How the US Gov Facilitates Child Trafficking, The Corporate Food Cartels, 'Social Prescribing' Transforms Lives
Revealing News Articles
July 30, 2024

The Biden administration’s Office of Refugee Resettlement failed to vet sponsors responsible for caring for unaccompanied children apprehended crossing the border, whistleblowers told Senators Tuesday, describing several cases of apparent human trafficking involving the minors and their sponsors. [Whistleblower Deborah] White revealed that she and her colleague, Tara Rodas, first discovered a case of trafficking involving minors crossing the border in June 2021, but even after reporting it, “children continued to be sent to dangerous locations with improperly vetted sponsors.” “Children were sent to addresses that were abandoned houses or nonexistent in some cases,” White said. “In Michigan, a child was sent to an open field, even after we reported making an 911 call after hearing someone screaming for help, yet the child was still sent. When I raised concerns about contractor failures and asked to see the contract I was told, ‘You’re not gonna get the contract and don’t ask for it again.’” White ... described the case of a 16-year-old girl from Guatemala, whose sponsor claimed to be her older brother. “He was touching her inappropriately. It was clear her sponsor was not her brother,” Rodas said, noting that the girl “looked drugged” and as if “she was for sale” on her sponsor’s social media postings. The sponsor had other social media accounts containing child pornography, according to Rodas, explaining that it keeps her up at night.

Three Republican U.S. senators and federal whistleblowers raised alarm over the government’s alleged complicity in human trafficking at the nation’s southern border. The New York Times [reported that] Health and Human Services could not reach more than 85,000 children between 2021 and 2023, adding that DHS and HHS leaders refused to attend the roundtable. Deborah White, who worked in Health and Human Services’ Unaccompanied Child Program, joined those senators in calling for justice. “Make no mistake, children were not going to their parents. They were being trafficked with billions of taxpayer dollars by a contractor failing to vet sponsors and process children safely, with government officials complicit in it,” White said at the roundtable. White began working at HHS’ Pomona, California, Office of Refugee Resettlement site in 2021, where she said she saw hundreds of children sent to unknown fates. “What I found there was horrifying and shocking, as I made [the] initial discovery at the site that children were actually being trafficked,” White told NewsNation. The last time HHS published a report on sexual abuse and sexual harassment among unaccompanied minors was in 2017. “We don’t know what happens to them afterwards, right? We never hear from them again,” White said. “Once they leave HHS or our custody, they wipe their hands of it. They’re not concerned with what’s happening to them once they leave. They’re supposed to do 30-day wellness calls, but … when they did 30-day wellness calls, the case managers were finding that the children were not anywhere to be found in most cases.”

Employees of a Texas-based nonprofit that provides housing to unaccompanied migrant children repeatedly subjected minors in its care to sexual abuse and harassment, the Department of Justice (DOJ) alleged in a new lawsuit. From 2015 through at least the end of 2023, multiple employees at Southwest Key Programs, the country’s largest private provider of housing for unaccompanied children, subjected unaccompanied children in their care to “repeated and unwelcome sexual abuse, harassment, and misconduct,” the lawsuit said. Minors housed in its shelters were subjected to severe sexual abuse and rape, solicitation of sex acts, solicitation of nude photos and entreaties for sexually inappropriate relationships, among other acts. The children range in age from as young as five years old to teenagers just shy of eighteen years old. Southwest Key employees allegedly discouraged children from reporting abuse, in some cases threatening them and their families. One report describes a Southwest Key Youth Care Worker who repeatedly sexually abused a five-year-old girl, an eight-year-old girl and an eleven-year-old girl. He entered their bedrooms in the middle of the night to touch their “private area,” and threatened to kill their families if they disclosed the abuse, according to the lawsuit. The company has come under scrutiny before. Videos from Arizona Southwest Key shelters in 2018 showed staffers physically abusing children.

