Part of this responsibility has moved into the area of protecting us from false advertising about the health value or safety of food or drugs.

It’s rather tough for the FDA to say that butter is dangerous to your health. After all, butter has been around for thousands of years.

 It would also be hard for some margarine maker to make a health claim for margarine if the FDA were doing its job properly.

Yet, you’ve been told, over and over, by your doctor and the media that saturated fats [butter] are dangerous. The cottonseed people have their puppets making this false claim.

Yet, you’ve been bombarded with ads, for decades, saying that some brand of margarine is low on those dangerous saturated fats -- you’ll even see ads for margarine that let you know how healthy margarine is, compared with saturated fats. They hardly ever go so far as to say that the margarine is better for your heart than butter -- but that message is out there -- very plain!

How did this all come to pass?

 The FDA has had a hand in this. For instance, "In 1971 the general counsel for the FDA -- the man in charge of prosecuting any violations of FDA regulations (including those of mislabeled polyunsaturated products) -- left the FDA to become president of the Institute of Shortenings and Edible Oils (the primary public relations group for polyunsaturates). At the same time the man who had been the legal representative of the edible oils companies suddenly became the general counsel of the FDA --- the government lawyer now in charge of regulating and disciplining the activities of his former clients."

Here is a story backed up with more evidence than you have ever seen in any other publication.

Back in 1946 Americans consumed about 60% of their fat from animal sources and only 40% from vegetable oils.

By 1963, when the dirty work had been pretty much accomplished, animal fat (saturated fat) accounted for only 40% of American fat intake, while vegetable oil had risen to about 60%. This very dramatic change was engineered and you are about to read the truth about that manipulation.

 Somewhere, behind the scenes, about 1946, some small group of faceless businessmen decided to change the American attitude about butter, get the people fearful of butter and preferring margarine.

These businessmen mostly worked for large drug companies, vegetable oil firms and for certain chemical companies. Some of them were doctors high up in the AMA even though the AMA, itself, did not officially become part of this particular master plan at this early date. It was busy on other conspiracies.

These men formed a front group, called the American Health Foundation about 1970.

From now on I’m going to refer to these unethical businessmen as master planners! Their real purpose was not just selling their vegetable oil, but removing a natural and healthy product (butter) from the market and substituting a chemically created product (margarine). This helped set the stage to make people more and more dependent on all sorts of drugs -- from crops raised with artificial fertilizers, to medical drugs and finally, through the help of psychiatrists, street drugs.

The Mr. Fit Program dealt with men with high risk of heart disease. They finally selected 12,866 for the final tests. Half continued to get whatever care they were getting from their regular doctors.

The other half was called the "Special Intervention Group" because their lives were intruded upon greatly! The program was mostly psychiatric manipulation -- aimed at getting these high risk heart people to stop smoking, improve their diet and otherwise change their life styles.

The first objective was a lowering of blood cholesterol by massive changes in diet. As far as behavior modification is concerned, the tests were very successful. Those being tested reduced their dietary cholesterol by a massive 42%! Saturated fat consumption dropped by 28%. Total calories dropped by 21%.

What didn’t change was the amount of cholesterol in their blood!

Of course. This had been the earlier findings of dozens of other studies. This Mr. Fit Program was supposed to come up with different results.

Originally the goal of the Program was to reduce blood cholesterol by a very modest 10%. Depending on how you measured it, they achieved either a 5% or 6.7% reduction.

The researchers worked hard, with their psychiatric tricks, to stop these guys from smoking. About 50% actually quit smoking. But the ones who quit were the light smokers. The heaviest smokers were least likely to stop. So, the psychiatric tricks didn’t actually work much.

The researchers also wanted to achieve a lowering of blood pressure with these diet and life style changes. They did reach a good success on that -- which suggests that diet and life style DO affect blood pressure even if they don’t affect blood cholesterol. I, personally, believe that excess weight is the number one factor in predicting disease of all kinds, and that proper diet is the number one solution for excess weight.

