Filed under: cancer, Chemical Warfare, corruption, coverup, deception, depopulation, depopulation, Empire, EPA, Eugenics, fda, food safety, food safety, Genocide, government crimes, health and environment, Human Experiments, infanticide, kellogg, population control, scandal, scandal, softkill, toxicity, toxicity | Tags: apple jacks, froot loops
Chemical in Kellogg Cereals Causing Illness
The Age
August 3, 2010
WHEN US cereal giant Kellogg recently recalled 28 million boxes of Froot Loops, Apple Jacks, Corn Pops and Honey Smacks, the company blamed elevated levels of a chemical in the packaging.
Dozens of consumers reported a strange taste and odour, and some complained of nausea and diarrhoea. But Kellogg said experts it hired determined that there was ”no harmful material” in the products.
American regulators, charged with ensuring the safety of food and consumer products, are in the dark about the suspected chemical, 2-methylnaphthalene. The Food and Drug Administration has no scientific data on its impact on human health.
The Environmental Protection Agency also lacks basic health and safety data for 2-methylnaphthalene – even though the EPA has been seeking that information from the chemical industry for 16 years.
The recall hints at a larger issue: huge gaps in government knowledge about chemicals in everyday consumer products, from furniture to clothing to children’s products. Under current laws, the US government has little or no information about the health risks posed by most of the 80,000 chemicals on the US market.
”It is really troubling that you’ve got this form of naphthalene that’s produced in millions of pounds a year and we don’t have some of the basic information about how toxic it is,” said Erik Olson, an expert at the Pew Charitable Trusts, which is advocating an overhaul of US chemical laws.
In 1994, the EPA invited the chemical industry to submit health and safety data for 2-methylnaphthalene because it was being produced in large quantities, said Mary Dominiak of the EPA. Chemical manufacturers have yet to disclose that information, she said. And they may not even have it. If a manufacturer possesses data showing that a chemical harms health or the environment, it is required to turn over the findings to the EPA. Critics say that creates a disincentive for manufacturers to test their chemicals.
A component of crude oil, 2-methylnaphthalene is structurally related to naphthalene, an ingredient in mothballs and toilet-deodorant blocks that is considered a possible human carcinogen by the EPA.
Kay Cooksey, a packaging expert at Clemson University, said 2-methylnaphthalene likely ended up in cereal because something went awry in the manufacturing of the foil-lined bags. The foil is attached to the paper bag with an adhesive that is heated, she said. If too much heat was applied, or if the composition of the adhesive was incorrect, 2-methylnaphthalene could form.
Kellogg submitted a copy of its health-risk assessment to the FDA, but neither the company nor the agency would release it.
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: 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: bacterial warfare, biosolids, Eugenics, fda, food contamination, food poisoning, food safety, Genocide, health and environment, human waste, Population Control, scandal, toxic earth, toxic environment, toxic waste, toxicity | Tags: Soda Fountains
How Does Feces Get Into Soda Fountains?
Daily Bread
January 8, 2010
Nearly half of all the fast-food soda fountains tested in a recent study dispensed coliform bacteria—that’s feces, folks—along with the pop.
The study, published in the International Journal of Food Microbiology, is being widely picked up in the blogosphere today. I kept clicking from one blog to the next, but none of them raised what to me is the obvious question: How does the fecal material make its way into the soda?
CBS News wondered, too, but they asked “Dr. Alanna Levine, a primary care physician,” who, as far as I can tell, had nothing to do with the study and has no particular expertise on soda fountains. For what it’s worth, she said: “Contamination can occur from employees or customers failing to wash their hands properly and touch the machine. Also, bacteria can enter your drink if the soda fountain machine and/or its water lines aren’t cleaned properly.”
Levine said, “You can get collections of bacteria in the water line, and that then runs through the whole machine and gets into the beverage.”
OK. I still wonder how that level of contamination can occur, given that soda fountains are basically closed-loop systems. How often do people touch the area around where the soda is dispensed? And are that many machines really being contaminated by dirty employees changing out the dispensers and hoses? If so, most of those employees are also handling food, right? How different is this level of contamination from the levels in other public places, like movie theaters or high-end restaurants?
