US-Funded Spy Tool Targeted Environmental and Food Activists, Google Ads Expose Americans’ Data to Global Firms, Blockchain Fixing Food Supply Chains
March 6, 2025

A US company that was secretly profiling hundreds of food and environmental health advocates in a private web portal has said it has halted the operations in the face of widespread backlash, after its actions were revealed by the Guardian and other reporting partners. The St Louis, Missouri-based company, v-Fluence, said it is shuttering the service, which it called a “stakeholder wiki”, that featured personal details about more than 500 environmental advocates, scientists, politicians and others seen as opponents of pesticides and genetically modified (GM) crops. The profiles – part of an effort that was financed, in part, by US taxpayer dollars – often provided derogatory information about the industry opponents and included home addresses and phone numbers and details about family members, including children. They were provided to members of an invite-only web portal where v-Fluence also offered a range of other information to its roster of more than 1,000 members. The membership included staffers of US regulatory and policy agencies, executives from the world’s largest agrochemical companies and their lobbyists, academics and others. The profiling was one element of a push to downplay pesticide dangers, discredit opponents and undermine international policymaking, according to court records, emails and other documents obtained by the non-profit newsroom Lighthouse Reports. “I’m quite familiar with corporate harassment of scientists who produce unwelcome research, and sometimes this includes dredging up personal information on the scientist to make their work look less credible,” [law professor Wendy] Wagner said.

A WIRED investigation into the inner workings of Google’s advertising ecosystem reveals that a wealth of sensitive information on Americans is being openly served up to some of the world’s largest brands despite the company’s own rules against it. Experts say that when combined with other data, this information could be used to identify and target specific individuals. Display & Video 360 (DV360), one of the dominant marketing platforms offered by the search giant, is offering companies globally the option of targeting devices in the United States based on lists of internet users believed to suffer from chronic illnesses and financial distress, among other categories of personal data that are ostensibly banned under Google’s public policies. Among a list of 33,000 audience segments obtained by the ICCL, WIRED identified several that aimed to identify people working sensitive government jobs. One, for instance, targets US government employees who are considered “decision makers” working “specifically in the field of national security.” Another targets individuals who work at companies registered with the State Department to manufacture and export defense-related technologies, from missiles and space launch vehicles to cryptographic systems that house classified military and intelligence data. In the wrong hands, sensitive insights gained through [commercially available information] could facilitate blackmail, stalking, harassment, and public shaming.

Brooke Rollins, our new secretary of Agriculture, is promising to reform the department. If she’s serious about eliminating waste, she’ll take a hard look at the wasteful mandates and billions of U.S. tax dollars that go directly to agricultural corporations every year. Despite spending $20 billion a year of our tax dollars on farm subsidies, Americans never see most U.S. agriculture products. We only eat about 37 percent of major crops produced. Subsidies over-incentivize production of foods that are making us sick. Heavily subsidized corn often ends up as high-fructose corn syrup in heavily processed foods like sugary cereals and beverages. Through direct subsidies and import restrictions, we also prop up sugar cane and sugar beet production. The overconsumption of these unhealthy foods contributes to obesity, diabetes, heart disease and other diet-related illnesses that cost our health system more than $1 trillion a year. If Rollins really cares about making America healthy again, she should stop forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for foods that are making us ill. Consumers can still buy whatever they want without lining the pockets of corporations benefiting from over-producing unnecessary, unhealthy foods. Between 2017-2022, the U.S. agricultural industry lost more than 100,000 small and medium farms to consolidation. Currently, only 6 percent of farms produce 90 percent of all meat, dairy and poultry products.

