Connect with us


Government Secrecy Exposed: Examples That Show It Goes Far Beyond Snowden, Wikileaks & Area 51

The world of secrecy is truly out of control. Most people don’t think about the fact that millions of pages of documents every year are classified and kept from public viewing, and that’s just in the United States alone. If a historian wanted to study the history of their country, how could they properly do it when a majority of their history remains ‘classified?’ It was only only three years ago (2013) when the Central Intelligence Agency finally admitted to the existence of Area 51. Although it didn’t ‘officially’ exist before the CIA made this admission, it was pretty clear that something secretive was going on in the Nevada desert. That secretive something would be the testing of secret aircraft and technology that the public has absolutely no idea about. Take for example the U.S. air strike against Libya in 1996. An f-111 jet was used, which had been operational since 1983, but its existence was still kept secret for a number of years after.

The efforts of Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, Bradley Manning and all of the other whistleblowers that you never hear about, are heroic, and no doubt important, but it’s interesting to ponder jus how far down the rabbit hole government secrecy goes. It’s in our nature to be curious, especially when it’s a known fact that there are things being concealed from us.

The United States has a history of government agencies existing in secret. The National Security Agency (NSA) was founded in 1952 but its existence was hidden until the mid 1960’s. Even more secretive is the National Reconnaissance Office, which was founded in 1960 but remained completely concealed for 30 years.

The real menace of our Republic is the invisible government, which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation … The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties … [and] control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government. It operates under cover of a self-created screen [and] seizes our executive officers, legislative bodies, schools, courts, newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.  – John F. Hylan was Mayor of New York City from 1918-1925 (source)(source)

Here is a great video illustrating the pyramid of financial dominance

The point of this article is to let more people know that our world is drenched with secrecy, and recent revelations in multiple areas are sparking, for some, a shift in consciousness. New information about our world that was once not known can always change things. Imagine if we lived in a world that was completely transparent, one that developed technology from a place of peace, one that used science to push the human race into greater depths of understanding regarding the true nature of reality.

In this day and age, it’s best to keep an open mind as new information is constantly surfacing challenging the belief systems of many.

There are so many reasons why transparency is important. Below are a few of many examples of government secrecy,

Examples of Government Secrecy

  • Patent Secrecy

The U.S. Patent and Trademark office is is a great example. The office is supposed to legally protect the inventions of entrepreneurs and companies, some of whom have developed ground breaking technology. Unfortunately, that’s not the case as new documents obtained via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) reveal how the Patent Office has been using a secret system to withhold the approval of some applications.

This 50-page document was obtained by Kilpatrick Towsend & Stockton, LLP, who commonly represent major tech companies that include Apple, Google and Twitter (to name a few). You can view that entire document HERE. (1)

The program delaying patent applications is called the Sensitive Application Warning System (SWAS). Usually, when an application is submitted for a patent approval it requires a couple of examiners who work with the Patent office to go through their process of approval. This process usually takes approximately 1 to 2 years, but  applications that are filed in SAWS must be approved from several people, and can be delayed for a number of years.

“There is no official channel to notify an applicant once their patent is placed in the system, and the Patent Office has denied requests to divulge what applications are on the SAWS list.” (source)

The documents also indicate areas of technology that might have a patent application placed in the SAWS program – these include smartphones, internet-enabling systems and more. This information is set to be published in an online journal called “Law360” to inform the public. Tech Columnist Alyssa Bereznak at Yahoo News states that most companies are fully aware of this.

I first came across this recent information in her article, which you can view here, but I felt compelled to add more information.

As you will see below, there is more information that has surfaced prior to these documents that suggest this type of “invention secrecy” goes far beyond these technologies.

One great example (out of many) of delayed patent applications comes from Dr. Gerald F. Ross. He filed a patent application for a new invention he had devised to defeat the jamming of electromagnetic transmissions at specified frequencies. It was not until June 17, 2014 (almost 37 years later) that this patent was granted. (2)

s great as it is to see new information pertaining to invention secrecy come to light, it’s also important to note (as reported by the Federation of American Scientists; see annotated bibliography) that there were over 5000 inventions that were under secrecy orders at the end of Fiscal Year 2014, which marked the highest number of  secrecy orders in effect since 1994.(3)

This is all thanks to an act many people are unaware of. It’s called the “Invention Secrecy Act” and it was written up in 1951. Under this act, patent applications on new inventions can be subject to secrecy orders. These orders can restrict their publication if government agencies believe that their disclosure would be harmful to national security.(4)(5)

As mentioned earlier, “national security” has become an excuse and justification for the classification of a large amount of information on a variety of topics that the public is deliberately kept in the dark about. Apparently, many of these projects and inventions go far above and beyond presidential knowledge.