Only the abstract of the study is available online, and it doesn’t address these questions. I am making inquiries.
However the nasty bacteria is getting there, it might be causing “episodic gastric distress in the general population and could pose a more significant health risk to immunocompromised individuals,” say the authors, who hail from a couple of colleges in Virginia.
And worse: it’s not just coliform, but other “opportunistic pathogenic microorganisms.” And most of what they found is at least somewhat resistant to antibiotics.
Thirsty? Bacteria linked to feces found on soda fountains
If you’re chugging a soda from a fast food joint, you may want to put it down and read this.
A team of microbiologists from Hollins University found that 48% of the sodas they tested from fast food soda fountains had coliform bacteria, according to Tom Laskawy, a media and technology professional and blogger for grist.org.
Coliform is typically fecal in origin.
On top of that, the study found that most of the bacteria were resistant to antibiotics.
The team tested 90 beverages from 30 fountains, and published their findings in the International Journal of Food Microbiology.
Here is an excerpt from the abstract:
“…Coliform bacteria was detected in 48% of the beverages and 20% had a heterotrophic plate count greater than 500 cfu/ml. […] More than 11% of the beverages analyzed contained Escherichia coli [E. Coli] and over 17% contained Chryseobacterium meningosepticum. Other opportunistic pathogenic microorganisms isolated from the beverages included species of Klebsiella, Staphylococcus, Stenotrophomonas, Candida, and Serratia. Most of the identified bacteria showed resistance to one or more of the 11 antibiotics tested.”
Lawasky made sure to note that there has been only one recorded outbreak linked to soda fountains, and that was 10 years ago.
But, the bacteria could cause sickness that could go unreported and therefore never linked to soda fountains.
You can read the abstract or purchase the report here.
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: biological warfare, Chemical Warfare, chlorine, Eugenics, european union, fda, food ban, food contamination, food market, food poisoning, food safety, Genocide, health and environment, Russia, toxic earth, toxic environment, toxic food, toxicity, USDA
Russia Bans U.S. Poultry Treated With Chlorine
Food Safety News
January 7, 2010
With as much as 30,000 tons of American poultry in the pipeline to Russia, the government in Moscow imposed a ban on future U.S. poultry imports on New Year’s Day.
Russia joins the European Union in prohibiting the use of chlorine as an anti-microbial treatment in poultry production, which is commonly used in the United States.
As for birds in the pipeline, USA Poultry and Egg Export Council President Jim Summers said he thinks based on earlier assurances from the Russian Veterinary Service that poultry in transit will be allowed to enter.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture defended the use of chlorine by the American poultry industry.
“Since chlorine has been used as an anti-microbial treatment for more than 25 years, this resolution effectively blocks U.S. exports of poultry to Russia, has a devastating impact on the U.S. poultry industry and trade, and raised the costs of poultry products for Russia’s consumers,” says USDA spokeswoman Katie Gorscak.
She said there is overwhelming scientific evidence that chlorine is safe and effective as a disinfectant for poultry.
American poultry exports to Russia are the biggest component of U.S. agricultural exports to the former Soviet Union. Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, Russia has grown to become American’s tenth largest Ag export market for a total of $1.8 billion in 2008. Poultry was almost half of that amount.
Losing another near billion-worth of exports to Russia over chlorine comes as the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has also been unable to open the EU to U.S. poultry for the same issue. For trade disputes with the EU, complaints go to the World Trade Organization (WTO). But, Russia is not a member of WTO.
In 2009, Russia accepted poultry from the U.S. under a quota lowered from 2008 levels. Russia’s domestic poultry industry has improved greatly over the past few years, but experts say the country will still need U.S. birds to meet the demands of its consumers.
The EU ban on bathing chicken in chlorine has been in effect since 1997. The US-EU dispute was a test case for the Transatlantic Economic Council, which was formed in 2007 to facilitate trade and business between the two economies. A plan to end the ban was vetoed by EU veterinary experts.
