million in earnings from drug companies between 2000 and 2007”. In any case, no one can easily get around the testimony of the father of ADHD: “ADHD is a prime example of a fictitious disease.”

The task of psychologists, educators and doctors is not to put children on the “chemical lead” because the entire society cannot handle the products of its misguided theories of man and raising children, and instead hands over our children to the free pharmaceutical market. Let us return to the basic matter of personal psychology and education: The child is to acquire personal responsibility and emphatic behavior under expert guidance – and that takes the family and the school: In these fields, the child should be able to lead off mentally. This constitutes the core of the human person. ]]> Health Freedom donnay http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414784-INVENTOR-OF-ADHD-S-DEATHBED-CONFESSION-quot-ADHD-IS-A-FICTITIOUS-DISEASE-quot EXPOSED: Angelina Jolie part of a clever corporate scheme... http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414660-EXPOSED-Angelina-Jolie-part-of-a-clever-corporate-scheme&goto=newpost Fri, 17 May 2013 00:15:11 GMT EXPOSED: Angelina Jolie part of a clever corporate scheme to protect billions in BRCA gene patents, influence Supreme Court decision (opinion) ... EXPOSED: Angelina Jolie part of a clever corporate scheme to protect billions in BRCA gene patents, influence Supreme Court decision (opinion)

Thursday, May 16, 2013
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

Angelina Jolie's announcement of undergoing a double mastectomy (surgically removing both breasts) even though she had no breast cancer is not the innocent, spontaneous, "heroic choice" that has been portrayed in the mainstream media. Natural News has learned it all coincides with a well-timed for-profit corporate P.R. campaign that has been planned for months and just happens to coincide with the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision on the viability of the BRCA1 patent.

This is the investigation the mainstream media refuses to touch. Here, I explain the corporate financial ties, investors, mergers, human gene patents, lawsuits, medical fear mongering and the trillions of dollars that are at stake here. If you pull back the curtain on this one, you find far more than an innocent looking woman exercising a "choice." This is about protecting trillions in profits through the deployment of carefully-crafted public relations campaigns designed to manipulate the public opinion of women.

The signs were all there from the beginning of the scheme: Angelina Jolie's highly polished and obviously corporate-written op-ed piece at the New York Times, the carefully-crafted talking points invoking "choice" as a politically-charged keyword, and the obvious coaching of even her husband Brad Pitt who carefully describes the entire experience using words like "stronger" and "pride" and "family."

But the smoking gun is the fact that Angelina Jolie's seemingly spontaneous announcement magically appeared on the cover of People Magazine this week -- a magazine that is usually finalized for publication three weeks before it appears on newsstands. That cover, not surprisingly, uses the same language found in the NYT op-ed piece: "HER BRAVE CHOICE" and "This was the right thing to do." The flowery, pro-choice language is not a coincidence.

What this proves is that Angelina's Jolie's announcement was a well-planned corporate P.R. campaign with carefully-crafted messages designed to influence public opinion. But what could Jolie be seeking to influence?

...how about trillions of dollars in corporate profits?

Upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision to rule on patent viability for BRCA1 gene
Angelina Jolie's announcement and all its carefully-crafted language had four notable immediate impacts:

1) It caused women everywhere to be terrified of breast cancer through the publishing of false statistics that drove fear into the hearts of anyone with breasts. (See below for explanation.)

2) It caused women to rush out and seek BRCA1 gene testing procedures. These tests just happen to be patented by a for-profit corporation called "Myriad Genetics." Because of this patent, BRCA1 tests can cost $3,000 - $4,000 each. The testing alone is a multi-billion-dollar market, but only if the patent is upheld in an upcoming Supreme Court decision (see below).

3) It caused the stock price of Myriad Genetics (MYGN) to skyrocket to a 52-week high. "Myriad's stock closed up 3% Tuesday, following the publication of the New York Times op-ed," wrote Marketwatch.com.

4) It drove public opinion to influence the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision to rule in favor of corporate ownership of human genes (see more below).

Women all over the world are being duped into supporting Angeline Jolie, having no idea that what she's really doing is selling out women to the for-profit cancer industry. But to fully understand what's happening, you have to dig deeper...

Myriad Genetics sees stock price skyrocket thanks to Jolie, and Obamacare will funnel billions their way
"Salt Lake City-based Myriad Genetics (MYGN) holds the patent on the test that determined the actress had an 87% chance of developing breast cancer, as well as the genes themselves," wrote MarketWatch.com.

And that's only the beginning. If the U.S. Supreme Court can be influenced to uphold Myriad's patent, it could mean a trillion-dollar industry over just the next few years. Even more, Myriad Genetics is reportedly "ripe for mergers" according to the financial press, because it's part of the super-hot human genome industry.