“It is ironic that the U.S. should be fighting monstrously expensive wars allegedly to bring democracy to those countries, when it itself can no longer claim to be called a democracy when trillions, and I mean thousands of billions of dollars, have been spent on projects which both congress and the commander in chief know nothing about.”  (source) – Paul Hellyer, Former Canadian Defense Minister.

So what type of technology is under restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act? We don’t really know, but a previous list from 1971 was obtained by researcher Michael Ravnitzky. Most of the technology listed seems to be related to various military applications. You can view that list HERE. (6)

As Steven Aftergood from the Federation of American Scientists reports:

“The 1971 list indicates that patents for solar photovoltaic generators were subject to review and possible restriction if the photovoltaics were more than 20% efficient. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction if they offered conversion efficiencies in “excess of 70-80%.” (source)

  • Black Budget Secrecy

“There exists a shadowy government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of the national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself.” – Senator Daniel K. Inouye, the highest ranking Asian-American politician in United States history (source)

Black budget programs  consist of Special Access Programs (SAPs). From these we have unacknowledged and waived SAPs. These programs do not exist publicly, but they do indeed exist. They are better known as ‘deep black programs.’ A 1997 US Senate report described them as “so sensitive that they are exempt from standard reporting requirements to the Congress.” (source)

The Washington Post revealed that the “black-budget” documents report  a staggering 52.6 billion dollars that was set aside for operations in the fiscal year 2013. Although it’s great to have this type of documentation in the public domain proving the existence of  these black budget programs, the numbers seem to be off according to some statements made by some very prominent people who have been involved in the defense sector for years. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that these programs are not using billions of dollars, but trillions of dollars that are unaccounted for. Here is a statement given by Canada’s former Minister of National Defence, Paul Hellyer in 2008:

It is ironic that the U.S. would begin a devastating war, allegedly in search of weapons of mass destruction when the most worrisome developments in this field are occurring in your own backyard.  It is ironic that the U.S. should be fighting monstrously expensive wars  allegedly to bring democracy to those countries, when it itself can no longer claim to be called a democracy when trillions, and I mean thousands of billions of dollars have been spent on projects which both congress and the commander in chief no nothing about(2)

We are talking about large amounts of unaccounted-for money going into programs we know nothing about. There have been several congressional inquiries that have noted billions, and even trillions of dollars that have gone missing from the federal reserve system. On July 16, 2001, in front of the house appropriations committee, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld stated:

The financial systems of the department of defence are so snarled up that we can’t account for some $2.6 trillion in transactions that exist, if that’s believable (3)

We don’t really hear about black budget programs, or about people who have actually looked into them.  However, the topic was discussed in 2010 by Washington Post journalists Dana Priest and William Arkin. Their investigation lasted approximately two years and concluded that America’s classified world has:

Become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employes, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work (4)

Another person was aviation journalist Bill Sweetman. Within the Pentagon, he estimated that approximately 150 special access programs existed that weren’t even acknowledged. These programs are not known about by the highest members of government and the highest ranking officials in the military. He determined that most of these programs were dominated by private contractors (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, etc.) and that he had no idea as to how these programs were funded(5)(8).

The amount that the US sets aside for sensitive operations each year is not allowed to be published for eyes outside of the intelligence community. We are in an age where the US is having a difficult time keeping sensitive information under wraps, and although there is an abundance of blatant information for the world to wake up to, that which is still kept under tight wraps has also become more transparent. Many phenomena previously labelled as merely a “conspiracy theory” are now surfacing as true and verifiable day after day.

  • The Corporate Connection To Government

“Because there’s absolutely no question. There are people in government, who truly agree when I talk with them, they agree that this mine shouldn’t go ahead, or that damn shouldn’t be built, or Monsanto shouldn’t be allowed to test its seeds here. It’s corruption really, the might of money, the corporations that hold governments in their hands, because of lobbying power and so forth, it’s really frightening.” – Jane Goodall

Because of this influence that corporations have over governments, a lot of information is swept under the rug. This happens in all industries, from energy to health, all the way to finance and education.  I’ve written a lot about medical fraud, and it’s a great way to show how corporate influence dominates our world, and manipulates/distorts important information.

