J&J Deliberately Failed to warn consumers about Cancer link

Source: RT
August 22, 2017

A jury in California has ruled against multinational pharmaceutical giant Johnson and Johnson in the costliest decision to date for the company. J&J now must pay $70 million in compensatory damages and $347 million in punitive damages, after the jury sided with California resident Eva Echeverria, who says she developed ovarian cancer through her use of Johnson’s talcum baby powder for feminine hygiene. RT America’s Mike Papantonio, host of America’s Lawyer, explains how big corporations deliberately avoid warning consumers of cancer risks in their products.

DuPont’s Dumping of GenX Toxin in North Carolina Water Could Be the Next Flint

Source: RTAmerica
June 24, 2017

Description: Mike Papantonio discusses Dupont’s chemical called GenX that has been found in the drinking water of North Carolina residents and speaks with attorney, Chris Paulos about the case.

Food Evolution Movie nothing but chemical industry PROPAGANDA to poison our food

Source: TheHealthRanger
Mike Adams
June 23, 2017

Pioneering food scientist and top selling author Mike Adams reveals why the new movie called “Food Evolution” is pure propaganda and disinformation from the chemical industry that poisons our food. Read more about the film at FoodEvolution.news.

Dr. Mercola and Dr. Osmunson on the Dangers of Fluoride

Source: Mercola.com
Dr. Mercola
June 7, 2017

Natural health expert and Mercola.com founder Dr. Joseph Mercola interviews Dr. Bill Osmunson about the dangers associated with water fluoridation. To find out more, visit Mercola.com.

Infographic: Vaccine industry science lies are nothing more than recycled Big Tobacco science lies

Big Tobacco
Source: NaturalNews.com
Mike Adams
May 17, 2017

You gotta love it when arrogant science devotees defiantly claim they alone have a monopoly on the “settled facts” of our reality. Throughout much of the 20th century, it turns out, these same sort of arrogant scientists claimed smoking was awesome for your health, too.

“More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette” was the headline of a full-page ad carried by the Journal of the American Medical Association. Doctors were paid by Big Tobacco to tout the amazing health benefits of smoking cigarettes, and any doctor who dared point out that smoking might be linked to cancer was subjected to the same industry blackballing, scientific censorship and verbal abuse that’s leveled today against honest researchers questioning the safety of GMOs or mercury in vaccines.

The real truth is that science never has a monopoly on facts, and science makes enormous mistakes (such as condoning smoking cigarettes) on a regular basis. Science is also for sale and easy corrupted by corporate interests.

Peer-reviewed science journals, too, are often little more than a collection of corporate-funded make-believe science tabloids. “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines,” writes the former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine, Marcia Angell.

“I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine,” she says in Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption.

With that in mind, take a look at the similarities between Big Tobacco science lies and vaccine industry science lies:

Skin care expert reveals the 20 most toxic chemical ingredients in beauty products… are you poisoning yourself?

Image: Skin care expert reveals the 20 most toxic chemical ingredients in beauty products… are you poisoning yourself?
Source: NaturalNews.com
Earl Garcia
April 25, 2017

Renowned skin care expert Dr. Trevor Cates lists 20 of the most toxic chemicals found in personal care products. “What we put on our skin should be as clean as what we eat. But for most people, it’s not. Even in tiny amounts, many of the chemicals commonly found in our cosmetics can have a tremendous health and hormonal impact, and we are only beginning to understand the consequences,” Dr. Cates writes in DailyMail.co.uk.

