You will have to excuse the MSN article. Wildtype is actually the third company that has gotten approval for GMO salmon by the FDA. They say it is the first. Poor research.
Great work team on making us healthier. That is just a small amount of what they have done. There is more.
Don’t forget “Organipeel” the synthetic that’s categorized as a pesticide and applied to organic produce. Let’s not forget Bovaer or similar synthetic in some dairy products to reduce methane. Yeah, let’s keep America healthy 👏🏻
I don’t think mandating that those on SNAP cant buy junk is the way to go. How about mandatory education on nutrition so they might choose a healthier option.
None of our tax dollars should subsidize these unhealthy products. THAT is the main point. The products are not banned. People can support the sugar snd snack industry with their own money, NOT government subsidies.
Thank you for clarifying a point I’m clear on. I don’t like the tone of the way it’s being approached. Sort of like the chest beating tax payer screaming don’t YOU spend MY money on sugar!(! I’ll spend my own money on sugar and get sick!)
Considering sugar consumption and obesity across our nation that sounds about right to me.
In my opinion, this could have been approached in a more “educational “ manner.
Actually, it appears my main point was lost. I don't object to this practice based on personal offense due to "MY money" being spent on something I don't approve of. It's not about my money or about the sugar per se. Subsidies drive behavior. Subsidies don't exist without their taxpayer funding. The issue is that the business model is based upon taxpayer subsidies. If you take away the subsidies the product and the behaviors will then exist in their own world without the economic intervention of subsidies. If the product is "worth it" to produce, the business owner will continue producing it. If the product is "worth it" to consume, the consumer will continue purchasing. Subsidies should only exist rarely and for very important products. (We have a really messed up agricultural subsidy system in the USA)
If they were mandating both, it would be less stigmatizing.
The YOU are costing taxpayers MONEY when fraudulent Medicaid claims through nonprofits and corporations have cost taxpayers FAR more just sounds like an attack to me.
And that’s just one example.
Take big pharma for instance and their use of taxpayer money for all the research they don’t do.
Just because they started with one does not mean that they won't do the second. Also, the second (like the former) is something that must be done at the state level and takes a lot more time to implement than the former. People need to relax and be grateful for each win we get and have faith that more wins are coming down the line -- not everything can be done on Day 1 or even Month 6. It took decades, if not a century, to get us where we are; it'll take a little time to reverse it.
I'm grateful for RFKs commitment because I believe he’s genuine, but while one thing is being eliminated it seems that three more are sliding through FDA approval.
This is promising except the danger is that it sets a precedent for the government using digital tracking to restrict your purchases. What happens if a different administration in the future, after cash has been banned and you are required to use a similar digital system to purchase food (even if it isn't based on free money from the government, the technology would be the same), and that administration decides that you are only allowed to buy 1 pound of red meat per month? Be aware of this creep of tech. control infrastructure.
Um... SNAP funding is already limited to only being able to use your SNAP dollars on food, so what you're saying makes no sense -- they already know what you're buying.
I have read that 10% of SNAP dollars go to sodas. Sodas have no nutritional value and lead to obesity and diabetes. I don’t feel we should be paying taxpayer money to fund something that undermines the health of a population in our country. This leads to high medical costs as well.
I didn't write anything that goes against what you said. I agree 100% with you. My only comment is towards Mark's concern of "increased" tracking, which is not a thing b/c they already do it. i.e., there is no "increase." i.e., the topic we're discussing has nothing to do with your point :-).
What I said makes sense because they are normalizing having the government decide what you can and cannot buy using some form of digital card. And even those on the right, the freedom fighters, are cheering it on seemingly oblivious to its implications. It's only a few steps away from having the ability to do it to everyone. And when AI takes half the jobs away and people will be forced to use government support in order to eat, whaddayagonnado?
I, too, am concerned about digital ID, but again, this is not an "increase" in that. The intent is not there nor is there increased surveillance technology built in that was not already there. What I'm saying is that this is a red herring re: us marching down the road to a social credit score/digital ID system. This is just NOT tha.