The latest example comes from an independent review found that the commonly prescribed antidepressant drug Paxil (paroxetine), is not safe for teenagers, despite the fact that a large amount of literature already previously suggested this. The 2001 drug trial that took place, funded by GlaxoSmithKline, found that these drugs were completely safe, and used that ‘science’ to market Paxil as safe for teenagers.

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine”    Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor in Chief of the New England Medical Journal (source)

To view the most widely accessed article in the history of the Public Library of Science (PLoS), click here: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False It was a study published more than a decade ago bringing more awareness to this topic.

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.” Dr. Richard Horton, the current editor-in-chief of the Lancet (source)

“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”  – (source)(source) Arnold Seymour Relman (1923-2014), Harvard Professor of Medicine and Former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal

Another example comes fromA merican psychologist Lisa Cosgrove, who investigated Financial Ties between the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders (DSM) panel members and the pharmaceutical industry. 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, it’s the same thing. (source)(source)

The list here is a long one, and I just wanted to provide a brief example, and a place to start if you are further interested in continuing your research.

  • What’s Going On In Space?

“This thing has gotten so highly-classified… it is just impossible to get anything on it. I have no idea who controls the flow of need-to-know because, frankly, I was told in such an emphatic way that it was none of my business that I’ve never tried to make it to be my business since. I have been interested in this subject for a long time and I do know that whatever the Air Force has on the subject is going to remain highly classified.” – Senator Barry GoldwaterChairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee (source)

Space news has been at an all time high lately, especially with the recent discovery of water on Mars.

Also in the news recently, the Russian government has called for an international investigation into the United States moon landings. They are concerned about the disappearance of film footage from the original moon landing, as well as the missing 400 kilograms of lunar rock that was taken from multiple missions. You can read more about that here.

Perhaps one of the strangest things is the recent disclosure of UFO files by multiple countries around the world. These files indicate that governments have spent a great deal of resources investigating this very serious/real phenomenon.

For example, here is an article that sources various documents detailing what happens when a UFO is tracked on radar.

Here is a document (1 of thousands of pages) from the FBI illustrating what type of documents were typed up, and the ‘important’ people they were sent to. It provides details of extraterrestrial bodies and craft on pages 21 & 22. You can read more about that document here.

Here is an NSA document pertaining to UFOs, and here is another.

I’m skeptical about many things, including the notion that government always knows best, and that the people can’t be trusted with the truth. The time to pull the curtain back on this subject is long overdue. We have statements from the most credible sources – those in a position to know – about a fascinating phenomenon, the nature of which is yet to be determined.” – John Podesta, Councillor to Barack Obama, former Chief of Staff at the White House under the Clinton administration, and current head of Hilary Clinton’s presidential campaign (taken from Leslie Kean’s 2010 New York Timesbestseller, UFOs: Generals, Pilots, And Government Officials Go On The Record, in which Podesta wrote the forward)

Here is a video of him at the National Press Club speaking about the issue.

Here is the latest batch of files released by the UK government.

Keep in mind that these files, in my opinion and according to my research, are not even the tip of the iceberg when it comes to government secrecy about UFOs and extraterrestrial life. Who knows what information remains hidden from the public, or why it is so?

All of these now-public documents and statements, like the one below, have people turning their heads.

To view some more statements like the one below, you can browse through THIS heavily sourced article.

“There is a serious possibility that we are being visited and have been visited for many years by people from outer space, from other civilizations. That it behooves us, in case some of these people in the future or now should turn hostile, to find out who they are, where they come from, and what they want. This should be the subject of rigorous scientific investigation and not the subject of ‘rubishing’ by tabloid newspapers.” (source) – Lord Admiral Hill-Norton, Former Chief of Defence Staff, 5 Star Admiral of the Royal Navy, Chairman of the NATO Military Committee

“Decades ago, visitors from other plants warned us about where we were headed and offered to help.  But instead, we, or at least some of us, interpreted their visits as a threat, and decided to shoot first and ask questions after.” – Paul Hellyer, Former Canadian Defense Minister (source)

“Intelligent beings from other star systems have been and are visiting our planet Earth. They are variously referred to as Visitors, Others, Star People, Et’s, etc…They are visiting Earth now; this is not a matter of conjecture or wistful thinking. – Theodor C. Loder III, Phd, Professor Emeritus of Earth Sciences, University of New Hampshire (source)

