Banned for More Than a Decade, This Chemical is Still Present!

Source: iHealthTube.com
July 6, 2017

Learn about a chemical that’s been banned for more than a decade, but is still showing up in high concentrations in certain people. Also learn of more benefits for those who love chocolate and a warning for those who are on multiple prescription medications.

‘In absence of regulation, consumers need to be aware of dangerous chemicals’ – nuclear physicist

Source: RT
February 12, 2017

Could your Big Mac kill you? According to a new study published in the Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, the answer is yes – but not for the reason you might think: Harmful chemicals called PFCs, which have been linked to cancer and other illnesses. Graham Peaslee, professor of experimental nuclear physics at Notre Dame, joins RT America’s Anya Parampil to explain why PFCs are so widely used and the dangers they pose to consumers.

Why Does America – The Country With The Most Vaccines – Have The Highest Mortality Rate On First Day Of Life In The Developed World?

[Editor’s Note]

As Dr. Seneff intimates, its odd that vaccines, which are supposed to protect infants from childhood mortality, seem to be doing a rather dismal job.  So much for America being a ‘developed nation.’  That’s beyond ironic that with so much technology, infant mortality rate is #1 in America.  But you won’t hear the mainstream media tell you that.  Especially since Big Pharma funds them heavily, and that’s a fact.  That doesn’t even get into the issues with injecting aluminum, mercury, formaldehyde, glutamate, which not only may lead autism, but also many other problems infants/children go through after taking vaccinations.
______________________________________________________________

Source: iHealthTube.com
Dr. Stephanie Seneff
November 22, 2016

Kids are recommended for more vaccines in their first days and years of life than every before in this country. Is it making kids healthier or could it have a connection with something much worse? Dr. Stephanie Seneff has studied the issue extensively and points out a frightening contradiction. She asks the question ‘why does the country with the most vaccines have this? What do you think the reason is?

Zika Spraying Enriches Chemical Companies While Endangering Public Health

Image result for zika pesticide dangers
Source: Mercola.com
Dr. Mecola
September 14, 2016

As you may recall, the Zika virus made big headlines back in January and February when the Brazilian government blamed Zika-carrying mosquitoes for an uptick in reports of microcephaly,1,2 a condition in which babies are born with unusually small heads.

Like many other nations, the U.S. overreacted to the news by increasing states’ mosquito eradication efforts. 3 Some early models estimated that 200 million Americans, about 60 percent of the U.S. population, would become infected with Zika this summer4 — estimates that were clearly vastly overblown.

Sounds just like President Bush who 11 years ago claimed that over 200 million would not only get infected with Bird Flu but would actually die from it. They must have figured most people forgot about this and it was time for another scare to sell more chemicals and vaccines.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) statistics5 reveal we’ve come nowhere near such numbers.

The two states with the highest rates of laboratory-confirmed Zika infections, New York and Florida, have had 625 and 507 cases respectively so far. New York accounts for 23 percent of all U.S. cases; Florida accounts for 19 percent of the total.

It’s worth noting though that the vast majority of all Zika cases in the U.S. occurred during travel elsewhere. Florida alone had 35 cases of locally acquired infections. All other states report zero locally-acquired cases.

Among the U.S. territories, Puerto Rico was worst beset, with 13,791 locally-acquired cases as of August 31, 2016. The U.S. Virgin Islands and American Samoa report 221 and 47 locally-acquired cases respectively.

Call for DDT Has (Fortunately) Been Left Unanswered

As the Zika scare grew to a fever pitch, groups like the Manhattan Institute and various journalists for prominent media outlets started calling for the return of DDT6 to address the mosquito problem. For example, in a June 6 article, The New York Post wrote:7

“The Zika virus outbreak makes it clearer than ever: It’s time to end the ban on DDT — a ban that was never sensible in the first place, but now is downright unjustifiable.”

Never mind the fact that DDT passes freely through the placenta during pregnancy,8 where it gains direct access to the developing fetus and its brain.9 DDT has also been linked to decreased fertility, premature delivery, Alzheimer’s10 and even microcephaly,11 making this recommendation about as ignorant as it gets.12

Fortunately, the ban on DDT has not been lifted. However, there’s no shortage of other dangerous insecticides on the market, and they’ve been heavily employed in many states.

