Connect with us


Nestle: Global Water Predator

Nestle: Global Water Predator 86

Nestle is a global predator. It lies calling itself “the world’s leading nutrition, health and wellness company.”

“Our mission of ‘Good Food, Good Life’ is to provide consumers with the best tasting, most nutritious choices in a wide range of food and beverage categories and eating occasions, from morning to night.”

Acquiring competitors secured it numerous water brands. They’re listed under the heading “Nestle Waters: The Healthy Hydration Company.”

They include Aqua Spring, Deep Spring, Glaciar, Ice Mountain, Perrier, Poland Spring, and Pure Life among others. They’re sold in dozens of countries worldwide.

It does so by stealing community water resources. It claims what’s “good for business can also be beneficial to society. This is what we call Creating Shared Value,” it claims.

It calls nutrition the only Nestle “raison d’etre.” Its concern for public health rings hollow. Profits alone matter.

“Rational water management is an absolute priority,” Nestle claims. It drains public aquifers and other water sources. It leaves communities high and dry when they’re exhausted.

It’s costly bottled water is no different from what most people in developed countries can get through their taps.

For sure it’s no better. At times it’s worse. In July 2013, the Natural Resources Defense Council(NRDC) headlined “Bottled Water: Pure Drink or Pure Hype?”

Its report discussed earlier findings. They show “bottled water is not necessarily safer than tap water.” Facts and figures don’t lie.


They expose water predators like Nestle. They rip off consumers. They make false claims to do so.

NRDC found “major gaps in bottled water regulation and conclude(d) that bottled water is not necessarily safer than tap water.”

Independent labs were used. They tested over 1,000 bottles of 103 brands.

One-third contained “significant contamination (i.e. levels of chemical or bacterial contaminants exceeding those allowed under a state or industry standard or guideline).”

Contaminants found in some samples included excessive coliform bacteria, and synthetic organic compounds. Ones named were toluene, xylene, styrene and others.


Flouride, phthalate, arsenic, nitrates, and other inorganic contaminants were found. Labeling stresses purity.

A January 2009 Food and Water Watch report was titled “All Bottled Up: Nestle’s Pursuit of Community Water,” saying:

“Nestle takes water from US communities” on the cheap. It “bottles and sells it. (It does so) for billions of dollars in profit. (It) dumps the environmental and other costs onto society.”

It ignores community and citizen rights. It plunders for bottom line priorities. It bottles what’s no different from tap water. It sells it “for thousands of times more cost” than what most people in developed countries can get cheap or free.

It contributes to pollution doing so. It from its plastic bottle production, as well as processing and distributing water.

It “greenwashe(s)” harmful environmental fallout. “Of the billions of empty plastic bottles that end up in landfills every year, Nestle’s brands” contribute hundreds of millions.

It’s a global predator writ large. It’s all take and no give. Weak regulatory oversight permits ripping off communities for profit.

Vandana Shiva calls privatized water “ecological terrorism.” It contributes to global water crisis conditions. It causes overuse, waste and pollution.

It results in “the most pervasive, most severe, and most invisible dimension of the ecological devastation of the earth.”

It’s a road to “ecological crisis with commercial causes but no market solutions.”

It “destroy(s) the earth and aggravate(s) inequality. Solving “an ecological crisis is ecological,” she says. Solving “injustice is democracy.”

Water is a fundamental human right. Nestle claims it a food for sale. Shiva says water rights are natural and “usufructuary.”

It can be “used.” It can’t be “owned.” It belongs to everyone. It’s part of the commons.

It’s essential for life “under customary laws. (T)he right to water has been accepted as a natural, social fact.”

It’s “nature’s gift.” There’s no substitute. It’s vital “for sustenance needs.” Life is “interconnected through water.”

It’s limited and exhaustible. Conserving it is essential.

“No one has a right to overuse, abuse, waste, pollute,” or own it.

It’s not a commodity. It belongs to everyone. Water predators like Nestle exploit it for profit.

Stop Nestle calls itself “a gathering point for rural citizens fighting to preserve control of their water supplies and local economies from Nestle.”