The U.S. and Russia plan to hold technical talks over the chlorine issue. As written, there is more chlorine in most U.S. public water systems than Russia would allow for chicken baths.
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: agriculture, biological warfare, cancer, Chemical Warfare, Child Abuse, city water, deception, DoA, drinking water, elite, establishment, eugenicists, Eugenics, fda, food contamination, food market, food poisoning, food safety, full-body scanners, Genocide, global elite, government crimes, government regulations, health and environment, internationalist, lobbyists, Mad Cow, nanny state, radiation, ruling class, softkill, toxic earth, toxic environment, toxicity, u.s. crops, USDA | Tags: Burger King, department of agriculture, fast food, health alert, junk food, McDonald’s, meat industry
U.S. Government Approves Treating Beef With Ammonia
NoWorldSystem
January 3, 2010
The New York Times forgot to mention that in the past, the USDA and FDA approved of injecting meat with carbon monoxide to keep rotten meat looking fresh, treating meat with viruses and even Oked the use of Mad Cow diseased beef into the food market just as long as it was mixed with 1% healthy beef.
The plan to inject ammonia into meat is just another toxic substance added to our daily intake that the government seems not to mind. The eugenicist elite that control the U.S. government know that stuff like this is bad for us and are purposely increasing the toxins in our environment. These are softkill methods of eugenics to cut the human population down by a ‘reasonable’ number, they use methods like; radiating us at airports, leaving drugs in the city water supply and using human sewage as fertilizer on major U.S. crops.
It should be painfully obvious now that the government doesn’t give a damn about you, the eugenicist elitists want you dead sooner than later because they look at ‘humans’ as a threat to the ‘ruling class’ clique, they consider us monsters that are unworthy of life. This is the real threat against humanity, not some patsy/terrorist crotch bomber. A decade from now we’ll all be wondering why people are dying at age 50 or 60.
New York Times
December 30, 2009
Eight years ago, federal officials were struggling to remove potentially deadly E. coli from hamburgers when an entrepreneurial company from South Dakota came up with a novel idea: injecting beef with ammonia.
The company, Beef Products Inc., had been looking to expand into the hamburger business with a product made from beef that included fatty trimmings the industry once relegated to pet food and cooking oil. The trimmings were particularly susceptible to contamination, but a study commissioned by the company showed that the ammonia process would kill E. coli as well as salmonella.
Officials at the United States Department of Agriculture endorsed the company’s ammonia treatment, and have said it destroys E. coli “to an undetectable level.” They decided it was so effective that in 2007, when the department began routine testing of meat used in hamburger sold to the general public, they exempted Beef Products.
With the U.S.D.A.’s stamp of approval, the company’s processed beef has become a mainstay in America’s hamburgers. McDonald’s, Burger King and other fast-food giants use it as a component in ground beef, as do grocery chains. The federal school lunch program used an estimated 5.5 million pounds of the processed beef last year alone.
But government and industry records obtained by The New York Times show that in testing for the school lunch program, E. coli and salmonella pathogens have been found dozens of times in Beef Products meat, challenging claims by the company and the U.S.D.A. about the effectiveness of the treatment. Since 2005, E. coli has been found 3 times and salmonella 48 times, including back-to-back incidents in August in which two 27,000-pound batches were found to be contaminated. The meat was caught before reaching lunch-rooms trays.
…
Carl S. Custer, a former U.S.D.A. microbiologist, said he and other scientists were concerned that the department had approved the treated beef for sale without obtaining independent validation of the potential safety risk. Another department microbiologist, Gerald Zirnstein, called the processed beef “pink slime” in a 2002 e-mail message to colleagues and said, “I do not consider the stuff to be ground beef, and I consider allowing it in ground beef to be a form of fraudulent labeling.”
One of the toughest hurdles for Beef Products was the Agricultural Marketing Service, the U.S.D.A. division that buys food for school lunches. Officials cited complaints about the odor, and wrote in a 2002 memorandum that they had “to determine if the addition of ammonia to the product is in the best interest to A.M.S. from a quality standpoint.”
“It is our contention,” the memo added, “that product should be labeled accordingly.”
