acts of kindness reduce risk of Alzheimer’s

Second Opinion Health Alert

December 19, 2008

Can this act of kindness reduce your risk of Alzheimer‘s by 89%?
The incidence of Alzheimer’s disease is increasing rapidly. There still
is no satisfactory treatment. Even alternatives have little impact. So
prevention is absolutely vital. Now, what if I told you it’s possible to
reduce your risk of getting Alzheimer’s disease by 89%? Would you be
interested?
This treatment doesn’t cost anything. But it does require some effort on
your part. No, it’s not exercise — though exercise does help
considerably. The treatment is quite simple. All you have to do is serve
others.
Yep, that’s all there is to it. You see, There’s a lot of research on
conscientiousness and longevity. Work going back into the early 1990s
strongly suggests a relationship. And now we’re seeing this research
applied to memory.
In fact, this latest study shows that serving others not only reduces
your risk of Alzheimer’s by a whopping 89%, but it also reduces your risk
of mild cognitive decline, as well.
This study followed 997 older Catholic nuns, priests, and brothers
without dementia at the start of the study. The researchers evaluated the
Catholics with a 12-item measure of conscientiousness. Then they followed
the participants for 12 years or until they died. The researchers
controlled the subjects for other personality traits, activity patterns,
and vascular conditions. Of course, they also controlled for age, sex,
and education. Eighteen percent (176) of the patients developed
Alzheimer’s during the study.
The authors found that those with the highest conscientiousness scores
(90th percentile) had the lowest risk. And those with the lowest scores
(10th percentile), had the highest risk.


In those who died, the researchers did pathological examinations of their
brains at autopsy. Conscientiousness had a measurable modifying effect on
the development of neurofibrillary pathologic changes and cerebral
infarction (stroke) before death. Neurofibrillary tangles are a
pathological hallmark of Alzheimer’s brains. This research strongly
suggests that conscientiousness can markedly reduce very nasty anatomical
changes in your brain while maintaining brain function.
There are a lot of nutritional steps you can take to reduce your risk of
dementia, but none of them can compare to these results. Does serving
others really work this well? Consider Mother Teresa. She lived a very
productive life until she died at 87. Many people consider her one of the
most conscientious people of all time.
I know many seniors who volunteer their time in service after they
retire. They seem happier, more active, and have a higher self worth. I
also see many patients who are working well into their 80s with no
apparent decline at all. While my experience is observational only, I
strongly believe there’s a significant benefit to your health when you
serve others.
This research is a compelling reason to reach out to others and help them
whenever possible. And now we know that serving others also serves
ourselves. Many of us make a point of helping others during the holidays.
That’s great. But this year, keep doing it throughout the year. It’s a
great way to keep your brain healthy.
Yours for better health and medical freedom,

Commercialism at it’s finest!

GUYS – DON’T GIVE BAD PRESENTS – YOU’LL END UP IN THE DOGHOUSE!

This is HILARIOUS! It’s an ad campaign from JC Penny about where men go when they give BAD XMAS GIFTS! Yes, it’s the commercialism of the holiday but I have to admit I find the ad creative and very funny!

http://blog.wired.com/business/2008/12/welcome-to-the.html

Santa Bush

Bu$h’$ gifts that keep on giving…..
http://santabush.com/

Support Obama labeling GMO

Obama wants GMO foods labeled-please support if you agree

> Please read and sign the petition. Mahalo.

>

>

> *President Elect Obama promised that genetically modified foods will

> require labels*.

> Please sign the petition

> <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/TakeAction/MandatoryLabelingPetitiontoObama/index.cfm>

> demanding comprehensive and meaningful GMO labeling; and thank him for

> giving us what we want, and deserve.

>

> ***************************************************

>

> President Elect Obama is finally going to get genetically modified

> (GM) foods labeled?something 270 million Americans have wanted for a

> long time. The Bush, Clinton, and Bush I administrations denied it to

> us, ignoring 9 out of 10 citizens in order to support the economic

> interests of the 5 Ag biotech companies that make GMOs.