“Why are we targeting Nestle Waters,” it asked? “Because Nestle’s predatory tactics in rural communities divide small towns and pit residents against each other.”

“Because Nestle reaps huge profits from the water they extract from rural communities – which are left to deal with the damage to watersheds, increases in pollution and the loss of their quiet rural lifestyle.”

“Because Nestle has a pattern of bludgeoning small communities and opponents with lawsuits and interfering in local elections to gain control of local water supplies.”

“Because the environmental consequences of bottled water on our atmosphere, watersheds and landfills are simply too big to ignore.”

Since 1993, McCloud, CA residents contested Nestle’s plan to build America’s largest bottling plant. They intended a huge one million square foot facility.

McCloud’s Services District contractually agreed. It did so secretly. No public input was allowed. Completion would have given Nestle control of McCloud’s water for 100 years.

It would have gotten it for virtually nothing. It operates the same way everywhere. It’s no good neighbor. Plunder is its bottom line priority.

It interfered in local McCould elections. It funded campaigns of pro-company candidates. It bought their support. It intimidated opponents. It harassed them.

It “had their legal hit squad subpoena (their) private financial records.”

It failed. Justice prevailed. In 2009, it abandoned plans to build in McCloud. It chose Sacramento instead.

Nestle sued Fryeburg, ME five times. Doing so tried to litigate it into insolvency. It sought the right to steal its aquifer water. It wanted it by default.

Corporate predators operate this way. Nestle’s size and financial clout make it formidable.

Fryeburg’s planning commission and citizens contested courageously. They opposed Nestle’s proposed 24/7 water pumping station. They faced long odds.

In return for intrusiveness, bullying, litigiousness, congestion, noise and pollution, Nestle offered townspeople virtually nothing. It contested them up to Maine’s Supreme Court.

In March 2010, it prevailed. It won the right to build a water pumping station. It did so despite overwhelming public opposition. It’s empowered to steal Fryeburg’s water.

Western Maine Residents for Rural Living attorney Scott Anderson fought a losing battle. Nestle gets water from around two dozen wells. They’re located in eight Maine communities.

It’s bottling plants operate in Hollis, Poland Spring and Kingfield. It bears repeating. Nestle’s no good neighbor. It’s a corporate predator writ large.

According to Stop Nestle, its “transgressions against rural communities and watersheds include communities from the Northwest, Michigan, Maine, Florida and Canada.”

It profits by stealing their water. It usually gets what it wants. It does so by bribing and/or bullying local politicians. Other times, it prevails litigiously.

Not always. It failed in McCloud. Enumclaw, WA and Kennebunk, ME “summarily kicked (it) out of” their communities. It’s not going quietly into the night.

Stealing water for virtually nothing is too profitable to abandon. Nestle pursues every way possible to do it.

Stop Nestle uses “community-building powers of the Internet to counter Nestle’s big-dollar PR/legal/marketing legions.”

It wants communities across America in control of their own water. It wants Nestle and other water predators kept out.

In March 2012, Marseille, France hosted two international forums on water issues.

On March 16, 2012, Public Services International headlined “The resounding message from people’s world water forum: Reclaim public water!”

The World Water Council promotes privatization. An Alternative World Water Forum opposes its agenda.

It focuses on water as a human right. It’s a common good. It belongs to everyone. It’s not a commodity for sale.

It supports establishing universal legal standards. It wants them in place to prevent corporate water predators from stealing public water.

It wants water free from corporate exploitation. It’s an essential to life resource.

The Transnational Institute (TNI) promotes water justice. It says “(t)he 1990s witnessed an ideologically-driven global push for water privatisation that failed to deliver promised investments and pushed prices beyond the reach of the poorest.”

“Water Justice believes it is critical to refocus the global water debate on the key (issue): how to improve and expand public water delivery around the world.”

It facilitates reclaiming water as a public resource. It does so by working with “an international network of civil society activists, trade unionists, academics, as well as water utility managers and engineers.”

Together they promote people-centred democratic public water servicesAdvocates and facilitate public-public partnerships (PUPs).”

