July 31, 2014

Senator Paul’s Amendment Would Stop the Ban on Interstate Raw Milk Sales

pin it button Senator Pauls Amendment Would Stop the Ban on Interstate Raw Milk Sales

Milk bottles Senator Pauls Amendment Would Stop the Ban on Interstate Raw Milk Sales

 

Two New Critical Senate Bill Amendments—Action Alerts!

Alliance for Natural Health

One of these amendments we have seen before. It must be stopped. The other one we wholeheartedly support.

Every five years, Congress reauthorizes the Farm Bill. It sets agriculture (and nutrition) policy for the nation. It is always a “must pass” piece of legislation—and because of that, legislators tend to offer tag-along amendments that may have nothing to do with agriculture in the expectation that they will be passed along with the bill.

Of the over eighty amendments being offered to this year’s Farm Bill, there are two of particular interest to supporters of natural health. One is very, very bad, while the other is very, very good.

The first amendment, offered by Sen. Patrick Leahy, is a revival of Leahy’s disastrous anti-supplement bill that passed in the Senate last year but which we have so far stopped in the House. The language of this amendment is exactly the same as that original bill. Attaching the same text to a “must-pass” bill may the only way his language can become law—unless you take action to stop it.

The amendment would increase criminal penalties for “misbranding” or “adulterating” foods to a maximum of one year in jail to ten years’ imprisonment.

To our ears, “adulterated” means that the food itself is somehow tainted or injurious to health, or contains an ingredient that presents a significant or unreasonable risk of illness. And “misbranded” suggests deliberate misstatements about the efficacy of a product.

In FDA-speak, however, these words take on completely different meaning. For example, a food or supplement may be “adulterated” if it does not follow “current good manufacturing practices” (CGMPs), which are extremely wide ranging—and include minor recordkeeping violations. “Misbranded” can mean that the producer makes a completely true statement about the product but without FDA permission. A cherry producer who cites peer-reviewed scientific research from prestigious universities on the health benefits of cherries would, in FDA-speak, have engaged in “false” and actionable “misbranding” which suddenly turns the cherries into drugs.

The dramatic increase in jail time and fines will make supplement production an even riskier proposition than it is today. To his credit, Leahy listened to our objections and added some additional language. The ten-year jail term would apply to those who “knowingly and intentionally defraud or mislead” and do so “with conscious or reckless disregard of a risk of death or serious bodily injury.” But this language is subjective and vague. Whether anyone meets these criteria would be determined solely by FDA. People shouldn’t be put in jail for a decade  because of how a biased party rates their intentions; it should be because of their actions.

You also have to understand how the FDA operates. Its most favored tactic is to send in armed agents who terrify everyone. Then the intimidation escalates. The agents say that the producer, whether a supplement producer or raw milk producer, could spend years in jail. To avoid this, just sign a “consent decree” which among other things will probably require hiring former employees of the FDA at extremely high rates to monitor everything. Huge reports will have to be filed and if anything falls short, then the jail terms can be triggered.

Would the FDA assert that a seller of raw milk is knowingly and intentionally disregarding risk of death? Of course they would. So the ten-year jail threat would apply.

Action Alert! Please contact your senators today and express your strong opposition to Sen. Leahy’s anti-supplement amendment. Take action now.

Speaking of raw milk, the second amendment, offered by Sen. Rand Paul, would allow for the interstate transport and sale of unpasteurized milk. While some states have passed legislation allowing raw milk to be sold within that state, it is against federal law to sell raw milk across state lines. This has permitted the FDA to pursue its current vendetta against raw milk producers and go after farmers like Daniel Allgyer for allegedly selling milk across borders.

Sen. Paul’s amendment would change that situation. It reads, in part, “A Federal department, agency, or court may not take any action (such as administrative, civil, criminal, or other actions) that would prohibit, interfere with, regulate, or otherwise restrict the interstate traffic of milk, or a milk product, that is unpasteurized and packaged for direct human consumption.”

As we have reported previously, raw (unpasteurized) milk is safe, extremely nutritious, and has been shown to be superior to pasteurized milk for protecting against disease.

Action Alert! Please contact your senators today and voice your strong support for Sen. Paul’s raw milk amendment. Take action now.

Read the Full Article and Comment Here: http://www.anh-usa.org/two-new-critical-senate-bill-amendments/

 

 


0 commentsback to post

Other articlesgo to homepage

We All have Pesticides in our Homes even if We don’t Use Pesticides

We All have Pesticides in our Homes even if We don’t Use Pesticides

Indoor air contamination has become a central issue today because most of us spend up to 90% of our time indoors and we are breathing and re-breathing the same old polluted air all day long.

The problem is worse for very young children, because the air quality is much worse at floor level. Many toxic substances are heavier than air and sink down to floor level.

Even though most every home in America probably has some level of pesticide residue, and we know that many health conditions and diseases are related to pesticide exposure, we find that our modern healthcare system seems to be unconcerned about indoor pesticide contamination. Doctors may ask us about our alcohol and drug use, ask us about our sexual practices, and sometimes ask us about our diet, but when was the last time a doctor asked you about your pesticide exposure?

Taking Thyroid Hormone Increases Breast Cancer Risk By 200%

Taking Thyroid Hormone Increases Breast Cancer Risk By 200%

A study found that women who take thyroid hormone for at least 15 years have 200% increase in the risk of breast cancer as compared to women who did not take thyroid hormone. You read that correctly: a 200% increase risk of breast cancer in women who took thyroid hormone as compared to women who did not take thyroid hormone.

How could that be? The answer is simple: The increased breast risk in thyroid supplemented women is due to iodine deficiency.

Should Dr. Oz be Silenced?

Should Dr. Oz be Silenced?

As Dr. Oz’s popularity with Americans grows—and with it a new openness to integrative medicine—mainstream medicine is alarmed.

Last year, when he was a second-year medical student, Benjamin Mazer took it upon himself to ask both the Medical Society of the State of New York (MSSNY) and the American Medical Association (AMA) to address what he called “medical quackery” on television and in other media. He suggested that they consider regulating the advice of celebrity physicians like Dr. Mehmet Oz—asking, in effect, that they do something to gag him.

Eucalyptus Essential Oil Reduces Spread of Tuberculosis

Eucalyptus Essential Oil Reduces Spread of Tuberculosis

Research from the University of Illinois’ College of Pharmacy has found that eucalyptus essential oil can be used to stop the spread of tuberculosis from those who are contagious.

The researchers tested essential oil from the Eucalyptus citriodora – also called Corymbia citriodora – with airborne tuberculosis.

The researchers found that a combination of citronellol, linalool and eucalyptol inhibited airborne tuberculosis transmission by more than 90 percent.

The Natural Method to Improve Vision that was Banned in NY

The Natural Method to Improve Vision that was Banned in NY

Wouldn’t it be wonderful to be able to see clearly without glasses or contacts? According to Greg Marsh, a certified natural vision coach, clear vision is achievable by virtually everyone, even if you’re already wearing strong corrective lenses.

read more


Get the news right in your inbox!