The bottom line for all this research was to be the reduction in death rates among the people whose lives were intruded upon! They expected to reduce heart disease deaths by 25% in the group being tested.

The tests failed completely!

There was no significant difference in heart disease deaths when comparing the two groups! Actually, there were more heart deaths in the intervention group, although the difference was not statistically significant.

More surprises? The group that got no special treatment? Their cholesterol levels dropped just as much as the group getting the $115 million intervention. Could it be that factors not even being examined were causing both groups to have a lower blood cholesterol?

Twenty nine percent of the group that got no psychiatric treatments stopped smoking.

Even the blood pressure of the untreated group came down, without the special intervention.

All in all, the Mr. Fit Program was a complete failure.

Yet, when you read references to it, today, you’ll hear how it "proves" that cholesterol in your food is bad for you, and causes heart disease.

By now you are wondering, What am I missing? Who said that margarine was safe and butter dangerous? Why should the government try to eliminate butter from the marketplace? You can see, above, that the government is helping the cottonseed people promote the value of their margarine against butter, on the basis of some sort of danger in butter.

What was the scientific basis for such claims?

Now, you have to go back in time to 1948 when the master planners secretly got some very early government money to start proving that butter was dangerous and margarine was safe and good for you. This very desirable conclusion, from their point of view, required two earlier inconvenient facts to be proven false:

First, it had been well established that cholesterol in the blood stream did not cause death from heart disease. If the master planners were to sell their oil they would have to reverse this truth.

Second, it had been well established that cholesterol in your diet did not cause cholesterol in your blood stream. It the master planners were to sell their oil they would have to reverse this truth.

The master planners concluded:

1. There needed to be research showing that high cholesterol in the blood caused death from heart disease.

The cholesterol myth started in 1913 when a Russian scientist, Dr. Nikolai Anitschkov, fed rabbits massive amounts of cholesterol -- the rabbits died of heart disease.

Later scientists, who had a point they wanted to prove, often quote these studies as the first proof that dietary cholesterol causes heart disease. It isn’t that these studies, in 1913, were so scientifically conducted, it was simply that they represent a historical foundation. If a scientist, today, wants to claim that dietary cholesterol causes high blood cholesterol and that that is the cause of heart disease, he will cite all sorts of studies, but in order to get some historical legitimacy he will often cite the 1913 study.

The 1913 study done by the Russian simply ignores the fact that rabbits are vegetarians and that they bodies cannot handle animal fat.

As my friend Dr. Mendelsohn would say, The Russian study proves conclusively that you should not feed butter to rabbits!

Today’s master planners will start off citing the rabbit study, but omit the fact that there were rabbits involved, or fail to mention that rabbits can’t use animal products in their diet -- they die! One of the most misleading of these is Dr. Kenneth H. Cooper:

This second research need would have seemed insurmountable to any honest researcher. There were, by 1970, literally dozens of well-done scientific studies which showed the exact opposite -- that cholesterol in the diet had no significant effect on cholesterol in the blood stream.

The master planners have succeeded, as you realize.

It is clear that for many decades most doctors and scientists had not the slightest clue as to the causes of heart disease.

But, the master planners who wanted you to take more drugs ignored Dr. Harman’s reports and started off on what seems to be an honest type of research. This is research referred to as epidemiological. Such a big word surely needs some explanation.

Let’s say that you notice that the rate of death from cancer is higher in Chicago than it is in Los Angeles. This happens to be true, but why?

You then get more statistics and you discover that there is a batch of cities which have high rates of cancer death and another batch of cities which have low rates. Why?

Here are two groups of cities where the cancer rates are very different.

High Cancer Rates

Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Cleveland, Washington, D.C., St. Louis, San Francisco, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh and Buffalo.

Low Cancer Rates

Los Angeles, Boston, New Orleans, Seattle, Cincinnati, Atlanta, Kansas City, Columbus, Newark and Portland, OR.

Now you start looking at other differences between the two groups of cities. If ALL of the high cancer rate cities were in cold climate areas, and ALL of the low cancer rate cities were in warm climate areas, you could begin to conclude that cancer had something to do with the climate.