Excerpt from the book “A.D. After Disclosure” written by Richard Dolan and Bryce Zabel

Richard Dolan’s Thoughts on the “Breakaway Civilization”

By now, the classified world has moved far beyond the reach of the public world, and far beyond in its power and capabilities. Consider the story of a former NSA scientist who spoke with the authors. According to this individual, the NSA was operating computers during the mid-1960s with a processing clock-speed of roughly 650 megahertz(MHZ). To put that in perspective, it took 35 years for personal computers in the consumer market to reach that speed. Indeed, in 1965 there were no personal computers at all. Immediately, the near-fatal Apollo 13 mission in 1971 comes to mind, with its reliance on slide-rulers by mission specialist to guide the damaged NASA spacecraft back to Earth. When presented with this image, the NSA scientist shrugged and stated that secret computational capabilities were too important to share with NASA. So in, in computing, the National Security Agency was an amazing 35 years ahead of the rest of the world. This leads one to wonder what its computational powers are today.

Another example was the U.S. air strike against Libya in 1986. The raid employed f-111 fighter aircraft. Left out of the mission, however, was the F-117A Nighthawk, better known as the stealth fighter. It had been operational since 1983, but was still classified in 1986. In a form of logic both perverse and rational, the F-117A was so radically advanced that keeping it secret was more important than using it for this military mission.

Given the mixture of a treasure chest of government money, and private connections, the likelihood exists that six decades later there is a clandestine group that possesses:

  • Technology that is vastly superior to that of the “mainstream” world.
  • The ability to explore areas of our world and surroundings presently unavailable to the rest of us.
  • Scientific and cosmological understandings that give them greater insights into the nature of our world
  • A significant “built off the grid” infrastructure, partially underground, that affords them a high degree of secrecy and independence of action

This might well qualify them as a separate civilization – one that has broken away from our own, in effect, a breakaway civilization. Still interacting with our own, its members probably move back and forth between the official reality of what we are supposed to believe, and the other reality which encompasses new truths and challenges.


Continue Reading


Anonymous has released another video, with this one titled, “This Is Unlike Anything We’ve Ever Seen.”

Anonymous has released another video, with this one titled, “This Is Unlike Anything We’ve Ever Seen.”

It paints a very ‘dark’ and ‘negative’ picture of the current human experience, which is one we may understandably feel when we look at current news. But there is something deeper going on here, and this is important to note. We have to focus on not getting so caught up in ‘the negative.’

Sometimes are afraid to acknowledge or even know about some of what’s happening in our world. Looked at without anything other than the ‘bad stuff’, this type of exposure can make you feel down and out. But with the right mix of news and information and by looking at it from a neutral place, things can seem very different.

As a result of so much global turmoil, lots of people prefer to take the ‘ignorance is bliss,’ route, and remain mentally comfortable here during their time on planet Earth.

Continue Reading


This Brilliant Animation Exposes The ‘Shadow Government’ That Controls Our Society (VIDEO)

I can’t stop watching this new animated short film, it is absolutely brilliant!


The depth of what writer, producer, and director — Lubomir Arsov — expresses is incredibly profound and explores our world in such a way that it gives me chills.

What I value is not just his ability to expose the insanity of modern society — and this inhumane system — but his awareness that there is a dark insidious presence controlling things in the background.

The fake music industry under the control of the shadow world

Our politicians are their puppets 

Children being “educated” by the shadow world

They are always lurking in the shadows

What I value the most though, is unlike many other artists who paint a picture of inescapable doom and gloom, Arsov reminds us that there is still hope — as his video takes us on a journey through the proverbial darkness and into the Light — because what we truly are is so much more powerful than what we have been permitted to believe.

Ascending to the Light, beyond the control of the shadow world

It is videos like these that help to fuel my soul in this great war between what I personally consider the intangible forces of good and evil.

I recommend putting your ear phones on, silencing the external world, and tuning in; because this video has the ability to awaken something deep within your mind and soul — the very forces we need to fight back intelligently and creatively — against the rapacious “shadow world.”

With that said, allow me to present you with this man’s brilliant work.

You can find the artist at the following profiles;


Original Soundtrack “Age of Wake” by Starward Projections
Composited by Sheldon Lisoy
Additional Compositing by Hiram Gifford

Written by Gavin Nascimento, Founder of

Find me also on;
YouTube (Please subscribe YT just banned my last account of over 13k followers)

All my work is open source and I encourage it to be reproduced. I only ask that you give me credit, and include my social media profiles as listed in the EXACT FORMAT above, in an effort to help me build a formidable following of people truly intent on learning and creating positive change. If you are not willing to do that, you are NOT permitted to use my work.

