catova

Great article, but one disagreement. The AMA is at the heart of the problem. In 2002, we consented with a well known pediatric Dr. in California about vaccinations, especially MMR. He told us that their were abnormally large amount of children coming back to his office with speech and behavioral problems three weeks after MMR shot. I asked him if we should vaccinate, he said he could not tell us not to vaccinate or he could potentially loose his medical licence. He also told us that his father was also forced by the AMA to recommend vaccinations or loose his medical licence.

OWNtheNWO

The American Murder Association definitely is playing a big part in the conspiracy.

catova

Its unfortunate, but this goes deep into all aspects of government colluding with corporations to destroy our children s health for future profit.

americandreamsicle

naturalnews.com has been in the forefront of reporting the US government's war on local food and dairy distributors. It's a hell of a lot more credible than anything in the mainstream with regards to the WoF (war on food).

Skeptico

I can't believe I'm asking this, but are you serious?

americandreamsicle

Ask me when you can believe your own words.

Skeptico

I'm going to reply to this on the assumption that you are either trolling, or irredeemably ignorant. This reply is for everyone else reading this thread. If you take even four seconds to look at the "sources" provided in the article, you'd find that they all link to personal blogs and websites making claims with absolutely no scientific basis or citations to any actual research. They don't cite anything, for that matter.

If you need links to the legwork, I've done that for you too. This Article links to wikis, blogs, and an incredibly biased 'news' website. None of those would be acceptable in academia, so why here? The graph on the website is reused on another "source" to push the same agenda as the aforementioned article. As for the graph? No sustainable evidence. It links back to this website which only serves to host such graphs for use in these very articles. They say they got the information from government data, but provide none of their sources or exactly where they got their absurd numbers. There is no actual evidence for any of it.

Yeah, mainstream media is a puppet for the big guys, but this is just as bad as an offense to the truth.

americandreamsicle

That's dandy, but my specific statement was that I like the site for its coverage of the Federal government's war on local food producers and distributors. There weren't too many sites covering the Feds' War on Food a few years ago.

I'm going to assume that you're a small minded bigot that thinks anyone that doesn't agree with you is ignorant or a troll.

Skeptico

I'm a bigot on the basis that I'm trying to have a debate with you? I apologize for assuming, and for assuming that you were a troll. That was a kneejerk response to your first reply to my question, and to Wolfborne's dismissal calling me a shill or retard. Again, I was wrong to assume.

You might be right about their coverage on local food producers and distributors, I'll do further research and reading on that. My statement is mostly geared toward the integrity of the website as a whole. If they're willing to fudge data or use blatantly made up statistics it makes me question whether they can be trusted at all.

americandreamsicle

Apology accepted. My own MO is to take all articles on a case by case basis, no matter the site. Lies, truth and mistakes live in this world everywhere side by side, websites and real life alike.

Skeptico

Well put, and thank you for pointing that out. I stay a middle road in my own life and pick truth out where it is presented, but never thought to apply the same logic to the internet.