This type of study can be extremely accurate because it deals with very large numbers of people and usually for these large groups there are all sorts of statistics gathered for that group. When the group is based on a geographical area, the quantity statistics tend to be enormous.

Thus, you can find out if ALL the high cancer cities have a different per capita number of telephones, dogs or any other factor you might wish to examine.

When this was done for these cities and cancer, the drug companies would never look for some difference relating to a drug as the cause, you can be sure. But, when Dr. John Yiamouylannis looked at these statistics he found something very obvious. He found that all the cities that had high cancer rates also fluoridated their drinking water, and that all the cities that had low cancer rates did NOT fluoridate their drinking water.

That is called an epidemiologic study because it studies large groups of people.

When the drug master planners started looking for the causes of heart disease, it was easy to find cities where death from heart disease was high, and other cities where it was low. They, of course, would then only look for causes that could be handled with drugs. I’ll come to their search in a moment.

When other researchers with other viewpoints looked at similar data, they often found problems that could be solved with non-drug solutions.

Back before the master planners were as powerful as they became by 1987, Dr. H. A. Schroeder discovered some interesting facts. He studied the death rates from heart disease in 163 different cities. He quickly found that there were significant differences in the death rates, depending on which city you lived in.

He then wrote a research report that actually got printed in the Journal of the American Medical Association, in April 1960, page 98. I suspect that such a report would NOT be published today, because the drug master planners have far more control now than they did in 1960.

His report was entitled the Relation Between Mortality From Cardiovascular Disease and Treated Water Supplies. It simply blew the whistle on the evils of treated water! Here was an epidemiological study that proved that people who drank treated (softened) water had higher rates of death from heart disease. How was water treated? With chemicals, of course. But the chemicals involved are nowhere near as profitable as the chemicals used in the heart pills you might be taking.

The cure for this, of course, is nothing more complicated than to quit treating the water. Such solutions seldom get much publicity, and you can guess why.

There were even studies that showed that two towns, using the same natural supply of hard water, had similar rates of death from heart disease. Then, when one of these towns, several miles distant from the first one, decided that they would enjoy soft water better than the hard stuff, they added chemicals to soften the water.

Well, they got softer water, but they also got more heart disease.

Now that you understand this type of research, let’s see what the master planners planed:

First, there were only discredible reports about cholesterol being a cause of heart disease. So, they decided to look at large groups of autopsy reports to see if the people who died from heart disease all had high levels of blood cholesterol. They didn’t find that to be true, so they abandoned that line of investigation.

They looked in other areas, and couldn’t find any cause and effect relationship for heart disease where the cure could possibly be a drug. They found other relationships, like diet and life style, but until later they also abandoned these because there didn’t seem to be a drug solution to diet or life style problems.

So, as it happened, they decided they just had to manufacture some evidence that the cause of heart disease was something, anything, that could be cured with drugs. You may think I put this too crudely, but when you examine all the evidence, the line in bold print, above, is true!

Why heart disease?

Because heart disease caused more death than all other forms of death combined and if you are going to look for a drug solution to some problem, you might as well find the problem where the solution would provide the largest possible boost to the sales of the drugs.

In other words, why study some rare disease, even if it could be cured with a drug, when a study of heart disease would produce far greater profits when the drug "cure" was found.

Even better would be a drug that didn’t cure, but only managed the problem. In other words, a drug that someone would have to take for the rest of his life, with no cure ever in sight, would be the ideal drug.

The actual identity of the master planners will probably never be known. It is certain that some of them started from deep inside the major drug companies, and some of those people were salted into various other organizations.

It is even possible that some otherwise innocent researchers were looking for a "cure" to heart disease that would tie in with some drug they were manufacturing.

The discouraging factor was that every good study of the causes of heart disease seemed to show factors such as drinking water, diet and life style which didn’t lend themselves to drug solutions.

