Like a script from a movie you already know the ending to; each year we can expect a hoax study or attack on anything that is not FDA approved.
It is with great hope that the average person will have enough sense to see through the latest propaganda (unlike an elderly woman I talked to last year who stopped getting natural help because the reports last year made it sound like vitamins = poison).
Chances are, you’ve recently been barraged by not-so-subtle headlines attacking multivitamins. The mainstream articles were very loosely and poorly based on three simultaneous and ridiculously flawed studies. If anyone bothers to read the studies, they might find that they are simply a vehicle for an attack – an attack so gratuitous and heavy handed to make one wonder about their MO.
But the real attack on multivitamins stems from a mere editorial cited by a media regurgitating the words “case closed,” “we don’t need multivitamins,” “evidence mounting [against multivitamins],” “enough is enough” and projections like the “vitamin industrial complex.” Oh, so the gavel has been slammed…God forbid someone have their own preference about a consumer product.
But who is actually saying this and by whom are they funded?
Brandon Turbeville writes of one of the three studies:
Interestingly enough, this study was not only funded by the National Institutes of Health but also by DSM Nutritional Products, Pfizer, and BASF. Pfizer and BASF, two multinational pharmaceutical manufacturers are widely known as organizations that are hostile toward the sale and manufacture of nutritional products as well as corporations that would stand to gain by an increase in poor health and medical treatment. DSM Nutritional Products, while lesser known, is a multinational chemical company that also manufactures nutritional supplements of the synthetic variety. DSM is a corporate colleague of Cargill and has worked closely with the UN-based World Food Programme.
The authors of the studies who say “Most supplements do not prevent chronic disease or death, their use is not justified, and they should be avoided” circumnavigated the following: ALL the other studies based on real vitamins/minerals that show profound improvement, like this one about carotenoids and multivitamins on eye healing.
The carrier articles like to claim that the multivitamin industry runs up to $28 billion annually – well, so what? First, that means there’s an interest and consumer demand. Secondly, it sounds like people don’t feel like they’re getting enough nutrition no matter how many times they are told to follow failing, pathetic dietary guidelines. And the Western modern medical complex trumps the multivitamin sales by a whopping $2 trillion annually! So it looks like they would have a vested interest in keeping you there even if pharmaceuticals kill about 100,000 people each year. What harm have wholesome vitamins and minerals done again? When is more nutrition a bad thing?
Synthetic vitamins/minerals can be patented whereas earth harvested ones cannot be exclusively owned (Big Pharma profits from its synthetic brands).
Big Pharma needs natural plant elements so they can chemicalize and commercialize them – so how can they discount what they eagerly use? It appears to be meant for their profit, not your use.
Synthetic vitamins/minerals are the ones used in these studies, prescribed by doctors, sold over-the-counter and used to “fortify” junk food.
Synthetic vitamins/minerals ARE rough on the liver, can lead to health problems and most often contain harmful fillers.
Big Pharma’s synthetic multivitamins took the fall for this slam “study,” in an attempt to bring the whole of natural health down the drain with it.
There are also a few shill-type doctor mouthpieces supporting calls to constantly reduce the perceived amount of nutrients needed – they just keep lowering the levels. I remember going down a maddening rabbit hole two years ago involving a doctor claiming vitamin D was toxic and telling people to take barely noticeable levels – he had ties to Big Pharma and was involved with a pharmaceutical company to create doctor-prescribed synthetic vitamin D.
Hopefully, you have access to highly bioavailable or whole food based supplements – hang on to them. They might go the path of the incandescent light bulbs soon if directives under Codex Alimentarius continue this way in America.
But why say false flag in terms of natural health? Because we’ve been down this road before…
If raw milk gets legalized in a certain state or the market for it explodes, look for a “special report” on pathogens and for small farms to get blamed for sickness…
Under Codex Alimentarius, the European Union made sweeping supplement bans (effective 2011).
In 2010/2011 organic produce was blamed for a sudden rush of food sicknesses and voila! – instantaneously, we got the Food Safety Modernization Act, another clamp down on natural health under Codex.
The FDA just released a special 200+ page report on how deadly natural spices are…when you look at the numbers, you’ll either laugh or cry. (I feel a ban coming on…)
If an independent study finds that GMO foods cause tumors on rats, then look for the counter studies to slam it and ones that say there is no difference between organic and conventional.
This hit piece could be more than just a Christmas sale for a medical industrial complex trying to deter people from healthy goals outside of modern treatments. It could be the preparation to sneak more global health rules on a people largely unaware.
It would be interesting to see if the vitamin/supplement industry takes a hit for this media campaign. And which side of it really suffers: the toxic fake Big Pharma vitamins, or real and valuable vitamins/minerals/supplements that are helping people.
On the other hand, our good vitamins and supplements could very well be going straight to the toilet if we aren’t set up to digest them. Stay tuned, I’ll be writing about how to make sure that doesn’t happen!