Represented by Dennis R. Johnson, a top lawyer and lobbyist for the meat industry, Beef Products prevailed on the question of whether ammonia should be listed as an ingredient, arguing that the government had just decided against requiring another company to list a chemical used in treating poultry.
School lunch officials said they ultimately agreed to use the treated meat because it shaved about 3 cents off the cost of making a pound of ground beef.
USDA serves pet food grade meat at public schools
FDA Is Urged to Ban Carbon-Monoxide-Treated Meat
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: California, Canada, cancer, food safety, health and environment, nanny state | Tags: acrylamide, asparaginase, fast food, junk food
Health Canada To Add Anti-Cancer Drugs To Junk Food
National Post
December 21, 2009
Health Canada is proposing an unorthodox way of combatting a food ingredient suspected in some cancers: It wants to let manufacturers put small amounts of a cancer-fighting drug into potato chips and similar foods to curb production of the harmful chemical.
Ever since acrylamide was discovered seven years ago in such foods as french fries and chips cooked at high temperatures, scientists have struggled for a way to get it out. The chemical is not added deliberately; it is an unintentional byproduct of cooking.
Though the evidence is far from definitive, acrylamide has been connected to cancer in animals and possibly people.
As a partial answer, Health Canada is suggesting removing the requirement for a prescription to administer the enzyme asparaginase, except when it is injected into leukemia patients as a treatment.
That way, food companies could include small amounts of the drug in their products, the department says in a “notice of intent” document published on Saturday. Evidence suggests that asparaginase lessens the production of acrylamide by as much as 90%.
The enzyme is destroyed in cooking so would have no impact on people consuming the food, said Varoujan Yaylayan, associate professor with McGill University’s food-science department.
“It has been used quite effectively on an experimental basis,” he said. “It appears to work.”
The acrylamide issue has preoccupied food manufacturers as they brace for the possibility of regulations that could limit levels of the chemical or ban it outright. California actually sued french fry and chip makers over the question, with several agreeing last year to reduce the volume of acrylamide in their goods.
“It’s been a big, big problem,” Prof. Yaylayan said. “Not so much in the public eye, but behind doors, the companies keep having meetings, having scientific symposia and seminars. I have attended many of them, here, in the U.S., in Europe.”
Manufacturers “fully support” the move suggested by Health Canada, Derek Nighbor of Food and Consumer Products of Canada said in a statement provided by the industry group yesterday.
Health Canada is accepting feedback on the idea for 75 days, and could implement it in six to eight months, the government document said.
Swedish scientists discovered in 2002 that acrylamide, used in making various industrial and consumer products, also occurred in foods ranging from breakfast cereals to bread cooked at over 120-degrees celsius. A by-product of heating certain sugars, levels are particularly elevated in carbohydrate-heavy food heated to high temperatures like chips and fries.
Tests have found that consuming the chemical increases the risk of some cancer in rodents. Evidence of its effect on humans who eat it in food is less clear, though, with some research linking it to cancer but most studies finding that the levels people eat would have no carcinogenic effect, said Lorelei Mucci, a Harvard medical school assistant professor who studies the issue.
In fact, Dr. Mucci questions devoting much energy or money to the substance.
Volumes of the chemical can be reduced by cooking at lower temperatures or soaking the product in water first to extract some sugar, but such techniques can affect the pleasant odour, crispiness or colour of some food.
Asparaginase is injected in leukemia patients, where it breaks down asparagine, an amino acid, killing the cancer cells. When it is applied to potatoes or other food before cooking, it similarly reduces the amount of asparagine, the key ingredient in the inadvertent production of acrylamide.
The “downstream effects” of using asparaginase to counter the chemical in food should be studied carefully, advised Dr. Mucci.