Now, whether someone actually planned, from the beginning, to falsify statistics I don’t know for sure. But, after false statistics had been publicized, it is plain that literally hundreds of sleazy scientists decided to reinforce these false statistics with more of the same.

One of the most famous of the early studies on heart disease was called the Framingham Study. It was based on the city of Framingham, Massachusetts. That town is near Boston, and physicians at the Boston University Medical School announced that they had decided to initiate this study.

The idea was to study a large number of people from one city -- to study them over a very long period of time and to spend so much money on the study that there would be every conceivable measurement included. This was more likely originated within a drug company which sold the idea to the National Institutes of Health, and its division, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute [NHLBI]. The NHLBI offered the largest financial grant in their history to do the study. Somewhere in here the idea was firmly planted that if the results implicated dietary cholesterol as the cause of heart disease, there would be more government grants and great prestige for the scientists who made those discoveries.

This study was so thorough that even today it is cited as the source for much of what doctors talk about when they talk about the causes of heart disease. The study took a sample of 5,127 adults in Framingham and put them through all sorts of regular physical examinations.

They were asked if they smoked, what they ate, whether they were stressed or not and many more questions.

They were given all sorts of blood tests, particularly as to the levels of their blood cholesterol. The electrical activity of their hearts was measured.

These 5,127 people were watched more closely than any other large group ever. During the time of the study 404 of them died of heart disease and those were immediately studied all the more -- to see how they might be different from the others.

The study lasted an amazing 24 years! Actually, its offspring continue to live!

If you were a young scientist, on your way up the career ladder of working for a prestigious university hospital, expecting eventually to get one of those high paying jobs in one of the drug companies, what would YOU do when the research showed that there was no evidence that dietary cholesterol had any effect on blood cholesterol.

The fact of what was done was discovered by Thomas J. Moore, and recounted with great detail in his book, Heart Failure.

Here is the bombshell dropped by Mr. Moore’s book -- information which had never been public until he dug deeply into the final unpublished results of the Framingham studies:

How could the Framingham Study be used as proof of something which found, in fact, to be not true at all?

The first part of that answer is the fact that this finding was never published as any part of the thousands of pages of reports put out officially by the Framingham Study Group.

Why? I would say because they were paid off, but you can be more charitable if you wish!

But, even if that terrible truth had not been revealed, how is it that the Framingham Study could be used as the source for this false data?

What actually happened was that the master planners hired some dishonest technicians to infiltrate the Framingham Study Group and from their position inside that Group, to leak out so-called preliminary results from the research.

This is actually what happened.

In 1932 a group of scientists selected 400 black people in Alabama -- blacks who had syphilis. These 400 black men were told they had a medical problem but that the government health service would "help" them. These 400 black men could have easily been cured of syphilis, with drugs well-known at the time. Instead, the doctors who did the "treatments" gave these men placebo pills -- pills that had no effect whatsoever on the disease. Why? The purpose of the "research" was to see what would happen to these men if they went on, untreated.

What happened? Many of them went insane, others went blind, and many died -- all while the researchers were watching! As unbelievable as this might seem, the evil "research" continued for years, and only in 1972 was the "experiment" stopped!

If a public health service, run by your government, could do THAT, how much easier would it be for that same public health service to finance "research" to prove that heart disease was caused by eating too many eggs!

Long before the Framingham report officially concluded in 1970, that there was no link between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol, these infiltrators simply manufactured completely false data -- saying that the Framingham research showed that people whose diets were high in cholesterol tended to have high blood cholesterol.

This false data was released covertly -- you would find it difficult, now, to go back and trace the actual release of that false data. The people who did it will never be caught, unless one of them decides to confess!

The actual original false data was quickly spread to the second level of dishonest technicians. These are the researchers looking for fame and glory without doing any real research. They wrote articles because they were promised space in various scientific journals if they would report on this "preliminary" and "disturbing" information coming out of the Framingham study.

Those second level false reports were published, often with enough complicated language that the average layman couldn’t understand them.