They represent “civil society’s voice in the UN’s Global Water Operators Partnerships Alliance (GWOPA).”

The struggle to control world water pits communities and ordinary people against giant corporate predators.

At stake is what’s essential to human life. It bears repeating. Water belongs to everyone. It’s a universal right.

It’s not the private domain of predators to exploit. Doing so is “ecological terrorism.”

The struggle for water continues. It’s a life sustaining resource too important to lose.


Activist Post

Image Credit


Professor: the virus has all the signs of a biological weapon! More and more people fall ill with covid-19 again, which shows a rapid disappearance of immunity

Professor: the virus has all the signs of a biological weapon! More and more people fall ill with covid-19 again, which shows a rapid disappearance of immunity 99

There is every reason to say that SARS-CoV-2 has signs of a biological weapon, a Russian infectious disease doctor, MD, Professor Mikhail Bala said. 

Answering the question about the possible artificial origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, Professor Mikhail Bala noted that the virus primarily attacks certain categories of the population: the elderly, overweight people, patients with chronic cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases, diabetes mellitus.

“There is every reason to say that the virus has signs of a biological weapon. This is not my fantasy. These are statements by very respected people, including experts on such weapons, ”the doctor said.

The doctor of medical sciences emphasized that this virus in most of its parameters corresponds to biological weapons, and a person who has recovered from COVID-19 remains a source of infection for others for a long time.

“Suppose someone needs a certain part of the population to suffer losses. What does he do. First, it creates conditions for this pathogen to penetrate into such a part of the population, no matter how far it is from the main traffic flows. Therefore, it must be an airborne transmission route, possibly supplemented by contact or food. The second is a long incubation – up to 14 days. During the incubation period, an infected person poses the greatest danger, and therefore is the most effective in spreading the virus ,” Professor Mikhail Bala said.

But the main thing, according to the doctor, is the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to penetrate into target cells: 

“This excellent capture mechanism allows the virus to easily enter the human body.”

The human immune system reacts to the virus in a paradoxical way, the professor says.

“Usually the virus enters the cell and controls the replication process, and in order to prevent the virus, the body turns on the mechanism of immune antiviral defense and takes control of the situation. But in this case, the opposite is true! ” – Bala declares.

“The stronger the body’s immune response, the greater the scale of the process of destruction of the cells and internal organs of the patient. A cytokine storm begins: the immune system is racing. She not only does not fight, but begins to bring down her own mechanisms of life. The virus hits cells, disrupts their metabolism. And the more the cell has previously suffered from chronic diseases, the more damage the virus inflicts on it ,” Professor Mikhail Bala explains.

“There are all the signs of the artificial origin of the virus: long incubation, high infectivity and virulence. Plus the target audience: people with chronic diseases, ” the doctor of medical sciences said.

Rapid disappearance of immunity?

In late June, Sanne de Jong developed nausea, shortness of breath, muscle pain and a runny nose. At first, she thought it was the effects of covid-19, which she contracted in the spring.

On April 17, 22-year-old de Jong was tested for coronavirus, which gave a positive result. Mild symptoms persisted for about two weeks. On May 2, she again passed the test, and the result was negative. She managed to say goodbye to her dying grandmother and returned to work at the Rotterdam hospital, where she was doing an internship.

But when she had symptoms again, the doctor suggested that the girl take the test again. “Re-infection so soon is strange, but possible ,” said Dr. de Jong, who had by then lost her sense of smell again and was suffering from stomach pain and diarrhea.

On July 3, she received a call from the municipal health service to inform her that the test result was again positive. “Are you joking!” The girl exclaimed.

Scientists are very interested in such cases. They are rare, but more and more of them. Re-infection indicates that immunity from covid-19 may be weak and disappear rather quickly. The danger lies not only in the fact that recovered patients risk getting sick again. We don’t know how long future vaccines will protect humans.

“Everyone wants to find an answer to the question of whether the second infection will be more severe in most cases than the first,” said Derek Cummings, who studies Infectious Disease Dynamics at the University of Florida. “And they are eager to know what re-infection can tell us about immunity from SARS-CoV-2 in general . 