>

> Former FDA man Henry Miller admitted, ?In this area, the US government

> agencies have done exactly what big agribusiness has asked them to do

> and told them to do.?

>

> Why don?t the biotech companies want us to know that their products

> are in our food? Because we wouldn?t eat them. According to a CBS/New

> York Times poll, most of us (53%) would avoid brands with genetically

> modified organisms (GMOs).

>

> *Close labeling loopholes*

>

> Outside the US and Canada, nearly all industrialized countries require

> GMOs to be labeled. But clear, comprehensive, and consumer-friendly

> criteria remain elusive.

>

> Japan?s laws allow food with a whopping 5% GMO contamination to go

> unlabeled. In Australia and New Zealand, loopholes exempt about 90% of

> their GM foods from labeling. Their law says that GM ingredients must

> be detectable in the final processed food in order to require labels.

> Thus, oil made from 100% GM soybeans, corn, cottonseed or canola (the

> four major GM crops) is unlabeled.

>

> These loose labeling regimes have consistently angered citizens and

> there is momentum for tightening standards. In the EU, for example,

> they used to exempt undetectable GMOs but now insist on labels if any

> ingredient is DERIVED BY GMOs. Thus, they require traceability of

> ingredients to their GMO or Non-GMO origins.

>

> The EU has another loophole that upsets citizens there (which we must

> avoid here in the US). Milk, meat, and eggs from animals fed GMOs

> don?t have to be labeled. Many groups are working hard to change this

> EU law. In the meantime several European food companies publicly

> committed not to use GMO animal feed.

>

> In the US, corporations have traditionally had the upper hand when it

> comes to negotiating details of regulations. We don?t want that to

> happen with labeling.

>

> President Obama is going to give us labeling?he promised us that. But

> will it be the citizens? labeling plan or Monsanto?s?

>

> Sign the petition

> <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/TakeAction/MandatoryLabelingPetitiontoObama/index.cfm>

> today demanding comprehensive and meaningful GMO labeling, and thank

> President Obama for giving us what we want, and deserve.

>

> But don?t wait for labeling to avoid GMOs. Download our Non-GMO

> Shopping Guide

> <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/DocumentFiles/144.pdf>, which

> gives tips and brands to help you choose healthier non-GMO food.

>

> Healthy Eating!

>

> Jeffrey M.Smith

> Executive Director

> www.responsibletechnology.org <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/>

> Author, Genetic Roulette and Seeds of Deception

>

>

>

————————————————————————

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG.

Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.9.15/1839 - Release Date:

12/9/2008 9:59 AM

Facts about GMO

Unintended GMO Health Risks

Genetically modified foods:

YES, you are already eating them.
NO, they are not safe to eat.

Did you know… since 1996 Americans have been eating genetically modified (GM) ingredients in most processed foods.

Did you know… GM plants, such as soybean, corn, cottonseed, and canola have had foreign genes forced into their DNA. And the inserted genes come from species, such as bacteria and viruses, that have never been in the human food supply.

Did you know… genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are not safe. They have been linked to thousands of toxic and allergenic reactions, thousands of sick, sterile, and dead livestock, and damage to virtually every organ and system studied in lab animals.

Find out what the risks are and start protecting yourself and your family today!

Why isn’t the FDA protecting us?

In 1992, the Food and Drug Administration claimed that they had no information showing that GM foods were substantially different from conventionally grown foods and therefore were safe to eat. But internal memos made public by a lawsuit reveal that their position was staged by political appointees under orders from the White House to promote GMOs. FDA scientists, on the other hand, warned that GMOs can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects, including allergies, toxins, new diseases, and nutritional problems. They urged long term safety studies, but were ignored.[1] The FDA does not require any safety evaluations for GMOs. Instead, biotech companies, who have been found guilty of hiding toxic effects of their chemical products, are now in charge of determining whether their GM foods are safe. (The FDA official in charge of creating this policy was Michael Taylor, Monsanto’s former attorney and later their vice president.)

