FEMA simulation warns unstable food supply may cause 395% spike in food prices across America

The globalist powers are planning for a real-life Hunger Games scenario in the next 15–20 years, according to new reports. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) says food prices are likely to quadruple all across the U.S. between 2020 and 2030, and that many people could end up having to fight for their survival during this unprecedented food crisis.

The bad news was unveiled at a meeting held back in November, where representatives from the State Department, the World Bank and agribusiness giant Cargill announced the findings of a Food Chain Reaction simulation game that predicts "food price and supply swings amidst burgeoning population growth, rapid urbanization, severe weather events, and social unrest."

The game, which is being held up as "scientific research" for evaluation by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and FEMA, highlights widespread crop failures as triggering a chain reaction of food shortages in the very near future. The results of the game were also published as a series of studies by the CNA Corporation back in December.

Mono-cropping techniques, chemical herbicides, genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) and other factors of industrial agriculture are major offenders in this regard; they're perpetually killing our soils and putting our food supply at risk. But instead of highlighting any of this, the studies instead blame "extreme weather events," "food insecurity," and "instances of significant internal and external migration and social unrest" as being the main contributors.

Consequently, the push will likely now be for more chemical inputs, more industrialization and more of mankind interfering with nature to try to make it "better" and more resilient to the coming turmoil. The fact that the CNA Corporation, a military contractor, published the studies, also suggests that the forecast is an omen of potential martial law.

This is further indicated by a panel held after the game's unveiling, entitled "The National Security implications of Climate Change and Food Security," which featured Nancy Stetson, the State Department's Special Representative for Global Food Security.

"Four different organisations commissioned CNA Corp to conduct the exercise: the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the Center for American Progress, giant food corporation Cargill, which controls a quarter of US grain exports, and Mars Inc., the global sweet manufacturer," explains VICE.

Federal government announces literal 'hunger game,' coming to a town near you

The peculiar use of the word "game" to describe this coming food crisis – nearly every media report seems to use this term – seems to be an eerily prophetic omen stemming from the Hunger Games series and other similar predictive programming fed up to the masses in recent years.

It appears as though world governments are prepping the general public, not only for higher food prices in the near future, but also for higher fuel prices. As agricultural production decreases due to "weather-related disruptions," oil prices are expected to rise by nearly 25 percent after 2023, the game predicts.

It also predicts that by 2024, excess heat due to "global warming" will trigger droughts, resulting in a nearly fourfold increase in food prices. These price increases will stimulate greater food production, which the game predicts will eventually bring food prices back down to a more normalized level around 2027, but only if business continues as usual with status quo industrial agriculture – and only if world governments agree to massive cash infusions to the UN's World Food Programme.

In other words, the game is about scaring people into further consolidating our food supply, all for the benefit of global food corporations.

"The role of Cargill and Mars Inc. in sponsoring the exercise could explain why the project failed to address the deep-seated problems of the prevailing industrial food system," VICE notes.

To learn more about how to prepare for social unrest and food shortages, check out the Ranger Bucket Organic Emergency Storable Food Supply here.

Read more »

London grocery stores prepare to sell Fukushima rice despite health concerns over radiated food

Rice grown in the zone surrounding the still-radioactive Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant will now be sold in London grocery stores, the European Union (EU) announced in late June.

In March 2011, the Fukushima plant suffered multiple meltdowns after being struck by a massive earthquake and tsunami. It was the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl in 1986, and only the second nuclear accident to receive the highest possible rating on the International Nuclear Event Scale.

The explosions scattered radioactive material across the area surrounding the plant, an area of Japan formerly famous for its agricultural production of crops from rice to peaches.

Regulators claim the food is safe, but is it?

Following the disaster, the EU and many other countries banned food imports from the Fukushima area, due to concerns about radioactive contamination of food. The primary concern, as far as regulators are concerned, is the presence of radioactive isotopes such as Cesium-137 (Cs-137), which likely contaminated the soil following the disaster, and could later have been taken up by growing plants.

Cs-137 has a half life of 30 years, and takes centuries to decay to non-detectable levels. If ingested, it remains in the body, where it continues its radioactive decay and continually exposes the body to internal radiation.

In recent months, the EU has begun lightening its restrictions on foods from Fukushima, with the first fruit imports allowed as of January. The United Kingdom will become the first EU country to import rice from Fukushima.

Despite its recent popular vote to exit the EU, the United Kingdom is likely to remain part of the union for several more years.

