ASA sues Obama Administration for interfering with state, local medical marijuana laws

(NaturalNews) The battle continues to rage between the individual states and the federal government over the legalized cultivation and use of medical marijuana. Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the nation’s largest medical marijuana advocacy organization, has now filed a lawsuit against the Obama Administration’s Justice Department for aggressively trying to subvert state and local laws by shutting down legal medical marijuana dispensaries. California, Oregon, New Mexico, Colorado, and a handful of other US states all have laws on the books that permit the growth, possession, and use of medical marijuana in some way, shape, or form. But the federal government still ignorantly classifies the natural plant as a Schedule I narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act, a tenet of the “War on Drugs” that has been a source of much conflict over the past several years. This ongoing clash between state and federal law has led to numerous federal raids of medical marijuana growers and distributors, particularly in the State of California where medical marijuana laws are among the most lenient, and where the plant is most utilized. The federal government also routinely intimidates local officials to try to get them to ban medical marijuana dispensaries. In a most recent raid, for instance, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) stormed Northstone Organics, a fully-licensed marijuana cultivation collective in Mendocino County, Cal. Agents reportedly cut down all 99 of the group’s marijuana plants, and handcuffed the owner and his wife with zip-ties. With a lawsuit, ASA hopes to finally put an end to this type of federal government oppression of medical marijuana both in California, and in the other states that have legalized the plant. “Although the Obama Administration is entitled to enforce federal marijuana laws, the Tenth Amendment forbids it from using coercive tactics to commandeer the law-making functions of the State,” said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who filed the lawsuit in San Francisco’s Federal District Court. “This case is aimed at restoring California’s sovereign and constitutional right to establish its own public health laws based on this country’s federalist principles.” For the first time ever, a recent Gallup poll shows that most Americans now support legalizing marijuana. Fifty percent say that general marijuana use should be legalized, while only 46 percent say it should remain illegal (http://www.gallup.com/poll/150149/Record-High-Americans-Favor-Legalizing-Marijuana.aspx). Sources for this article include: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=6921

FDA violates law by refusing to ban antibiotics from use in animal feed

(NaturalNews) Earlier in the year, several concerned groups sued the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for failing to address the issue of antibiotic use in animal feed (http://www.naturalnews.com/032824_antibiotics_animal_feed.html). Though numerous studies have found that adding antibiotics to animal feed undeniably causes antibiotic resistance, including an FDA study from 1977, the agency insists that banning the practice is too difficult. The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the Food Animal Concerns Trust (FACT), and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) all agree that using penicillin and tetracyclines (antibiotics used to treat humans) in animal feed to bulk animals up and cause them grow faster is an unacceptable threat to public health. But the FDA apparently does not agree, as it claims that implementing any sort of ban will be “too expensive and resource intensive,” according to a FACT press release. The FDA stated in its response to the lawsuit that, rather than forcibly restrict the use of antibiotics, the agency will instead allow drug companies to continue “self-regulating” themselves. In other words, it is just more business as usual at the taxpayer-funded Big Pharma agency that looks out for special interests rather than the interests of the people. “Instead of adhering to its mission to protect consumers, the FDA is waiting for the drug companies to voluntarily do what the agency is legally mandated to do,” said FACT’s Public Health Program Director Steven Roach. “There is absolutely no reason to believe that drug companies will voluntarily reduce sales of antibiotics and act against their own financial self-interest. Without reductions in antibiotics used it is impossible for there to be any public health benefit.” It only makes sense that the agency tasked with protecting public health would be expected to step up to the plate and restrict antibiotic use in animals except in cases of actual illness. But the FDA works for a different boss, and few in the American public seem to care that this rogue traitor continues to pad its pockets at the expense of their health. Not only do antibiotics cause animals to become obese and ill (http://www.naturalnews.com/030938_antibiotics_animals.html), but they also cause serious health problems in those at eat meat produced from such animals. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) even admitted back in 2010 that antibiotic use in livestock is a serious threat to human health (http://www.naturalnews.com/029337_antibiotics_livestock.html). Sources for this article include: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fda-denies-citizen-petitions-on-animal-antibiotics-133541598.html