"The world's largest maker of DNA testing and analysis tools, Life Technologies Corp. said that it is set to be acquired by Thermo Fisher Scientific for a record $13.6 billion," writes MarketWatch.com. "A race that kicked into high gear more than 26 years ago is heating up, with foreign governments and corporations joining the U.S. in funding the quest to map all the human genomes. And even as the recent flurry of mergers and acquisitions in the genomics space has spurred returns, investors still have opportunities to profit from this multibillion-dollar industry."

The higher Myriad's stock price goes, the more profitable a merger becomes for its current owners. So Jolie's P.R. stunt just happened to generate unknown millions of dollars in value for the very people who claim a patent monopoly over the breast cancer genes residing in the bodies of women. Coincidence? Hardly.

Obamacare mandates taxpayers pay for BRCA gene testing: yet another government handout to wealthy corporations
But here's what's even more crooked about all this: You know how Obama likes to talk "free market" but actually engages in so-called "crony capitalism" by handing out money to all his corporate buddies, Wall Street insiders and deep-pocketed campaign donors? Part of Obamacare -- the "Affordable Care Act" -- mandates that taxpayers pay for BRCA1 genetic testing!

Myriad Genetics, in other words, stands to receive a full-scale windfall of profits mandated by government and pushed into mainstream consciousness through a campaign of "medical terror" fronted by Angelina Jolie and the New York Times. Are you starting to see how this all fits together yet?

This is all one big coordinated corporate sellout of women, and it's all being hidden by playing the "women's power" card and using "choice" language to more easily manipulate women. Angelina Jolie, remember, is a key spokesperson for the United Nations, an organization already caught engaged in child sex slavery and drug running. Although Jolie obviously isn't engage in that sort of behavior, her job is to covertly influence American women into supporting a carefully-planned, plotted and executed corporate profit campaign that turns women's bodies into profits.

Here's why the Supreme Court decision puts trillions of dollars at stake...

Details on the upcoming Supreme Court decision

The ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation filed a lawsuit in 2009, challenging the corporate ownership of human genes. Anyone who believes in women's rights, human rights, civil rights or even the right to eat non-GMO foods should immediately agree that corporations should NOT be able to patent human genes and then use those patents to rake in billions of dollars in profits while stifling scientific research into those genes.

A question to all women reading this: Do you believe a corporation in Utah owns your body? If not, you should be opposed to corporate ownership of human genes. It also means you should oppose Angelina Jolie's P.R. campaign because although she's running a brilliant public relations campaign, behind the scenes her actions are feeding potentially trillions of dollars of profits directly into the for-profit human gene patenting industry that denies human beings ownership over their own genetic code.

The ACLU explains the basics of its lawsuit against Myriad Genetics as follows:

On May 12, 2009, the ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) filed a lawsuit charging that patents on two human genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2, are unconstitutional and invalid. On November 30, 2012, the Supreme Court agreed to hear argument on the patentability of human genes. The ACLU argued the case before the U.S. Supreme Court on April 15, 2013. We expect a decision this summer.

On behalf of researchers, genetic counselors, women patients, cancer survivors, breast cancer and women's health groups, and scientific associations representing 150,000 geneticists, pathologists, and laboratory professionals, we have argued that human genes cannot be patented because they are classic products of nature. The suit charges that the gene patents violate the First Amendment and stifle diagnostic testing and research that could lead to cures and that they limit women's options regarding their medical care.

Got that? If the Supreme Court rules against Myriad Genetics, it will cause a multi-billion-dollar breast cancer genetic testing industry to collapse virtually overnight. This means a huge loss for not just Myriad, but also many other human gene corporations that wish to exploit the human body -- including the bodies of women -- for monopolistic profits. (All patents are government-granted monopolies.) Ultimately, trillions of dollars in corporate gene patents are at stake here.

Patenting human genes is huge business

Today, about 20 percent of your genes are already patented by corporations and universities. As the ACLU explains, "A gene patent holder has the right to prevent anyone from studying, testing or even looking at a gene. As a result, scientific research and genetic testing has been delayed, limited or even shut down due to concerns about gene patents."

This means that when corporations own patents on human genes, it stifles scientific research while granting that corporation a monopoly over the "intellectual property" encoded in your own DNA! (How criminal is that? You decide...)

What this means is that if the Supreme Court rules against Myriad, it would set a precedent that would dismantle the entire human gene patenting industry, affecting trillions of dollars in future profits.

This, I believe, is the real reason behind Angelina Jolie's announcement. It seems designed to invoke women's emotional reactions and create a groundswell of support for corporate-owned genes, thereby handing these corporations a Supreme Court precedent that will ensure trillions in future profits. It's a for-profit PR stunt that tries to trick women into supporting a corporate system of patents and monopolies that claims, right now, to own portions of the bodies of every woman living today.