Although these biotech companies participate in a voluntary consultation process with the FDA, it is a meaningless exercise. The summaries of the superficial research they submit cannot identify most of the health risks of GMOs.[2]

Genetic modification is radically different from natural breeding

In contrast to the statements of biotech advocates, FDA scientists and others affirm that genetic modification is not just an extension of the conventional breeding techniques that have been used by farmers for millennia. Genetic engineering transfers genes across natural species barriers, using imprecise laboratory techniques that bear no resemblance to natural breeding. Furthermore, the technology is based on outdated concepts of how genes and cells work.[3]

Widespread, unpredictable changes

Gene insertion is done either by shooting genes from a “gene gun” into a plate of cells or by using bacteria to invade the cell with foreign DNA. The altered cell is then cloned into a plant. These processes create massive collateral damage, causing mutations in hundreds or thousands of locations throughout the plant’s DNA.[4] Natural genes can be deleted or permanently turned on or off, and hundreds may change their levels of expression.[5]

In addition:

• The inserted gene is often rearranged;[6]
• It may transfer from the food into our body’s cells or into the DNA of bacteria inside us;[7] and
• The GM protein produced by the gene may have unintended properties or effects.

GM foods on the market

The primary reason companies genetically engineer plants is to make them tolerant to their brand of herbicide. The four major GM plants, soy, corn, canola, and cotton, are designed to survive an otherwise deadly dose of weed killer. These crops have much higher residues of toxic herbicides. About 68% of GM crops are herbicide tolerant.

The second GM trait is a built-in pesticide. A gene from the soil bacterium called Bt (for Bacillus thuringiensis) is inserted into corn and cotton DNA, where it secretes the insect-killing Bt-toxin in every cell. About 19% of GM crops produce their own pesticide. Another 13% produce a pesticide and are herbicide tolerant.

There is also Hawaiian papaya and a small amount of zucchini and yellow crookneck squash, which are engineered to resist a plant virus. Help stop the introduction of GM sugar in late 2008. Send a letter to top companies on our website.

Growing evidence of harm from GMOs

GM soy and allergic reactions

• Soy allergies skyrocketed by 50% in the UK, soon after GM soy was introduced.[8]
• A human subject showed a skin prick allergic-type reaction to GM soy, but not to natural soy.[9]
• The level of one known soy allergen is as much as 7-times higher in cooked GM soy compared to non-GM soy.[10]
• GM soy also contains an unexpected allergen-type protein not found in natural soy.[11]

Bt corn and cotton linked to allergies

The biotech industry claims that Bt-toxin is harmless to humans and mammals because the natural bacteria version has been used as a spray by farmers for years. In reality, hundreds of people exposed to Bt spray had allergic-type symptoms,[12] and mice fed Bt had powerful immune responses[13] and damaged intestines.[14] Moreover, Bt in GM crops is designed to be more toxic than the natural spray and is thousands of times more concentrated.

Hundreds of laborers in India report allergic reactions from handling Bt cotton.[15] Their symptoms are identical to those exposed to Bt spray.[16]

GMOs fail allergy tests

No tests can guarantee that a GMO will not cause allergies. Although the World Health Organization recommends a protein screening protocol,[17] the GM soy, corn, and papaya in our food supply fail those tests— because they have properties of known allergens.[18]

GMOs cause immune reactions to non-GM foods

• If proteins “digest” slowly, there is more time for allergic reactions. Because GM soy reduces digestive enzymes in mice,[19] it may slow protein digestion and promote allergies to many foods.

• Mice not only reacted to Bt -toxin, they had immune responses to formerly harmless compounds.[20]
• Similarly, a mouse test indicated that people eating GM peas could develop allergies both to the peas and to a range of other foods. The peas had already passed all the allergy tests normally used to get GMOs on the market. It took this advanced mouse test, which was never used on the GMOs we eat, to discover that the peas could be deadly.[21]

GMOs and liver problems

• Rats fed GM potatoes had smaller, partially atrophied livers.[22]
• The livers of rats fed GM canola were 12-16% heavier.[23]
• GM soy altered mouse liver cells in ways that suggest a toxic insult.[24] The changes reversed after their diet switched to non-GM soy.[25]