South Korean scientists first reported possible re-infections in April, but this diagnosis was officially confirmed only on 24 August. The 33-year-old man was treated at a Hong Kong hospital in March for a mild form of SARS-CoV-2, and on August 15, he was again diagnosed with the infection during an examination at a Hong Kong airport when he returned from a trip to Spain. Since then, at least 24 cases of reinfection have been officially confirmed, but scientists say there are actually many more.

To confirm reinfection, the patient must have a twice positive PCR test result with an asymptomatic one month break. But virologist Chantal Reusken of the Dutch National Institute for Health and Environment explains that a second test can also be positive if the patient has residual non-replicating viral RNA in the patient’s airways from the first infection due to simultaneous infection with two viruses or because the virus was suppressed, but not completely destroyed. Therefore, most scientific journals want to see two complete virus sequences from the first and second diseases, significantly different from each other. Paul Moss, a hematologist at the University of Birmingham, talks about this. “The bar is very high,” he says.

But even if there is, many laboratories do not have enough time and money to tackle this closely. As a result, the number of genetically proven re-infections is many times less than the number of suspected re-infection. Holland alone has 50 such cases, Brazil 95, Sweden 150, Mexico 285, and Qatar at least 243.

The second infection in the Hong Kong patient was milder than the first. Immunologists suspected that this would be the case, because the first infection creates a certain immunity. This helps explain why re-infections are rare, says Maria Elena Bottazzi, a molecular virologist at Baylor Medical College and Texas Children’s Hospital.

In the next two months, re-infections may increase if those who have been ill earlier begin to lose their immunity. Re-infections with the four coronaviruses that cause the common cold occur on average after 12 months, as recently demonstrated by a team of researchers led by virologist Lia van der Hoek of the University of Amsterdam Medical Center. Van der Hock thinks covid-19 may have the same pattern.

“I think we better prepare for the wave of re-infections that will rise in the coming months ,” she says. 

This is bad news for those who still believe in herd immunity from natural infections, the virologist adds. It’s also a wake-up call for future vaccines.

Other scientists are less pessimistic. Antibodies can be significantly weakened over several months, especially if the patient has a mild disease, but sometimes they are still effective. Neutralizing antibodies, as well as memory B cells and T cells, appear to be fairly stable for at least half a year, according to a paper published in a preview on Nov.16. “For the vast majority of people, this will certainly help avoid hospitalization for illness and severe illness for many years to come,” lead author Shane Crotty of the Institute of Immunology in La Jolla told The New York Times.

And there are also hints that people with severe illness from covid-19 have the strongest immunity, as is the case with two other serious diseases caused by coronavirus – SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome. In both cases, the level of antibodies is so high that immunity lasts up to two years. And the T-cell response to SARS can be detected even later. Because the immune defenses are so robust, “I believe most re-infections will be asymptomatic,” says infectious disease specialist Antonio Bertoletti at the National University of Singapore. According to him, it is even useful to be infected again, because this way “you will continue to strengthen and train the immune system.”

But not all repeated infections recorded to date are mild. “We see all sorts of combinations,” says Rusken. When Luciana Ribeiro, a surgeon from Rio de Janeiro, fell ill for the second time, the illness was much worse. She first contracted the infection in March from a colleague, her symptoms were mild and tests came back shortly thereafter. Three months later, the woman again developed symptoms of coronavirus infection. She did not smell while eating, but did not immediately take tests, believing that she had immunity. However, the woman began to get tired more and more and asked for a CT scan. “It showed that half of my lungs were affected,” Ribeiro said. – The radiologist said it was definitely covid. 

Ribeiro thinks that she was reinfected by a patient in the intensive care unit where she works, and that the second illness could be much more serious, as during the medical procedure, an airborne mixture with a high content of viruses entered her lungs. But she has another theory: “Perhaps during this time the virus has become more dangerous.”

So far, there is no evidence that the virus mutates, becoming more pathogenic, and mutations help the virus bypass immunity. But recently, scientists at the Swedish Medical Center in Seattle published preliminary data from a study and suggested that mutations exist. Scientists talked about a man who became infected in March and fell ill again four months later. The second virus had a mutation that was widespread in Europe. It causes small changes in the spike protein of the virus, which helps it enter human cells.