EU rules will require all rice from Fukushima to be tested before import, to make sure that they do not contain any radioactive isotopes. According to conventional regulatory wisdom, this is enough to guarantee the safety of food, even if it has previously been exposed to radiation.

But, organic food advocates have raised concerns that irradiation may modify the nutrient content of foods, possibly creating dangerous free radicals that can themselves cause cell and DNA damage.

Today the UK ... tomorrow the USA

Under the terms of the recent agreement, 1.9 tons of a Fukushima rice variety called Ten no Tsubu will be imported into the United Kingdom for sale by London retailers, wholesalers and restaurants, including high-end Bond Street restaurant, Tokimeite. This will make the United Kingdom the third country to import Fukushima rice commercially, after Singapore and Malaysia.

The opening of London markets to Fukushima rice came after a long campaign by Fukushima farmers, who are seeking to change the global perception of their products as being tainted by radioactivity.

"It's bright news for Fukushima, which has been struggling with the import restrictions. We will make further efforts so the restrictions will be lifted entirely," said a spokesperson for an office in the Fukushima government.

Fukushima farmers announced their intention to seek more markets for their products.

"With the UK as a foothold, we hope to expand the sale of prefecture-produced rice to other EU member countries," said Nobuo Ohashi of the farmers group Zen-Noh.

"We would like to expand Japanese rice exports not only to the UK but also to the world, by enabling Japanese rice to be tasted in the UK," the group's PR manager, Seiichi Niizuma, said.

The decision is part of a larger trend of officials seeking to change the public perception of Fukushima. In March, the US National Academy of Sciences said that most seafood caught off the coast of Japan can safely be eaten.

"The overall contamination risk for aquatic food items is very low," the academy said in a report.

It remains to be seen whether consumers will trust such official assurances. Acceptance may be hampered by a recent admission that Fukushima operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), actively covered up the fact that the plant was in meltdown for a full two months after the disaster.

"I would say it was a cover-up," TEPCO president Naomi Hirose said. "It's extremely regrettable."

Read more »

FDA crushes patient access to nutritious medical foods that help prevent and reverse disease

The most oppressive force when it comes to standing between Americans who want to make many of their own decisions about their health, and nutritional intake, isn't Big Pharma or the medical establishment. Believe it or not, it's the federal government.

In particular, it is the various federal government bureaucracies and agencies, whose nanny-state tendencies prevent thinking, thoughtful, free people from making up their own minds about what to put into their own bodies.

One of the most onerous of these agencies when it comes to nutrition and health, is the Food and Drug Administration. And now, the agency is standing in the way of doctors who want to assist their diabetic patients in managing their disease with specially formulated foods.

"What does your doctor know about nutrition and its ability to heal illness? That's a good question for many conventional doctors, but most integrative doctors actually know a lot about it. And the FDA has no business telling them what to do," says an "Action Alert" from the Alliance for Natural Health USA (ANH-USA).

Recently, the non-profit group noted, the FDA issued its final guidance on so-called medical foods, essentially ignoring a number of very passionate pleas from members of ANH-USA and their allies, by placing severe restrictions on consumer access to medical foods and banning medical foods altogether for diabetics.

Rules 'dramatically limit' medical foods

"Why? Presumably because the use of medical foods might interfere with Big Pharma profits," ANH-USA opined in its alert.

"With the FDA, money always seems to be the same transparent motivation. In 2010, Americans spent $34.4 billion on prescription diabetes drugs. The drug industry is expected to make as much as $54 billion on diabetes drugs alone within the next four years," the group said.

By federal definition, "medical foods" are not just diet plans that doctors prescribe. They are foods specially formulated and processed for sick patients.

Medical foods do not require FDA premarket approval, ANH-USA noted. As such, makers of these foods can assert claims without having performed random controlled trials. However, such foods must follow presently accepted good manufacturing practices, facility registration and additional safety requirements, the non-profit noted.

But the FDA's final rules dramatically limit the specific medical conditions that medical foods can claim to help manage. Specifically, as ANH-USA noted:

-- The guidance uses "inborn errors of metabolism" (IEMs) as the criterion for determining which diseases or conditions are included on the list.

-- For example, inherited biochemical disorders in which absence of an enzyme interferes with the metabolism of protein, fats, or carbohydrates would be treatable with medical foods.

-- Don't get too excited, though—the guidance specifically excludes diseases resulting from essential nutrient deficiencies like scurvy and pellagra.