Florida and New York Being Heavily Sprayed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPHmzZMIINs

In Miami-Dade County, Florida, the aerial spraying campaign against Zika-carrying mosquitoes has been referred to as a “blitz” that “could be one for the record books if the [CDC] records it as a success.”13 The area began spraying the insecticide Naled from low-flying planes on August 4.

Naled is banned in the European Union (EU), and when residents in Puerto Rico found out the CDC was going to use the chemical against Zika-carrying mosquitoes there, the streets filled with protesters. Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla finally forced the CDC to take the shipments back.14

Concerned residents took to the streets in Wynwood, Miami, as well, but it didn’t have much of an impact.

Neighborhoods in Queens and Brooklyn, New York, were doused with Duet15 and Anvil insecticides from trucks on the nights of August 31 and September 1, 2016, to combat mosquitoes known to carry either the Zika or West Nile virus (Asian Tiger, Aedes Aegypti and Culex mosquitoes).16,17 Duet has also been used in Orange County, California.18

Duet19 contains two pyrethroid pesticides, Sumithrin and Prallethrin, plus a synergistic compound called piperonyl butoxide (PBO), which boosts the effectiveness of the former two.

Sumethrin is an endocrine disruptor, neurotoxin and likely carcinogen, and PBO has been shown to be harmful to the fetal brain, causing “profound developmental defects in children exposed in utero.”

According to recent research, children living in areas exposed to annual aerial spraying of pyrethroids (such as Duet and Anvil) have a 25 percent higher risk of autism compared to areas where mosquito control is done primarily through pellets distributed on the ground.

This suggests the method of application can make a big difference when it comes to human health.20,21 In another study, exposure to pyrethroids during the third trimester increased the chances of the child having autism by 87 percent.22

Low-flying helicopters also released pellets of Altosid and VectoBac over four New York City boroughs earlier this summer, including Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island and The Bronx. As noted by The Vaccine Reaction:23

“What might be of particular concern to the New York City’s residents is the ironic possibility that using these chemicals against mosquitoes to control the perceived threat of the Zika virus could actually have the effect of creating a serious local health crisis where there was previously none.

While the CDC seems convinced that Zika is behind the microcephaly cases in Brazil … other organizations such as Médicos de Pueblos Fumigados (Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Villages) of Argentina … has argued that an insect growth regulator similar to Altosid may be responsible for the microcephaly cases.”

Aerial Spraying Is Not an Effective Strategy for Controlling Zika

Many have also argued that aerial sprayings against the Zika-carrying mosquito Aedes aegypti is futile, exposing the population to toxic chemicals for no good reason.24

These tiny black and white striped mosquitoes have a very limited range of flight, and since it’s so difficult to catch them airborne, insecticidal sprays and foggers are mostly useless for controlling them.25 Reporting on recent research, WebMD writes:26

“Female mosquitoes can transmit the Zika virus to their eggs and offspring, and this may make it harder to contain outbreaks, a new lab study suggests. Control programs that focus only on adult mosquitoes may not halt Zika’s spread, the researchers warned …

‘Spraying affects adults, but it does not usually kill the immature forms — the eggs and larvae,’ said [study co-author Dr. Robert] Tesh. As a result, ‘spraying will reduce transmission, but it may not eliminate the virus’ …”

CDC Relies on Unpublished Data to Support Aerial Spraying

Curiously, CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden defended the use of aerial insecticide sprayings in a recent article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) citing a non-peer-reviewed presentation by a New Orleans mosquito control board employee named Brendan Carter.

According to Carter, aerial disbursement of “ultra-low volumes of insecticide” reduced caged Aedes aegypti by more than 90 percent in a New Orleans field trial. However, as reported by Kaiser Health News:27

“Carter earned his master’s degree in 2014 from the Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine … Even so, other experts in mosquito-borne diseases were unconvinced when asked about Carter’s finding as described in Frieden’s commentary for JAMA.

‘I know of no published reports that support this figure,’ said Durland Fish, [Ph.D.] a Yale University professor emeritus of microbial diseases as well as a professor of forestry and environmental studies there.

Fish worked with public officials in Dominica in 2014 to counter chikungunya virus, another disease spread by the Aedes aegypti mosquito. ‘This is a domestic mosquito, meaning they live inside the house — in closets, under the bed, in the sink. Spraying outside won’t be very effective,’ he said.”

Micro-Mist May Work by Entering Your Home, but Is That Wise?