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: Child Abuse, education, education system, food poisoning, food safety, health and environment, public school, USDA | Tags: health alert, school food
USDA serves pet food grade meat at public schools
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: ADHD, alzheimers, Bio Weapons, biological warfare, darwin, depopulation, diabetes, Eugenics, fda, food safety, health and environment, Monosodium Glutamate, MSG, obsity, Population Control, softkill, toxicity | Tags: Betty Crocker, Burger King, Campbell's soup, doritos, Heinz, Hostess, Jack in the Box, KFC, kraft, lays, McDonald's, pringles, Taco Bell, Top Ramen, Wendy's
MSG Causes Obesity, Hides Behind Many Fake Names
Rense
December 3, 2009
MSG hides behind 25 or more names, such as “Natural Flavoring”. MSG is even in your favourite coffee from Tim Horton’s and Starbucks coffee shops.
I wondered if there could be an actual chemical causing the massive obesity epidemic, and so did a friend of mine, John Erb. He was a research assistant at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada, and spent years working for the government. He made an amazing discovery while going through scientific journals for a book he was writing called “The Slow Poisoning of America”.
In hundreds of studies around the world, scientists were creating obese mice and rats to use in diet or diabetes test studies. No strain of rat or mice is naturally obese, so scientists have to create them. They make these creatures morbidly obese by injecting them with MSG when they are first born.
The MSG triples the amount of insulin the pancreas creates, causing rats (and perhaps humans) to become obese. They even have a name for the fat rodents they create: ‘MSG-Treated Rats.’
When I heard this, I was shocked. I went into my kitchen and checked the cupboards and the refrigerator. MSG was in everything — the Campbell’s soups, the Hostess Doritos, the Lays flavoured potato chips, Top Ramen, Betty Crocker, Hamburger Helper, Heinz canned gravy, Swanson frozen prepared meals, and Kraft salad dressings, especially the ‘healthy low-fat’ ones. The items that didn’t have MSG marked on the product label had something called ‘Hydrolysed Vegetable Protein,’ which is just another name for Monosodium Glutamate.
It was shocking to see just how many of the foods we feed our children everyday are filled with this stuff. MSG is hidden under many different names in order to fool those who read the ingredient list, so that they don’t catch on. (Other names for MSG are ‘Accent, ‘Aginomoto, ‘Natural Meat Tenderiser,’ etc.) But it didn’t stop there.
When our family went out to eat, we started asking at the restaurants what menu items contained MSG. Many employees, even the managers, swore they didn’t use MSG. But when we ask for the ingredient list, which they grudgingly provided, sure enough, MSG and Hydrolysed Vegetable Protein were everywhere.
Burger King, McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Taco Bell, Jack in the Box, every restaurant — even the sit-down eateries like TGIF, Chili’s, Applebee’s, and Denny’s — use MSG in abundance. Kentucky Fried Chicken seemed to be the WORST offender: MSG was in every chicken dish, salad dressing and gravy. No wonder I loved to eat that coating on the skin — their secret spice was MSG!
So why is MSG in so many of the foods we eat? Is it a preservative, or a vitamin?
Not according to my friend John Erb. In his book “The Slow Poisoning of America”, he said that MSG is added to food for the addictive effect it has on the human body.
Even the propaganda website sponsored by the food manufacturers lobby group supporting MSG explains that the reason they add it to food is to make people eat more.
A study of the elderly showed that older people eat more of the foods that it is added to. The Glutamate Association lobbying group says eating more is a benefit to the elderly, but what does it do to the rest of us?
‘Betcha can’t eat [just] one,’ takes on a whole new meaning where MSG is concerned! And we wonder why the nation is overweight!
MSG manufacturers themselves admit that it addicts people to their products. It makes people choose their product over others, and makes people eat more of it than they would if MSG wasn’t added. Not only is MSG scientifically proven to cause obesity, it is an addictive substance.
Since its introduction into the American food supply fifty years ago, MSG has been added in larger and larger doses to the pre-packaged meals, soups, snacks, and fast foods we are tempted to eat everyday.
The FDA has set no limits on how much of it can be added to food. They claim it’s safe to eat in any amount. But how can they claim it’s safe when there are hundreds of scientific studies with titles like these:
”The monosodium glutamate (MSG) obese rat as a model for the study of exercise in obesity.” Gobatto CA, Mello MA, Souza CT, Ribeiro IA. Res Commun Mol Pathol Pharmacol. 2002.