"Food is a weapon. When you sell real weapons, you control armies. When you control food, you control society. But when you control seeds, you control life on Earth," [Indian physicist and social advocate Vandana] Shiva says in her feature-length documentary The Seeds of Vandana Shiva, referring to industrial farming as the "single biggest destructive force on the planet today." Shiva may be most renowned for her work opposing Asia's Green Revolution, a well-meaning initiative in the 1960s to increase food production in less-developed countries. However, Shiva argued that the revolution's tactics were more harmful than helpful, increasing the use of toxic pesticides and polluting fertilizers while reducing indigenous seed biodiversity. Moreover, farmers became dependent on chemical solutions, which raised their operating costs. To combat this, the [Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology] founded seed banks across India in the 1990s as part of its Nine Seeds project, teaching farmers about sustainable agriculture, which incorporates practices that improve soil and ecosystem health, protect against erosion, and reduce the need for expensive chemicals. Shiva has also authored numerous books addressing corporate plundering of poorer countries, the potential pitfalls of seed biodiversity loss related to genetically modified crops, and proposing the development of innovative solutions. "We will continue to create a new world — seed by seed, person by person," Shiva says.

The “Make America Healthy Again” agenda has catapulted nutrition issues to the forefront of conversations about Americans’ health. The policy proposals range from getting junk foods out of schools to preventing the government from subsidizing candy through programs like SNAP. To advance these policies, we need a clear system of labeling unhealthy junk foods in the food supply. The Food and Drug Administration is considering implementing this type of labeling system, but the food industry is trying to interfere. Warning labels signaling when foods are high in salt, added sugar and saturated fat can help consumers easily identify which foods they should limit. Ten countries already require such labels, and the National Academy of Medicine first recommended them in the U.S. more than 14 years ago. Food companies criticize the science supporting front-of-package labeling, delay public consultation periods, push for their own confusing label designs and emphasize the possible harms of a mandatory labeling policy. Food companies have deployed these tactics to avoid effective labeling policies around the globe for decades. In the public discourse, food companies are making distracting arguments about the possible harms of a clear front-of-package labeling policy, arguing that such labels may hurt the economy, raise food prices, scare consumers or lead to shame when selecting certain foods. None of these arguments are supported by scientific evidence.

Pesticide company efforts to push through laws that could block litigation against them is igniting battles in several US farm states. Laws have been introduced in at least eight states so far and drafts are circulating in more than 20 states, backed by a deluge of advertising supporting the measures. The fight is particularly fierce now in Iowa, where opponents call the pesticide-backed proposed law the “Cancer Gag Act”, due to high levels of cancer in Iowa that many fear are linked to the state’s large agricultural use of pesticides. Iowa has the second-highest rate of new cancer cases in the United States and the fastest growing rate. The bill would bar people from suing pesticide manufacturers for failing to warn them of health risks, as long as the product labels are approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Opponents say the legislation will rob farmers and others who use pesticides from holding companies accountable in court if their pesticide products cause disease or injury. “We’re very worried. Our farmers feel that if they have injuries or illnesses due to their use of a pesticide they should have access to the courts,” said [Iowa Farmers Union president] Aaron Lehman. The actions in the states come alongside a simultaneous push for changes in federal law that would in effect shield companies from lawsuits brought by people claiming they developed cancers or other diseases due to their use of pesticides.

The former head of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) drug division is joining Pfizer as its chief medical officer. Patrizia Cavazzoni was formerly director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) from 2020 until January, when she resigned just ahead of President Trump’s return to office. Cavazzoni previously worked at Pfizer prior to joining the FDA in 2018. The announcement spurred renewed criticisms about the common “revolving door” between the FDA and industry. Critics worry the close relationship leads to a quid pro quo and favoritism toward industry. Scott Gottlieb, FDA commissioner during Trump’s first term, now serves on the board of Pfizer. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has long accused the FDA of being corrupt and beholden to industry influence and has pledged to root out supposed conflicts of interest across the agency. Just ahead of the election, while Trump was considering him for HHS secretary, Kennedy posted on social media that FDA employees who are “part of this corrupt system” should “pack their bags.” Watchdog group Public Citizen panned Cavazzoni’s hiring. “Cavazonni’s move demonstrates that the revolving door between the FDA and the industries it regulates is alive and well and continues to undermine the FDA’s credibility as a public health agency,” the organization’s health research group director Robert Steinbrook said.