Continue Reading


Genetic Modifications – GMO and More

Frankenfoods to Frankly Horrific

by Robert Bruce Baird

The Rockefeller Foundation is an outgrowth of the Rothschild family desire to help develop a world where people can be managed according to a plan people are not participants in establishing. Maybe you are against certain elements of this plan; I am, but I know we need a plan and there is no other plan except by default a plan to de-populate the world. You might even say the two above-mentioned plans are connected after you read this.


I know Dr. Warren Weaver of the Rockefeller Foundation understood nuclear threats were a mere ‘hide the ball’ initiative despite being horrifically able to destroy life on Earth. He said that because in the mid-60s he was working on far more scientifically important research. It included the human genome since the days this Foundation moved away from Frederick T. Gates the Theologian evangelical who was a founding director of it. At that time they began to support Dr. Black in the late 1920s research on early man and his bones found in China.

In the interim or around the same time Weaver was the Foundation’s chief scientist we had Ezra Taft Benson as the U. S. Department of Agriculture head. He wrote a cover comment on the book None Dare Call It Conspiracy, which is still well worth reading. He then became the head of the Mormon Church and I believe in concert with other esoteric people in Salt Lake City a council of religious leaders which support far-reaching intrusions you have never heard about. That is a very brief introduction to what now begins to be discussed by this author. The Taft family are top Merovingian and eastern establishment people from colonial times and Ezra expanded their reach geographically and geometrically. In this article from a Pittsburgh paper you have Benson and Weaver commenting side by each. Averill Harriman and Brown Bros. were found guilty of supporting Hitler and one of their paladins or running dogs was Prescott Bush. Harriman later raised Shrub as your Manchurian Candidate on Jupiter Island, but that is a far larger use of science and media than I intend to address here. It would behoove the truly interested reader to read the thread The Most Important Man of the 20th Century (Colonel Edward Mandell House) to get a feel for the pre-war era connections to these plans including how the Rockefellers established the FED.…,1740091&hl=en


By 1992, President George H.W. Bush was ready to open the Pandora’s Box of GMO. In an Executive Order, the President made the ruling that GMO plants and foods were “substantially equivalent” to ordinary plants of the same variety, such as ordinary corn, soybeans, rice or cotton.5 The doctrine of “substantial equivalence” was the lynchpin of the whole GMO revolution. It meant that a GMO crop could be considered to be the same as a conventional crop, merely because GMO corn looked like ordinary corn or GM rice or soybean, and even tasted more or less like conventional corn, and because in its chemical composition and nutritional value, it was “substantially” the same as the natural plant. That determination that GMO plants were to be treated as “substantially equivalent” ignored the qualitative internal alteration required to genetically engineer the particular crop. As serious scientists pointed out, the very concept of “substantial equivalence” was itself pseudo-scientific. The doctrine of “substantial equivalence” had been created primarily to provide an excuse for not requiring biochemical or toxological tests.

Because of the Bush Administration’s “substantial equivalence” ruling, no special regulatory measures would be required for genetically engineered varieties. Substantial equivalence was a phrase which delighted the agribusiness companies. That wasn’t surprising, for Monsanto and the others had created it. Its premise was deceitful, as Bush’s science advisers well knew. Genetic modification of a plant or organism involved taking foreign genes and adding them to a plant such as cotton or soybeans to alter their genetic makeup in ways not possible through ordinary plant reproduction.


Often the introduction was made by a gene “cannon” literally blasting a plant with a foreign bacteria or . DNA segment to alter its genetic character. In agricultural varieties, hybridization and selective breeding had resulted in crops adapted to specific production conditions and regional demands. Genetic engineering differed from traditional methods of plant and animal breeding in very important respects. Genes from one organism could be extracted and recombined with those of another (using recombinant DNA, or rONA, technology) without either organism having to be of the same species. Second, removing the requirement for species reproductive compatibility, new genetic combinations could be produced in a highly accelerated way. The fateful Pandora’s Box had indeed been opened. The fictional horrors of the “Andromeda Strain” the unleashing of a biological catastrophe, was no longer the stuff of science fiction. The danger was real, and no one seemed to be overtly concerned. Genetic engineering introduced a foreign organism into a plant in a process that was imprecise and unpredictable. The engineered products were no more “substantially equivalent” to the original than a tiny car hiding a Ferrari engine would be to a Fiat. Ironically, while companies such as Monsanto argued for “sub*stantial equivalence” they also claimed patent rights for their genetically modified plants on the argument that their genetic engineering had created substantially new plants whose uniqueness had to be protected by exclusive patent protection.