  1. Fragrances – According to Dr. Cates, fragrance mixtures may contain hundreds of individual chemicals that may trigger allergies and disrupt certain hormones. He suggests avoiding fragrances unless in their natural form such as pure essential oils.
  2. Formaldehyde – Nearly one in five personal care products contain this chemical. This toxic chemical can be found in hair care products, adhesives and nail products. According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), formaldehyde is a carcinogenic chemical associated with the onset of various forms of cancer.
  3. Ethanolamines – According to the skin care expert, impurities in these chemicals may trigger the onset of certain types of cancer.
  4. Mineral oils – These oils, along with petroleum, are key ingredients in cosmetic products such as foundation, moisturizers and cleansers. However, these chemicals contain dioxane. According to Dr. Cates, dioxane is found to be carcinogenic in various animal studies.
  5. Oxybenzone – This harmful chemical is commonly found in lip balms, sunscreens, and other products that contain SPF. Oxybenzone is found to be easily absorbed in the bloodstream, and is associated with the onset of early puberty in girls.
  6. Parabens – Parabens are commonly used preservatives in various beauty products. The chemical is linked to breast cancer cell growth in women and lower testosterone levels and sperm count in men.
  7. Hydroquinone – According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), hydroquinones may cause ochronosis, a skin disease characterized by disfiguring and irreversible lesions on the skin. Hydroquinones are also found to be carcinogenic.
  8. Coal tar – Coal tar is a known carcinogenic. The chemical can be found in dandruff shampoos, creams, soap, and ointments.
  9. Toluene – According to Dr. Cates, toluene is a potent neurotoxic chemical and may trigger impaired breathing and nausea. Toluene is commonly found in nail care products.
  10. Butylated hydroxyanisole – BHA is a waxy compound that is used in various cosmetics and personal care products such as eye shadow and lipstick. The U.S. National Toxicology Program has identified BHA as a potential carcinogen, while the European Union (EU) classified the chemical as an endocrine disruptor.
  11. Triclosan and triclocarban – These chemicals are commonly used as antibacterial agents in personal care products. Both chemicals are known endocrine disruptors.
  12. Mica, silica, talc, and nanoparticled titanium dioxide – According to Dr. Cates, these minute particles may lead to lung disease when they accumulated in the body over time.
  13. Heavy metalsHeavy metals — such as mercury, lead, arsenic and aluminum —  can cause brain and nervous system impairment and hormone disruption. These heavy metals are also known carcinogens.
  14. Carbon black – Carbon black is a commonly used pigment in make up and nail polish. This chemical is known to cause cancers.
  15. P-phenylenediamine – This chemical is commonly found in hair dyes. Exposure to this chemical may lead to organ toxicity, adverse skin reactions, and cancer.

Other toxic chemicals commonly found in personal care products include resorcinol, methylisothiazolinone and teflon as well as phenoxyethanol and acrylamide.

“The personal care products industry is inundated with extremely toxic, cancer-causing chemicals,” explains the Health Ranger, founder of the Health Ranger Store which formulates and retails hundreds of non-toxic personal care products. “The average consumer poisons themselves with over 300 synthetic chemicals before they even leave the house each morning, and these chemicals are deliberately added to personal care products by manufacturers that care more about profit than consumer safety,” he adds.

Personal care products — such as cosmetics, body washes and hair and skin care products — have been subject to scrutiny for years due to potentially hazardous chemicals that most of them contain. These chemicals, when in contact with human body, may cause adverse health effects. In fact, a study by Herb Research Foundation reveals that the skin may absorb up to 60 percent of toxic chemicals found in personal care products.

Read More at: NaturalNews.com

Sources include:

DailyMail.co.uk

OSHA.gov

Did Bayer AG Do A Sly Deal On Glyphosate With The European Union Commission?

Did Bayer AG do a Sly Deal on Glyphosate with EU Commission?

Source: WilliamEngdahl.com
F. William Engdahl
January 24, 2017

There is growing evidence that the EU Commission’s extraordinary ruling of June 29, 2016 granting the toxic weed-killing agent Glyphosate a reprieve of 18 months until December, 2017 was made in order to allow sufficient time for Bayer AG, the new owner of Monsanto since December time to bring its substitute weed-killer on the market once the merger is complete. The issue is highly controversial not the least owing to a determination from an agency of the Geneva WHO that glyphosate is a “probable carcinogen.” The EU Commission ignored that WHO determination, relied on a fraudullent German government safety assessment and ignored the will of a majority of EU Governments to give glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s world-leading weed-killer, Roundup, an artificial life extension.

