Filed under: big pharma, biochemical warfare, biological warfare, Chemical Warfare, city water, corruption, darwinists, deception, depopulation, desalination, Dictatorship, drinking water, Empire, environmental disaster, EPA, Eugenics, EWG, Fascism, fda, fluoride, Genocide, government crimes, government regulation, health and environment, human waste, malthusian, malthusian catastrophe, medical industrial complex, Mercury, methanphetamines, Nazi, New York, pharmaceuticals, Population Control, reverse osmosis, scandal, softkill, tap water, toxic earth, toxic waste, toxicity, water contamination, water safety, water supply, White House | Tags: contaminated environment, drugs, drugs in drinking water, environmental working group, estrogen in drinking water, lowering IQ, pharmaceutical drugs, public health, public water, rozac, toxic environment
Drugs in Drinking Water Killing Our Brains
Pharmaceuticals, Personal Care Products Found in New York City Water Supply
Natural News
December 31, 2009
The Environmental Working Group (EWG) has issued support for a proposed law that would require the Department of Environmental Protection in New York City to test the city’s drinking water supply for personal care product and pharmaceutical residue. Citing numerous studies that have found measurable levels of such contaminants in water supplies around the nation, EWG is encouraging support for measures that would investigate and report contaminant levels to the public.
Reports have found that the nation’s water supplies contain various antibiotics, phytoestrogens and estrogenic steroids, and pharmaceutical and genotoxic drugs. New York City’s water supply is no exception. Since these contaminants have the potential to inflict widespread reproductive harm, neuro-degeneration, endocrine disruption, and cell destruction in humans, EWG is urging that New York City monitor contaminant levels and issue annual water quality reports that outline the results. Since most of these contaminants are currently unregulated, they are typically not disclosed in existing water quality reports.
Wastewater treatment facilities are capable of removing most contaminants from water, however a small percentage of fragments make their way back into the water supply. When combined with thousands of other fragments, the aggregate mass of contaminant particles can pose serious health risks. The extent to which such contamination causes harm has yet to be fully understood and observed.
As it currently stands, pharmaceutical drugs are not regulated in tap water. Drinking water is usually not tested for them and, when it is, the results are usually withheld from the public. Both the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have failed to set any guidelines for pharmaceutical content in water. Thus any level of pharmaceuticals in water is considered to be legal.
Perhaps the most important call from EWG is for improvements in wastewater treatment facility technology. Current methods work for certain microorganisms and compounds but fail to adequately filter pharmaceutical drugs and other synthetic compounds from water. Ultraviolet treatment, activated carbon treatment, and ozonation are some of EWG’s suggestions for updating filter technology.
The goal of EWG is to promote water pollution reduction strategies that include raising public awareness about the issue, gathering and disseminating regular water quality data, and working to implement mitigation strategies both in the short and long terms.
Installing a home reverse osmosis system is a great way to ensure that one’s family is receiving clean water. Reverse osmosis is highly effective at purifying water, removing virtually every known particle and contaminant. It also removes chlorine, fluoride, and other toxic substances added to many municipal water supplies that would otherwise pass through most other water filtration systems.
Filed under: amy goodman, big oil, BP, catastrophic event, corruption, coverup, deception, environmental disaster, federal crimes, george bush, government crimes, gulf of mexico, gulf oil, health and environment, mexico gulf, ocean, offshore oil drilling, oil, oil spill, scandal, toxic earth | Tags: Scott West
Fmr. EPA Investigator Scott West: U.S. Government Tells BP “It Can Do Whatever It Wants and Won’t Be Held Accountable”
Filed under: bottled water, environmental disaster, EPA, Eugenics, health and environment, ocean, plastic, toxic earth, toxic environment, toxicity | Tags: great pacific garbage patch
Wheres greenpeace now? Thats right, trying to pass carbon taxes.
Plastic Trash Found in Whale’s Stomach
‘Toxic stew’ of chemicals causing male fish to carry eggs in testes
Filed under: bisphenol A, bottled water, BPA, cancer, environmental disaster, EPA, Eugenics, fda, food contamination, food safety, health and environment, ocean, phthalates, plastic, softkill, toxic earth, toxic environment, toxicity
BPA hormone disruptor contaminates Earth’s oceans
Natural News
April 13, 2010
Earlier this year, research linked bisphenol A (BPA), a common component of plastics and a powerful hormone disrupter, to heart disease (http://www.naturalnews.com/027974_b…). Now, in the March issue of the Journal of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, researchers have reported yet another newly discovered danger posed by BPA. Hugh S. Taylor, M.D., professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences at Yale University, and his research team have found for the first time that BPA exposure during pregnancy can cause abnormalities in the uterus of offspring and permanent alterations in DNA.
But at least you can avoid plastics and therefore avoid exposure to the BPA, right? Unfortunately, another group of scientists has just announced that’s getting harder and harder to do. Bottom line: there is now solid evidence that Earth’s oceans have been contaminated on a global scale with BPA.
Katsuhiko Saido, Ph.D., of Nihon University in Chiba, Japan, and his colleagues announced their startling and worrisome findings at the 239th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society held in San Francisco recently. He stated that the massive BPA contamination of oceans resulted from hard plastic trash thrown in the seas as well as from another surprising source — the epoxy plastic paints used to seal the hulls of ships.
“This new finding clearly demonstrates the instability of epoxy, and shows that BPA emissions from epoxy do reach the ocean. Recent studies have shown that mollusks, crustaceans and amphibians could be affected by BPA, even in low concentrations,” Dr. Saido said in a statement to the media.
The scientists noted that light, white-foamed plastic decomposed rapidly at temperatures commonly found in the oceans, releasing the endocrine disruptor BPA. It isn’t just soft plastics that leach BPA, either.
“We were quite surprised to find that polycarbonate plastic biodegrades in the environment,” Dr. Saido explained. “Polycarbonates are very hard plastics, so hard they are used to make screwdriver handles, shatter-proof eyeglass lenses, and other very durable products. This finding challenges the wide public belief that hard plastics remain unchanged in the environment for decades or centuries. Biodegradation, of course, releases BPA to the environment.”
Dr. Saido’s research team analyzed sand and seawater from over 200 sites in 20 countries, including areas in Southeast Asia and North America. Every site tested contained what Dr. Saido labeled as “significant” amounts of BPA, ranging from 0.01 parts per million (ppm) to 50 ppm.
Dr. Saido pointed out that littering currently results in about 150,000 tons of plastic debris washing up on the shores of Japan alone each year. In addition, a huge area of plastic waste known as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, which is about two times the size of Texas, now contaminates the area between California and Hawaii. “Marine debris plastic in the ocean will certainly constitute a new global ocean contamination for long into the future,” Dr. Saido predicted in the press statement.
In yet more BPA news, Rolf Halden, associate professor in the School of Sustainable Engineering at Arizona State University and assistant director of Environmental Biotechnology at the Biodesign Institute, has just published a sobering research article on the hazards of chemical-loaded plastics. His findings, which are included in the latest issue of the Annual Review of Public Health, provide more evidence that plastics in garbage dumps, landfills and the world’s oceans are an ever-increasing toxic problem.
In fact, Dr. Halden concluded in his paper that plastics and their additives such as BPA aren’t only around us; they are inside virtually every human. The chemicals show up in blood and urine tests because they are ingested with the food we eat, the water we drink and from other environmental exposures.
“We’re doomed to live with yesterday’s plastic pollution and we are exacerbating the situation with each day of unchanged behavior,” Dr. Harden said in a press statement. “We are at a critical juncture and cannot continue under the modus that has been established. If we’re smart, we’ll look for replacement materials, so that we don’t have this mismatch — good for a minute and contaminating for 10,000 years.”
New study confirms bisphenol A found in plastic is linked to heart disease
Filed under: Al Gore, autism, chemtrails, climate manipulation, climate modification, dumbed down, ecocide, EPA, Eugenics, federal crimes, Genocide, geoengineering, HAARP, health and environment, Human Experiments, influenza pandemic, malthusian catastrophy, Mercury, Oppression, Pandemic Influenza, plague, pollution, Population Control, Science and technology, softkill, super weapons, toxic earth, toxic environment, toxicity, weather manipulation, weather modification, weather weapons | Tags: aaas
Earth Being Sprayed With Aluminum?
Michael J. Murphy
Infowars.com
April 6, 2010
Could a Ban of Transparent Reporting at the Asilomar Conference be an Attempt to Cover-Up World-Wide Contamination From Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-Engineering Programs?
Geo-engineers gathered once again near Monterey California at the Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention Technologies meeting to develop norms and guidelines for what they say will be “controlled experimentation” on geo-engineering the planet. While many claim that stratospheric aerosol geo-engineering (SAG), aka chemtrail programs are in full-scale deployment, organizers of this meeting showed a lack of transparency by either denying or holding reporters to a high set of rules which limited what information was brought to the attention of the public. While we might never know how much information from the conference was suppressed in articles and reports, we do know some of the information that was not included. The issue of current SAG deployment and the use of aluminum in these programs seemed to be missing from reports and articles that came out of the conference.
Mauro Oliveira, webmaster of GeoEngineeringWatch said that aluminum became a concern to many after the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) meeting when independent journalists sent shockwaves around the world after breaking the story of scientists discussing the plausibility of spraying 10 to 20 mega-tons of aluminum into the sky in SAG campaigns. Francis Mangels, a retired USDA/USFS Biologist commented on the use of aluminum by saying, “although aluminum is an abundant element, it does not exist naturally in the environment in free form. Dispersing massive amounts of ultra-fine aluminum particulates as proposed by geo-engineers into the stratosphere would have unquantifiable human health and environmental impacts”. When scientists were asked about the risks associated with the use of aluminum sprayed as an aerosol in SAG programs, they admitted that they have only begun to research aluminum and have published nothing. They also admitted that something terrible could be found in the future that they don’t know about. Also, when asked about deployment of current programs, scientists denied that any SAG programs have been deployed. This contradicted the findings of many who claim that SAG programs are well under-way and that high amounts of aluminum and other harmful substances from these programs are being found resulting in the devastation of eco-systems and the health of people around the world.