Late last year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) quietly introduced a regulation that may be one of the most important shifts in how [clinical research organizations, universities large and small, pharma companies, and multi-billion dollar corporations] conduct future medical and public health research. A bedrock of ethical research design is the universal requirement of informed consent for any medical procedure, treatment, or intervention. These measures have generally been strengthened since the Nuremberg Trials, formally adopted across the U.S. government through the institutional review board (IRB) system. An IRB is a committee of specialists and administrators at each institution that oversees research design and assures the protection of research subjects. At its core, the new FDA rule change allows any IRB to broadly assume the FDA's own exemption power, dubiously granted under the 21st Century Cures Act of 2016, to grant exemptions to informed consent requirements based on "minimal risk." Based on vague guidelines, it effectively gives thousands of IRB committees the unilateral ability to determine that researchers need not obtain true informed consent from research participants. The relaxed standards could facilitate the quick approval of controversial research projects. The Gates Foundation-backed Oxitec program is currently releasing millions of genetically modified mosquitos in the Florida Keys. Another application of the relaxed standards is to government-funded studies of online posts designed to identify "misinformation." Entities like the Stanford Internet Observatory have laundered government demands for censorship of speech—even true speech—in online settings like Facebook and X (formerly Twitter). The literal purpose of this research is to harm its research subjects by censoring their speech and labeling them as purveyors of misinformation. In 2021, a conservative journalist sued Stanford University for slandering him via this research project, which never sought his informed consent to be a subject of their study. Under the new FDA rule, IRBs everywhere would feel no compunction to require it.

Every state in the U.S. requires hospitals to take a small blood sample from newborns to test for genetic diseases. In most places, the samples are destroyed or given to parents shortly after the testing, but New Jersey keeps them stored in a state facility—for 23 years—without asking for the parents’ consent. During the decades that New Jersey keeps the baby blood samples, it can do whatever it wants with the samples. In fact, on at least a few occasions, samples have been handed over to law enforcement, without consent or a warrant. There is an opt out of testing for religious objections, and parents can request the state to destroy the sample after the testing is complete. But parents don’t even know that the state is keeping the blood in the first place. This puts New Jersey out of step with other states, who in recent years were forced to end the sharing of blood samples without consent. Texas destroyed more than 5.3 million blood samples after a 2009 lawsuit revealed that the state had sold some of them to private companies and the Pentagon. Suits in Minnesota and Michigan also led those states to destroy millions of samples. The New Jersey parents aren’t suing for money. What they want is for the state to do one of three things: 1) obtain informed consent including the specific uses New Jersey may have for the samples; 2) promptly return all samples that are produced without consent; or 3) destroy all samples once the screening tests are completed.

Being overweight or obese is a serious, common, and costly chronic disease. More than two in five U.S. adults have obesity. By 2030, nearly one of two adults in the U.S. are projected to be obese. More than 108 million U.S. adults live with obesity and more than 1 billion people are obese around the world. Obesity accounted for nearly $173 billion in medical expenditures in 2019. Recent news that weight loss medications, including GLP-1 receptor agonists like Ozempic and others, are revolutionizing obesity medicine. Some patients lose up to 20 percent of their initial body weight in a year or two on these drugs. Yet a recent lawsuit challenging a top brand heightens concerns about this relatively new class of drugs. More than half of graduating medical students report that the time dedicated to clinical nutrition instruction is insufficient. In a striking study of 115 medical doctors, the majority of participants (65.2 percent) demonstrated inadequate nutrition knowledge, with 30.4 percent of those scoring low having a high self-perception of their nutrition knowledge. The important role of medical doctors in addressing nutrition in clinical practice has been acknowledged by multiple authoritative professional bodies. Ironically, most doctors often lack the knowledge to help a patient eat healthy and to realize the importance of food to wellness. In a contested space filled with commercial interests and influencers, it is critical for a doctor to be a reliable source of evidence-based nutrition.

Vaccine adverse effects are real. I know it makes some people uncomfortable to acknowledge this, but alongside the benefits of vaccines, there are cases of profound harm. Recently, the New York Times covered my story: “Thousands Believe COVID Vaccines Harmed Them. Is Anyone Listening?” Sadly, no one is listening yet, and very few people are willing to help. I am a research nurse practitioner who has dedicated my professional career to community health and clinical research, including vaccines. My beliefs are firmly rooted in science. Three years ago, when the COVID-19 vaccine emerged, I stepped forward to receive it. What followed was unexpected and devastating. Within hours I developed tingling along my right arm, which over days radiated across my body. A neurologist and colleague recommended that I proceed with a second dose. With the vaccine mandate from my employer at the top of my mind, I proceeded, against my own medical judgment. After the second dose, my condition rapidly worsened. I developed positional tachycardia, wildly fluctuating blood pressures, internal tremors, electrical zap sensations on my legs, intense right-sided headaches, abdominal pain and severe tinnitus. I struggle to live with all of this and more to this day. Medical gaslighting, coupled with the absence of legal recourse or adequate compensation, compounds the challenges we endure. When I reach out for help, my pleas often fall on deaf ears, or I am disparaged as a misinformed “anti-vaxxer.”

