The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has decided to ban Berkey water filters, officially labeling them as pesticides. Berkey has sued the EPA in response to their sudden and unorthodox reinterpretation of their own regulations. Berkey water filters are regarded by many as some of the best filters money can buy, and several of Berkey’s products have been featured on Good Morning America, Martha Stewart, Food Network, Thrillist, Goop and Forbes. Berkey products, which have been on the market for a quarter century, became popular due to their gravity purifier and filtering elements that can remove hundreds of waterborne pathogens and contaminants.

According to Berkey’s website, their products can “dramatically reduce bacteria like E. coli, Chlorine, Chloramines, Parasites, Fluoride, Heavy Metals, Inorganic Minerals, Trihalomethane (THMs), Pharmaceuticals, Petroleum Contaminants, Bisphenol-A (BPA), Perfluorochemicals (PFOAS), Herbicides & Pesticides, Protozoa, Inorganic minerals, VOCs, Petroleum products, Perfluorinated chemicals, Rust, Silt, Sediment, and even Radiological.”

One of the main elements in Berkey water filters that contributes to their successful purification is silver. Silver is an active ingredient in many pesticides, thus partly explaining the EPA’s decision to label Berkey as such. However, there were several decisions made by the EPA before this nonsensical label that shed greater light on their true intentions.

The EPA announced at the beginning of the COVID “pandemic” that they were considering reinterpreting their own regulations regarding water filters capable of removing viruses. Concerned by this announcement, Berkey owner Jim Shepherd contacted an EPA consultant for guidance. They provided none. In fact, they even told Shepherd that Berkey products were exempt from the reinterpreted regulations.

EPA pretends to care about Americans’ health, but does very little to protect us from contaminants in water

Following his lackluster consultation from the EPA representative, Shepherd decided it was best to continue manufacturing Berkey products. Shepherd was confident Berkey products were not only safe for the American people, but also incredibly helpful. Arguably the most important role that Berkey filters play in terms of American health is their removal of fluoride. According to a Harvard study, “results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children’s neurodevelopment.” The EPA identifies fluoride as a dangerous chemical, yet the US government still introduces it to the public water supply to supposedly reduce tooth decay.

As the EPA continued to review its regulations, they did not do anything to reduce the amount of fluoride being spoon-fed to the American people in their tap water. But what they did do was begin banning the filtration product companies that provide effective ways to remove the fluoride. Shepherd said that representatives of the EPA have shut down Berkey’s production plants and delivered stop sale orders to their part manufacturers.

Currently, all Berkey products are listed as unavailable on their website. Shepherd said that he may be faced with having to lay off over 500 American workers if he is unsuccessful in his litigation.

Why would the EPA, out of nowhere, change their minds about this company that so clearly creates a positive impact on American society and health? Even more puzzling is the timing of the decision. As pawns of the Biden administration seem to be preparing for a revamp of COVID, the federal government wants to make water filters that remove the virus unavailable to the American people. Interesting.

Berkey water filters are some of the best filters money can buy, by the way. Use their website below to cover how they filter like 99% of all contaminants, including fluoride, which can cause cancer, brittle bones and lowered IQ. Keep your truth news in check by adding Preparedness.news to your favorites list and tuning in daily for updates on real news about surviving and thriving in the near future, and news that’s being scrubbed from MSM and social media as you read this.

Sound off about this on the Late Prepper Substack.

Sources for this article include:

• Censored.news
• Twitter.com
• USAberkeyfilters.com
• PRnewswire.com
• NaturalNews.com

When they first failed, some speculated that they were allowed to do so for the sake of bigger banks wanting to muscle in on the climate change industry. But as it turns out, there’s another player in the green banking world: the Environmental Protection Agency. John Hugh DeMastri from Daily Caller News Foundation describes that below.

In the planned Liberal World Order, the Globalist Elite Cabal won’t just work through governments. In fact, governments will be only marginally in control. It’s through the public-private partnerships that are currently forming that the globalists will exert real tyranny over the people. This move by the Biden-Harris regime aligns perfectly with those goals.

Here’s DeMastri’s article. As you read it, keep the failed green banks from earlier this year in mind…

Biden EPA Launches $20 Billion ‘Green Bank’ Before GOP Can Repeal Funding

The Biden administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a $20 billion funding push for startups and local communities investing in green technology Friday morning.

The funding is broken into two grant competitions, the $14 billion National Clean Investment Fund, which will support “two-to-three” financial institutions that will, in turn, fund climate startups and other green initiatives, and the $6 billion Clean Communities Investment Accelerator, which will support between two and seven “hub nonprofit organizations” to develop green projects in low-income communities, according to the EPA. The funding comes from the Biden administration’s $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), which the EPA must spend by September 30, 2024, thanks to a mandate by Democratic lawmakers designed to shield the fund from Republican efforts to repeal it and other aspects of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

“The President and I set ambitious goals to cut our greenhouse gas emissions by half by 2030 and reach net-zero emissions by 2050—the investments announced today move our nation towards achieving these goals and a cleaner, healthier future for generations to come,” Vice President Kamala Harris said in the press release. “Students, small business owners and community leaders with innovative ideas to reduce our emissions and accelerate our clean energy transition will now see their projects become reality, all while creating good-paying jobs and a clean energy economy that works for all.”

Republicans have proposed clawing back roughly $7.8 billion of this funding as part of their budget for the federal government in fiscal year 2024, with GOP Rep. Gary Palmer of Alabama referring to the bill as a “taxpayer-funded $27 billion slush fund,” according to The Washington Post. Republican Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho argued that reductions are “necessary to right-size” the “excessive level of funding” that the EPA and other federal agencies “received outside of the regular appropriations process.”

EPA Administrator Michael Regan pointed out that many projects backed by the IRA have been located in Republican districts, in a statement to the Post.

“We have $27 billion to design a very effective program that, by the way, will go in all districts — red, blue and independent districts,” Regan told the outlet. “This is about investing in America.”

The EPA did not immediately reply to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Michael Regan visited East Palestine and took some questions. The answer to a question posed by independent journalist Nick Sortor prompted an honest and scary answer from Regan. Watch:

“Would you allow your kids anywhere close to these streams right now,” Sortor asked.

“I would not,” Regan, replied. “I’m a father of a nine-year-old. I think we have to all agree that we wish this accident didn’t occur. But the accident occurred and as a result, some of our creeks and our streams have pollution in them.”

At least he was honest.