Like the AAAS meeting, the Asilomar geo-engineering conference hosted some of the world’s leading geo-engineers, environmental groups and scientists who gathered to discuss various issues relating to SAG. Unlike the AAAS meeting, reporters were either denied attendance or set to a high standard of rules which included a ban on daily reporting, quoting, and recording anything from the meeting without the consent of presenters. Stewart Howe was one of the reporters denied access into the conference. Howe helped break the story about aluminum when he was sent to the AAAS meeting in San Diego to report for Infowars. He feels that he was denied access because of this and his reporting of evidence that suggests SAG programs are in full-scale deployment. Howe said, “due to the devastating effects of aluminum and world-wide claims of current deployment, transparent reporting of this could devastate the entire SAG agenda compromising billions of dollars in contracts.” He went on to say that it was apparent that this meeting had no intentions of being transparent.
Whereas many reporters were denied access to this event, some “privileged” journalists did have the opportunity to attend. Although some of the articles about the conference appeared to be critical of geo-engineering, they largely ignored the use of aluminum and other serious issues that could have impacted or changed the damaging components of the SAG agenda. Due to their agreement to the strict, non-transparent guidelines of the conference, the reporting journalists not only helped keep some of the meeting secret, they also helped hide the fact that geo-engineers are “planning” to use aluminum in SAG programs. Some articles were also falsely written stating that geo-engineers are planning on using sulfur in the various SAG campaigns. This contradicts articles written by some reporters who attended the AAAS meeting and quoted scientists as stating that they initially considered using sulfur for the program; however, aluminum is more effective and will be the ingredient considered for use. To date, scientists have not corrected the journalists who falsely reported the use of less damaging sulfur instead of harmful aluminum as being an ingredient for SAG programs.
Let’s look at this issue a little more closely. People from around the world are witnessing white trails behind airplanes and believe them to be a product of SAG programs that scientists deny exist. People are also reporting test results of high amounts of aluminum, barium and strontium in their snow, rain and soil where the alleged spraying is occurring. These are the exact substances that scientists are “considering” implementing into the various SAG programs discussed at the AAAS meeting. Shockwaves were sent around the globe after the AAAS meeting because of reports that led many to believe that the destruction of eco-systems and the massive amounts of aluminum found in the snow, rain and soil are in fact from SAG programs that have already been deployed. As a result of these reports, many around the world are asking questions about the current deployment and the dangers of using aluminum in these programs. And finally, journalists are restricted from reporting certain facts from this conference that could be damaging to the SAG agenda.
Could transparent reporting of certain facts threaten the current and future deployment of SAG programs around the world? Could denying independent reporters the freedom to openly report on this meeting be an attempt to cover-up allegations that SAG programs are in full-scale deployment and are also destroying eco-systems around the world with the use of aluminum? Is it possible that the reporters who were allowed into this meeting were invited for the purpose of protecting the corporate and political interests of those involved with SAG programs? What would the political and monetary implications be for those who have vested interests in SAG if the larger public was made aware of the multiple environmental and health effects of spraying mega-tons of aluminum into our environment? Whatever the reason for this lack of transparency and denial of information, we the public need to hold both reporters and scientists to a higher degree of professionalism, transparency and ethical consideration when it comes to these and other issues of public interests. The future of our health and environment is dependent upon it. More information and videos on the subject of geo-engineering/chemtrails can be found on my blog at http://truthmediaproductions.blogspot.com/ . I can also be reached at whtagft@hotmail.com.
Metals in Chemtrails Heat-Up Atmosphere
Small town becomes sick after jelly substance rains from the sky
Filed under: agriculture, Bio Weapons, corruption, depopulation, Dictatorship, EPA, Eugenics, Fascism, fda, food safety, genetic engineering, genetically modified, GM corn, gm crops, gm food, GM foods, health and environment, Human Experiments, malthusian, malthusian catastrophe, Monsanto, Population Control, scandal, softkill, toxic earth, toxic environment, toxicity | Tags: GM corn, gm soy, kidney failure, liver damage, liver health
GM Food Causes Liver and Kidney Damage
Disturbing Fact: 75% of processed foods that Americans eat have genetically modified ingredients
Daily Mail
January 21, 2010
Fresh fears were raised over GM crops yesterday after a study showed they can cause liver and kidney damage.
According to the research, animals fed on three strains of genetically modified maize created by the U.S. biotech firm Monsanto suffered signs of organ damage after just three months.
The findings only came to light after Monsanto was forced to publish its raw data on safety tests by anti-GM campaigners.
They add to the evidence that GM crops may damage health as well as be harmful to the environment.
The figures released by Monsanto were examined by French researcher Dr Gilles-Eric Seralini, from the University of Caen.
Yesterday he called for more studies to check for long-term organ damage.
‘What we’ve shown is clearly not proof of toxicity, but signs of toxicity,’ he told New Scientist magazine. ‘I’m sure there’s no acute toxicity but who’s to say there are no chronic effects?’
The experiments were carried out by Monsanto researchers on three strains of GM maize. Two of the varieties contained genes for the Bt protein which protects the plant against the corn borer pest, while a third was genetically modified to be resistant to the weedkiller glyphosate. All three strains are widely grown in America, while one is the only GM crop grown in Europe, mostly in Spain.
Monsanto only released the raw data after a legal challenge from Greenpeace, the Swedish Board of Agriculture and French anti- GM campaigners.
Dr Seralini concluded that rats which ate the GM maize had ‘ statistically significant’ signs of liver and kidney damage. Each strain was linked to unusual concentrations of hormones in the blood and urine of rats fed the maize for three months, compared to rats given a non-GM diet.
The higher hormone levels suggest that animals’ livers and kidneys are not working properly.
Female rats fed one of the strains also had higher blood sugar levels and raised levels of fatty substances caused triglycerides, Dr Seralini reported in the International Journal of Microbiology.
The analysis concluded: ‘These substances have never before been an integral part of the human or animal diet and therefore their health consequences for those who consume them, especially over long time periods are currently unknown.’
Monsanto claimed the analysis of its data was ‘based on faulty analytical methods and reasoning, and does not call into question the safety findings for these products’.
Filed under: biological warfare, bisphenol A, bottled water, BPA, cancer, canned food, CDC, Chemical Warfare, depopulation, EPA, Eugenics, fda, food contamination, food market, food poisoning, food safety, Genocide, health and environment, heart disease, obesity, phthalates, plastic, PVC, softkill, toxic earth, toxic environment, toxic food, toxicity | Tags: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, NHANES
New study confirms bisphenol A found in plastic is linked to heart disease
Natural News
January 19, 2010
According to the American Heart Association, cardiovascular disease is the number one killer in the U.S. Various forms of the disease take the lives of over 80 million Americans a year. And while we’ve all heard about the risk factors for cardiovascular disease — including smoking, being overweight, high cholesterol and lack of exercise — it appears it’s time to add bisphenol A, better known as BPA, to that list.
This chemical has been used for decades in polycarbonate plastic products including refillable drink containers, plastic eating utensils and baby bottles as well as the epoxy resins that line most food and soft-drink cans. Now a new study just published in the journal PLoS ONE provides the most compelling evidence so far that BPA exposure is dangerous to the cardiovascular system.
Using 2006 data from the US government’s National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), researchers from the Peninsula Medical School at the University of Exeter in the UK studied urinary BPA concentrations and found a significantly strong link between BPA exposure and heart disease. In 2008, these same scientists discovered that higher urinary BPA concentrations were associated with a long list of medical problems in adults, including liver dysfunction, diabetes and obesity. This research team was also the first to report evidence that BPA was linked to cardiovascular disease — and their new research offers further confirmation of a strong connection between BPA and heart ailments.
Despite the fact the new study found that urinary BPA concentrations were one third lower than those measured from 2003 to 2004, higher concentrations of BPA were still associated with heart disease. “This is only the second analysis of BPA in a large human population sample. It has allowed us to largely confirm our original analysis and exclude the possibility that our original findings were a statistical ‘blip’,” David Melzer, Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Peninsula Medical School and the research team leader, said in a statement to the media.
“We now need to investigate what causes these health risk associations in more detail and to clarify whether they are caused by BPA itself or by some other factor linked to BPA exposure. The risks associated with exposure to BPA may be small, but they are relevant to very large numbers of people. This information is important since it provides a great opportunity for intervention to reduce the risks,” added scientist Tamara Galloway, Professor of Ecotoxicology at the University of Exeter and senior author of the paper.
As NaturalNews has previously reported, BPA exposure has been shown in other studies to be associated with neurological problems (http://www.naturalnews.com/025801_B…), diabetes and aggressive behavior in little girls (http://www.naturalnews.com/027382_B…). Unfortunately, the FDA has demonstrated little ability or interest in taking decisive measures to protect consumers from this chemical (http://www.naturalnews.com/024593_t…).Your best strategy to avoid BPA? Eat natural, fresh foods and stay away from cans, bottles and other plastic containing products that are not certified BPA-free.
Filed under: agriculture, Bio Weapons, depopulation, Dictatorship, DNA, EPA, Eugenics, Fascism, fda, food safety, genetic engineering, genetically modified, GM, GM corn, gm food, GM foods, health and environment, Human Experiments, malthusian, malthusian catastrophe, Monsanto, New World Order, NWO, Oppression, softkill
Is Monsanto’s Corn Destroying Your Internal Organs?
Sustainable Food
January 8, 2010
Yes, this is another story about Monsanto, the controversy-prone American agricultural giant that, according to Greenpeace, sells 90 percent of the world’s genetically modified seeds.