Early in 2016, the EU Commission recommended re-approval for another 15-years of the license for the controversial glyphosate toxin, the most widely used weed-killer in the world, the main ingredient in Roundup of Monsanto. The Commission, a decidedly anti-democratic, non-elected body of faceless bureaucrats, declared then that their “yes” decision was based on the determination by the EU’s European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) that there was no reason to believe glyphosate is a carcinogen. That all was before the decision by Germany’s Bayer AG to takeover Monsanto.

The snag in that early EU Commission decision to renew for another 15 years glyphosate lies in the fact that the EFSA refused to make open disclosure of the relevant health and safety studies EFSA claimed to rely on. Most alarming in that initial EU decision to renew was the fact that EFSA’s decision went totally against the 2015 determination by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) that glyphosate, was a “probable human carcinogen.” In lay terms that means odds greater than 50% are that it causes human cancers on exposure. Glyphosate presence has been tested in ordinary drinking water or in food crops sprayed with Roundup of other glyphosate-based weed-killers.

German Government Corrupt Science

EFSA based its initial early 2016 glyphosate renewal approval solely on a report by Germany’s Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), which in turn took its decision from a clearly biased report by Monsanto and other agrochemical industry groups. Using the Monsanto-linked assessment for glyphosate, the German BfR went against the professional and highly-respected WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer, stating, again using Monsanto’s self-interested claim, that glyphosate was “unlikely” to pose a cancer risk. IARC used only data that was in the public domain, but the corrupt German BfR based its report on secret industry studies by Monsanto and other agrichemical firms that it refused to release to IARC or to the public

Public pressure, the objections of several EU states and an EU-wide petition signed by more than one million EU citizens demanding an end to glyphosate use as well as a letter of protest signed by almost one hundred leading scientists to EU Health and Food Safety Commissioner (also known as DG SANTE) Vytenis Andriukaitis, were ignored.

The fact that the member states of the EU were unable to reach a required Qualified Majority vote in favor of renewing glyphosate, allowed the decision, through an EU Commission technical loophole, to fall to the clearly biased Vytenis Andriukaitis.

To little surprise, Andriukaitis ruled to extend. Until now however, the bizarre aspect was that he stated a renewal for only 18 months and not the 15 years requested by Monsanto and approved by him only a few months before.

Bayer Swallows Monsanto

The EU Commission extrordinary ruling flew in the face of the widely-accepted and even EU law that requires decisions based on the “precautionary principle,” namely that when there is the slightest doubt about health risks of a crop or chemocal, err on the side of precaution and ban.

Notably, Andriukaitis’ ruling for limited renewal of glyphosate was made on June 29 just as the boards of the German pesticide giant, Bayer AG and Monsanto were finalizing weeks of discussion of a friendly $66 billion takeover of Monsanto to create the largest agribusiness leviathan on the planet, with an alarming 29 percent of the world’s seeds, most of the market share of GMO patented seeds, and 24 percent of its pesticides and agrichemicals.

To make the situation more alarming for those of us seeking a healthy diet, in 2016 a huge cartelization of world agrichemicals and GMO seed makers took place. In addition to the Bayer swallow of Monsanto, ChemChina, a China state chemical company bought the large Swiss GMO and pesticide company, Syngenta. And the two other US GMO and agrichemical giants, Dow Chemical and DuPont, have also merged in the past twelve months. The Swiss company fended off that offer only to agree later to a takeover by China’s state-owned ChemChina. The effect is that these now three giant behemoth companies control nearly 70 percent of the world’s pesticide market and 80 percent of the U.S. corn-seed market, most all the latter GMO seed.

Bayer Takes Liberty

At this point, since the WHO determination that glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen,” glyphosate’s days were clearly numbered. Now once the technical corporate takeover by Bayer of Monsanto is completed, expected towards the end of this year, 2017, just as the renewal for glyphosate expires, Bayer AG plans to push its fast-growing substitute for glyphosate known by the trade name, Liberty and Basta, a so-called systemic Glufosinate weed-killer similar to glyphosate but without (so far) the WHO stigma of carcinogenic.

Moreover, since the Monsanto patent on glyphosate-based Roundup expired, other companies have been flooding the market globally with cheap substitutes. Three Chinese companies — Jiangsu Sevencontinent, Hebei Veyong, and Sichuan Lier — have been aggressively exporting glufosinate since 2015. Production of glufosinate on the other hand is far more limited allowing Bayer AG, minus Roundup, to emerge as the dominant weed-killer giant. Moreover, by offering to sell off its Roundup busiess, the new Bayer AG appears to be making a noble sacrifice in the interest of reducing anti-trust concerns.