-- More to the point, the examples given by the agency that fit the new IEM standard are restricted to rare genetic conditions that affect a small fraction of people, and are not applicable for patients who have more common disorders, no matter how controllable the condition might be with medical foods.

'Another instance' of govt. interference in 'doctor-patient relationship'

What is even more outrageous is that the rules exclude both types – 1 and 2 – of diabetes, as well as gestational diabetes because, the FDA says, diabetes can be brought under control just by managing or tweaking a diabetic's normal diet (in addition to using FDA-approved medications, of course).

"According to the FDA, type 1 diabetics should use carbohydrate counting or the carbohydrate exchange system to match their insulin dose to their carbohydrate intake," says ANH-USA. "And type 2 diabetes patients should simply restrict calories, eat regularly, increase fiber intake, and limit their intake of refined carbohydrates and saturated fats—in addition to taking prescription diabetes drugs."

While the group says it is all in favor of a food-based approach to controlling many chronic diseases, and diabetes in particular, the FDA's advice to diabetics is "woefully out of date—and therefore is bad medicine. ...

"This is yet another instance of the FDA inserting itself into the doctor-patient relationship—an illegal federal infringement on the practice of medicine, which is supposed to be regulated at the state level," the group notes.

Read more »

Philadelphia aims to raise $91M for 'fighting poverty' by imposing sugary drink tax on low-income consumers

In Philadelphia, the price of most beverages is about to go up. Cashing in on the city's sugar addiction, the Philadelphia city council just passed a new law taxing all sugary drinks 1.5 cents per ounce. This new levy will affect all canned, bottled and fountain sugary drinks. According to the city council, it's all part of Philadelphia's strategy for "fighting poverty." The bureaucracy's goal is to raise 91 million dollars annually.

And 91 million dollars will be an easy goal to reach. Most consumers are so addicted to their favorite sodas and energy drinks that they won't mind paying an extra quarter when they grab a drink at the gas station. The city will start collecting the tax on January 1, 2017. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg spent over $1.6 million to lobby in support of the plan.

Initial proposals would have slapped a 3 cent per ounce tax rate on the beverages, but a compromise was ultimately reached, and the council believed that a 1.5 cent per ounce tax would be the best way forward. Beverage distributors will take the first hits as the tax slowly works its way down to consumers.

Consumers being locked into a cycle of dependency

Will the law affect consumer purchasing habits? Not very likely, since the tax will also apply to diet drinks. This new beverage tax is really just a way for the city to redistribute people's money to take away their freedom and control their lives a little bit more. The tax transfers the health responsibility from the individual to the collective visions of government bureaucrats, who think they know how best to manage everyone's lives.

As the government takes advantage of people's sugar addictions to "fight poverty," what the government will likely end up doing at some point with the siphoned money is to bolster subsidies to lobbying junk food companies so that they can continue to rule people's lives with food chemicals, more added sugars and brain-damaging artificial sweeteners. After all, when the people start backing off from buying expensive sugary drinks, the government will need to make it easier again for junk beverage companies to advertise and hook people on the beverages (so the government can continue to collect their revenue and provide their programs.)

The people that were siphoned from will ultimately choose government food or education programs (that continue to feed the junk food to them, thus creating a steady revenue stream and setting the people up with chronic disease.)

When it's all said and done, any extra money could be used to set people up to receive affordable prescription drugs and vaccines that they must take so they can manage their lifelong conditions of type-II diabetes and susceptibilities to illnesses.

When the government starts taxing personal decisions, it's always going to lead to corruption. In this way, it's a rigged game.

Philadelphia mayor Kenney is calling the new beverage consumption tax his first major political victory, capable of "changing the narrative of poverty in our city." Apparently he's one of the economically illiterate politicians who cannot understand that taking people's money and redistributing it never generates wealth, responsibility, opportunity or freedom. It always leads to more corruption, more control, at the same time increasing urgency for more redistribution and control, until all production and personal responsibility is drained out of the population, leading to a collapse in society.

While this is usually the dark result of increased taxation, supporters of the law see this consumption tax as an opportunity to punish bad behaviors and promote healthier ones. Some of the money the city siphons through the beverage tax could be used to hand out tax credits for businesses that sell healthy beverages. Some of the money is also being earmarked to create pre-kindergarten programs and community schools within the city.

As these programs are set up in this way, the government will be counted on to continually find ways of capitalizing on people's personal decisions to provide them with the services the government promised them. In this way, corruption and control will grow exponentially in the city of Philadelphia, and in any other city that goes down this slippery slope.

Read more »