The company’s dominance is such that even the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating it for possible antitrust practices.
But the government has been a willing partner in marketing GMO crops, repeatedly refusing to require GMO foods to be labeled (as the E.U. does) and signing off on their alleged safety.
Funny thing about that: There’s hardly any research to back it up: The government hasn’t funded it and independent researchers can’t get a hold of the — patented — seeds.
What studies there are don’t look good. One Australian report suggests the GMO corn made by Monsanto causes significant fertility problems in mice (and, by implication, possibly humans).
And a new study — which had to resort to analyzing data sets produced by studies conducted by Monsanto and another biotech firm, Covance Laboratories, and submitted to European governments because researchers couldn’t get seeds — has found that Monsanto corn impairs rats’ kidneys and livers. The “data strongly suggests” that after just 90 days of eating GM corn, rats experienced kidney toxicity and showed effects to their hearts, adrenal glands, spleen and blood cells. (The study was published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences.)
The authors explain that their analysis of the data differed from Monsanto’s because the company overlooked different reactions in male and female rats. The ag giant continues to maintain that its GMO corn is safe.
So what happens to humans who eat GM corn products as well as animals who’ve been fed GM corn? That’s a darn good question, and one the U.S. government ought to have an answer to before waving these products into the food supply. (And if you think that just because humans and livestock aren’t dropping dead on the spot GMOs must be fine, read this very sane analysis.)
Take action and Get the FDA to Suspend Approval for Monsanto’s GMO corn.
Filed under: amalgam, autism, Bio Weapons, biological warfare, bisphenol A, bottled water, BPA, brain damage, cancer, CDC, Chemical Warfare, darwin, depopulation, drinking water, EPA, Eugenics, fda, food contamination, food market, food poisoning, food safety, genetic engineering, Genocide, health and environment, medical industrial complex, Mercury, obesity, phthalates, plastic, Population Control, PVC, softkill, sterilization, tap water, tooth fillings, toxic earth, toxic environment, toxic food, toxicity, Vaccine, vaccine side effects | Tags: MTBE, PBDEs, PFOA, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers
Six Risky Chemicals You’re Carrying in Your Body
Dr. Mercola
January 7, 2010
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has released its latest assessment of the chemicals people are carrying around in their bodies.
The biomonitoring study is the most comprehensive in the world, measuring 212 chemicals in the blood and urine of 8,000 Americans.
The CDC highlighted a few chemicals because they are both widespread — found in all or most people tested — and potentially harmful.
Here’s a look at what they are and how you can try to avoid them:
Polybrominated diphenyl ethers
- Better known as “flame retardants”, PBDEs are used widely in all sorts of goods to reduce fire risk. They also accumulate in human fat, and some studies suggest they may harm your liver and kidneys as well as your neurological system. Some states have restricted the use of certain PBDEs, but short of such bans, avoiding them is difficult because the chemicals are integrated into so many products.
Bisphenol A
- BPA, which is found in many plastics, in the lining of cans, and even coating many sales receipts, was found in more than 90 percent of Americans tested. The health concerns about BPA are many and growing. While BPA-free products are available, it can be difficult to find them unless you do research ahead of time.
PFOA
- PFOA and other perfluorinated chemicals are used to create heat-resistant and non-stick coatings on cookware, as well as grease-resistant food packaging and stain-resistant clothing. Studies have linked these chemicals to a range of health problems, including infertility in women, and to developmental and reproductive problems in lab animals. Avoiding products that contain them is a first step towards avoiding them.
Acrylamide
- Formed when carbohydrates are cooked at high temperatures (fried foods), acrylamide and its metabolites are extremely common in Americans. High-level exposure has caused cancer and neurological problems in lab animals and workers, respectively. Avoiding it in food comes down to food choice, storage and preparation.
Mercury
- The main source of mercury — a potent neurotoxin that can lead to permanent brain damage if young children or fetuses are exposed — continues to be contaminated fish. I do not recommend eating most fish for this reason (mercury is also found in amalgam tooth fillings and vaccines).
MTBE
- This gasoline additive has been phased out of use in the U.S. in favor of ethanol, but it still can be detected widely in American’s bodies; it has contaminated many drinking water supplies. Studies have linked it to a variety of potential problems, including neurological and reproductive damage.
Filed under: agriculture, animal cruelty, ben bernanke, Bio Weapons, depopulation, Dictatorship, DNA, EPA, Eugenics, Fascism, fda, food safety, genetic engineering, genetically modified, GM, GM corn, gm food, GM foods, health and environment, Holocaust, Human Experiments, malthusian catastrophe, Monsanto, New World Order, NWO, Oppression, softkill | Tags: health alert, spider goat
Monsanto named “Company of the Year” by Forbes Magazine
NoWorldSystem
January 7, 2010
Monsanto is named “2009 Company of the Year” by Forbes Magazine. This is just another slap in the face on the American people, just as devaluer-in-chief Ben Bernanke was nominated “Man of The Year” by Times Magazine, it’s completely absurd.
Filed under: cancer, Chemical Warfare, Congress, deception, Empire, environmental disaster, EPA, Eugenics, GAO, Genocide, government crimes, government regulation, health and environment, infanticide, softkill, toxic earth, toxicity | Tags: health alert, toxic furnature
17,000 toxic chemicals kept secret from consumers
Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post
January 4, 2010
Of the 84,000 chemicals in commercial use in the United States — from flame retardants in furniture to household cleaners — nearly 20 percent are secret, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, their names and physical properties guarded from consumers and virtually all public officials under a little-known federal provision.
The policy was designed 33 years ago to protect trade secrets in a highly competitive industry. But critics — including the Obama administration — say the secrecy has grown out of control, making it impossible for regulators to control potential dangers or for consumers to know which toxic substances they might be exposed to.
At a time of increasing public demand for more information about chemical exposure, pressure is building on lawmakers to make it more difficult for manufacturers to cloak their products in secrecy. Congress is set to rewrite chemical regulations this year for the first time in a generation.
Under the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, manufacturers must report to the federal government new chemicals they intend to market. But the law exempts from public disclosure any information that could harm their bottom line.
Government officials, scientists and environmental groups say that manufacturers have exploited weaknesses in the law to claim secrecy for an ever-increasing number of chemicals. In the past several years, 95 percent of the notices for new chemicals sent to the government requested some secrecy, according to the Government Accountability Office. About 700 chemicals are introduced annually.
Some companies have successfully argued that the federal government should not only keep the names of their chemicals secret but also hide from public view the identities and addresses of the manufacturers.
“Even acknowledging what chemical is used or what is made at what facility could convey important information to competitors, and they can start to put the pieces together,” said Mike Walls, vice president of the American Chemistry Council.
Although a number of the roughly 17,000 secret chemicals may be harmless, manufacturers have reported in mandatory notices to the government that many pose a “substantial risk” to public health or the environment. In March, for example, more than half of the 65 “substantial risk” reports filed with the Environmental Protection Agency involved secret chemicals.
“You have thousands of chemicals that potentially present risks to health and the environment,” said Richard Wiles, senior vice president of the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization that documented the extent of the secret chemicals through public-records requests from the EPA. “It’s impossible to run an effective regulatory program when so many of these chemicals are secret.”
Of the secret chemicals, 151 are made in quantities of more than 1 million tons a year and 10 are used specifically in children’s products, according to the EPA.
The identities of the chemicals are known to a handful of EPA employees who are legally barred from sharing that information with other federal officials, state health and environmental regulators, foreign governments, emergency responders and the public.
Last year, a Colorado nurse fell seriously ill after treating a worker involved at a chemical spill at a gas-drilling site. The man, who later recovered, appeared at a Durango hospital complaining of dizziness and nausea. His work boots were damp; he reeked of chemicals, the nurse said.
Two days later, the nurse, Cathy Behr, was fighting for her life. Her liver was failing and her lungs were filling with fluid. Behr said her doctors diagnosed chemical poisoning and called the manufacturer, Weatherford International, to find out what she might have been exposed to.
Weatherford provided safety information, including hazards, for the chemical, known as ZetaFlow. But because ZetaFlow has confidential status, the information did not include all of its ingredients.
Mark Stanley, group vice president for Weatherford’s pumping and chemical services, said in a statement that the company made public all the information legally required.
“It is always in our company’s best interest to provide information to the best of our ability,” he said.
Behr said the full ingredient list should be released. “I’d really like to know what went wrong,” said Behr, 57, who recovered but said she still has respiratory problems. “As citizens in a democracy, we ought to know what’s happening around us.”
The White House and environmental groups want Congress to force manufacturers to prove that a substance should be kept confidential. They also want federal officials to be able to share confidential information with state regulators and health officials, who carry out much of the EPA’s work across the country.
Walls, of the American Chemistry Council, says manufacturers agree that federal officials should be able to share information with state regulators. Industry is also willing to discuss shifting the burden of proof for secrecy claims to the chemical makers, he said. The EPA must allow a claim unless it can prove within 90 days that disclosure would not harm business.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration is trying to reduce secrecy.
A week after he arrived at the agency in July, Steve Owens, assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, ended confidentiality protection for 530 chemicals. In those cases, manufacturers had claimed secrecy for chemicals they had promoted by name on their Web sites or detailed in trade journals.
“People who were submitting information to the EPA saw that you can claim that virtually anything is confidential and get away with it,” Owens said.
The handful of EPA officials privy to the identity of the chemicals do not have other information that could help them assess the risk, said Lynn Goldman, a former EPA official and a pediatrician and epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
“Maybe they don’t know there’s been a water quality problem in New Jersey where the plant is located, or that the workers in the plant have had health problems,” she said. “It just makes sense that the more people who are looking at it, they’re better able to put one and one together and recognize problems.”
Independent researchers, who often provide data to policymakers and regulators, also have been unable to study the secret chemicals.