Tomorrow at 12:00 the president will meet with RFK Jr to press him to back off from de-funding MRNA jabs. Call the White House. Ask to keep his word to let Bobby have his way and "just stay away from the oil" @Whitehouse , @realdonaldtrump , @Potus , @DrMakaryFDA , @SecKennedy
Congratulations to those 11 states who are removing junk food from their SNAP program. It is the common sense option. Hopefully, those on the SNAP program will see the benefits of this move in a reduction of those chronic diseases promoted by junk food.
Swooning over making crappy processed food less toxic. Now, that aside, can we talk about The Childhood Vaccine Schedule, The PREP Act, and the push to expand mRNA shots in other vaccines, etc. We need more leaders with balls. Is it affect of Radiation and Toxins that has turned appointed leaders to be fearful and compliant? Vaccines Trump Junk Food for negative outcomes.
How about shutting down any facility that pushes the spike protein murder shots??
Have you heard of this approval yet? They are doing strong work at the FDA. Say hello to self amplifying mRNA.
https://ir.arcturusrx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/arcturus-therapeutics-receives-us-fda-fast-track-designation-0
YAY! Cheers for RFK Jr., for driving this through with intense focus! We LOVE what he is doing.
They are forcing citizens to not spend taxpayers dollars on junk. I wish taxpayers could force them to not spend taxpayer dollars on unhealthy things.
Go Brooke Rollins and make our food healthier with a new GMO corn and a mRNA shot for healthy dogs with no testing on shedding and the like.
https://anh-usa.org/usda-poised-to-deregulate-new-gmo-corn-what-could-go-wrong/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
https://www.merck.com/news/usda-approves-merck-animal-healths-nobivac-nxt-canine-flu-h3n2-the-first-and-only-rna-particle-technology-vaccine-for-canine-influenza/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Go Markary with making our food healthier with 3 new frankenfoods. 2 salmons and 1 pork approved for human consumption. GMO's are so healthy.
https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/aquadvantage-salmon/aquadvantage-salmon-fact-sheet?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
https://www.gmo.news/2025-05-13-gene-edited-pork-sneaks-onto-your-plate.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/lab-grown-salmon-receives-fda-approval-in-the-us-the-first-cultivated-seafood-to-do-so/ar-AA1GPfTf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
You will have to excuse the MSN article. Wildtype is actually the third company that has gotten approval for GMO salmon by the FDA. They say it is the first. Poor research.
Great work team on making us healthier. That is just a small amount of what they have done. There is more.
Don’t forget “Organipeel” the synthetic that’s categorized as a pesticide and applied to organic produce. Let’s not forget Bovaer or similar synthetic in some dairy products to reduce methane. Yeah, let’s keep America healthy 👏🏻
I don’t think mandating that those on SNAP cant buy junk is the way to go. How about mandatory education on nutrition so they might choose a healthier option.
None of our tax dollars should subsidize these unhealthy products. THAT is the main point. The products are not banned. People can support the sugar snd snack industry with their own money, NOT government subsidies.
Thank you for clarifying a point I’m clear on. I don’t like the tone of the way it’s being approached. Sort of like the chest beating tax payer screaming don’t YOU spend MY money on sugar!(! I’ll spend my own money on sugar and get sick!)
Considering sugar consumption and obesity across our nation that sounds about right to me.
In my opinion, this could have been approached in a more “educational “ manner.
Actually, it appears my main point was lost. I don't object to this practice based on personal offense due to "MY money" being spent on something I don't approve of. It's not about my money or about the sugar per se. Subsidies drive behavior. Subsidies don't exist without their taxpayer funding. The issue is that the business model is based upon taxpayer subsidies. If you take away the subsidies the product and the behaviors will then exist in their own world without the economic intervention of subsidies. If the product is "worth it" to produce, the business owner will continue producing it. If the product is "worth it" to consume, the consumer will continue purchasing. Subsidies should only exist rarely and for very important products. (We have a really messed up agricultural subsidy system in the USA)
Yes, i understand and fully agree with this concept. Maybe my issue is the way it’s been presented
They're not mutually exclusive.