GM soy, reproductive problems, and infant mortality

• More than half the offspring of mother rats fed GM soy died within three weeks.[26]
• Male rats[27] and mice[28] fed GM soy showed changes in their testicles; the mice had altered young sperm cells.
• The DNA of mouse embryos whose parents ate GM soy functioned differently than those whose parents ate non-GM soy.[29]

Many offspring of female rats fed GM soy were considerably smaller,
and more than half died within three weeks (compared to 10% of the
non-GM soy controls).[30]

Bt crops linked to sterility, disease, and death

• When sheep grazed on Bt cotton plants after harvest, within a week 1 in 4 died. Shepherds estimate 10,000 sheep deaths in one region of India.[31]
• Farmers in Europe and Asia say that cows, water buffaloes, chickens, and horses died from eating Bt corn varieties.[32]
• About two dozen US farmers report that Bt corn varieties caused widespread sterility in pigs or cows.[33]
• Filipinos in at least five villages fell sick when a nearby Bt corn variety was pollinating.[34]

The stomach lining of rats fed GM potatoes showed excessive cell growth, a condition that may be a precursor to cancer. Rats also had damaged organs and immune systems.[35]

Functioning GM genes remain inside you

Unlike safety evaluations for drugs, there are no human clinical trials of GM foods. The only published human feeding experiment verified that genetic material inserted into GM soy transfers into the DNA of intestinal bacteria and continues to function.[36] This means that long after we stop eating GM foods, we may still have their GM proteins produced continuously inside us.

• If the antibiotic gene inserted into most GM crops were to transfer, it could create super diseases, resistant to antibiotics.
• If the gene that creates Bt -toxin in GM corn were to transfer, it might turn our intestinal flora into living pesticide factories.
• Animal studies show that DNA in food can travel into organs throughout the body, even into the fetus.[37]

GM food supplement caused deadly epidemic

In the 1980s, a contaminated brand of a food supplement called L-tryptophan killed about 100 Americans and caused sickness and disability in another 5,000-10,000 people. The source of contaminants was almost certainly the genetic engineering process used in its production.[38] The disease took years to find and was almost overlooked. It was only identified because the symptoms were unique, acute, and fast-acting. If all three characteristics were not in place, the deadly GM supplement might never have been identified or removed.

If GM foods on the market are causing common diseases or if their effects appear only after long-term exposure, we may not be able to identify the source of the problem for decades, if at all. There is no monitoring of GMO-related problems and no long-term animal studies. Heavily invested biotech corporations are gambling away the health of our nation for profit.

Help end the genetic engineering of our food supply

When the tipping point of consumer concern about GMOs was achieved in Europe in 1999, within a single week virtually all major food manufacturers committed to remove GM ingredients. The Campaign for Healthier Eating in America is designed to reach a similar tipping point in the US before the end of 2009.

Our growing network of manufacturers, retailers, healthcare practitioners, organizations, and the media, is informing consumers of the health risks of GMOs and helping them select healthier non-GMO alternatives.

Go to www.responsibletechnology.org to get involved and learn how to avoid GMOs. Look for our Non-GMO Shopping Guide in summer 2008.

Start buying non-GMO today.

Help us stop the genetic engineering of our food supply.

Donations to the Institute For Responsible Technology are tax-deductible. Your $25 membership includes a free educational gift.

There are three ways to become a member or make a donation:

By mail:

Institute For Responsible Technology
P.O. Box 469, Fairfield, IA 52556

Online:

www.responsibletechnology.org

By phone:

(641) 209-1765

The health information is from the book Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risk of Genetically Engineered Foods, by Jeffrey M. Smith.

© copyright Institute For Responsible Technology 2008

The Institute is a fully tax deductible project of The Coordinating Council, a 501c(3).

Mark Fiore cartoons

Some holiday cheer
http://www.markfiore.com/

Alternative to Christmas spending

Greetings Everyone!

I am grateful to the adults in my extended family who agreed to end exchanging Christmas gifts this year.

After watching this video, I decided to redirect money I would have spent on Christmas gifts to help less fortunate people, help themselves.