FDA violates law by refusing to ban antibiotics from use in animal feed

(NaturalNews) Earlier in the year, several concerned groups sued the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for failing to address the issue of antibiotic use in animal feed (http://www.naturalnews.com/032824_antibiotics_animal_feed.html). Though numerous studies have found that adding antibiotics to animal feed undeniably causes antibiotic resistance, including an FDA study from 1977, the agency insists that banning the practice is too difficult. The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the Food Animal Concerns Trust (FACT), and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) all agree that using penicillin and tetracyclines (antibiotics used to treat humans) in animal feed to bulk animals up and cause them grow faster is an unacceptable threat to public health. But the FDA apparently does not agree, as it claims that implementing any sort of ban will be “too expensive and resource intensive,” according to a FACT press release. The FDA stated in its response to the lawsuit that, rather than forcibly restrict the use of antibiotics, the agency will instead allow drug companies to continue “self-regulating” themselves. In other words, it is just more business as usual at the taxpayer-funded Big Pharma agency that looks out for special interests rather than the interests of the people. “Instead of adhering to its mission to protect consumers, the FDA is waiting for the drug companies to voluntarily do what the agency is legally mandated to do,” said FACT’s Public Health Program Director Steven Roach. “There is absolutely no reason to believe that drug companies will voluntarily reduce sales of antibiotics and act against their own financial self-interest. Without reductions in antibiotics used it is impossible for there to be any public health benefit.” It only makes sense that the agency tasked with protecting public health would be expected to step up to the plate and restrict antibiotic use in animals except in cases of actual illness. But the FDA works for a different boss, and few in the American public seem to care that this rogue traitor continues to pad its pockets at the expense of their health. Not only do antibiotics cause animals to become obese and ill (http://www.naturalnews.com/030938_antibiotics_animals.html), but they also cause serious health problems in those at eat meat produced from such animals. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) even admitted back in 2010 that antibiotic use in livestock is a serious threat to human health (http://www.naturalnews.com/029337_antibiotics_livestock.html). Sources for this article include: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fda-denies-citizen-petitions-on-animal-antibiotics-133541598.html

Max Kane calls out FDA to enforce raw milk law against moms — will the agency show up on Nov. 1?

(NaturalNews) A caravan of Raw Milk Freedom Riders (RMFR) will be making its way to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) headquarters in just a few days on Nov. 1 to protest against the agency’s irrational ban on the sale and distribution of raw milk across state lines. Max Kane, executive producer of FarmFoodFreedom.org and one of the speakers at the event, wants to know if the FDA will actually show up and try to enforce these laws against the mothers. Kane recently tried to call the FDA to report the “illegal” activity that will soon take place in front the agency’s main facilities in Silver Spring, Md., on Nov. 1. After getting shuffled around a couple dozen times to different offices and divisions of the FDA, he finally gets through to the voicemail of John Sheehan, director of the FDA’s Division of Plant and Dairy Food Safety, and one of the head honchos in the war against raw milk. You can watch the full video of Kane’s attempts to report the RMFR event to the FDA at the following link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8KfB7005UY In early 2011, the FDA used its interstate commerce clause to file a lawsuit against Dan Allgyer, an Amish farmer from Pennsylvania, alleging that he was illegally shipping raw milk across state lines into Maryland where the food is prohibited for sale. Consumers in other states are now challenging this lawsuit with one of their own against the FDA (http://www.naturalnews.com/029322_raw_milk_Amish.html). But a group of mothers has decided to take things one step further by organizing a caravan that will deliberately bring raw milk into Maryland from Pennsylvania, and stage a massive “drink in” in front of FDA headquarters, which is located at 10903 New Hampshire Avenue in Silver Spring. This offensive approach, which is drawing nationwide attention, has left the FDA literally speechless. In his voicemail message, Kane invites Sheehan and any others at the FDA to either attend the event, or to come and take action against the mothers, whom he says will be parked on the southbound shoulder of Conowingo Road (US Route 1) in Rising Sun, Md., at exactly 10:30 am EST on Nov. 1. This is the official meeting spot just south of the Pennsylvania border where the caravan will meet up and proceed to FDA’s headquarters. Be sure to watch Kane’s full video appeal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8KfB7005UY To learn more about Raw Milk Freedom Riders, or to join the caravan yourself, visit: http://www.rawmilkfreedomriders.com

India files biopiracy lawsuit against Monsanto, says biotech giant is stealing nature for corporate gain