Across the world, over 800 million people spend their days hungry. More than 2 billion have limited access to food. Yet today’s global food system produces enough to feed every person on the planet. To account for these trends, we need to look at market concentration, and how a small number of very big companies have come to dominate the production and supply of the food we all eat. The global food system has become much more concentrated in recent years, partly through an increase in mergers and acquisitions, where large firms buy up rival companies until they completely dominate key areas. High levels of market concentration mean less transparency, weaker competition, and more power in the hands of fewer firms. And our research reveals that a rise in the number of mergers and acquisitions is taking place at all stages of the global food system – from seeds and fertilisers to machinery and manufacturing. This is all part of food being increasingly seen as a source not only of human sustenance, but as a profitable investment – or what is known as the “financialisation of food”. Just four firms control 44% of the global farm machinery market, two companies control 40% of the global seed market, and four businesses control 62% of the global agrochemicals market. This trend is matched in food retail, with four firms – Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Asda, and Morrisons – estimated to control over 64% of the UK grocery market.

Corporations across the food system increasingly have the power, by virtue of their size, market domination, political connections, and deep pockets, to set prices, meddle with science, evade regulation, and write the rules to benefit themselves. “Big Ag” and “Big Food” are shorthand for a sprawling collection of giant, often multinational corporations that wield enormous market power throughout our food system. Some of these companies are household names—for example, Tyson Foods, John Deere, and General Mills—while others are virtually unknown to consumers. Those lesser-known companies tend to operate up the supply chain, and include Bayer and Syngenta, which sell the seeds farmers need and the pesticides they’ve come to rely on, and Nutrien and CF Industries Holdings, which manufacture synthetic fertilizers. The consequences of extreme agriculture and food industry concentration ... include supply chain instability, unsafe working conditions and downward pressure on wages, and higher food prices for consumers. Some 40% of farmland nationally is owned, in ever-larger tracts, by absentee landlords who don’t farm but rent to others (in the Corn Belt bullseye of Iowa, it’s more than half). Billionaires, including Microsoft founder Bill Gates, are among the largest private owners of US farmland. And corporations and investment funds like Nuveen and Manulife are buying up farmland at a rate that should alarm you.

Every five years or so, Congress reauthorizes a comprehensive, multibillion-dollar law that has a major impact not only on farmers and ranchers—who make up less than 2 percent of the US population—but also on the environment, public health, and the economy. Generically called the “farm” bill, it is actually a farm and food bill that supports a wide range of programs, including ones that cover crop insurance, financial credit, and export subsidies for farmers, as well as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps. SNAP, which eats up 80 percent of the bills’ total budget, currently serves 41 million low-income Americans. A major ... reason farm and food bills routinely fail to live up to their original intent is the undue influence the agribusiness sector has over Congress, which it exerts via campaign contributions and lobbying. The sector includes commodity crop traders, meat and poultry processors, fertilizer and pesticide makers, multinational food and beverage companies, giant supermarket chains, and all of their related trade associations. The agribusiness sector spent more than $793 million on lobbying on a range of issues between 2019 and 2023. Top spenders included the American Crystal Sugar Company, the American Farm Bureau Federation, Koch Industries, and the US Chamber of Commerce. Agribusiness’s influence peddling is largely overlooked by the mainstream news media.

Someday soon, in addition to prescribing medication or therapy, doctors may begin directing patients to visit a museum or join a choir. The growing practice of “social prescribing” is a way for healthcare providers to address patients’ health and wellbeing by connecting them to a range of nonclinical services, often taking the form of community arts and cultural activities. Attention on the healing power of the arts grew during the COVID-19 pandemic. A UK study found that during lockdown in 2020, individuals who spent 30 minutes per day on arts activities had lower rates of depression and anxiety, as well as greater life satisfaction. The first social prescribing pilots in the United States are kicking off on the heels of research demonstrating the long-term health benefits of arts engagement. Adolescents who regularly engage in arts activities have lower odds of behavioral problems, criminalized behaviors, and substance use and higher odds of maintaining strong social support networks. Creatively engaged older adults have 20% lower odds of depression and are more likely to have better memory, life satisfaction, and overall aging experiences. One particularly striking study found that older adults with frequent cultural engagement are less likely to use inpatient healthcare or nursing home stays. In a study of people experiencing chronic pain, doing monthly arts activities is associated with better physical wellbeing, specifically less difficulty with everyday activities.