Many others agree with Fish’s conclusion, noting there’s virtually no scientific evidence to support the use of aerial spraying to control Aedes mosquitoes. However, Joseph Conlon, spokesman for the American Mosquito Control Association, is not on that list.

According to Conlon, the idea that aerial spraying against Aedes mosquitoes doesn’t work is an outdated notion, since Naled can now be sprayed in a micro-fine mist, “capable of wafting into homes through screen doors and bathroom vents.”28 But what about the residents, including infants and pregnant women, inside those homes who then breathe in this super-fine mist?

Naled, an organophospate insecticide is known to interfere with cholinesterase activity, an enzyme essential for the proper working of your nervous system. Organophosphates as a group are also linked with shortened pregnancies, lowered IQ and increased risk of attention deficit disorder (ADD).29

According to the Extension Toxicology Network, “Naled is moderately to highly toxic by ingestion, inhalation and dermal adsorption. Vapors or fumes of Naled are corrosive to the mucous membranes lining the mouth, throat and lungs, and inhalation may cause severe irritation.”30

It is also readily absorbed through your skin and should be immediately washed off if contact occurs. High temperatures and/or UV light enhances its toxicity — an added concern when sprayed in hot and sunny areas like Florida.

I live in Florida full-time now and this is a significant issue for me personally. This is one of the reasons why I use my infrared sauna three times a week to help me detox not only from these admitted exposures but also from all the other ones that we have no idea of but nevertheless have exposure to.

Naled Decimates Bee Populations in South Carolina

Naled was also sprayed in Dorchester County, South Carolina, in the morning hours between 6:30 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. on August 28, 2016 — with devastating consequences. In one Summerville apiary, 46 hives totaling 2.5 million bees died that same morning. Many other beekeepers also claim massive losses. As reported by The Washington Post:31

“[T]o the bee farmers, the reason is already clear. Their bees had been poisoned by Dorchester’s own insecticide efforts, casualties in the war on disease-carrying mosquitoes … Given the current concerns of West Nile virus and Zika … Dorchester decided to try something different … It marked a departure from Dorchester County’s usual ground-based efforts. For the first time, an airplane dispensed Naled in a fine mist, raining insect death from above …”

Naled is known to be highly toxic to bees, which is why counties that use it will typically spray it at night, when honey bees are not out foraging. Provided they have sufficient warning, beekeepers can also shield their hives to prevent exposure. According to Dorchester County administrator Jason Ward, all but one beekeeper on the county’s contact list was notified of the spraying.

However, many local beekeepers were not on the county’s list to begin with, and the county only requested a more complete list from the Lowcountry Beekeepers Association after the fact. In a WCSC-TV interview, local beekeeper Juanita Stanley said: “Had I known, I would have been camping on the steps doing whatever I had to do, screaming, ‘No you can’t do this.'”

Florida Governor Has Financial Stake in Zika Mosquito Control

Considering the limited risks of Zika and the significant risks of aerial insecticides on critical pollinators like bees and human health, one wonders what’s really driving the decision process. When you start to dig, you’ll often find financial incentives. In Florida, people are now wondering whether Governor Rick Scott may have a personal stake in unleashing chemical warfare.

On June 23, 2016, Scott allocated $26.2 million in state emergency funds to combat Zika. As it turns out, an undisclosed conflict of interest could potentially have influenced this generous release of funds. According to Florida Bulldog:32

“… Rick Scott has an undisclosed financial interest in a Zika mosquito control company in which his wife, Florida First Lady Ann Scott, owns a multi-million dollar stake through a private investment firm she co-owns. The company is Mosquito Control Services LLC of Metairie, LA. According to its website,

MCS ‘is a fully-certified team of mosquito control experts — licensed throughout the Gulf Coast, including Louisiana, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida’ … It is not known whether MCS, whose services include monitoring and aerial spraying, stands to benefit from Florida government funds … MCS did not respond to two requests for comment.”

Is Zika Being Hyped to Save Toxic Insecticides From Being Banned?

In a recent Health Nut News article,33 Erin Elizabeth pieces together a long list of events and players suggesting the real reason for the Zika hype may be related to the fact that the primary chemical weapons against Zika — Naled and Malathion — are both up for re-evaluation at the EPA under a special provision of the Endangered Species Act. If found to harm endangered species, they will be banned — unless there’s sufficient political pressure to keep them on the market, that is.