(NaturalNews) Representing one of the most agriculturally bio-diverse nations in the world, India has become a primary target for biotechnology companies like Monsanto and Cargill to spread their genetically-modified (GM) crops into new markets. However, a recent France 24 report explains that the Indian government has decided to take an offensive approach against this attempted agricultural takeover by suing Monsanto for “biopiracy,” accusing the company of stealing India’s indigenous plants in order to re-engineer them into patented varieties. Brinjal, also known in Western nations as eggplant, is a native Indian crop for which there are roughly 2,500 different unique varieties. Millions of Indian farmers grow brinjal, which is used in a variety of Indian food dishes, and the country grows more than a quarter of the world’s overall supply of the vegetable. And in an attempt to capitalize on this popular crop, Monsanto has repeatedly tried to commercially market its own GM variety of brinjal called Bt brinjal. But massive public outcry against planned commercial approval of Monsanto’s “frankencrop” variety in 2010 led to the government banning it for an indefinite period of time. But Monsanto is still stealing native crops, including brinjal, and quietly working on GM varieties of them in test fields, which is a clear violation of India’s Biological Diversity Act (BDA). So at the prompting of various farmers and activists in India, the Indian government, representing the first time in history a nation that has taken such action, has decided to sue Monsanto. “This can send a different message to the big companies for violating the laws of the nation,” said K.S. Sugara, Member Secretary of the Karnataka Biodiversity Board, to France 24 concerning the lawsuit. “It is not acceptable … that the farmers in our communities are robbed of the advantage they should get from the indigenous varieties.” You can watch the full France 24 video report of India’s lawsuit against Monsanto here: http://www.france24.com/en/20110921-india-monsanto-gmo-brinjal-bio-piracy-biopiracy-steal-seeds-terminator-cotton-onion-melon-debt-suicide Farmers and active members of the public in India have been some of the world’s most outspoken opponents of Monsanto’s attempted GM takeover of agriculture. Besides successfully overturning the attempted approval of Bt brinjal, these freedom fighters have also successfully destroyed several attempted Monsanto GM test fields.

Interview with Gary Cox, Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, about Rawesome Foods raid

(NaturalNews) I’ve just completed an interview with Gary Cox, an attorney with the Farm-To-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (www.FTCLDF.org), which provides legal assistance to help protect raw dairy farmers from overzealous government attacks on their freedom. You can listen to the full interview at: http://soundcloud.com/naturalnews/2011-interview-gary-cox-ftcldf (Or click the PLAY button in the audio object below.) Here’s some of what you’ll hear in this interview, which was recorded on August 5th, 2011: • How the government is becoming more militant in its armed raids on innocent farmers. “I’ve seen numerous search warrants being carried out; I’ve even seen it where a SWAT team would come into a family’s home in Northern Ohio and hold the family including the children at gunpoint for six hours while the agents searched the home for food,” says Gary. • Details about the Evergreen Acres case in which an innocent farmer is also being threatened by the government. • Details on the lawsuit against the FDA’s ban of the interstate transportation of raw milk. Additional quotes from Gary Cox in the interview • Certain individuals in the California Dept of Food and Agriculture are hot and heavy to put raw milk producers out of business and they want to send a strong message. • So there’s some assistant DA in LA County who’s trying to make a name for herself or who has a vendetta against small family farmers, or who just has an inflated ego and wants to exercise the power given to the district attorney’s office. • You get these investigators and inspectors who work for a state agency who think they have all the power in the world to just punish a small, law-abiding citizen into submission. • As a public servant, you really have to be cautious in how you wield the power given to you, and in this case of Rawesome Foods, it’s just mind boggling to me that government thinks that there are victims involved in this conduct and that they have to throw people in jail to send a message. It’s just beyond my comprehension. • We constantly get the argument from the government that when people engage in a cow share they’re doing nothing but circumventing the law. And my response has always been that look, we have these fundamental these rights, and your law that prevents us from drinking our own raw milk is an attempt to circumvent our fundamental and inalienable rights. • I think this is really an act of desperation on the part of the LA County prosecutor’s office. I know for a fact that the Ventura County DA office has threatened actions against Sharon Palmer. So I think this recent action of arresting these people is not only an escalation but an act of desperation, because I think the DA office in LA is realizing that it’s losing control over these people… these people are exercising their fundamental inalienable rights and it’s upsetting the District Attorney’s office. Special thanks to Gary Cox: www.FTCLDF.org Also be sure to check more news about this situation at www.RealFoodRights.com and www.WestonAPrice.org Listen to the full interview with this SoundCloud widget (sorry, doesn’t play on iPhones or iPads): 2011 Interview Gary Cox FTCLDF by NaturalNews Check out more videos at www.NaturalNews.TV