They saw no problem in having their cake and eating it too . . With the Bush Administration 1992 ruling, that was to be upheld by every successive Administration, the US Government treated GMO or bio-engineered foods as “natural food additives” therefore not subjecting them to any special testing. If it wasn’t necessary to test normal corn to see if it was healthy to eat, so went the argument, why should anyone have to bother to test the “substantially equivalent” GMcorn, soybean, or GM milk hormones produced by Monsanto and the other agribusiness companies? In most cases, the Government regulatory agencies simply took the data provided to them by the GMO companies themselves in order to judge that a new product was fine. The US Government agencies never ruled against the gene giants.

Nature’s Most Perfect Food …

The first mass-marketed GMO food was milk containing a recom*binant Bovine Growth Hormone, known as rBGH. This was a genetic manipulation patented by Monsanto. The FDA declared the genetically-engineered milk safe for human consumption before crucial information on how the GM milk might affect human health was available, diligently holding up to the doctrine of sub*stantial equivalence. The rBGH hormone constituted a huge temptation for struggling dairy farmers. Monsanto claimed that if injected regularly with rBGH, which it sold under the trade name Posilac, cows would typically produce up to thirty percent more milk. For the struggling farmer, a thirty percent jump in output per cow was astonishing and virtually irresistible. Monsanto advertised that farmers should “leave no cow untreated”.

One state agriculture commissioner termed rBGH “crack for cows” because of its extraordinary stimulating effects on milk output.6 Monsanto’s new Posilac rBGH hormone not only stimulated the cow to produce more milk. In the process it stimulated production of another hormone, IGF-l, which regulated the cow’s metabolism, in effect, stimulating the cell division within the animal and hin*dering cell death. This is where problems began to appear. Various independent scientists spoke out, warning that Monsanto’s rBGH hormone increased the levels of insulin-like growth factors, and had a possible link to cancer. One of the most vocal scientists on the matter was Dr. Samuel Epstein, from the University of Illinois’s School of Public Health. Epstein, a recognized authority on carcinogens, warned of a growing body of scientific evidence that the Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF-l), was linked to the creation of human cancers, cancers which might not appear for years after initial exposure. Not surprisingly, hormone stimulation that got cows to pump 30% more milk had other effects.

Farmers began to report their cows burned out by as much as two years sooner, and that many cows had serious hoof or udder infections as a by-product of the rBGH hormone treatment, meaning that some of them could not walk. In turn, the cows had to be injected with more antibiotics to treat those effects. The FDA countered the growing criticism by using data pro*vided by Monsanto, which, not surprisingly, severely criticized the independent scientists. With Monsanto’s chief rBGH scientist, Dr. Robert Collier, with tongue firmly in cheek, retorted that, “In fact the FDA has commented several times on this issue …. They have publicly restated human safety confidence … this is not something knowledgeable people have concerns about.

That was hardly reassuring for anyone aware of the relationship between Monsanto and the FDA leadership. In 1991, a scientist at the University of Vermont leaked to the press that there was evidence of severe health problems affecting rBGH-treated cows, including mastitis, an inflammation of the udder, and deformed births. Monsanto had spent more than half a million dollars to fund the University of Vermont test trials of rBGH. The chief scientist of the project, in direct opposition to his alarmed researcher, had made numerous public statements asserting that rBGH cows had no abnormal levels of health problems compared with regular cows.

The unexpected leak from the upstart whistleblower was embarrassing for both Monsanto and the University receiving Monsanto research dollars, to say the least.9 The US General Accounting Office, an investigative arm of the US Congress, was called in to investigate the allegations. Both the University of Vermont and Monsanto refused to cooperate with the GAO, which was finally forced to give up the investigation with no results. Only years later did the University finally release the data, which indeed showed the negative health effects of rBGH. By then, however, it was too late. In 1991, the Food and Drug Administration created the new position of Deputy Commissioner for Policy to oversee agency policy on GMO foods.