”Adrenalectomy abolishes the food-induced hypothalamic serotonin release in both normal and monosodium glutamate-obese rats.”
Guimaraes RB, Telles MM, Coelho VB, Mori C, Nascimento CM, Ribeiro. Brain Res Bull. 2002 Aug.
”Obesity induced by neonatal monosodium glutamate treatment in spontaneously hypertensive rats: An animal model of multiple risk factors.” Iwase M, Yamamoto M, Iino K, Apparatchik K, Maraschinos N, Seminarians Fujishima Hyper tens Res. 1998 Mar.
”Hypothalamic lesion induced by injection of monosodium glutamate in suckling period and subsequent development of obesity.” Tanaka K, Chimaera M, Nakamura K Kusunoki. Exp Neural. 1978 Oct.
(Hypothalamic dysfunction is a problem with the region of the brain called the hypothalamus, which helps control the pituitary gland and regulate many body functions, particularly in response to stress. The pituitary, in turn, controls the:
*Adrenal glands,
*Ovaries
*Testes
*Thyroid gland
No, the date of that last study was not a typo; it was published in 1978. Both the ”medical research community” and ”food manufacturers” have known about the side effects of MSG for decades.
Many more of the studies mentioned in John Erb’s book link MSG to diabetes, migraines and headaches, autism, ADHD, and even Alzheimer’s. So what can we do to stop the food manufactures from dumping this fattening and addictive MSG into our food supply and causing the obesity epidemic we now see?
Several months ago, John Erb took his book and his concerns to one of the highest government health officials in Canada. While he was sitting in the government office, the official told him, ‘Sure, I know how bad MSG is. I wouldn’t touch the stuff.’ But this top-level government official refuses to tell the public what he knows.
The big media doesn’t want to tell the public either, fearing issues with their advertisers. It seems that the fallout on the fast food industry may hurt their profit margin. The food producers and restaurants have been addicting us to their products for years, and now we are paying the price for it. Our children should not be cursed with obesity caused by an addictive food additive.
But what can I do about it? I’m just one voice! What can I do to stop the poisoning of our children, while our governments are insuring financial protection for the industry that is poisoning us?
This message is going out to everyone I know in an attempt to tell you the truth that the corporate-owned politicians and media won’t tell you.
The best way you can help to save yourself and your children from this drug-induced epidemic is to forward this article to everyone. With any luck, it will circle the globe before politicians can pass the legislation protecting those who are poisoning us.
The food industry learned a lot from the tobacco industry. Imagine if big tobacco had a bill like this in place before someone blew the whistle on nicotine?
If you are one of the few who can still believe that MSG is good for us and you don’t believe what John Erb has to say, see for yourself. Go to the National Library of Medicine at http://www.pubmed.com. Type in the words ‘MSG Obese’ and read a few of the 115 medical studies that appear.
We the public do not want to be rats in one giant experiment, and we do not approve of food that makes us into a nation of obese, lethargic, addicted sheep, feeding the food industry’s bottom line while waiting for the heart transplant, the diabetic induced amputation, blindness, or other obesity-induced, life-threatening disorders.
With your help we can put an end to this poison. Do your part in sending this message out by word of mouth, e-mail, or by distribution of this printout to your friends all over the world and stop this ‘Slow Poisoning of Mankind’ by the packaged food industry.
Blowing the whistle on MSG is our responsibility, so get the word out.
Filed under: Animal Abuse, animal cruelty, Bio Weapons, bovine growth hormone, cancer, depopulation, Dictatorship, Empire, Eugenics, fda, food market, food safety, genetic engineering, genetically engineered, genetically engineered food, genetically modified, Genocide, GM, gm food, GM foods, GMO, GMOs, health and environment, Human Experiments, malthusian catastrophe, Monsanto, rBST, soft kill, toxicity, Uncategorized | Tags: (IGF-1, Cancer Prevention Coalition, CPC, homogenization, milk, pasteurization
Genetically engineered hormones used by dairy industry promote cancer
E. Huff
Natural News
November 17, 2009
An industry report claiming that the genetically-engineered hormone Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin (rBST) is safe has received criticism from the Cancer Prevention Coalition (CPC) for its dubious findings. Funded by producers of rBST, the report was conducted entirely by industry-paid consultants rather than by independent, credible scientists, indicating it is fallacious.
Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, chairman of the CPC, lambasted the report for failing to recognize the grave, scientifically-proven dangers imposed by rBST. Author of the 2006 book What’s In Your Milk?, Dr. Epstein stated the report was “blatantly false”.
One of the primary effects of rBST on cows is that is causes them to become seriously ill with various diseases including mastitis, an infection of the udder that ultimately contaminates milk with pus. Commonly branded as Posilac, rBST unnaturally increases milk production at the expense of the cow’s health, the repercussions of which are passed on to the consumer.
Monsanto, the original creator of rBST, was forced to reveal the truth that rBST induces roughly 20 toxic effects, all of which end up tainting the milk with disease. When farmers then treat these illnesses with antibiotics, those too end up in the milk that is eventually drunk by unsuspecting consumers.
Got milk hormones?
Research has also revealed that rBST-treated milk is both chemically and nutritionally different than natural milk and that traces of the hormone end up in the milk. Those who drink rBST-tainted milk readily absorb the hormone in their digestive tract which is then assimilated into the blood.
Milk from rBST-treated cows contains unnaturally high levels of natural growth factor (IGF-1) which inhibits the body’s natural defense mechanisms designed to fend off cancer. Well-documented scientific studies have implicated the hormone in precipitating prostate, breast, and colon cancer.
CPC has been working for decades to eliminate rBST from the milk supply. In 1990, the group issued a warning in conjunction with over 40 other organizations about the dangers of rBST. The warning fell upon deaf ears at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) which continued to accept the flawed notion that rBST was safe in spite of its proven dangers.
In 2007, CPC sent a petition to the FDA entitled “Seeking Withdrawal of the New Animal Drug application for rBST”, which was endorsed by several farmer and consumer protection groups. Citing Congressional concerns about the hormone that date back to the 1980s, as well as countless studies illustrating the toxicity of rBST, these groups labored to reform the FDA’s flawed position. Unfortunately, the FDA ignored the facts and continues to keep the interests of industry as its priority at the expense of consumer protection.
Dr. Epstein’s recommendation, especially for children who are most susceptible to cancer-causing additives like rBST, is to choose organic milk if they are going to drink milk at all. Organic milk is not allowed to contain rBST or any artificial hormones and is the best alternative to conventional milk that may be tainted with rBST.
Organic, raw milk is the most preferable option as it is a whole, living food rich in beneficial enzymes, probiotics, and other nutrients that get destroyed during pasteurization and homogenization. Many believe raw milk is a perfect food rich in essential vitamins and high in protein.
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: AAP, ADD, ADHD, aspergers, autism, Bio Weapons, brain damage, CDC, Child Abuse, corporatism, darwin, Dictatorship, Empire, environmental health study, Eugenics, Fascism, fda, food market, food safety, Genocide, health and environment, huxley, Mercury, New World Order, Population Control, toxicity
Mercury Found in High-Fructose Corn Syrup
Natural News
March 26, 2009
High-fructose corn syrup has taken our food shelves by storm. It is present in many different types of bread, cereals, breakfast bars, yogurts, soups and sugary beverages. It is estimated that, on a typical day, an American consumes an average of 12 teaspoons of such syrup. Further, teenagers and others with high consumption may even be taking in up to 80% more than average. Recently, two separate studies, one published in the journal Environmental Health and the other conducted by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), have revealed a further danger of high-fructose corn syrup, having found that it may contain mercury.
Environmental Health Study
In the report of the first study, it was noted that mercury cell chlor-alkali products are used to make many food ingredients; these include citrus acid, sodium benzoate, as well as high-fructose corn syrup. The latter, referred to as HFCS for short, is used to sweeten and stabilize food products and lengthen their shelf lives.