Duke University chemist Heather Stapleton, who researches flame retardants, tried for months to identify a substance she had found in dust samples taken from homes in Boston.
Then, while attending a scientific conference, she happened to see the structure of a chemical she recognized as her mystery compound.
The substance is a chemical in “Firemaster 550,” a product made by Chemtura Corp. for use in furniture and other products as a substitute for a flame retardant the company had quit making in 2004 because of health concerns.
Stapleton found that Firemaster 550 contains an ingredient similar in structure to a chemical — Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, or DEHP — that Congress banned last year from children’s products because it has been linked to reproductive problems and other health effects.
Chemtura, which claimed confidentiality for Firemaster 550, supplied the EPA with standard toxicity studies. The EPA has asked for additional data, which it is studying.
“My concern is we’re using chemicals and we have no idea what the long-term effects might be or whether or not they’re harmful,” said Susan Klosterhaus, an environmental scientist at the San Francisco Estuary Institute who has published a journal article on the substance with Stapleton.
Chemtura officials said in a written statement that even though Firemaster 550 contains an ingredient structurally similar to DEHP does not mean it poses similar health risks.
They said the company strongly supports keeping sensitive business information out of public view. “This is essential for ensuring the long-term competitiveness of U.S. industry,” the officials said in the statement.
Filed under: 2-party system, agriculture, arsenic, biochemical warfare, biological warfare, Chemical Warfare, coal, corruption, darwinists, deception, Dictatorship, DoA, Empire, environmental disaster, EPA, Eugenics, food safety, health and environment, Human Experiments, human waste, left right paradigm, malthusian, malthusian catastrophe, Mercury, Nazi, Population Control, scandal, softkill, toxic earth, toxic waste, toxicity, US Crops, USDA, White House | Tags: coal-fired power plants, FGD gypsum
U.S. wants farmers to use coal waste on fields
Washington Post
December 23, 2009
The federal government is encouraging farmers to spread a chalky waste from coal-fired power plants on their fields to loosen and fertilize soil even as it considers regulating coal wastes for the first time.
The material is produced by power plant “scrubbers” that remove acid-rain-causing sulfur dioxide from plant emissions. A synthetic form of the mineral gypsum, it also contains mercury, arsenic, lead and other heavy metals.
The Environmental Protection Agency says those toxic metals occur in only tiny amounts that pose no threat to crops, surface water or people. But some environmentalists say too little is known about how the material affects crops, and ultimately human health, for the government to suggest that farmers use it.
“This is a leap into the unknown,” said Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. “This stuff has materials in it that we’re trying to prevent entering the environment from coal-fired power plants, and then to turn around and smear it across ag lands raises some real questions.”
With wastes piling up around the coal-fired plants that produce half the nation’s power, the EPA and U.S. Department of Agriculture began promoting what they call the wastes’ “beneficial uses” during the Bush administration.
Part of that push is to expand the use of synthetic gypsum — a whitish, calcium-rich material known as flue gas desulfurization gypsum, or FGD gypsum. The Obama administration has continued promoting FGD gypsum’s use in farming.
The administration is also drafting a regulatory rule for coal waste, in response to a spill from a coal ash pond near Knoxville, Tenn., one year ago Tuesday. Ash and water flooded 300 acres, damaging homes and killing fish. The cleanup is expected to cost about $1 billion.
The EPA is expected to announce its proposals for regulation early next year, setting the first federal standards for storage and disposal of coal wastes.
EPA officials declined to talk about the agency’s promotion of FGD gypsum before then and would not say whether the draft rule would cover it.
Field studies have shown that mercury, the main heavy metal of concern because it can harm nervous-system development, does not accumulate in crops or run off fields in surface water at “significant” levels, the EPA said.
“EPA believes that the use of FGD gypsum in agriculture is safe in appropriate soil and hydrogeologic conditions,” the statement said.
Eric Schaeffer, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project, which advocates for more effective enforcement of environmental laws, said he is not overly worried about FGD gypsum’s use on fields because research shows it contains only tiny amounts of heavy metals. But he said federal limits on the amounts of heavy metals in FGD gypsum sold to farmers would help allay concerns.
“That would give them assurance that they’ve got clean FGD gypsum,” he said.
Since the EPA-USDA partnership began in 2001, farmers’ use of the material has more than tripled, from about 78,000 tons spread on fields in 2002 to nearly 279,000 tons last year, according to the American Coal Ash Association, a utility industry group.
About half of the 17.7 million tons of FGD gypsum produced in the United States last year was used to make drywall, said Thomas Adams, the association’s executive director. But he said it is important to find new uses for it and other coal wastes because the United States will probably rely on coal-fired power plants for decades to come.
“If we can find safe ways to recycle those materials, we’re a lot better off doing that than we are creating a whole bunch of new landfills,” Adams said.
Filed under: agriculture, AGW, amazon, carbon dioxide, climate change, climate science, climategate, Co2, EPA, famine, food crisis, food market, food prices, food shortage, Global Warming, global warming hoax, greenhouse, health and environment, Hoax, malthusian, malthusian catastrophe, man made global warming, netherlands, o2, oxygen, photosynthesis, rainforest, scandal, third world | Tags: ammonia, Anthropogenic Global Warming, aspen forest, aspen tree, bigger yields, co2 farming, dr. sherwood idso, forest trees, greenhouse gases, Jan van Duijn
Forest Trees Growing Like Crazy From CO2 Level Increase
Mike Adams
Natural News
December 21, 2009
Scientists from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Minnesota at Morris have found that increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide have led to the rapid growth of certain tree species. The quaking aspen, a popular North America deciduous tree, has seen a 50 percent acceleration in growth over the past 50 years due to increased CO2 levels.
Trees are necessary climate regulators since they process carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. Humans process oxygen and give off carbon dioxide, working harmoniously with natural plant life to maintain proper atmospheric composition. Since natural forests represent about 30 percent of the earth’s surface, they are highly effective at segregating greenhouse gases.
The quaking aspen is a vibrant, dominant tree found in both Canada and the United States. It is considered to be a “foundation species”, meaning that it helps dictate the dynamics of the plant and animal communities that surround it. Roughly 42 million acres in Canada and 6.5 million acres in Wisconsin and Minnesota are composed of aspen trees.
Elevated levels of CO2 will naturally lead to increased plant growth since CO2 is a precursor to plant food. Tree-ring analyses verified that aspen trees have been growing at an increasingly accelerated pace over the years because of this phenomenon.
Because accelerated growth was not seen in other tree species like oak and pine, scientists admit they will have to further investigate the issue. Similarly, drier regions where the trees were found did not experience the same rapid growth rates as those found in the wetter regions.
Comments by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
An interesting side effect of increased carbon emissions by human activity is that plants will grow more quickly. CO2 is to plants as oxygen is to humans, so the more CO2 is in the atmosphere, the more quickly many plants can grow.
Of course, plants produce oxygen as the “waste” product of their respiration, and that’s a poison to other plants, so there’s a natural balancing effect that keeps oxygen and CO2 levels in balance over the long haul.
This is why greenhouse gases are called “greenhouse gases”, by the way — because they turn the planet into a really effective greenhouse where plants grow like crazy. Of course, the clear-cutting of rainforest in the Amazon (and elsewhere) kills any chance of those regions taking part in that accelerated plant growth. Even in a high-CO2 environment, human beings can destroy plant life with bulldozers.
It’s interesting that plants and humans breathe the same air but extract very different chemical elements from it: Humans need oxygen while plants need carbon dioxide. For both species to survive, the air needs to contain both chemicals in balance. Currently, the oxygen content of the air is roughly around 20% (and falling).
Carbon Dioxide: The Breath of Life
Dutch aubergine grower yields big after piping CO2 into greenhouses
Telegraph
December 14, 2009
Jan van Duijn, however, walks proudly through his greenhouse, a vast glass and metal structure spread out over five hectares (12.3 acres) where millions of aubergines are doing very nicely thank you.
He’s happy because thanks to a deal with a supplier, he’s getting hot water piped in from the factory, which produces ammonia, to maintain the temperature at a constant 68 degrees F (20C).
The chemical site, five kilometres (three miles away), also supplies carbon dioxide which helps his aubergines grow more abundantly.
“We’re pioneers in a way,” van Duijn said, while admitting that what drove him to try this business model was cost.
The water from the Yara factory, where it is used as a coolant, flows along underground pipes and into his greenhouse at a temperature of 90 degrees C.
There it is circulated in pipes between the rows of aubergines, sharing its heat among the beds of rockwool they grow in, before being pumped back to the factory as coolant again.
Similarly, CO2 released during the manufacture of ammonia is injected into the greenhouse to stimulate growth.
“It’s the basic principle of photosynthesis,” van Duijn said. Combined with water and light, the plants convert the carbon dioxide into organic compounds, releasing oxygen as a side product.
The level of CO2 inside is three times higher than outside, giving a crop yield that according to van Duijn is two to three times greater.
He reckons the project will produce 2.5 million kilogrammes (5.5 million pounds) of aubergines a year, adding to the millions he already cultivates under glass on his land in the southern Netherlands.
Filed under: agriculture, biochemical warfare, biological warfare, biosolids, CFS, Chemical Warfare, corruption, deception, Dictatorship, DoA, Empire, environmental disaster, EPA, Eugenics, food safety, health and environment, Human Experiments, human waste, malthusian, malthusian catastrophe, methanphetamines, Michael Mack, Michelle Obama, Nazi, Population Control, san francisco, scandal, softkill, syngenta, toxic earth, toxic waste, toxicity, US Crops, USDA, water safety, White House | Tags: Center for Food Safety
Toxic Sewage Sludge in Your Food
Mercola.com
December 16, 2009
The increasing use of sewage sludge as fertilizer for your food is an under-publicized and often hidden threat.