If they were mandating both, it would be less stigmatizing.
The YOU are costing taxpayers MONEY when fraudulent Medicaid claims through nonprofits and corporations have cost taxpayers FAR more just sounds like an attack to me.
And that’s just one example.
Take big pharma for instance and their use of taxpayer money for all the research they don’t do.
Just because they started with one does not mean that they won't do the second. Also, the second (like the former) is something that must be done at the state level and takes a lot more time to implement than the former. People need to relax and be grateful for each win we get and have faith that more wins are coming down the line -- not everything can be done on Day 1 or even Month 6. It took decades, if not a century, to get us where we are; it'll take a little time to reverse it.
I'm grateful for RFKs commitment because I believe he’s genuine, but while one thing is being eliminated it seems that three more are sliding through FDA approval.
This is promising except the danger is that it sets a precedent for the government using digital tracking to restrict your purchases. What happens if a different administration in the future, after cash has been banned and you are required to use a similar digital system to purchase food (even if it isn't based on free money from the government, the technology would be the same), and that administration decides that you are only allowed to buy 1 pound of red meat per month? Be aware of this creep of tech. control infrastructure.
Um... SNAP funding is already limited to only being able to use your SNAP dollars on food, so what you're saying makes no sense -- they already know what you're buying.
I have read that 10% of SNAP dollars go to sodas. Sodas have no nutritional value and lead to obesity and diabetes. I don’t feel we should be paying taxpayer money to fund something that undermines the health of a population in our country. This leads to high medical costs as well.
I didn't write anything that goes against what you said. I agree 100% with you. My only comment is towards Mark's concern of "increased" tracking, which is not a thing b/c they already do it. i.e., there is no "increase." i.e., the topic we're discussing has nothing to do with your point :-).
What I said makes sense because they are normalizing having the government decide what you can and cannot buy using some form of digital card. And even those on the right, the freedom fighters, are cheering it on seemingly oblivious to its implications. It's only a few steps away from having the ability to do it to everyone. And when AI takes half the jobs away and people will be forced to use government support in order to eat, whaddayagonnado?
I, too, am concerned about digital ID, but again, this is not an "increase" in that. The intent is not there nor is there increased surveillance technology built in that was not already there. What I'm saying is that this is a red herring re: us marching down the road to a social credit score/digital ID system. This is just NOT tha.
I'm glad to see my state is early on this movement!
How is junk food defined for the waivers?
Tomorrow at 12:00 the president will meet with RFK Jr to press him to back off from de-funding MRNA jabs. Call the White House. Ask to keep his word to let Bobby have his way and "just stay away from the oil" @Whitehouse , @realdonaldtrump , @Potus , @DrMakaryFDA , @SecKennedy
Immediate Call to Action: Support RFK Jr!
It's a start. Next we need Sec Rollins and USDA going all out on support for small regenerative farms.
🇺🇸👏👏👏🇺🇸
Congratulations to those 11 states who are removing junk food from their SNAP program. It is the common sense option. Hopefully, those on the SNAP program will see the benefits of this move in a reduction of those chronic diseases promoted by junk food.
Not a single democrat state amongst them.
Swooning over making crappy processed food less toxic. Now, that aside, can we talk about The Childhood Vaccine Schedule, The PREP Act, and the push to expand mRNA shots in other vaccines, etc. We need more leaders with balls. Is it affect of Radiation and Toxins that has turned appointed leaders to be fearful and compliant? Vaccines Trump Junk Food for negative outcomes.
Brilliant!!
No matter who helps pay for our food, NOBODY tells me what I can or can't eat!
Eat what you want on your own dime....