Although the patient’s symptoms were weaker the second time, neutralization experiments showed that the antibodies that appeared in connection with the first virus fight the second virus rather weakly. The authors note that this could have important implications for vaccination programs.

And some scientists are worried about another scenario in which the second episode of the disease could get worse. This occurs when an unsuccessful immune response to the first infection exacerbates the second response. For example, in dengue fever, antibodies produced in response to an initial infection help dengue viruses and other serum types enter cells, causing a more severe, sometimes fatal, second infection. In some other diseases, the first infection results in ineffective antibodies and T cells, which prevents an effective response a second time.

In a paper recently published by Chinese scientists, it is said that patients with very severe first covid-19 infection may have ineffective antibodies, so they are prone to re-infection in the same severe form. But so far, observations of re-infected patients do not give grounds to assert that with covid-19 the disease intensifies, although scientists cannot rule out this.

Vaccination against certain diseases can also worsen the patient’s condition later. Complications are known to arise from vaccines against dengue and respiratory syncytial virus in humans, as well as against coronavirus diseases in cats. But, according to Cummings, there is no indication yet that future covid-19 vaccines could cause such complications. “After working with dengue, I can say that there is simply no empirical basis for aggravating the disease, and dengue is very strong,” said Cummings.

The virus samples taken from de Jong were sequenced in both cases in Rusken’s laboratory. The result was unexpected. The sequences were not identical, but there were so many similarities between them that virologist Harry Vennema said: “Probably, in April, the virus did not completely disappear from her, and in June it began to replicate again.” “After my first illness, I was very stressed by the death of my grandmother,” says de Jong. “Maybe it affected my immune system.”

In this case, she had a fake re-infection, although Vennema says there is not much difference, because in both cases, the immune system was unable to provide a protective response. His lab has identified at least one similar case, suggesting that some of the unconfirmed re-infections are actually the result of the virus re-emerging from the first infection.

Other coronaviruses can also cause persistent infections, according to Stanley Perlman of the University of Iowa. In 2009, his team proved that the mouse coronavirus, which causes encephalitis, can persist in the body and trigger immune responses for a long time, even if it does not replicate. In a study published on November 5, a group of American scientists showed that SARS-CoV-2 can persist in the intestine for several months. They suggested that such persistent infections explain the symptoms, which persist for an extremely long time and bother those who have recovered from covid-19.

De Jong has some of these symptoms. The September tests were negative and the girl has a high level of antibodies. So she’s protected for at least a couple of months. However, she has complaints of gastrointestinal problems, fatigue and impaired cognitive functions. De Jong says her case should serve as a warning to those who have had the virus and who, after illness, consider themselves invulnerable. “Please, be careful. You could get sick again, ”she warns.

Continue Reading


Why are Spanish scientists working to create a chimera of man and ape in China?

Why are Spanish scientists working to create a chimera of man and ape in China? 100

The Internet is full of rumors. So, according to the leaked studies of Spanish scientists, as reported by El Pais, the world’s first ape-human hybrid was created in a Chinese laboratory. 

Lead author Juan Carlos Ispisua previously worked on pig and human embryos. The proposed research goal is to use animals to create organs for human transplantation. In the course of the work, scientists injected human stem cells into the monkey embryo, allowing the cells to create any kind of tissue within the embryo. But for ethical reasons, the Spanish authorities stopped the experiment before the animals began to get pregnant. For this reason, Spanish scientists were forced to conduct an experiment in China, since the country has a large infrastructure in transgenic scientific field – in other words,

The research project was led by biologist Juan Carlos Ispisua, who also runs a laboratory at the Salk Institute of California. The stated aim of the work is to figure out how to use animals to create organs for human transplantation.

Creation of chimeras ape man

Despite the fact that the word “chimera” sounds intimidating, their creation is relatively simple and not even scary. Scientists inject human embryonic stem cells into another species of embryo that is only a few days old. Ispisua has experience with this kind of research, as he previously tried to add human cells to pig embryos. As his research with pigs ran into obstacles, he turned to experiments on primate embryos.