Raw milk farmer wins victory against county over ‘illegal’ sales

(NaturalNews) A small victory has been won on the raw milk battle front. Greene County, Mo., Circuit Judge Daniel Imhoff recently threw out a lawsuit against Armand Bechard, a farmer who sells raw milk to customers in the Springfield area. According to the judge, Bechard was not the proper subject of the lawsuit, and the statute of limitations prevents any further action in the case, so Bechard is free to resume business as usual. It all started back in April 2009 when undercover agents tricked Bechard’s daughters into selling them raw milk. Farmers can legally sell raw milk in the state of Missouri as long as they do so directly from the farm, but they cannot sell it from anywhere else. Cusomters can also legally pick up milk from “drop points”, which Bechard had set up to deliver farm-purchased milk to customers. But agents pretending to be new customers were able to persuade Bechard’s daughters to sell them extra milk right from the drop point, which landed the family in legal trouble. In the summer of 2010, Bechard lost a municipal court case concerning the incident. At the time, he was represented by a public defender, but in the recent victory he represented himself. Judge Imhoff determined that since Bechard’s daughters had sold agents the milk instead of Bechard, they would have to have been the subject of the case. So he flat out dismissed it. But the ordeal is far from over. Despite having already lost thousands of dollars in lost business throughout the past year-and-a-half, Bechard must now face a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Christ Koster over the same incident. This time, Bechard will be represented by a lawyer from the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF), a group launched in 2007 to assist small farmers in protecting themselves while they conduct honest business. To learn more about the FTCLDF and to support its endeavors, visit: http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/ Sources for this story include: http://www.news-leader.com/article/20110107/NEWS01/101070352/Judge-dismisses-charges-against-Laclede-County-farmer-in-raw-milk-case

DePuy To Face 4000 Lawsuits Over The Manufacture Of Defective Hip Implants

DePuy Orthopaedics might have already realized the severity of the troubles that they are currently in. They are not an unpopular company, after all, because Johnson & Johnson owns them. They have been even more known for manufacturing the ASR implants, specifically the ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System, that have [...]

Minnesota attorney general files lawsuit against 3M for years of environmental pollution

(NaturalNews) Minnesota attorney general Lori Swanson is determined to hold the 3M Company, one of the world’s largest multinational corporations based near St. Paul, responsible for years of environmental pollution that tainted the Mississippi River and contaminated water supplies in the east-metro area of the Twin Cities. Swanson recently filed a lawsuit against 3M requesting that the company pay for residual cleanup costs associated with the pollution it caused. “The company caused damage to the environment,” Swanson is quoted as saying in the Star Tribune . “We are simply asking, let’s make it right.” For many years, 3M was dumping perfluorochemicals, or PFCs, into the environment. PFCs do not decompose, and they gradually build up in the environment over time. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) indicates that the chemicals cause brain, nervous system, and organ damage, as well as reproductive and developmental problems, autoimmune disorders, and cancer (http://www.ewg.org/chemindex/term/496). A spokesman from 3M, however, denies the allegations. He told reporters that PFCs are “not hazardous,” and that any water contaminated by the company’s PFCs is below government safety thresholds. But tell that to the numerous residents in the metro area near the 3M plant whose water wells were ruined by PFCs, or the water drilling project of the nearby city of Lake Elmo, Minn., that ultimately failed due to PFC levels that exceeded state safety thresholds. One resident told the Star Tribune that he and his wife drank PFC-contaminated well water for years without knowing it, which ultimately led to his wife dying of cancer. Though 3M has already paid out several millions of dollars to help remediate certain aspects of the damage caused by its pollution, Swanson does not believe it is enough. If successful, her lawsuit will be one of the first to hold a large corporation responsible for damage it caused to the environment many years prior. Sources for this story include: http://www.startribune.com/local/112695399.html

US suing BP for Gulf oil disaster

(NaturalNews) The U.S. government has filed a lawsuit against BP and eight other firms involved in Gulf oil drilling for allegedly violating safety regulations. The massive oil spill that took place earlier this year has been dubbed the most heinous environmental disaster in history, and U.S. officials are saying that BP and the other companies involved be held completely responsible for all costs associated with clean-up and restoration. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder says the companies violated both the Clean Water Act and Oil Pollution Act by failing to follow proper safety procedures and guidelines, and that such violations were directly responsible for the spill which took about three months to finally cap. The U.S. Justice Department also indicated that more defendants could be added to the lawsuit as the investigation continues. BP responded in a statement saying that it would continue to work with the government to remediate the spill damage. Others like Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling Inc., a drilling contractor, combated the allegations saying that it played no role in the disaster and that “[t]he responsibility for hydrocarbons discharged from a well lies solely with its owner and operator.” Interestingly, a BBC News report explains that both Halliburton, the firm responsible for cementing the well just 20 hours before it exploded, and Cameron International, the firm that procured the well equipment, are both missing from the government lawsuit (http://www.naturalnews.com/028693_Gulf_of_Mexico_Halliburton.html). So it is unclear whether or not the lawsuit is actually going after the right companies since it is leaving out two very important ones. Over 300 lawsuits have already been filed regarding the spill, many from those in the fishing and tourism industries surrounding the Gulf that were decimated following the after-effects of the spill. Sources for this story include: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12005240

Next Page »