Moreover, the Clean Water Act stipulates you must have a NPDES permit34 in order to be “allowed” to discharge pollutants into U.S. waters. Insecticides are a significant water pollutant, and mosquito control applications that result in water discharges must have an NPDES permit, which includes limits on the discharges and has certain monitoring and reporting requirements to ensure the chemical does not hurt water quality and human health.

Should Naled and/or Malathion be found harmful to endangered species, operators would not likely be able to get an NPDES permit for the chemicals even if they somehow were not outright banned under the Endangered Species Act.

Interestingly enough, the American Mosquito Control Association has lobbied Congress to pass HR 935, which would exempt mosquito control operations from the NPDES permit requirement altogether, allowing them to discharge whatever chemical without limits, monitoring or reporting requirements.

When Congress remained unreceptive to the idea, HR 935 was suddenly renamed the “Zika Control Act.” Once Congress comes back from recess, they could potentially be forced to vote yes on this disastrous bill if there’s sufficient panic about Zika.

The Senate is also scheduled to vote on whether to set aside another $1.1 BILLION in funding to fight Zika — a virus that so far has not seriously harmed a single person in the U.S., and has not conclusively been proven responsible for the microcephaly cases in Brazil either. In short, this whole thing appears to be little more than a gift to the chemical industry at the expense of public health. As noted by Erin:

“The American Mosquito Control Association and the chemical companies can only benefit from huge hype and fear surrounding Zika. They NEED the populace to fear Zika so that Congress is forced to approve a terrible bill that would pollute/erode the Clean Water Act and eventually allow for Malathion and Naled [to] continue to be used despite data showing their effect on endangered species.”

Some States Now Offer Free Mosquito Repellents

In related news, in addition to boosting mosquito sprayings across entire neighborhoods, some states have decided to hand out free mosquito repellents. Universal Studios, Walt Disney World and SeaWorld in Orlando, Florida, now offer free bug repellents to visitors35 and, in Texas, pregnant women on Medicaid are eligible to receive free DEET mosquito repellent at pharmacies without a prescription.36

However, DEET is by no means harmless. On the contrary, DEET has been shown to harm brain and nervous system function and is so poisonous that even the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says you should wash it off your skin when you return indoors, avoid breathing it in and not spray it directly on your face. Why focus on distributing a highly toxic chemical to pregnant women rather than giving them something that’s actually safe?

Neem-based products, for example, are a viable alternative that can keep mosquitos at bay without risking your and your baby’s health. Citronella oil and geraniol can also be used, and both are safe for the whole family, including infants. Products containing either 20 percent picaridin or 30 percent oil of lemon and eucalyptus have also been shown to outperform DEET in tests.

Picaridin resembles the natural compound piperine, an essential oil in black pepper. Lemon eucalyptus oil and picaridin are not actual repellents; they primarily work by masking the environmental cues that mosquitoes use to locate their target. Side effects of both picaridin and lemon eucalyptus include potential skin or eye irritation, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states picaridin should not be used on children under age 3. Still, they’re both likely FAR safer than DEET!

Biological Warfare Is a Risky Game

Are we doing the right thing by waging war against pests with toxic chemicals? It needs to be understood that there’s a price to pay, both in human and environmental health. We’re poisoning our world, and ourselves, in the name of protecting public health. There’s something inherently wrong with that position. Some are quick to say we have no other options. But this isn’t necessarily true.

In the short term, there are safer options to guard against mosquitos than aerial insecticides and topical DEET. But we also need to take a much wider view. What’s needed is the political and societal will to make necessary changes, and this involves fully embracing ecologically sound, regenerative methods of agriculture. Why? Because when nature is in balance, pests fail to gain the upper hand. They still exist, but they’re kept in check naturally.

It may not be as effective as releasing a potent toxin, but if we keep going the way we’re headed, we’re just going to encounter more of the same problems. Is it really worth putting our children’s health and future at risk? Is it worth decimating pollinators, on which our food supply depends? I believe the answer is no, but at the very least, we need a more open discussion about what we’re doing and what the options are. We also need to implement more farsighted solutions.

Again, this is all based on the likely flawed assumption that what the media, CDC and public health authorities are saying about Zika is true. In my view, this is merely a repeat of the Bird Flu Hoax, which is a New York Times best-selling book I previously wrote. They just fast-forwarded the clock a decade and hoped they could use the fear-based tactics to push their pernicious agenda yet again.