To help entrepreneurs in 3rd world countries restore dignity; experience more joy and their own greatness I found 3 sites for consideration.

http://www.worldchangingbusiness.com/1_million_initiative.html

http://www.kiva.org

http://www.thp.org and short video of what they are up to
http://www.thp.org/what_we_do/program_overview/intro_video


Thank you expanding human potential.
Doreen


Doreen
www.thetruthgourmet.com <www.thetruthgourmet.com>
Living in a conscious world
http://thetruthgourmet.blogspot.com <http://thetruthgourmet.blogspot.com>

Eliant Campaign in Europe-please sign

Dear friends,

Have you heard that anthroposophical medical rememdies, biodynamic products, and Waldorf education, indeed, all the things out of anthropsophy that we love and hold dear are in danger, because the European Union does not recognize the validity of the products and services that are based on a spiritual view of the human being? Do you know that the EU is making laws that will make these products and services illegal? (For instance, the new EU guidelines mandate that ALL baby food must have synthetic vitamins added, even though the Demeter baby foods don’t need them because their own NATURAL vitamin content has been proven to be equivalent. And Hauschka sun screen will not longer be manufactured because it doesn’t have the particular CHEMICAL ingredients that the EU requires.) Just today we learned that now in Holland the anthroposophical medicines that are not classified as “homeopathic” are no longer legal.

The freedom of the consumer is being curtailed through these laws. And what happens in Europe could easily and predictably also happen here.

Our friends in Europe have been told that if they can gather 1,000,000 signatures (by Dec. 31, 2008), they will establish their identity as an interest/consumer group, and be guaranteed a positive review of their products under EU laws. Signatures gathered in North America will also be accepted, in the spirit of international commerce. We thus far have 630,000 signatures — a good start, but still less than 2/3 of the way there!

Therefore, PLEASE JOIN ME in supporting this movement, by going to the website listed below and signing this signature. AND PLEASE also forward this email — with my text if you like — to 3, or 5, or 10 of your friends this week, and urging them to get on board as well.

Cynthia Hoven

Director, Eurythmy training program

Rudolf Steiner College

choven@steinercollege.edu

Dear supporters of the ELIANT campaign

One alone does not help, but

rather whoever unites with

many others at the right time.

Goethe

We’d like to thank you very warmly for your online signatures for the ELIANT campaign. We have now received over 630,000 signatures, which encourages us to ask you for a one-off Christmas gift to ELIANT:

Would it be possible for you to send this email to 3 friends or acquaintances and ask them to sign online? If so, we could achieve one million signatures by Christmas!

In this way you will be helping to secure legal safeguards in Europe for DEMETER quality baby and infant foods without artificial vitamin supplementation, freedom of choice in education and full and free availability of anthroposophic medicines!

Your friends and acquaintances can sign online here: www.eliant.eu

And >here< you can print out a signature list and send it out with your Christmas post

With very warm thanks

and best wishes for Advent and Christmas

for the ELIANT Alliance sponsor group

Christof Wiechert

Waldorf educationalist

Initial signatory of ELIANT Charter

Nikolai Fuchs

International Association

for biodynamic agriculture

Günther Schulz

International Federation of

of Anthroposophic Medical Associations / IVAA

Heike Sommer

ELIANT campaign

press / publicity officer

Dr. jur. Jürgen Erdmenger

Institut anthroposophique Rudolf Steiner

Associate member

Dr. med. Michaela Glöckler

Foundation

for Anthroposophic Medicine

Thomas Göing

ELIANT campaign

Project manager

Secretary of Agriculture Appointment-important action

Dear Friends:

Obama is soon to select the Secretary of Agriculture. This is a vitally important office. The fate of organic foods and the impact of Genetically Modified Foods, and the state of our soil and hence our future, depends on this.

The Organic Consumers Assn. says, “The Secretary of Agriculture is responsible for directing the U.S. Department of Agriculture and its $90 billion annual budget, including the National Organic Program, food stamp and nutrition programs, and agriculture subsidies. Through the Organic Consumers Association web portal, you can now directly communicate with the President-Elect about your choice for Secretary of Agriculture and your vision for our nation‘s food system.”

