***Johnson and Toxin

Many of you will have heard or seen the horrible mess that Johnson and Johnson is now in. It seems that that lovely little baby we all know on their baby shampoo has been a phony for some time. And J & J has known that for some time. According to Emily Patterson (www.sunflowernaturals.com). There are five different formulas for just that simple baby shampoo. The US, the UK, and Australia get the worst of the cancerous formulas. In the Chinese formula, there is no formaldehyde. In the Japanese formula, no phalates and no 1,4-dioxane. In Denmark, no parabens. (Note that we in the USA get all the above in our baby shampoo.) And, that's just one baby product of many that contain these dangerous and cancerous chemicals!

Yet, J & J insists that they are merely following the rules of the different countries.

YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY'RE RIGHT! But, why is the FDA putting up with this when most other countries aren't? I've been saying for years that the FDA is not protecting us (the public), but is actually a "tool" used by Big Pharma to make profits and kill people in doing so.

If you visit the Sunflower Naturals web site (http://www.sunflowernaturals. com/article_poisoned_babies. shtml ), you will find links to coverage of a United States boycott of J&J products reported by MSNBC, Forbes, CBS, Newsweek and other major media outlets. Join the boycott and share the information with your family and friends through Twitter, FaceBook, email and help make the boycott of J&J products a success. We need to work together to let them know that we do not want their poisons in our products - especially our baby products, when formulations exist for other countries that are safer and do not contain carcinogens as the products available in the United States .

J&J issued a press statement explaining that the products are safe (yeah, right) but that, due to consumer demands, they will begin developing a common, global baby shampoo formulation without formaldehyde (a known human carcinogen) or 1,4-dioxane (a known human carcinogen). Why are they dragging their feet for U.S. consumers when obviously, a formula without these two potent carcinogens is already in production and available in other countries? Why? Because sick children are very profitable for J&J's diagnostic equipment and pharmaceuticals. The longer they drag their feet, the more children will become sick with asthma, allergies, cancers, leukemia and learning disorders such as ADD, ADHD and Autism. Although J&J has stated they will change the formulation when they get around to it, what about all the other products and other companies that contain the same, and in some cases worse, chemicals?

Take a look at another aspect of J&J: Their medical diagnostics and pharmaceutical sectors, which profit from the children they made sick with body care products...

There's a former employee of J & J, who's been telling some interesting tales. Emily recently met a J&J whistle blower who was fired for questioning the fraudulent financial schemes of J&J. There is currently a court case with this documentation including, fraudulent pricing for Medicare and Medicaid, as well as fraudulent pricing for insurance companies for medical equipment and pharmaceuticals manufactured by a variety of J&J's 250 subsidiary companies. In addition, J&J sales representatives were trained on and used fabricated information to promote pharmaceuticals to doctors and to promote off-label use in children - which J&J knew would cause permanent physical harm to the children who used drugs intended for adults.

One of those drugs was Risperdal which caused premature development of breasts in girls, development of breasts in boys and caused both genders to lactate, or make breast milk. Other drugs were prescribed to prevent lactation - the same drugs used for women who had babies and chose not to breast feed their children to dry up the milk. You can read the entire court filing on the Sunflower Naturals web site: http://www.sunflowernaturals. com/article_jnj.shtml . This is a page Emily maintains for all of the numerous legal issues associated with J&J including fraud, bribery, and even lies during FDA hearings and include links to the FDA hearings that are available online through the FDA web site. They include payoffs to FDA, at the same time they are overcharging the US for drugs. It's a pretty sad story of corporate greed and corruption all around.

Surprisingly, this same Emily Patterson seems to have been one of the catalysts. She's the one who started the "Johnson and Toxin" nickname that has gone like a virus thru the "alternate health" community. Her website (www.sunflowernaturals,com) has a huge amount of information on exactly what cancerous and other harmful drugs are in cosmetics, and household cleaning products that are dangerous. She has done a lot of research on J & J as well as many other Big Pharma companies. She even offered them a solution some months ago. Simply buy her company, and use her formulas for all those products. Then she, as an "expert" in this area would help Johnson and Toxic to get back to Johnson and Johnson. Surprise! J and T isn't that smart, and now some of their products are hitting the fans. They are being investigated big time, and now, the public is really starting to boycott them, and knowing what has been going on. Shoulda listened to her months ago J&T.

J & J has also been "spying" on Ms Patterson for many months. I am told that she is in hiding, as big corporations have been known to "hit" opponents. But her website is going strong. Her books are for sale, and if you want to know what is safe to use and what is not, they're a pretty cheap investment. Before she was foreclosed on, her products in household and cosmetic areas were totally safe and free of dangerous chemicals. Just what J & J needs to combat their present boycott.

What's really stupid about J & J is that the cost of manufacturing SAFE products doing the same things would cost almost the same, and in some cases, less. Is Big Pharma really trying to solve the overpopulation problem by killing a lot of us? That's pretty far-fetched, but.....