There is no aspect of the Bayer AG takeover of Monsanto that is positive for the world. To mention “anti-trust” violations is putting it mildly. Government anti-trust, certainly in the agribusiness sector is a dead letter. True protection of consumer health and safety is a dead letter, certainly in Brussels. How the Trump Presidency and his Agriculture Secretary nominee, former Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue, weigh in on this will be more than interesting to see. After all, Bayer-Monsanto is not “America First,” but a German company.

Read More At: WilliamEngdahl.com
__________________________________________________

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

Dove’s ‘natural’ beauty products contaminated with cancer causing chemicals, fake dyes and toxic fragrances

Image: Dove’s ‘natural’ beauty products contaminated with cancer causing chemicals, fake dyes and toxic fragrances
Source: NaturalNews.com
Amy Goodrich
December 7, 2016

Every day we are bombarded by unattainable standards of beauty. Magazines, TV, adverts, and social media all picture perfect models which undervalue the real beauty in ourselves. These beauty advertisements shape our expectation in terms of how we see ourselves.

The desperate need for the perfect body makes us buy the same products these models are promoting in the hopes it will make us flawless and beautiful like them. Unlike most other companies, Dove uses ‘real people’ in their campaigns, which makes us feel much better about the way we look.

This is one of the main reasons why people opt for Dove products that offer real and genuine beauty made from natural components. Or that is what they claim. In truth, Dove isn’t any better than all the other highly promoted toxic beauty products. Their so called ‘real’ or ‘pure’ products are one big scam since Dove, together with all the other companies, uses many toxic ingredients in their products.

What “Real Beauty” looks like

Today, Dove is one of the leading brands of cosmetics generating $2.5 billion in purchases worldwide. With their ‘Real Beauty’ campaign they have lured many insecure, health-conscious people to their side who believe they are buying a ‘pure’ or ‘natural’ product.

Sadly, Dove’s beauty products are one great cocktail of toxic chemicals that have been associated with a wide range of health issues ranging from simple allergies and obesity to more severe problems such as infertility and cancer.

In contrast to its pure messaging, Dove’s foundation product called ‘White Beauty Bar’ is loaded with substances you’d rather not apply to your skin. Marketed as the number one moisturizing product recommended by dermatologists, this traditional soap bar contains chemicals such as stearic acid, sodium tallowate, tetrasodium edta, cocamidopropyl betaine, and synthetic fragrances. Do these substances sound natural or real to you?

Here are just a few examples of harmful chemicals found in most Dove products and what they do to your body.

Methylisothiazolinone

Methylisothiazolinone is a widely-used preservative that has been shown to contribute to allergic reactions, neurodegenerative disorders, and seizures.

Fragrance/perfume

Since the law does not currently require a detailed list of what makes up a fragrance, a manufacturer can hide any substance it wants under the term fragrance or perfume. One of these unlisted chemicals is diethyl phthalate, which is a synthetic liquid commonly used to make plastics more flexible.

Tetrasodium edta

Tetrasodium edta breaks down skin tissue thus letting other chemicals enter the bloodstream more easily. Furthermore, it is made from formaldehyde which is a known carcinogen.

Retinyl palmitate

Retinyl palmitate is a synthetic version of retinol (vitamin A). When applied to the skin in the presence of sunlight, it may speed up the development of cancerous lesions and skin tumors.

Sodium laureth sulfate (SLS)

As reported by Organic and Healthy, approximately 16,000 studies have linked exposure to SLS to irritation of skin and eyes, organ toxicity, developmental and reproductive issues, neurotoxicity, ecotoxicology, endocrine disruption, mutations, and cancer.

These damaging substances are only the tip of the iceberg of the toxic chemicals found in Dove products. The complete list is so overwhelming that it is a surprise that these products are still allowed on the market. According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG) Dove has a whopping 215 different chemicals in their products that range from highly toxic to tolerable and innocuous.