The agency named Michael R. Taylor to be its first head. Taylor came to the job as a Washington lawyer. But not just any old garden variety of Washington lawyers. As ·a food and drug law specialist with the Washington power firm, King & Spalding, Taylor had previously successfully represented Monsanto and other biotech companies in regulatory cases. 10 Monsanto’s chief scientist, Margaret Miller, also assumed a top post in the FDA as Deputy Director of Human Food Safety at the beginning of the 1990’s. In this position, Dr. Miller, without an explanation, raised the FDA standard by 100 times for the permissible level of antibiotics that farmers could put into milk. She single-handedly cleared the way for a booming business for Monsanto’s rBGH hormone. A cozy club was emerging between private biotech companies and the government agencies that should be regulating them. It was a club more than a little fraught with potential conflict of interest.

As one of its top officials, Taylor helped the FDA draw up guide*lines to decide whether GMO foods should be labeled. His decision was not to label GMO foods. At the same time, again under Taylor’s guiding hand, the FDA ruled that risk-assessment data, such as data on birth defects in cattle or even possible symptoms in humans arising from consumption of GMO foods, could be withheld from the public as “confidential business information:’ Were it to leak out that Monsanto, Dow or other biotech com*panies were creating grotesque deformities in animals fed GMO foods, it might be detrimental for the stock price of the company, and that would damage the full flowering of private enterprise. This, at least, seemed the logic behind the perverse kind of “Shareholder value ueber Alles:’ As FDA Biotechnology Coordinator James Maryansky remarked, “The FDA would not require things to be on the label just because a consumer might want to know them.”

A lawyer for Monsanto, Michael R. Taylor, had been placed in charge of GMO food policy within the government’s principal food safety body. As a suitable postscript, honoring the adage, “we take care of our friends;’ Monsanto rewarded the diligent public ser*vant by appointing Michael Taylor to be Vice President of Monsanto for Public Policy after he left the FDA. 13 FDA and Monsanto Milk the Public By 1994, after a suitable amount of time had elapsed, the FDA approved the sale of rBGH milk to the public. Under the FDA rules, of course, it was unlabeled, so the consumer could avoid undue anxiety about giving himself or his children exposure to cancerous agents or other surprises. He would never know.

When Monsanto’s Posilac caused leukemia and tumors in rats, the US Pure Food and Drug Act was rewritten to allow a product that caused cancer in laboratory animals to be marketed for human consumption with*out a warning label. It was as simple as that. Though Monsanto claimed that its rBGH was one of the most thoroughly examined drugs in US history, rBGH was never tested in the long-term for (chronic) human health effects. A generally accepted principle in science holds that two years of testing is the minimal time for long-term health studies. rBGH was tested for only 90 days on 30 rats. The short-term rat study was submitted by Monsanto to the FDA but was never published. The FDA refused to allow anyone outside the administration to review the raw data from this study, saying that publication would “irreparably harm” Monsanto. Monsanto has continued to refuse to allow open sci*entific peer review of the 90 day study. This linchpin study of cancer and BGH has never been subjected to scrutiny by the scientific community. 14 Not content to feed GMO milk exclusively to its own unwary population, the US Government exerted strong pressure on Mexico and Canada also to approve rBGH, as part of an effort to expand Monsanto’s rBGH market globally.

However, the FDA-Monsanto campaign got a nasty setback in January 1999, when the Canadian counterpart to the FDA, Health Canada, broke ranks with the US and issued a formal “notice of non-compliance” disapproving future Canadian sales of rBGH, sometimes also called rBST or recombinant Bovine Somatotropin. The action followed strong pressure from the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association and the Royal College of Physicians, which presented evidence of the adverse effects of rBGH milk, including evidence of lameness and reproductive problems. Monsanto had been very eager to break into the Canadian market with its rBGH, even to the point, according to a Canadian CBC television report, that a Monsanto official tried to bribe a Canadian health official sitting on the Government review committee with an offer of $I-2 million, to secure rBGH approval in Canada without further studies. The insulted official reportedly asked, “Is that a bribe?” and the meeting ended.

Moreover, a special European Commission independent com*mittee of recognized experts concluded that rBGH, as reported in Canadian findings, not only posed the above-named dangers, but also major risks especially of breast and prostate cancer in humans. In August 1999, the United Nations Food Safety Agency, the Codex Alimentarius Commission, ,ruled unanimously in favor of a 1993 European Union moratorium on the introduction of Monsanto’s rBGH milk. Monsanto’s rBGH was thus banned from the EU.16 This setback was not to daunt the persistent bureaucrats at the FDA, or their friends at Monsanto. Since GMO labeling had been forbidden by the FDA, Americans were blissfully unaware of the dangers of drinking the milk they were encouraged to consume for better health.