Nick was 19 when a psychiatrist offered him the antidepressant Trintellix to treat his moderate anxiety and depression after just a few short visits. Going on the popular selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) ... didn’t seem like a big deal at the time. But, when Nick went off the medication after six years, he immediately noticed his genitals were losing sensation. Over the course of a couple weeks, he almost entirely lost feeling in the area — and it never returned, nor did the high sex drive he once had. He would ultimately learn he suffers from Post-SSRI Sexual Dysfunction (PSSD). “I wasn’t at risk of taking my own life or anything like that … I still had a hell of a lot of fun in life … I think I definitely should have [done] therapy first and foremost,” he said. “Now there’s just no enjoyment in anything. It’s like watching a brick wall.” For many, antidepressants are lifesaving treatments, but, in rare instances, they can potentially cause debilitating side effects that persist for years after stopping the drugs. SNOMED, the National Institute Of Health’s official source of medical terminology for US healthcare systems, recognizes PSSD as a legitimate disorder as of last year, defining it as “persistent sexual side effects” including genital numbness and loss of libido that “can last for weeks, months, or even years after stopping” antidepressants. The rate of prescriptions for those ages 12 to 25 jumped by about two-thirds from 2016 to 2022. “The studies that were done for SSRIs to be approved by the FDA were not done on children, they were done on adults,” [clinical psychologist Meg Jay] said. “But now it’s much more common for tweens and teens to be prescribed medications than it used to be." In the past two years alone, [Psychopharmacologist and former professor of psychiatry David Healy] said he’s known more than a dozen people, many of them young, who were so distressed by PSSD that they committed suicide.

Antidepressants are frequently prescribed to people with dementia for symptoms like anxiety, depression, aggressiveness and sleeplessness. But a specific class of antidepressant medications - selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) - actually might speed up brain decline among some dementia patients, a new Swedish study suggests. Heavier doses of certain SSRIs are tied to a higher risk for severe dementia, researchers reported in a new study ... in the journal BMC Medicine. The SSRI drug escitalopram was associated with the fastest cognitive decline, followed by citalopram and sertraline. For the study, researchers tracked the brain health of more than 18,700 patients enlisted in the Swedish Registry for Cognitive/Dementia Disorders between May 2007 and Oct. 2018. The patients’ average age was 78. During an average follow-up of more than four years, about 23% of patients received a new prescription for an antidepressant, researchers said. SSRIs were the most commonly prescribed antidepressant, amounting to 65% of all those prescriptions, the study says. “Higher dispensed doses of SSRIs were associated with higher risk for severe dementia, fractures, and all-cause mortality,” the researchers concluded. “These findings highlight the significance of careful and regular monitoring to assess the risks and benefits of different antidepressants use in patients with dementia.”

The toughest restaurant reservation in the country is at a suburban D.C. dining room. Inside, diners pay in cash for high-quality meals whipped up by a chef identified only by his first name. He can tell outsiders only that he works as the executive chef of a secure government building. Cellphones are forbidden. That’s because the only people who can book a table here at one of the most secure compounds in the world are employees of the Central Intelligence Agency in Langley, Virginia. As the first food critic ever admitted to the 50-seat Agency Dining Room, I find myself in covert company. The director of the agency approves the menus, which change quarterly. Before he made headlines with it in the White House, then-CIA Director George H.W. Bush let it be known that he didn’t want to be served broccoli. William J. Casey had a sweet tooth; one of his favorite desserts was apple tarte Tatin. The agency’s most recent director, William J. Burns, ate on the healthful side, “a salad with a protein,” sometimes Caesar with salmon and often on a tray delivered to his office, says the executive chef. John Ratcliffe, the new director appointed by Trump, always begins his day with a fresh cup of coffee from the Agency Dining Room and is looking forward to trying the smash burger, according to the CIA. Servers aren’t tipped at the CIA because they are paid differently from servers on the outside, Neises says. Waiters at the agency are doing “mission-critical work.”