Sludge is the toxic mix that is created by our municipal wastewater treatment facilities. Just about anything that is flushed down toilets or that ends up in sewers is in this sludge; the pollutants in sludge come not just from household sewage, but also from every hospital, industrial plant, and stormwater drain.
For a long time, sludge was simply dumped in the oceans. Over time, it became apparent that this was an environmental and human health disaster. An alternative solution has been pushed since the 1980’s by the U.S. government. The EPA determined that a good way to dispose of treated sewage sludge was to legally distribute it as a cheap alternative to fertilizer.
Unsurprisingly, scientific analysis of the poisons in sewage sludge shows it’s the wrong, and dangerous, solution for U.S. farmers and communities. Unfortunately, many American farmers and gardeners are unknowingly using sludge-derived “compost,” which is given away free in many cities throughout the United States.
As a result, farms and homes across the country have been unknowingly spreading hazardous chemicals and heavy metals on their fields, lawns and gardens.
Meanwhile, Michael Mack, the chief executive of Syngenta, a Swiss agribusiness giant that makes pesticides, is waging war against the organic movement as a whole. He argues that, “Organic food is not only not better for the planet. It is categorically worse.”
“If the whole planet were to suddenly switch to organic farming tomorrow, it would be an ecological disaster,” he said. Pesticides, he argued, “have been proven safe and effective and absolutely not harmful to the environment or to humans.”
Of course, Mr. Mack dismissed the notion that Syngenta, a company that sold nearly $12-billion worth of “crop protection” technologies last year, felt threatened by the organic movement.
Dr. Mercola’s Comments:
If you’re looking for a compelling reason to switch to a primarily organic diet, the fact that it is free from sewage sludge fertilizers is a very good one. Sewage sludge, or “biosolids” — as they’re referred to with a PR spin — began being “recycled” into food crops when, ironically, it was realized that dumping them into rivers, lakes and bays was an environmental disaster.
Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) states that about 50 percent of all biosolids are recycled to land. This sludge is what’s leftover after sewage is treated and processed.
Your first thought may be the “yuck factor” of human waste being used to fertilize your food, but that is only the tip of the iceberg. Every time a paintbrush gets rinsed, an old bottle of medications flushed, or solvents are hosed off a factory floor, it ends up in the sewage system.
So it’s not surprising that a past analysis of sewage sludge by the Environmental Working Group found:
- *Over 100 synthetic organic compounds including phthalates, toluene, and chlorobenzene
*Dioxins in sludge from 179 out of 208 systems (80%)
*42 different pesticides — at least one in almost every sample, with an average of almost 2 pesticides per survey sample
*Nine heavy metals, often at high concentrations
And it was sewage sludge that was partly blamed earlier this year for contaminating the White House lawn, and Michelle Obama’s organic vegetable garden, with lead.
This toxic sludge has been masterfully spun by PR masters into an acceptable, even “green,” fertilizer. Even San Francisco, arguably one of the “greenest” cities around, has been distributing toxic sewage sludge to homeowners and schoolyards and calling it “organic compost”! Nevermind that in 2008 its sludge was found to contain industrial chemicals, disinfectants, phenol, pesticides and solvents.
The Center for Food Safety (CFS) has recently petitioned San Francisco to stop this “compost” giveaway, lest it contaminate backyards and communities with toxic chemicals, but the sludge is still being widely used all across the United States.
If you want to get the real dirt on how this toxic sewage sludge has become such a popular fertilizer, I strongly encourage you to read Toxic Sludge is Good for You: Lies, Damn Lies and the Public Relations Industry. It’s written by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber, the authors of one of my favorite exposes on the PR industry, Trust Us, We’re Experts, and does not disappoin
What is Going On With the State of Agriculture in the United States?
They say truth is stranger than fiction, and the once respectable business of farming in the United States is a perfect example of how true this statement can be.
Gone are the days when farmers grew food according to the laws of nature, with a deserved respect for the Earth and its resources. Nowadays, with the exception of the small but growing movement of organic and sustainable farmers, it may surprise you to learn that farming — once the symbol of all that’s natural and wholesome — creates some of the worst pollution in the United States.
That’s because most “farming” today is nothing like the small farming of our ancestors. The Farm Sanctuary points out that farm animals produce 130 times more waste than humans. And agricultural runoff is the primary reason why 60 percent of U.S. rivers and streams are polluted.
Meanwhile, in areas where animal agriculture is most concentrated (Iowa, Minnesota, North Carolina, Illinois and Indiana round out the top five states with the most factory-farm pollution) bacteria known as pfiesteria is common in waterways. Not only does pfiesteria kill fish, it also causes nausea, memory loss, fatigue and disorientation in people!
Aside from the pollution, factory farms use vast quantities of resources. According to FactoryFarm.org, industrial milking centers that use manure flush cleaning and automatic cow washing systems, go through as much as 150 gallons of water per cow per day!
Energy costs are even steeper.
A 2002 study from the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found that industrial farms use an average of three calories of energy to create one calorie of food. Grain-fed beef is at the top of the list of offenders, using 35 calories of energy to produce one calorie of food! And this does not even take into account the energy used to process and transport the foods, so the real toll is even larger.
The Agribusiness Giants are Getting Out of Control!
On top of the environmental assaults, you have agribusiness executives like Michael Mack, the chief executive of pesticide manufacturer Syngenta, making outrageous statements like “Organic food is not only not better for the planet, it is categorically worse.”
What?!
His entire argument was based on the premise that organic farming takes up more land than non-organic farming for the same yield.
He obviously must have missed the recent study that examined a global dataset of 293 farming examples, which found that in developing countries organic systems produce 80% more than conventional farms. And a review of 286 projects in 57 countries found that farmers who used “resource-conserving” or ecological agriculture had increased agricultural productivity by an average of 79%!
- “It is clear that ecological agriculture is productive and has the potential to meet food security needs … Moreover, ecological agricultural approaches allow farmers to improve local food production with low-cost, readily available technologies and inputs, without causing environmental damage,” Lim Li Ching, the study’s author, writes.
Really, the question we should be asking ourselves shouldn’t be ‘Can organic or sustainable farming feed the world?’, but ‘How can food production possibly continue as it is?’
When I hear someone extolling the virtues of “modern” agriculture and wondering how “organic” or “sustainable” farming could possibly be the solution, I maintain that the fact we have come to accept inefficient, industrial practices, including dousing our food with chemical fertilizers and pesticides, as a viable way to grow food is the real wonder.
And then I always look at the source, which in this case is a pesticide giant CEO … which makes his motives very clear, indeed.
How Can You Find Safe Food for Your Family?
There are still safe food options out there, but it does take a bit of digging to find them. Your local grocery store is generally NOT going to be the best source for healthy, fresh food.
So, short of starting your own sustainable farm (which you can do on a small-scale in your own backyard), you can find safe food options by supporting sustainable agriculture movements in your area.
Make it a point to only buy food from a source you know and trust, one that uses safe and non-toxic farming methods. This will do your health a major favor and support the small family farms in your area. You’ll receive nutritious food from a source that you can trust, and you’ll be supporting the honest work of a real family farm instead of an agri-business corporation.
Filed under: AGW, arsenic, biochemical warfare, biochemicals, biological warfare, cancer, cap-and-trade, carbon dioxide, Carbon Tax, Chemical Warfare, climate change, Co2, copenhagen, Copenhagen treaty, corruption, deception, depopulation, desalination, Dictatorship, drinking water, Empire, environmental taxation, EPA, Eugenics, Fascism, federal crimes, fluoride, food safety, fruedian catastrophe, genetically modified, global tax, Global Warming, global warming hoax, gm food, health and environment, hypocrisy, man made global warming, medical industrial complex, Mercury, methanphetamines, Nazi, Population Control, radiation, radium, radon, scandal, softkill, tap water, toxic waste, toxicity, Uncategorized, uranium, water safety, White House | Tags: contaminated environment, estrogen, health risks, hyperthyroidism, kidney failure, lowering IQ, perchlorate, prozac, public health, rocket fuel, thyroid disease, thyroid function, thyroid gland, toxic environment
EPA HYPOCRISY
EPA: CO2 is a deadly gas, but uranium, mercury, arsenic, rocket-fuel and drugs in drinking water is perfectly safe.
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
December 8, 2009
While the EPA declares the gas that we exhale to be a deadly poison, as protesters at Copenhagen decry the suffering of polar bears as their population figures increase to record levels, and as delegates in the Danish capital warn of the dastardly peril of cows farting, a New York Times report confirming that U.S. drinking water contains dangerous levels of arsenic, uranium and other radioactive substances barely gets noticed.
Furthermore, the new study shows that the Environmental Protection Agency knew that water systems all over the United States were contaminated with dangerous levels of numerous toxic substances, yet failed to punish the vast majority of water authorities involved.
Since the environmental movement was completely hijacked by globalists hell bent on world government and devastating carbon taxes, real environmental problems have been swept aside as the contrived scam of man-made global warming swallows up all the attention.
Our drinking water is contaminated with toxic waste, our food supply is poisoned by genetically modified garbage, and our consumer products are laced with cancer-causing chemicals, but who cares right? Surely all this pales in comparison to the effort to stop the world warming by a percentage of a degree over the next 100 years?
- More than 20 percent of the nation’s water treatment systems have violated key provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act over the last five years, according to a New York Times analysis of federal data.
That law requires communities to deliver safe tap water to local residents. But since 2004, the water provided to more than 49 million people has contained illegal concentrations of chemicals like arsenic or radioactive substances like uranium, as well as dangerous bacteria often found in sewage.
But unlike the mammoth threat posed by the life-giving gas carbon dioxide, which the EPA yesterday classified as a health threat to the same humans that exhale it, the Environmental Protection Agency is noticeably less concerned about the fact that our water is filled with contaminants that are “linked to millions of instances of illness within the United States each year.”