“Nature’s most perfect food” was the dairy indus*try’s slogan for milk. With regard to reporting the UN decision and the negative Canadian conclusions, the US media were respect*fully quiet. Americans were simply told that the EU was trying to hurt American cattle farmers by refusing imports of hormone-fed US beef. One concerned FDA scientist who refused to sit by idly was FDA Veterinarian Dr. Richard Burroughs, who was responsible, from 1979 until 1989, for reviewing animal drugs such as rBGH. From 1985 until the year he was fired, Burroughs headed the FDA’s review of Monsanto’s rBGH, thus being directly involved in the evaluation process for almost five years. Burroughs wrote the original proto*cols for animal safety studies and reviewed the data submitted by rBGH developers from their own safety studies. In a 1991 article in Eating Well magazine, Burroughs described a change in the FDA beginning in the mid-1980s. Burroughs was faced with corporate representatives who wanted the FDA to ease strict safety testing protocols. He reported seeing corporations dropping off sick cows from rBGH test trials and then manipulat*ing data in such ways as to make health and safety problems “disappear.”


Burroughs challenged the agency’s lenience and its changing role from guardian of public health to protector of corporate profits. He criticized the FDA and its handling of rBGH in statements to Congressional investigators, in testimonies to state legislatures, and in declarations to the press. Within the FDA, he rejected a number of corporate-sponsored safety studies, calling them insufficient. Finally, in November 1989, he was fired for “incompetence.” The FDA failed to act on the evidence that rBGH was not safe. In fact, the agency promoted the Monsanto Corporation’s product before and after the drug’s approval. Dr. Michael Hansen of Consumers Union noted that the FDA acted as an rBGH advocate by issuing news releases promoting rBGH, making public state*ments praising the drug, and writing promotional pieces about rBGH in the agency’s publication, FDA

In April 1998, two enterprising award-winning television journalists at Fox TV, an influential US network owned by Rupert Murdoch, put together the remarkable story of the rBGH scandal including its serious health effects. Upon pressure by Monsanto, Fox killed the story and fired Jane Akre and her husband Steve. In an August 2000 Florida state court trial, the two won a jury award of $425,000 damages and the Court found that Fox “acted intentionally and deliberately to falsify or distort the plaintiffs’ news reporting on rBGH.”19 With their ample financial resources, Fox Television and Monsanto took the case to a higher court on appeal and got the decision reversed on a legal technicality. The FDA kept silent.

Monsanto continued to market rBGH milk unabated. As one former US Department of Agriculture official stated, the guiding regulatory percent for genetically modified foods was, “don’t tell, don’t ask:’ which meant, “If the industry does not tell government what it knows about its GMOs, the government does not ask:’20 That was little reassurance for the health and safety concerns of the population. Few ever realized it however, as on the surface it appeared that the FDA and other relevant agencies were guarding their health interests in the new area of GMO foods.


15 In January 2004, after FDA inspectors broke their silence by declaring having found unacceptable levels of contamination in rBGH, Monsanto finally announced it would reduce the supply of Posilac by 50%. Many thought Monsanto would quietly discontinue production of the dangerous hormone. Not easily deterred by anything, least of all evidence of danger to human health, Monsanto announced a year later that they planned to increase the supply of Posilac again, initially to 70% of its peak level. They had come under enormous pressure not only from citizens concerned about health consequences, but also from farmers who realized that the 30% rise in national milk output from dairy herds had only served to create an even larger glut of unsold milk in a nation already in surplus. It had also triggered collapsing milk prices. By then, Monsanto had moved on to corner the global market in seeds for the most important staples in the human and animal diets.

Monsanto’s Cozy Government Relations

The relation between the US Government and giant GMO seed producers such as Monsanto, DuPont or Dow AgriSciences was not accidental.


The Government encouraged development of unregulated GMO crops as a strategic priority, as noted, since the early years of the Reagan Presidency, long before it was at all clear whether such engineering of nature was at all desirable. It was one thing for a government to support long-term laboratory research through science grants. It was quite another thing to open the market’s floodgates to untested, risky new procedures which had the potential to affect the basic food supply of the country and of the entire planet.”


Continue Reading