Please consider voting for Fred Kirshenmann, a long-time Bioneer and man of integrity (see below). Please go to this link and vote.
http://organicconsumers.org/obama.htm

Thanks,
JOY

If you don’t want to receive emails of this nature, please just Reply with “No Politics” in the Subject Window.

-

Joy Gardner
Vibrational Healing Program
600 S. Churton St. #6
Hillsborough, NC 27278
808 345-5838 • joyus@copper.net
http://www.highvibrations.net

This is extremely important - please forward widely!

“Fred Kirshenmann has been the director of the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture since 2000. He is president of Kirschenmann Family Farms, a 3,500-acre certified organic farm in Windsor, North Dakota, where he also was president (1990-1999) of Farm Verified Organic, a private organic certification agency. He is a leader of the organic/sustainable agriculture movement, and has served on many boards and advisory committees of such organizations. He has completed a five-year term on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Organic Standards Board, and has chaired the administrative council for the USDA’s North Central Region’s Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program. He recently completed work for the North Dakota Commission on the Future of Agriculture, and was a charter member of the Northern Plains Sustainable Agriculture Society in 1979. He has been a member of the board of directors for the Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture since 1994, and was president in 1997. He has authored or co-authored numerous articles and book chapters dealing with ethics and agriculture.”

http://organicconsumers.org/obama.htm

Blessings,
Dorisse


“Illnesses do not come out of the blue, they are developed from the small daily sins against nature. When enough sins have been accumulated, illnesses will suddenly appear.” Hippocrates, circa 500BC, from his treatise on Airs, Waters, and Places


BreathDance - Wellness Through Breathing
828-450-5999
www.breathdance.org <http://www.breathdance.org>

We are loaning $2 trillion to who?