Indeed, records show that fewer than 6 percent of the water systems that broke the law were ever punished or fined by the EPA.
“In some instances, drinking water violations were one-time events, and probably posed little risk. But for hundreds of other systems, illegal contamination persisted for years, records show,” according to the article.
The Senate Environment and Public Works committee will question a high-ranking E.P.A. official about why they allowed water companies to continue such contamination without punishment at a hearing today.
According to the study, not only were water systems contaminated with radioactive substances like uranium as well as arsenic, but they were also found to contain cancer-causing solvents and illegal amounts of bacteria.
“The amount of radium detected in drinking water was 2,000 percent higher than the legal limit,” adds the report. Radium is described as “extremely radioactive” and has a half-life of 1602 years. People exposed to radium suffer serious health effects including sores, anemia and bone cancer. The use of radium in paints as late as the 1950’s was eventually halted after many deaths were attributed to exposure to the chemical.
True to form, the NY Times chooses to characterize water which contains deadly radioactive chemicals as “dirty” in its headline!
Millions in U.S. Drink Dirty Water, Records Show – oh its just a bit of dirt you know! Cancer-causing radioactive toxins and poisonous arsenic – its just a little dirty!
“The problem, say current and former government officials, is that enforcing the Safe Drinking Water Act has not been a federal priority,” reports the Times, adding that current and former EPA officials who attempted to make the agency enforce the drinking water law were targeted.
“I proposed drinking water cases, but they got shut down so fast that I’ve pretty much stopped even looking at the violations,” said one longtime E.P.A. enforcement official who, like others, requested anonymity for fear of reprisals. “The top people want big headlines and million-dollar settlements. That’s not drinking-water cases.”
So there you have it – according to the EPA – breathing is a threat to human health – but drinking water laced with arsenic, cancerous carcinogens, and radioactive chemicals is perfectly nutritious!
So pour a fresh glass of toxic tap water, drink up and say cheers to the fact that the government really cares about our health and the real environmental issues – before you drop dead.
Court strikes down EPA’s plan on mercury
EPA: American lives less valuable
Filed under: Bio Weapons, biological warfare, bisphenol A, bottled water, BPA, breast cancer, cancer, child care, child safety, darwin, depopulation, EPA, Eugenics, fda, feminization, gender bender, genetic engineering, health and environment, miscarriage, obesity, phthalates, plastic, Population Control, pregnancy health, PVC, softkill, sterilization, trans gender, vinyl
BPA chemical found in 90% of newborns
Meg Kissinger
Milwaukee/Wisconsin Journal Sentinel
December 4, 2009
A study released Wednesday which found that nine of 10 babies tested were born with bisphenol A in their systems has renewed calls for the chemical to be banned.
In the study commissioned by the Environmental Working Group, scientists found the chemical in nine of 10 randomly selected samples of umbilical cord blood.
Previous studies have found BPA in the urine of 93% of Americans tested. But Wednesday’s study is the first to find it in the cord blood of U.S. newborns.
“It’s alarming,” Janet Gray, director of the Environmental Risks and Breast Cancer project at Vassar College, said of the study results. “What more evidence do we need to act?”
BPA Side Effects Include: Breast cancer, prostate cancer, diabetes, obesity, ADHD, miscarriage, sterilization, erectile dysfunction, impotence, increased estrogen, feminized newborn boys, down’s syndrome, transgender newborns, early onset puberty, memory loss, increased aggression.
A scary study shows the hidden causes of feminizing baby boys
Medications contain chemicals that “feminize” unborn baby boys
Filed under: agriculture, animal cruelty, Bio Weapons, cancer, David Rockefeller, depopulation, Dictatorship, DNA, Empire, EPA, Eugenics, Eugenics Society, Fascism, fda, food market, food safety, genetic engineering, genetically engineered, genetically engineered food, genetically modified, genetics, Genocide, GM, GM corn, gm food, GM foods, GMO, GMOs, health and environment, Holocaust, Human Experiments, malthusian catastrophe, Monsanto, New World Order, NWO, Oppression, Population Control, rockefeller, Science and technology, soft kill, super weapons, syngenta, toxicity, White House | Tags: Michael Taylor, spider goat
GMO foods are changing the DNA of humans
Filed under: adjuvant, attenuated vaccine, attenuated vaccines, attenuated virus, autism, autoimmune disease, big pharma, Bio Weapons, biological warfare, brain damage, Child Abuse, dangerous vaccinations, deadly vaccinations, deadly vaccines, Deirdre imus, depopulation, disabled, Dr. Roby Mitchell, EPA, Eugenics, Eugenics Society, Fascism, fda, federal crimes, flu shot, fluvirin, formaldehyde, Genocide, Guillain-Barré syndrome, Gulf War Syndrome, h1n1, h1n1 clinic, h1n1 miscarriage, h1n1 vaccine, health and environment, Human Experiments, human rights, immune system, infanticide, influenza, influenza vaccine, innoculation, live virus, live virus vaccine, malthusian, malthusian catastrophe, medical Experiments, medical industrial complex, Mercury, mf59, miscarriage, Nazi, Oppression, Paralysis, parental rights, polysorbate 80, Population Control, Sanofi-Aventis, soft kill, squalene, sterilization, super weapons, swine flu, Thimerosal, toxicity, tween 80, vaccinations, Vaccine, vaccine deaths, vaccine miscarriage, vaccine side effects | Tags: h1n1 package insert
MUST READ!
A Surge of Miscarriage Reports From Pregnant Women After Taking Swine Flu Vaccine Hits The Internet – Tell Every Pregnant Woman You Know!
Organic Health Advisor
November 11, 2009
U.S. health authorities have made pregnant women one of the highest priority groups for getting the H1N1 swine flu vaccine, but is it actually safe for pregnant women and their babies? Well, the truth is that miscarriage reports from pregnant women who have taken the H1N1 swine flu vaccine are starting to pour in from all over the nation. Vaccines and pregnancy simply do not mix safely. In fact, the package inserts for the swine flu vaccines actually say that the safety of these vaccines for pregnant women has not been established.
What you are about to read below should shock and anger you. If they are telling us that the swine flu vaccine is not safe for children under 6 months of age, then why in the world would it be safe for pregnant women and their babies? That doesn’t make an ounce of sense, does it?
The following H1N1 swine flu vaccine miscarriage horror stories are from a June 2010 birth club…..
EBWashington:
I am so upset. I was so excited to be pregnant after trying for a year. As soon as I found out I was pregnant, I joined this birth club and I was due June 25th. We have two healthy boys with no history of miscarriage. Everything was going great. Last Monday, I got the H1N1 vaccine thimerosal reduced (mercury reduced for pregnant women). On Tuesday morning, I started cramping and on Wednesday I started bleeding heavily. My hcg was 50 on Wednesday and I was almost 6 weeks along so it was low. They still thought that I might be pregnant but on Friday my hcg was down to 22. I am an emotional wreck. I feel like I had a healthy baby and I caused this by getting the H1N1 vaccine. My doctors pushed it. I researched online and there have been many miscarriages after the H1N1 vaccine but they haven’t been reported since it is hard to say what caused the miscarriages. I hope that I did not cause this. I wish everyone the best.
Tayla08:
I don’t have an answer for you, but a friend of a friend just had a miscarriage 2-3 days after getting the shot. She was 7weeks. She had no previous history of m/c… No one can answer if they’re related…it hasn’t been out long enough and there haven’t been any studies done on pregnant women. I will tell you, that it has made up my mind on getting it…I won’t and I’m not going to get it for my DD either. My daughter and I both had H1N1 last week, and although it truly sucks…I think I’ll take my chances. One doctor will tell you to get it and the next will tell you not too…you have to do what’s in your heart.
90707:
my heart goes out to you as i recently miscarried as well and was due in june. i had a healthy heart beat at 6wks. then at 7.5 wks my son got the h1n1 mist vaccine which has live vaccine in it. the nurse said to be careful b/c it could technically spread if he rubbed his nose and touched a surface etc. the next night i miscarried and 5 days later was diagnosed with h1n1. i work from home, kids are home, hadnt been anywhere during that time. so the chances that it is all related are very high. the flu mist vaccine warns for immunocompromised patients (which includes prego) to stay away from recipients of the flu mist for 21 days.
This next set of H1N1 swine flu vaccine miscarriage horror stories is from an About.com page about miscarriage…..
Jo:
I got the flu vaccine (regular not H1N1) at 8 weeks pregnant. Three days later I miscarried. I am not going to get the H1N1.
Regrets:
I got both vaccines on Thursday. I was 9 weeks pregnant. I miscarried on Sunday. I was told by several doctors to get these vaccines. Now I wish I followed my gut feeling and not get them at ALL!
sad:
i work in a hospital like setting and was told ‘the benefits outweigh the risks” 1am i got the vaccine, 3am i started bleeding and craming, 3pm miscarried. you decide
sue:
I had the H1N1 vaccination and 24 hours later had a miscarriage.
Linda Hill:
My daughter in law was 10 weeks pregnant and had the H1N1 vaccine on Friday that night she miscarried.
SoSorry:
I was so ready to get the H1N1 vaccine last week and they were only giving them to pregnant women. I was 6 weeks along and got it and the next day I started cramping and miscarried. I already had two healthy pregnancies and never miscarried or had any problems. My doctors think I am crazy to think it was the H1N1 but if no one looks into this than other women will not know. I am so sorry that I got it.
Connie:
I also received the H1N1 vaccination on October 22nd, 2009 and went into labor on October 25th, at 16 weeks pregnant and we just heard the heartbeat and everything was fine with my pregnancy on October 16th, 2009, then on October 28th my water broke then on October 29th, I delivered a stillborn baby boy, and no one can tell me why…Everyone wants to say it did not come from the shot but I believe it did. My baby was growing at the correct pace and everyone wants to brush off the vaccination. I say if you have the vaccination and suffer a miscarriage if they are able to perform an autopsy have it done.