While most media outlets have no clue about the patent issues at stake here, the Detroit Free Press took notice, saying:

"The Hollywood star's decision to get tested for a breast cancer gene mutation, undergo a double mastectomy and then write about it calls attention to a case now pending before the court. The justices have just weeks to decide if Myriad Genetics' patent on the two genes that can identify an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer is legal. Critics complain that the company's monopoly leaves them as the sole source of the $4,000 tests needed to determine each woman's risk."

Lying with statistics: Jolie's 87% risk exaggeration
There's more to this story than just the patents on BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Angelina Jolie is also using blatantly misleading statistics to terrify women into thinking their breasts might kill them.

In the NYT op-ed piece, Jolie claims her doctor told her she has an "87% risk" of developing breast cancer. But what she didn't tell you is that this number doesn't apply to the entire population: it's actually old data derived almost exclusively from families that were previously documented to have very high risks of breast cancer to begin with.

A study published on the National Human Genome Research Institute website and conducted by scientists from the National Institutes of Health reveals that breast cancer risks associated with BRCA1 genes are significantly lower than what's being hyped up by Jolie and the mainstream media.

In fact, in a large room of 600 women, only ONE will likely have a BRCA mutation in her genetic code. The actual incidence is 0.125 to 0.25 out of 100 women, or 1 in 400 to 1 in 800. I used 600 as the average of 400 and 800.

And out of that 1 in 600 women who has the mutation, her risk of breast cancer is only 56 percent, not 78 percent as claimed by Jolie. But 13 percent of women without the BRCA mutation get breast cancer anyway, according to this scientific research, so the increased risk is just 43 out of 100 women.

So what we're really talking about here is 1 in 600 women having a BRCA gene mutation, then less than half of those getting cancer because of it. In other words, only about 1 in 1200 women will be affected by this.

Yet thanks to people like Jolie and the fear-mongering mainstream media, women all across the nation have been terrified into believing their breasts might kill them and the best way to handle the problem is to cut them off!

This, my friends, is the essence of doomsday fear mongering. This issue affects less than one-tenth of one percent of women but is being riled up into a nationwide fear campaign that just happens to feed profits into the for-profit cancer diagnosis and treatment industry, not to mention the monopolistic human gene patenting cartels.

That's the real story of what's happening here. Don't expect to read this in the New York Times.

Corporate media refuses to mention real prevention and treatment options

As part of the breast cancer fear mongering and treatment scam now being run across the mainstream media, nearly all media sources are prohibiting any mention of holistic or natural options for treatment or prevention.

Sure, the media talks about "options," but all those options just happen to lead back to the for-profit cancer industry. As an example, read this story by ABC News, part of the lying mainstream media that misinforms women and pushes a corporate agenda:

If you do test positive for BRCA, you have options, and you don't necessarily have to go the Jolie route. Some women choose not to have surgery. Instead, they increase cancer surveillance with imaging tests. These include regular mammograms to test for breast cancer, and regular pelvic sonograms and blood-tests to watch for ovarian cancer.

Nowhere in this article does ABC News mention ways to suppress the BRCA1 gene by, for example, eating raw cruciferous vegetables containing Indole-3-Carbinol (I3C), a potent anti-cancer nutrient that halts breast cancer in its tracks. Nowhere does ABC News mention vitamin D which prevents nearly 4 out of 5 cancers of all types, including breast cancer.

Nope, the "options" being pushed by mainstream media are nothing more than mammograms, surgery, radiation and chemotherapy -- all owned and run by the for-profit cancer industry that feeds on women and exploits their bodies for profit.

Nor is their any discussion of the total scam of the "pink ribbons" cancer cure industry which is primarily focused on giving women cancer through "free mammograms." As any scientist or physicist already knows, mammograms cause cancer because they emit ionizing radiation directly into the breast and heart tissues. Get enough mammograms done and sooner or later they will detect breast cancer because they caused it! To date, 1.3 million women have been harmed by mammography.

Thanks, Angelina, for keeping the wool pulled over the eyes of women everywhere while selling out to for-profit, monopolistic, corporate interests that incessantly seek to exploit women for profit.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040365_An...#ixzz2TVIJoOyN ]]> Health Freedom donnay http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414660-EXPOSED-Angelina-Jolie-part-of-a-clever-corporate-scheme Marijuana Improves Depression in Low Doses, Worsens It in High Doses, Study Says http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414619-Marijuana-Improves-Depression-in-Low-Doses-Worsens-It-in-High-Doses-Study-Says&goto=newpost Thu, 16 May 2013 17:41:33 GMT http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/10/25/marijuana-improves-depression-in-low-doses-worsens-it-in-high-doses-study-says/ Actually this dichotomy... http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/10...es-study-says/

Actually this dichotomy makes sense. Most antidepressants such as Zoloft can have the reverse effect in certain circumstances. ]]> Health Freedom jmdrake http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?414619-Marijuana-Improves-Depression-in-Low-Doses-Worsens-It-in-High-Doses-Study-Says