Updated: New York, Dec 14 05:43

London, Dec 14 10:43

Tokyo, Dec 14 19:43

Exclusive Worldwide Regions Markets Industries Economy Politics Law Environment Invest Science Opinion Spend Sports Arts and Culture Editors’ Video Picks Bloomberg Markets Magazine Special Report RESOURCES Bloomberg TV Bloomberg Radio Bloomberg Podcasts Bloomberg Press More News • Armani, 74, Will Keep His Company If His Health Holds, Talked With Hermes • Treasury’s Record Low Borrowing Rates Failing to Benefit Corporate Debtors • Boeing’s `7-Late-7′ Dreamliner Rivals Pioneering 707 in Slowness to Market STORY PHOTO VIDEO Fed Refuses to Disclose Recipients of $2 Trillion (Update2) Email | Print | A A A By Mark Pittman Dec. 12 (Bloomberg) — The Federal Reserve refused a request by Bloomberg News to disclose the recipients of more than $2 trillion of emergency loans from U.S. taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral. Bloomberg filed suit Nov. 7 under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act requesting details about the terms of 11 Fed lending programs, most created during the deepest financial crisis since the Great Depression. The Fed responded Dec. 8, saying it’s allowed to withhold internal memos as well as information about trade secrets and commercial information. The institution confirmed that a records search found 231 pages of documents pertaining to some of the requests. “If they told us what they held, we would know the potential losses that the government may take and that’s what they don’t want us to know,” said Carlos Mendez, a senior managing director at New York-based ICP Capital LLC, which oversees $22 billion in assets. The Fed stepped into a rescue role that was the original purpose of the Treasury’s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. The central bank loans don’t have the oversight safeguards that Congress imposed upon the TARP. Total Fed lending exceeded $2 trillion for the first time Nov. 6. It rose by 138 percent, or $1.23 trillion, in the 12 weeks since Sept. 14, when central bank governors relaxed collateral standards to accept securities that weren’t rated AAA. ‘Been Bamboozled’ Congress is demanding more transparency from the Fed and Treasury on bailout, most recently during Dec. 10 hearings by the House Financial Services committee when Representative David Scott, a Georgia Democrat, said Americans had “been bamboozled.” Bloomberg News, a unit of New York-based Bloomberg LP, on May 21 asked the Fed to provide data on collateral posted from April 4 to May 20. The central bank said on June 19 that it needed until July 3 to search documents and determine whether it would make them public. Bloomberg didn’t receive a formal response that would let it file an appeal within the legal time limit. On Oct. 25, Bloomberg filed another request, expanding the range of when the collateral was posted. It filed suit Nov. 7. In response to Bloomberg’s request, the Fed said the U.S. is facing “an unprecedented crisis” in which “loss in confidence in and between financial institutions can occur with lightning speed and devastating effects.” Data Provider The Fed supplied copies of three e-mails in response to a request that it disclose the identities of those supplying data on collateral as well as their contracts. While the senders and recipients of the messages were revealed, the contents were erased except for two phrases identifying a vendor as “IDC.” One of the e-mails’ subject lines refers to “Interactive Data — Auction Rate Security Advisory May 1, 2008.” Brian Willinsky, a spokesman for Bedford, Massachusetts- based Interactive Data Corp., a seller of fixed-income securities information, declined to comment. “Notwithstanding calls for enhanced transparency, the Board must protect against the substantial, multiple harms that might result from disclosure,” Jennifer J. Johnson, the secretary for the Fed’s Board of Governors, said in a letter e-mailed to Bloomberg News. ‘Dangerous Step’ “In its considered judgment and in view of current circumstances, it would be a dangerous step to release this otherwise confidential information,” she wrote. New York-based Citigroup Inc., which is shrinking its global workforce of 352,000 through asset sales and job cuts, is among the nine biggest banks receiving $125 billion in capital from the TARP since it was signed into law Oct. 3. More than 170 regional lenders are seeking an additional $74 billion. Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said in September they would meet congressional demands for transparency in a $700 billion bailout of the banking system. The Freedom of Information Act obliges federal agencies to make government documents available to the press and public. The Bloomberg lawsuit, filed in New York, doesn’t seek money damages. ‘Right to Know’ “There has to be something they can tell the public because we have a right to know what they are doing,” said Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Arlington, Virginia-based Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “It would really be a shame if we have to find this out 10 years from now after some really nasty class-action suit and our financial system has completely collapsed,” she said. The Fed’s five-page response to Bloomberg may be “unprecedented” because the board usually doesn’t go into such detail about its position, said Lee Levine, a partner at Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz LLP in Washington. “This is uncharted territory,” said Levine during an interview from his New York office. “The Freedom of Information Act wasn’t built to anticipate this situation and that’s evident from the way the Fed tried to shoehorn their argument into the trade-secrets exemption.” The Fed lent cash and government bonds to banks that handed over collateral including stocks and subprime and structured securities such as collateralized debt obligations, according to the Fed Web site. Borrowers include the now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Citigroup and New York-based JPMorgan Chase & Co., the country’s biggest bank by assets. Banks oppose any release of information because that might signal weakness and spur short-selling or a run by depositors, Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs for the Financial Services Roundtable, a Washington trade group, said in an interview last month. ‘Complete Truth’ “Americans don’t want to get blindsided anymore,” Mendez said in an interview. “They don’t want it sugarcoated or whitewashed. They want the complete truth. The truth is we can’t take all the pain right now.” The Bloomberg lawsuit said the collateral lists “are central to understanding and assessing the government’s response to the most cataclysmic financial crisis in America since the Great Depression.” In response, the Fed argued that the trade-secret exemption could be expanded to include potential harm to any of the central bank’s customers, said Bruce Johnson, a lawyer at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP in Seattle. That expansion is not contained in the freedom-of-information law, Johnson said. “I understand where they are coming from bureaucratically, but that means it’s all the more necessary for taxpayers to know what exactly is going on because of all the money that is being hurled at the banking system,” Johnson said. The Bloomberg lawsuit is Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 08-CV-9595, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan). To contact the reporters on this story: Mark Pittman in New York at mpittman@bloomberg.net; Last Updated: December 12, 2008 17:12 EST
NEWS | MARKET DATA | INVESTMENT TOOLS | TV AND RADIO | ABOUT BLOOMBERG | CAREERS | CONTACT US | LOG IN/REGISTER Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Trademarks | Site Map | Help | Feedback | Advertising | ??????