I also agree something needs to be done and looked more into with this vaccination because most women are being advised it’s just something that happens, but I also had two healthy children normal pregnancies and when I received this vaccination with my third pregnancy, my baby is gone.
sioux falls, south dakota:
I received the H1N1 vaccine on October 16th and started experiencing cramping on the 22nd. I was nearly 17 weeks pregnant and gave birth to a stillborn baby boy on the 23rd. Like many of the other women here, the first thing I suspected was the H1N1 vaccine. I immediately asked a nurse at the hospital if that would have anything to do with it. Without hesitation, she told me “absolutely not.” I had reservations about getting the vaccine, but followed the advice of my long trusted family doctor. In a follow up appointment with my doctor 3 days after I lost my baby, I asked him if the vaccine would have had any adverse effects on my baby. He also said that it was not possible. I don’t believe that my doctor was necessarily lying to me, he was simply following the accepted practices and opinions of his field. I do, however, believe that as a nation, we are being lied to. This vaccine is NOT safe during pregnancy. There has not been enough testing done to determine this and there are far too many “coincidences” for this to be anything but a result of a vaccine that was hastily pushed into production and distribution in an effort to stop widespread panic. I have read so many stories in defense of the vaccine that will talk about how common miscarriages are, but I would challenge you to ask ANY health care professional how common second trimester miscarriages are. My baby was doing perfect developmentally and I had felt him move earlier that day. My heart goes out to all of you out there who have had to go through the same heartache and loss that I have had in the last couple of weeks. There is no reason that any woman or family should have to go through this. Get the word out to all of the pregnant women that you know. I know that if I had heard that women had been losing their babies shortly after they received the vaccine, I would have followed my gut and not gotten it myself. Maybe then Wyatt would have had a chance at life.
Marina Rossi:
I recently got the H1N1 vaccine and miscarried 3 days later. I thought it could have been the vaccine but didnt ask. After finding this site I believe it was the vaccine. Sorry to everyone else out there who has just experienced a miscarriage.
kathy-sd:
I’m from a town of 2000 in SD, there are several women pregnant and we are all due within a few weeks of each other. Four of us got the H1N1 vaccine 2 weeks ago and one by one each of us started to have preterm contractions. We are all due in Nov and Dec so we are further along than most of the people that lost their babies. There is no way you can tell us that our preterm labor was not caused by the H1N1 vaccine. It may look like a “fluke” to some people when these women are scattered all over the country but we are talking about 4 of us in our small community. My heart goes out to all of you that lost your babies.
ashley:
Im not sure but not only myself, i know someone that withing 4 days of getting the shot we both miscarried, i was only 6 weeks and she was 4 months along, not sure if the shot caused it and cant find any other information but i am a little concerned about this coincidence.
Time Machine:
I got a flu shot in pregnancy, developed incredibly strange symptoms immediately (numb hands, feet and mouth, heart palpitations, sudden weakness in my legs, a bright red face), began bleeding and miscarried by 11 weeks. I had no idea there was mercury in most flu shots but once I found out after the fact, I was assured that I’d had the “mercury free” form. As it turned out, the shot wasn’t completely mercury free and, according to the EPA website, it still had 5,000 times the limit for mercury in drinking water– not to mention a list of other toxins (MSG, formaldehyde, etc.).
I’d had no idea the shots were so dirty. I guess I’d been under the impression they were something like sterile water and a dead virus, that’s it.
The strange symptoms– which I’d been told were “just pregnancy” lasted six months. No one could figure out what was wrong with me, why I couldn’t make stairs, why I felt like I’d been shot with novocaine. I learned later from a book by Jane Hightower that these were all symptoms of mercury exposure. I guess I’m one of those susceptible people. No one in my family is getting the H1N1– no one even gets regular flu shots anymore, we all read labels.
If you are a pregnant mother, please do not take the H1N1 swine flu vaccine. Instead, do everything that you can do to avoid public places and make sure to wash your hands more than you usually would. Take extra large doses of immunity building vitamins and research many of the great natural ways for fighting the flu that are out there on the Internet.
The truth is that if you do take the vaccine and then something happens, you will NOT be able to sue anyone (thanks to Congress). You will have to bear all the responsibility yourself. That doctor who kept pushing and pushing it on you will tell you that it could not have been the vaccine and that you probably would have miscarried anyway.
Do you honestly want to inject a vaccine that may contain mercury, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (associated with infertility), triton X100 (a strong detergent), phenoxyethanol (antifreeze) and a whole bunch of other toxic ingredients into your system when you know that your baby will absorb it too and has no defenses against most of these things?
In the very short video posted below, you will see one health expert explain to Sean Hannity that even the swine flu vaccine package insert says that it is safe for pregnant women…
The following video highlights a retraction made by a medical doctor, Dr. Roby Mitchell, after he initially advised a group of nurses to take the H1N1 Swine Flu vaccine. Once he had read the actual package insert which comes with the vaccine and realized that the vaccine makers themselves admit it is untested and may cause a myriad of disorders to include paralysis, neurological damage, possible sterilization and may cause fetal harm in pregnant women (one of the high priority groups targeted to get the vaccine), he retracted his advice so that they would have informed consent. 1
Here are a few screen-shots from the FLUVIRIN package insert:
The reality is that if you are pregnant, you need to hear what both sides have to say before ever subjecting your baby to the swine flu vaccine. You do NOT want to end up like one of the mothers above. Please help us out by sharing this information with as many people as you can. If you know of any additional H1N1 swine flu vaccine miscarriage horror stories please post them below in the comments section.
Filed under: 9/11, 9/11 Families, 9/11 Firefighters, 9/11 heros, 9/11 pension, 9/11 survivors, 9/11 Truth, 9/11 victims, 9/11 workers, auto bailout, bailouts, bank bailout, Big Banks, Censorship, christy todd whitman, CIA, EPA, fealgood foundation, first responders, giuliani, Ground Zero, Media, media blackout, New York, NYPD, Rudy Giuliani, We Are Change, World Trade Center
9/11 Hero: Bailout Us Sick First Responders
Filed under: Al Gore, Barack Obama, cap-and-trade, carbon dioxide, carbon rationing, carbon regulation, Carbon Tax, climate bill, Co2, Dictatorship, eco nazi, EIA, electricity, Empire, energy, EPA, Fascism, global cooling, global tax, Global Warming, global warming bill, government bureaucrat, Hoax, homeowners, House, HR 2454, Iowa, nanny state, Nazi, New World Order, New York, NWO, obama, Oppression, Senate | Tags: Congressional Budget Office, U.S. Energy Information Administration
U.S. Climate Bill Seen Increasing Household Energy Cost
Reuters
August 4, 2009
Climate change legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives would increase the energy costs of the average family by $142 a year in 2020 and by $583 in 2030, according to the government’s top energy forecasting agency.
The estimate from the U.S. Energy Information Administration is in line with cost impact projections made by the Congressional Budget Office and the Environmental Protection Agency, and contradict claims by energy and business trade groups that consumers would pay thousands of dollars more a year under a government plan to fight global warming.
The EIA’s estimate says gasoline prices would be 23 cents a gallon higher in 2020 and 36 cents more in 2030, according to a copy of the agency’s analysis that was sent to U.S. lawmakers and obtained by Reuters.
Jeremy Symons, who oversees the National Wildlife Federation’s climate change program, said the EIA’s analysis shows that industry claims that efforts to fight global warming would significantly boost energy costs “are completely unfounded and simply scare tactics.”
(even though Obama himself said his climate plan will make energy bills skyrocket!)
The EIA reviewed the impact of the climate change bill at the request of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The agency sent its report to the panel, but has yet to make it public.
The House in June passed legislation to cut U.S. carbon emissions from utilities, manufacturers and others by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, from 2005 levels.
The lower emission levels would be accomplished through a cap-and-trade system, where a U.S. company would be required to have a pollution permit to emit one ton of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions each year.
Those companies that use cleaner energy and reduce their emissions could sell their permits to companies that pollute more.
The U.S. Senate is expected to unveil its climate change bill in September when lawmakers return from their summer recess.
New York Fails to Hit 90 Degrees for June, July for Second Time
Gore: Climate Bill Will Help Bring About ‘Global Governance’
Mandatory Home Inspections Under Climate Bill
Filed under: agriculture, colorado, Congress, corporations, Dictatorship, Empire, EPA, facism, health and environment, Media, nanny state, Nazi, Oppression, Police State, s.787, Senate, utah, water shortage
Utah: Capturing Rainwater is Illegal
S.787 Would Regulate All Water Sources in the U.S.
Ching Lee
CFBF
June 24, 2009
Despite strong opposition from agricultural groups and private property rights advocates, a bill that would expand the federal reach of the Clean Water Act, and that could have sweeping effects on everyday farming activities, passed out of a key U.S. Senate committee last week.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted 12-7 to advance S. 787, also known as the Clean Water Restoration Act, which now faces consideration by the full Senate.
