[📚Thursday Recharge] Chronic Corruption in the CDC ➕ How the Law Protects Big Pharma ➕ “The Republic of Kinney, Minnesota”

Also Inside: HUGE Announcement Coming Saturday! If you are having trouble viewing this email, [click here.]( Thursday, July 13, 2023  Happy Thursday, {NAME}!  On this day in 1977, the small town of Kinney, Minnesota, boldly declared its independence from the United States. Unable to garner necessary state funds for a much-needed water system upgrade, Kinney, led by Mayor Mary Anderson, issued a tongue-in-cheek declaration of secession. By declaring itself the "Republic of Kinney," this little town put forth a serious message wrapped in a light-hearted approach: when larger bodies of government fail to address the needs of the smaller entities, the latter must find creative ways to defend their interests.  Though secession was merely a publicity stunt to draw attention to their plight, Kinney's actions represent a deeper issue. It speaks to a broader concept of self-determination and resistance against larger, more powerful entities when one's needs and rights are being disregarded.  Turning to the world of business, this narrative resonates quite profoundly. There are countless instances where larger corporations, with their considerable influence and resources, effectively drown out the voices of smaller companies, local communities, and even states. It seems the centralization of power and wealth in a few hands perpetuates inequality and inhibits the proper functioning of free markets.  Just as Kinney felt neglected by the state of Minnesota, many state entities experience the same neglect from larger corporate bodies. These states, armed with legislative authority, must contend with corporations that wield tremendous economic power. This creates a tug of war between states trying to enforce rules and regulations and corporations striving to maximize profit often at the expense of other stakeholders.  Kinney's secession underscores the urgency of a form of "corporate secession." It's not about annihilating corporations or stifling their success; instead, it's about preventing them from impinging on the rights and welfare of smaller entities. There's a pressing need for a clear boundary between corporations and state entities, where neither interferes unduly in the affairs of the other.  Much like the town of Kinney, state entities should strive to preserve their independence and their right to self-determination. They must ensure that their decisions reflect the best interests of their residents, rather than yielding to the pressures and whims of major corporations. It's about asserting a degree of sovereignty in the face of powerful corporate entities.  In doing so, states would also encourage a truly competitive market. When corporate giants hold excessive sway, competition suffers. However, with stronger boundaries, smaller businesses would be able to innovate and grow without the fear of being squashed by larger corporations. This would engender diversity in the market, fostering greater innovation, competitive pricing, and overall, a healthier economy.  Kinney's faux secession was a wake-up call, a reminder that the underdog has a voice that deserves to be heard. On a larger scale, it signals the necessity for a form of secession, a redefinition of boundaries, between state entities and large corporations. Not in a literal sense, but through policies that uphold fair competition, prioritize the welfare of residents, and maintain the integrity of state autonomy.  The truth is that corporate influence has not only stifled fair markets; it’s cost lives. We have a few stories below about the damage these corporate entities can cause when left unchecked (and why regulatory bodies need to secede from the financial governance of the pharmaceutical industry).   Let’s dive in…  Chronic Corruption Part I: A History of Incompetence  We all want to believe that we live in a fundamentally good world. A world in which our leaders serve the best interests of the greater good, in which our most wealthy and successful citizens and companies use their influence to help others, and where communities come together to support one another in times of crisis. A world where an organization like the CDC would actually act in the best interests of public health and individual well being.  Sadly, this simply isn’t the case.    Major corporations routinely put profits above people, implementing legal jujitsu, bribes, and lies to cover up their sins and continue on as usual. Many (if not most) of our elected officials are all too eager to exercise authority that is not lawfully theirs while becoming fabulously wealthy on the backs of the citizens they’re meant to serve.  Powerful men and women use their financial, political, and business influence to manipulate agencies that are designed to keep them accountable. The media, the education system, the tech and pharmaceutical industries, government oversight committees, and even international watchdog organizations are all bought and paid for by a few wealthy elites who seek only to further their agenda.  >> [The Truth About the CDC]( <<    Medicinal Justice: How the Law Protects Big Pharma & Harms Victims (Part 1)  The pharmaceutical industry is a vast and complex realm. Its primary goal, ostensibly, is to improve human health and extend human life. However, it’s also a fiercely competitive business environment where billion-dollar companies are continually vying for market share and profitability. The critical process from drug discovery to clinical trials, and finally to market approval, involves years of intense research, investment, and innovation.    The legal framework surrounding this industry is equally intricate. It spans from intellectual property laws that protect pharmaceutical companies’ investment and innovations to stringent regulatory laws meant to ensure the safety and efficacy of the drugs entering the market. In the U.S, the primary regulatory authority is the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), whose approval is required for any medication to be marketed and sold.  This complex blend of business, science, and law creates a unique dynamic. Pharmaceutical companies, in their quest to bring effective drugs to the market and turn a profit, must navigate a stringent regulatory landscape. This landscape, though designed to protect public health, sometimes contains provisions that shield these companies from certain liabilities. >> [The Legal Landscape of the Pharmaceutical Industry]( <<   Medicinal Justice: How the Law Protects Big Pharma & Harms Victims (Part 2)  In the [first part of our series](, we explored the legal framework that protects pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits when their drugs cause adverse side effects. The principles of preemption, court rulings such as Wyeth v. Levine, and the Hatch-Waxman Act all contribute to an environment where it can be difficult for patients to seek legal recourse. As we saw in the case of Singulair, a popular asthma medication, these laws and regulations can even discourage pharmaceutical companies from conducting further safety research on their drugs. In Part 2, we’ll continue our examination by delving deeper into the complex relationship between the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry and the implications this relationship has for legal battles involving drug safety.  The legal and regulatory landscape surrounding drug safety has, in many ways, favored pharmaceutical companies. The interplay of court precedents, laws such as the Hatch-Waxman Act, and regulatory decisions by the FDA provides a protective shield to these companies, even when questions about the safety of their drugs emerge. The implications are profound for patients who suffer adverse effects from drugs. They face significant hurdles in seeking legal recourse, while pharmaceutical companies can often evade responsibility, especially if the drug in question is a generic version. >> [FDA Interactions and their Role in Legal Precedents]( <<   “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority.” —Sir John Dalberg-Acton   To Your Health & Liberty,  P.S. We have a HUGE announcement on Saturday, so be checking your email!!  © Copyright 2022, TTAC Publishing LLC, All Rights Reserved. This email was sent to {EMAIL} by info@thetruthaboutcancer.com PO Box 530, Portland, TN 37148 [Edit Profile]( | [Manage Subscriptions]( | [Report Spam](