Efficiently run food supply chains can positively impact communities and lives across the globe. Real-time tracking supports sustainability, prevents food waste, and ensures compliance with environmental, social and governance (ESG) standards. Communication throughout the supply chain can help producers earn fair compensation for their efforts. Traditional approach to food supply chain management face challenges to efficiency, security and transparency. The consequences can be dire, from food waste to death by contamination. Blockchain technology can provide much-needed transparency, traceability and privacy, as well as co-ordination across disparate parties, enabling greater food access and quality improvements across the global supply chain. Built on a blockchain backend, Silal Fresh adopted a comprehensive traceability solution that utilizes consumer apps, a web-based dashboard, and integration with existing supply chain management systems. This significantly improved identifying and flagging delays in their deliveries, as well as increased satisfaction, trust and brand loyalty. They even added tracking to each piece of produce so that a consumer could pick up a vegetable, scan a QR code, and see that food item's journey. Ultimately, increased transparency and traceability can save lives. With improved traceability, food recalls can happen faster, and the source of contamination can be determined quicker.

Akeela Shaikh is a natural carer. But the care jobs she loved so much started to tax her physically. She tried antidepressants, then counselling although neither worked for her. But then a nurse gave Shaikh a different kind of medicine: "She gave me a card that read 'social prescribing'." The card led to a phone call with Joanne Gavin, at the time a link worker with Bolton Community and Voluntary Services. Instead of asking "what's the matter with you", link workers ask patients "what matters to you" and find suitable community activities that fit their answer. It was clear what mattered to Shaikh was really another chance to take care of someone. Gavin intuited this. And when she asked Shaikh what she thought might help her feel better, she honoured her answer: "a job". Gavin prescribed the perfect gig for Shaikh: a shift at the office of Lagan's Foundation, a non-profit providing caregiving to children with complex needs. After Gavin intervened, Shaikh says she started feeling more like herself. "It was a way for Akeela to still be involved with the care inside, without the heavy lifting." The power of social prescribing – helping patients to improve their health and wellbeing by connecting them to community resources and activities – is increasingly backed by scientific studies. Prescriptions can cover everything from art classes and cycling groups to food and heating bills. One particularly surprising 2019 study of nearly 7,000 older Americans found that life purpose was significantly inversely linked with all-cause mortality. In other words, having a high sense of life-purpose could help you live longer than those who lack one. "My approach is to listen to someone's story and look at not just what's going on now but what they were like before they started to feel depressed or anxious," says Gavin.

A social prescription is officially defined as a nonmedical resource or activity that aims to improve a person’s health and strengthen their community connections. Don’t let the “social” bit fool you: These are not small-talky, introvert hellscapes where docs sprinkle friendship fairy dust and motley crews of strangers suddenly become best buds. And they’re not prescribed only for social isolation, either. Social prescriptions can cover everything from orchestra practice to fresh vegetables and can help treat everything from depression to poverty. Instead of replacing other kinds of medicine, social prescriptions complement them, offering healing that pills and procedures can’t offer alone. Instead of just treating symptoms of sickness, social prescriptions reconnect us to our sources of wellness. And instead of just addressing “What’s the matter with you?”, social prescriptions address “What matters to you?” History is filled with examples of “social prescribing” from all around the globe. Indigenous groups have long linked an individual’s health to the health of their interconnected relationships— both with their neighbors, and the natural world. African villages have long used community rituals to help heal and prevent stress and pain. Traditional Chinese medicine and Ayurveda in India have long emphasized the relationship between a person’s body and their surrounding environment. If we want to change our health, we have to change our environment, too.

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.

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