If adopted, the legislation would give the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers authority over nearly every wet area in the nation, including farm ponds, intermittent streams, ditches and, potentially, groundwater, said Elisa Noble, director of livestock, public lands and natural resources for the California Farm Bureau Federation.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Al Gore, Alex Jones, bailout, Barack Obama, Britain, carbon dioxide, Carbon Tax, Co2, David Rockefeller, eco-nazis, energy, environmental taxation, environmentalist, environmentalists, EPA, Eugenics, Europe, european union, France, gas prices, genetically modified, global cooling, global elite, global government, global tax, Global Warming, Globalism, GM, gordon brown, health and environment, henry paulson, Hoax, icecaps, jupiter, knock and talk, london, mars, mikhail gorbachev, Neolibs, nerve gas, New World Order, obama, Paulson, Petrol, poland, Population Control, rockefeller, rothschild, rupert murdoch, siberia, Surveillance, Taxpayers, UN, United Kingdom, US Treasury, zbigniew brzezinski | Tags: Clean Air Act, David Bookbinder, fluorecent lightbulbs, Heinz, Jason Grumet, maurice strong, Mayer de Rothschild, sierra club, sun, sunspots, the nature conservancy
If Elected Obama Will Declare CO2 a “Dangerous Pollutant”
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
October 17, 2008
In an interview with Bloomberg’s Jim Efstathiou Jr., Barack Obama’s energy adviser, Jason Grumet, said if elected Obama will classify carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant. Obama will tell the Environmental Protection Agency that it may use the 1990 Clean Air Act to set emissions limits, according to Grumet, and he will likely do this immediately upon taking office, David Bookbinder, chief climate counsel for the Sierra Club told Bloomberg.
“The U.S. has to move quickly domestically so we can get back in the game internationally,” Grumet said. In other words, an Obama administration would impose draconian carbon emission regulations on the American people and “help clear the deadlock in talks on an international agreement to slow global warming,” according to Rajendra Pachauri, head of a United Nation panel of climate-change scientists. Negotiators from almost 200 countries will meet in December in Poznan, Poland, to discuss ways to limit CO2, that is to say they will work on a global carbon taxation structure.
Obama has worked closely on this global taxation and world government scam under the cover of environmentalism with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Al Gore, and former communist leader Mikhail Gorbachev, an advocate of the so-called Earth Charter and the author of Manifesto for Earth. Brzezinski co-founded the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller in 1973. Rockefeller and fellow globalist Maurice Strong of Canada were instrumental in the creation of the Earth Charter. As noted above, the Sierra Club will play a decisive role in Obama’s administration. The organization takes money from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and is closely aligned with the United Nations Environmental Program. Strong was UNEP’s first executive director.
It is a well documented fact the environmental movement receives huge disbursements from chartered institutions such as the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, W. Alton Jones Foundation, Turner Foundation, The Pew Charitable Trusts, the David and Lucille Packard Foundation, the Alfred W. Mellon Foundation, and others, including Bill and Melinda Gates, the Heinz family and the Carnegie Corporation. It is no mistake foundation funded environmental groups are now calling for a global carbon tax structure and an international governing regime to monitor and regulate carbon dioxide, as this serves the plan of their masters well.
An Obama administration will kick this scheme into warp drive and hasten the implementation of a world government of the sort members of the global elite have worked toward for many years. A phony environmental crisis, with carbon emissions playing the role as chief villain, is a perfect storm for the global elite. “We are on the verge of a global transformation,” David Rockefeller once quipped. “All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”
France: Turmoil Must Not Affect Climate Change Bill
AP
October 21, 2008
France and Germany urged smaller European Union economies not to use the world financial meltdown as an excuse to gut legislation that aims to combat global warming with deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.
French Environment Minister Jean-Louis Borloo said at an EU environment ministers’ meeting that “the European Union must keep its leadership role” in climate change to nudge the United States and others into a global deal on slashing emissions.
The bill, which aims to cut EU greenhouse gas emissions 20 percent by 2020, is to be adopted in December. The EU hopes it will lead to a deal that month at UN climate negotiations in Poznan, Poland.
“We cannot afford to delay,” German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel said.
In last-minute objections, Italy said the bill would hurt its industries because Chinese and US competitors face no equivalent emission burdens. Italian officials pushed for a clause that would force the European Commission to do a new cost analysis of the climate change bill in 2009.
Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia say they have already made great cuts in carbon emissions since emerging from communism.
Borloo said “there was a very strong willingness” to work toward a deal by December.” But, he added, “the financial markets crisis must not delay this. The EU must keep its leadership role or there will be no point in going to Poznan.”
The financial turmoil has triggered fears of a global recession that would make governments less eager to get major polluters such as energy generators, steel makers and cement producers to pay billions into a cap-and-trade emissions scheme.
The EU cap-and-trade program could impose up to 50 billion euros ($68.8 billion) a year in polluter fees.
EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said critics exaggerated the costs.
“Approving the EU bill in December will be consistent with tackling the financial crisis,” because it will promote investments in clean energy, creating jobs and easing the EU’s dependence on oil imports, he said.
The European Commission estimates the cost of the climate change bill at 0.5 percent of the bloc’s gross national product by 2020.
Eco-Surveillance Agents To Scan Homes
London Guardian
October 23, 2008
Essential surveillance kit for the new green police: the Energy Saving Partnership has taken out a patent on Heatseekers, thermo-imaging vehicles which, at full potential, have the capacity to identify 1,000 properties an hour, or 5,000 properties a night, that are leaking carbon.
“Once the property has been scanned, a dedicated team of energy advisers will visit householders to show them the thermal image scan of their homes,” says Inspector Knock-on-the-Door.
That’ll go down well after midnight.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthe..vision-paulson-s-bailout-2-0
Eco bulbs emit skin-damaging UV radiation, health experts warn
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/..V-radiation-health-experts-warn.html
Dim Bulbs: Those Squiggly “Green” Light Bulbs Could Hurt the Environment, Study Says
http://blogs.wsj.com/environm..hurt-the-environment-study-says/
Global Warming? Blizzards forecast as temperature set to drop lower than Siberia
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/..iberia–wonder-swans-staying-there.html
Record Low Temperatures Hit America
http://www.prisonplanet.com/..-low-temperatures-hit-america.html
WWF Resorts To Deception In Climate Fearmongering
http://www.prisonplanet.co..eption-in-climate-fearmongering.html
Spotless Sun: Blankest Year of the Space Age
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/30sep_blankyear.htm?list878321
Traditional lightbulbs banned by EU
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world..-banned-by-EU.html
Global Cooling: Alaskan Glaciers Grow For First Time In 250 Years
http://www.prisonplanet.com/global-cooling-a..n-250-years.html
Filed under: 2008 olympics, agriculture, asia, beijing, China, EPA, Eugenics, fda, federal crime, genetically modified, Genocide, Globalism, GM, gm crops, gm food, health and environment, Human Experiments, malthusian catastrophe, melamine, Monsanto, olympics, Population Control, USDA | Tags: cyromazine, dangerous candy, deadly candy, halloween, halloween candy, herbicide glyphosate, hersheys, infant deaths, infanticide, John Schorr, kelloggs, kidneys, lactose powder, M&Ms, made in china, mars, milk, non-fat milk powder, pet food, powdered milk, roundup, roundup ready, sugar, sugar beet, sugar beets, target, trick or treating, u.s. food safety, u.s. food supply, wheat gluten, whole milk powder
Halloween Candy With Melamine on U.S. Store Shelves?
This Halloween, Say No To Candy Containing GM Sugar
Joanne Waldron
NaturalNews
October 27, 2008
Parents in Brazil are refusing to feed their children products made using genetically-modified sugar, according to an article at Food & Water Watch. Halloween is just around the corner, and unbeknownst to many American parents, foods like Kellogg’s cereal and Hershey’s chocolate may be made with sugar from genetically-modified sugar beets, warns Kisha Lewellyn Schlegel in a report at NewWest.net. There are many reasons that parents of American children need to be concerned.
Why Would They Use GM Sugar Beets?
Not surprisingly, it’s all about the money. These sugar beets have been genetically altered so that they can withstand regular applications of a weed killer made by Monsanto known as RoundUp. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently increased the allowable residue of the active ingredient of the weed killer (known as glyphosate) on beetroots by a whopping 5000%. Those scientists at the EPA are really doing their jobs protecting everyone, eh?
What’s The Trouble With Glyphosate?
So, what’s the trouble with the weed killer residue? Probably the biggest issue is that there have been studies linking glyphosate exposure to cancer and other health problems. Of course, there is also the Network of Concerned Farmers, a group of farmers who believe that glyphosate can create “super weeds” that are resistant to herbicides. Then, of course, there is a concern that these frankenfood crops may be responsible for the gene pollution of other crops and plants.
Monsanto Hires a Team of Lobbyists – Parents Must Take Action!
While the sugar industry is trying to keep their use of genetically-modified sugar beets quiet, Monsanto has hired a whole team of lobbyists to work on their behalf. This is why it is very important for concerned parents to make their views known before it is too late! Contact Nancy Pelosi at AmericanVoices@house.gov, and tell her that laws are needed to protect consumers from genetically-modified sugar beets. It is also important to send faxes to lawmakers. One can (at the time of this writing) send two free faxes per day at FaxZero.com right from any computer with an Internet connection (see terms and conditions at the site). Consumers should never have to worry about getting cancer from eating a piece of Halloween candy. (Even if parents are strict about what their children eat at home, it’s hard to police what they might be given at at class parties at school.) Why not send a free fax to two different lawmakers every single day? If enough people complain, lawmakers will have to listen. E-mail or fax this article to lawmakers today.
Don’t Support Child Slave Labor
Unfortunately, there is another reason to be concerned about the candy one purchases. According to an article by Dr. Edward Group, two of the companies that rule the chocolate industry (M&M/Mars and Hershey’s) purchase much of their cocoa from the Ivory Coast. Unfortunately, Ivory Coast cocoa farms use child slave labor to work their farms. Parents must consider whether they really want their children indulging in sweets made at the expense of other children.
Dr. Group: Put Your Money Where Your Health Is
Dr. Group believes parents can make their voices heard by voting with their dollars, by purchasing only organic chocolate and candy products. Dr Group asks parents to ask themselves if they would buy a chocolate bar if the label on the product said: “Consuming this candy bar may cause cancer – contains sugar from genetically engineered beets, cocoa harvested by child slaves, and harmful pesticides and fungicides.” Sounds much less appealing, doesn’t it?
noworldsystem.com 