During the creation of chimeras, scientists genetically engineer certain types of animal cells to be disabled so that human stem cells have a better chance of anchoring. This kind of research is prohibited in a number of countries, but in China, for example, there are no such laws.

Why are Spanish scientists working to create a chimera of man and ape in China? 101
Japanese scientist plans to insert human cells into rat embryos (pictured)

It is important to understand that the human-ape hybrid in question has never been born. The fact is that mixed embryos do not progress after one to two weeks of growth in the laboratory. In a statement to El País, Estrella Nunez, biologist and administrator of the Catholic University of Murcia, said that mechanisms have been created to stop the progressive growth of the embryo.

The creation of the ape-man chimera, like other such experiments, has generated mixed reactions from the general public. For example, a number of ethical questions have been raised, such as the fear that human stem cells might somehow migrate into the brain of a monkey embryo. Dr. ngel Raya of the Barcelona Center for Regenerative Medicine told El Pais the following:

What happens if stem cells break out and form human neurons in the animal’s brain? Will he have consciousness? What happens if these stem cells turn into sperm?

However, Nunez notes that human cells self-destruct if they enter the brain. In addition, there is an established agreed date for the destruction of all such chimeras – 14 days of pregnancy. This is necessary so that the embryo does not have time to develop the central nervous system.

The consequences of such studies

Nunez described her findings as “very promising,” and said the study was pending peer review in a reputable scientific journal. At the moment, we are not aware of the full scope of the experiment, as the results have not yet been published.

Notably, this news came after Japan became the first country to approve experiments with human and animal embryos. The Japanese government intends to allow stem cell researchers to conduct experiments with the same goal – one day, create organs that could be transplanted into humans.

Why are Spanish scientists working to create a chimera of man and ape in China? 102
Genetic engineering is developing rapidly, which sometimes causes alarm to the general public

There is still debate over whether this is the best method. Pablo Ross, a UC Davis veterinarian who has worked on experiments on pig and human chimeras, doesn’t believe it makes sense to grow human organs in monkey cells, for example. 

“I’ve always thought there was no point in using primates for this. They are usually very small and take too long to develop, ”he said in an interview with Big Think.

Ross believes that researchers may be looking for answers to more fundamental scientific questions, such as “evolutionary distance and interspecies barriers,” since the creation of chimeras causes disgust in both the public and ethicists. Whether the research proves to be valid or productive, it still – at first glance – continues to push the boundaries of biological and genetic research.

Although China has already made a mistake with the scientist He Juankui, who edited the genes of two babies, the country’s open laws generally allow for more daring experiments.

Continue Reading


Scientists create meat from human cells. Its name is ‘Ouroboros’

Scientists create meat from human cells. Its name is 'Ouroboros' 103

A group of American scientists and designers have created meat grown from human cells, according to Deezen.

The grown steak was named Ouroboros by scientists. This word denotes a snake biting its own tail and is an ancient symbol of eternity and the cyclical nature of life. The authors of the project themselves do not consider this method of manufacturing cannibalism.

In addition, the creators believe that such meat can be grown in eateries or right at home. To get a steak, you need to harvest your own cells from the inside of your cheek and then place them in expired blood serum. As a result, a piece of meat the size of one bite grows from the cells. The whole growing process takes three months.

The authors emphasize that the advantage of the study is the absence of harm to animals. A person gets all the same meat, but no one dies. The scientists used expired donated blood as a basis. If it had not been taken for development, then the doctors would have simply disposed of it.

McDonald’s began testing a meatless burger last September. Restaurants in Germany, for example, have added vegetarian burgers to their menus. It is not yet known how many vegan items on the McDonald’s menu will appear next year and in which countries they will be available. 

Earlier in November, it became known that the restaurant chain plans to launch its own vegan McPlant burger cutlet next year. So far, we are talking about a beef substitute, but in the future, vegan chicken may appear in the chain’s restaurants. The project involves the manufacturer of artificial meat Beyond Meat.

Continue Reading