Somewhere, inside some large drug company, a senior executive said to a bright and ambitious marketing person:

Watch for any scientific reports showing butter to be dangerous and margarine to be healthy. When and if you see any such, we’ll spend millions of dollars to spread that information.

And, there were many honest doctors who raised their voices in protest at the claims being made about dietary cholesterol.

For instance, in 1953 there was a prominent research report that showed that when the equivalent cholesterol in 45 eggs was given to healthy men, along with a breakfast of scrambled eggs, the cholesterol in their blood rose within four hours, but returned to normal within 24 hours.

For instance, in 1964 one of America’s leading heart surgeons, Dr. Michael DeBakey, reported that his research of a group of 1,700 patients with heart disease showed no correlation between the level of cholesterol and the condition of heart disease.

After the Framingham Study was released in 1970, omitting the important conclusion that diet did NOT influence blood cholesterol, there were many more honest scientists who tore the Framingham report into shreds -- all while the powerful master planner machine continued to pump out false propaganda about the dangers of saturated fats.

For instance, Drs. Werko, Oster and Mr. Bauman, each tore into various aspects of this very flawed study.

The master planners, however, had already started another dishonest "study," called the National Pooling Project. Even though this flawed study did not, itself, claim that dietary cholesterol caused heart disease, the various infiltrators connected with it made those claims anyway.

This is not unusual. A study is started. False data is "leaked" out from the study and manipulated into the popular truth. The fact that the actual study results don’t later justify the earlier leaks is lost in the small print on the last page.

The master planner machine has set the course for publicity on the "facts" as they want them to be known.

Here are more warnings from fake experts, planted by the master planners:

The truthful, but contrary reports, far outnumbered the fake and false reports, but these truthful reports just didn’t get much publicity. Who controlled the publicity? The rich master planners, with billions of drug company profits at their call, and the national media always ready to bow down to money offered for advertising -- these were the people, behind the scenes, who made sure that you never heard about the large number of research studies that showed no relationship between diet and blood cholesterol, nor any link between high blood cholesterol and heart disease.

Not to worry, the master planners had thousands of puppets, with millions in their budgets for publicity.

During the 1970’s and into the 1980’s, you began to see so much publicity against eggs and butter that there are literally millions of Americans today, and many thousands of doctors, who still believe that eggs and butter cause heart disease. I actually detailed some of that publicity earlier in this Chapter, starting on page 43.

This publicity campaign finally reached its height in about 1986 when the master planners were ready to launch their final attack on American society.

One of the most persistent and serious attacks on society that has ever existed is the continuous, usually covert, attempt to get more and more drugs into mankind.

Margarine is just another drug -- driving a natural and healthy food product, butter, off the market. Carlton Fredericks said it well, I think:

Worse, this particular drug campaign was aimed at forcing many millions of Americans onto a daily diet of a dangerous heart medication. There are more details on this below.

You should realize that when the Surgeon General of the United States officially announces that dietary cholesterol causes blood cholesterol and that high blood cholesterol causes heart disease, that gentlemen has become the final effect of a very lengthy and powerful process which started decades before.

The Surgeon General simply reflects the highest political reality in Washington at the time. The Surgeon General in 1994 was Dr. Joycelyn Elders, chosen, then later fired by President Clinton. What she has to say about heart disease probably tells you how President Clinton feels;

She was asked by a reporter why the United States spends more on AIDS research (#9 killer) than on heart disease and cancer (#1 and #2). Her reply:

If that attitude about heart disease gives you the chills, just consider this one. Dr. Elders was asked about making street drugs free for addicts:

This doctor is quite a woman, and you may feel that her views on medical issues are quite bad enough. But, she also feels that several social issues are in her field, too. She appeared on a news television show where the subject of birth control came up. It actually came up in connection with providing free birth control assistance to prostitutes. Then, the question came up as to whether a woman would have to stop being a prostitute before she could get government assistance with birth control. Dr. Elders speaks for the government, apparently, when she says:

Can you be comfortable with a government speaking with this official voice, in charge of the research into the number one killer -- heart disease?