In 2003, the Environmental Protection Agency had reported that an average of about 7 tons of mercury from each of the then 8 mercury cell chlor-alkali plants located in the US were unaccounted for in 2000. All that mercury must have gone somewhere, and, with it being such a dangerous neurotoxin, that was a dangerous statistic implying additional exposure for humans and the environment. Of particular concern is exposure for children and other sensitive segments of the population.
An Environmental Health Officer (EHO) thus conducted an investigation in 2004, which revealed that both mercury grade and membrane grade caustic soda were used by the industry to manufacture HFCS. Another chemical used was hydrochloric acid. Since mercury grade chemicals were used in the manufacturing process of HFCS, it was likely that mercury could be found in the final product, too.
The EHO dug deeper, collecting HFCS samples from 3 manufacturers and then analyzing them for total mercury content. In almost half of the samples, or 9 out of 20, mercury levels above the detection limit of 0.005 micrograms of mercury per gram of HFCS was found. The maximum level detected was 0.570 ìg mercury/g HFCS in one sample. The samples were collected from 17 to 24 February, 2005.
IATP Study
For the IATP study, the researchers had tested 55 popular brand-name food products and detected mercury in 17 of them (see WebMD link below for a list of the affected products). The 55 products had been chosen based on the fact that HFCS was the number one or two labeled ingredient; such labeling indicates that HFCS was the highest or second highest ingredient in the product, according to weight. The worst hit products were dairy products, followed by dressings and condiments.
“Mercury is toxic in all its forms. Given how much high fructose corn syrup is consumed by children, it could be a significant additional source of mercury never before considered. We are calling for immediate changes by industry and the FDA to help stop this avoidable mercury contamination of the food supply,” said David Wallinga, MD, from the IATP, who was involved in both the said studies.
It should be noted that a “snap-shot” sample of the products was obtained, which would not conclusively prove that these products were always or often contaminated.
Filed under: 1984, agriculture, Big Brother, biometrics, cargill, consolidation, Control Grid, department of agriculture, digital angel, Echelon, fda, food safety, global elite, global government, Globalism, gps, Mad Cow, mandatory microchipping, michigan, microchip, Monsanto, nanny state, New World Order, NWO, Oppression, organic, orwell, RFID, Science and technology, Spy, Surveillance, USDA, Verichip | Tags: internet of things, microchip implant cancer, National Animal Identification System, rfid cancer, Ubiquitous living, utopia
Amish farmers lose court battle against RFID
Beasts must still be numbered, says court
The Register
July 31, 2009
Michigan farmers have failed in their attempt to block the introduction of RFID tags for cattle, despite arguments about the cost and the risk of upsetting an otherwise benevolent deity.
The case was bought by the catchily-named Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defence Fund (FTCLDF), representing small farmers in Michigan as well as a group of six Amish farmers: the former concerned about the cost of the tags, while the latter were more worried about eternal damnation brought on by applying numbers to God’s own cattle.
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) tried to get the case dismissed back in November last year, but only now has it managed to have the case thrown out on the basis that it is a Michigan ruling and thus subject to state laws, rather than part of any agenda being set by the USDA as part of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), against which the plaintiff’s case was based.
Even in Michigan the law is intended to be voluntary, but the plaintiffs clearly believe that the voluntary status is just a ruse under which a mandatory ruling can be later implemented, which would threaten their livelihoods, or eternal souls, as appropriate. It’s worth noting, as the Judge did, that even Amish cattle already have numbered metal ear studs, so the contention that numbering cattle is against God’s law was already in shaky ground.
As for the USDA agenda, RFID Journal covers the case in some detail including quotes from a Michigan representative explaining:
“We implemented this program nearly 10 years ago… This was done pre-NAIS. Michigan is the only state with a mandatory electronic animal-tracking program, but it is also the only state with documented bovine TB cases”
Electronic tracking, in this instance, doesn’t necessarily mean RFID tags. The same thing can be, and is, achieved using the existing metal studs, with the data gathered electronically whenever the cattle are moved. But such assurances aren’t going to dent a good conspiracy theory about federal control.
National Animal Identification System
Insane Food Bill 2749 Passes House On 2nd Try. HR 2749: Totalitarian Control Of Our Food Supply
noworldsystem.com 