To make sure none of these chemicals mess up your body opt for natural, organic, chemical-free beauty products instead.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

OrganicAndHealthy.org

DailyHealthPost.com

TimeForYouMag.com

EPA just approved another toxic herbicide linked to infertility, birth defects and lung cancer in both humans and animals

Image: EPA just approved another toxic herbicide linked to infertility, birth defects and lung cancer in both humans and animals

Source: NaturalNews.com
Daniel Barker
December 7, 2016

The EPA has just approved the widespread use of a highly toxic herbicide called dicamba, a chemical which poses serious health risks to both animals and people. In doing so, the agency has turned its back on its legal obligation to assess any threat to endangered species, as well as its responsibility to protect human health.

Dicamba has been in use for years, and is an ingredient in more than 1,000 farming and gardening products. Under the EPA’s new guidelines, however, its use is expected to increase on a massive scale.

Dicamba use will increase current levels more than 20 times

The EPA approval covers the use of dicamba for spraying dicamba-resistant GMO cotton and soybean crops that were developed by (you probably already guessed it) Monsanto as an alternative to its glyphosate-resistant GM crops.

From The Daily Sheeple:

“Dicamba is part of Monsanto’s two-point plan: replace glyphosate (the main ingredient in the company’s best-selling RoundUp weed killer), as it increasingly comes under fire, and create public acceptance of the GM crops engineered to withstand dicamba.

“Monsanto’s own conservative estimates predict that dicamba use on soybeans will likely rise from around 233,000 pounds per year to 20.5 million pounds per year — and dicamba use on cotton could go from 364,000 pounds per year to 5.2 million pounds per year.”

Dicamba health risks

Like many other toxic herbicides, Dicamba can cause a range of serious negative health effects in both humans and animals. Dicamba exposure has been linked to lung cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, reproductive damage, birth defects and hormonal disruption.

Monsanto would like for people to believe that dicamba represents a safer alternative to glyphosate, but it is also a highly toxic herbicide that will have an as-yet unknown impact on the environment and human health when its use is so dramatically increased.

The danger posed to other crops by dicamba

Dicamba has recently been making headlines due to crop damage caused by drift. At least 10 states have reported widespread damage to thousands of acres of “non-target” crops, and in one case, a farmer was allegedly killed over a dicamba drift incident:

“Allegedly, a farmer on the Missouri-Arkansas border applied dicamba without a permit and caused significant damage to a neighboring farmer’s soy crop. An argument bubbled over, which led the shooting death of one farmer, and the arrest of the other.”

Much of the recent drift problem was caused by illegal spraying of dicamba, and Monsanto has been highly criticized for selling its dicamba-resistant seed before the EPA approved the herbicide for use.

This resulted in widespread illegal spraying and incidents of herbicide drift – one peach farmer in Missouri lost 30,000 trees. Drift damage from dicamba also affected watermelon, tomato, rice and many other crops as well as non-dicamba-resistant strains of soybean and cotton.

Monsanto’s new dicamba-based herbicide product – designed to work with its dicamba-resistant GM soybean and cotton seeds –  is theoretically formulated to minimize drift contamination, but some are highly skeptical about its true effectiveness, while others worry that many farmers will continue illegally using the old drift-prone dicamba products.

At any rate, the EPA’s approval means that tens of millions more pounds of carcinogenic poison will be dumped yearly into our soil, water and air as the result of a money-making scheme propagated by an evil monopoly bent on owning and genetically manipulating the world’s seed supply, while destroying biodiversity and marginalizing those who would rather rely on organic farming techniques.

Monsanto wins a major victory with the help of the EPA

It sounds like the plot of an improbable Hollywood disaster film, but it’s all too real. Monsanto – after losing much of its company’s stock value and being forced to lay off a sizable portion of its workforce in recent years – seems to be rebounding with new strategies to maintain its stranglehold on global agriculture and food production.

Of course, having the EPA in its pocket hasn’t hurt Monsanto’s cause, either. In the war against food freedom and biodiversity, it appears Monsanto has just won a decisive battle.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

TheDailySheeple.com

BiologicalDiversity.org

EcoWatch.com