A practice called social prescribing is being explored in the United States, after being adopted in more than 20 other countries. Social prescriptions generally aim to improve health and well-being by connecting people with nonclinical activities that address underlying problems, such as isolation, social stress and lack of nutritious food, which have been shown to play a crucial role in influencing who stays well and for how long. For Ms. Washington, who is among thousands of patients who have received social prescriptions from the nonprofit Open Source Wellness, the experience was transformative. She found a less stressful job, began eating more healthfully and ... was able to stop taking blood pressure medication. At the Cleveland Clinic, doctors are prescribing nature walks, volunteering and ballroom dancing. In Newark, an insurance provider has teamed up with the New Jersey Performing Arts Center to offer patients glassblowing workshops, concerts and museum exhibitions. A nonprofit in Utah is connecting mental health patients with community gardens and helping them participate in other activities that bring them a sense of meaning. Universities have started referring students to arts and cultural activities like comedy shows and concerts. Research on social prescribing suggests that it can improve mental health and quality of life and that it might reduce doctor visits and hospital admissions.

Dr. Kate Mulligan is the Senior Director of the Canadian Institute for Social Prescribing (CISP), a new national hub created to support health care providers and social services professionals to connect people to non-clinical supports and community resources. Mulligan ... led one of Canada’s first social prescribing projects. "They have a conversation with someone with expertise [like a doctor] to determine a plan, and get support to follow through on something non-clinical that benefits their health. It should be happening systematically, as a regular part of our health system," [said Mulligan]. Someone experiencing food insecurity or an illness like diabetes can be prescribed fresh foods. That could mean a voucher for your local farmers’ market, a food box delivery to your home or a credit card that you can spend at the regular grocery store. Social prescribing also means making sure the provided food is culturally appropriate ... thinking about possible connections to include and benefit local farmers. A small community largely inhabited by retirees — lots of people ending up living alone without a strong support network — implemented social prescribing. An older man was diagnosed with depression after his wife died. He kept going for primary care, but really what he was experiencing was unsupported grief. Through social prescribing, he was connected with a fishing rod and a fishing buddy. This is like a $20 intervention. Within a fairly short time, he got off his medication and reconnected with other services too — built friendships, got connected to other community offerings. The health centre started developing their own services, like grief support cooking classes for older grieving widows.

In 2002, Chris Morgan lost his wife to cancer. A British army veteran who had put in 24 years of service as a gunner in the Royal Artillery, he was already struggling with PTSD when she passed away, and the grief from the loss triggered a breakdown. In despair, Morgan contemplated taking his own life. Instead, Morgan retreated to his shed. "It was my woodworking shed that was my safe place. And although I may not have done too much woodworking, it was just being in there that I knew helped," Morgan shared. "In fact, it saved my life." In 2008, he held an impromptu spoon carving class for a group of visiting wounded soldiers. The spontaneous seminar became a weekly workshop, and ultimately evolved into a dedicated permanent woodworking seminar that has been known as Veterans Woodcraft since 2016. Veterans Woodcraft is one of 3,000 so-called Men's Sheds scattered across the UK, Ireland, New Zealand, Canada, the US, Kenya and South Africa. The concept began in Australia in the 1990s to help tackle isolation and loneliness in predominantly older men. Men's Sheds UK chief officer Charlie Bethel ... says that of all the impacts he's seen from Men's Sheds in his five-year tenure, suicide prevention is the one that stands out the most. In a recent survey of 178 of the UK's 600 Men's Sheds, 25 percent of respondents said they had definitely saved a member's life, and 14 percent felt confident they had. Bethel hopes to set up a further 1,900 Men's Sheds across the UK over the next 10 years.

www.peerservice.org - PEERS websites: Spreading inspiration, education, & empowerment
www.momentoflove.org - Every person in the world has a heart
www.personalgrowthcourses.net - Dynamic online courses powerfully expand your horizons
www.WantToKnow.info - Reliable, verifiable information on major cover-ups
www.weboflove.org - Strengthening the Web of Love that interconnects us all