Read More At: Mercola.com

China Dumps $30 Million Into Weather Modification Program, Seeding Clouds With Chemicals To Create Rainfall

[Editor’s Note]

For those seeking more information about this subject please watch the eye-opening Documentary:

What In The World Are They Spraying

Geoengineering
Source: NaturalNews.com
Daniel Barker
August 3, 2016

China’s Ministry of Finance recently announced that it has allocated 199 million yuan ($29.8 million) to be spent on cloud seeding weather modification projects being implemented throughout the country.

The Chinese government is hoping that the cloud seeding operations will ease drought conditions and lessen the impact of weather-related disasters, which claim hundreds of lives each year.

Cloud seeding technology was developed in the United States during the late 1940s, and involves the use of chemicals, such as silver iodide crystals, which are dispersed in the air to create rainfall.

When cloud seeding chemicals are introduced into the atmosphere, they cause raindrops within a cloud to form more quickly, making rain fall sooner than it normally would.

The Chinese plan involves the use of aircraft, guns and rockets to fire salt-and-mineral “bullets” into the sky to stimulate rainfall in drought-stricken regions. The Ministry of Finance hopes to create an extra 60 billion cubic meters of rain each year by 2020 through the use of the technology.

At least 52 countries currently pursuing weather modification programs

China is not the only country currently implementing weather modification projects.

As Business Insider reported:

“China is far from the only nation trying to bring (or stop) the rain. At least 52 countries — including the United States — have current weather modification programs, 10 more countries than five years ago, according to the World Meteorological Organization.”

Weather modification – also known as geoengineering – has become a controversial issue in the United States and elsewhere.

And although there is no definitive proof that the so-called “chemtrails” filling our skies are the product of a secret government plot created to modify the weather (or, according to some, to depopulate the planet), there certainly are cloud seeding operations taking place in the U.S. and in many other countries.

Geoengineering has become a booming business, particularly in response to recent severe drought conditions in the U.S. and throughout the world.

California and several Midwest states are currently using cloud seeding technology to combat drought conditions. Rainfall is desperately needed in many areas where water for drinking and crop irrigation is in short supply.

In India, millions are being spent on cloud seeding programs, and in Russia, $1.3 was spent on a project in May created to stop rain from falling during International Worker’s Day. China was reportedly successful in clearing the skies for the 2008 Beijing Olympics by causing the rain to fall early.

What will be the long-term impact of geoengineering?

Cloud seeding is an inexact science, however, and it’s difficult to measure just how effective it really is, although most experts agree that it does work – at least to a degree.

But it doesn’t take a meteorologist to realize that if it rains more in one place, then it is likely going to rain less somewhere else.

That’s an oversimplification, of course, but there are legitimate legal and ethical concerns regarding large-scale geoengineering operations – not to mention their effect on overall weather patterns and the environment in general.

Some experts are worried that silver residue from cloud seeding operations may pollute river basins.

D. Samuelson of News Target questioned the practice of “paying billions of dollars to spew chemicals like ammonium perchlorate, aluminum powder, copper iodide, acetone and silver iodide to make rain.”

Do we really need to be dumping more toxins into our environment just to make it rain?

Geoengineering may be used for more sinister purposes than easing droughts. The U.S. government employed cloud seeding technology in Vietnam for military purposes, and research into weather modification as a weapon continues in the U.S. and elsewhere.

The multi-billion dollar geoengineering business is likely to keep growing, especially with more nations beginning to see the potential for both peaceful and military applications of the technology.

But the long-term impact of “playing God” with the weather remains to be seen – and the costs may be greater than we realize …

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

China.org.cn

Express.co.uk

BusinessInsider.com

DailyMail.co.uk

GeoEngineeringWatch.org

NewsTarget.com

NaturalNews.com

Fracking Industry Dumping Radioactive Waste In Landfills, Exposing Homes & Schools To Cancer-Causing Chemicals

Fracking
Source: NaturalNews.com
Isabelle Z.
July 28, 2016

Most of us want to think of our homes and schools as safe places where families can pass time with minimal exposure to danger. Unfortunately, some residents and school students in Irvine, Kentucky, have suddenly found themselves in an environment more akin to Chernobyl than Appalachian Kentucky.

Denny and Vivian Smith live in the idyllic Estill County town situated near the Kentucky River on property that has belonged to their ancestors since the 1800s. Last August, the area was descended upon by a convoy of trucks that were transporting concentrated fracking waste from northern West Virginia to the Blue Ridge Landfill.

The trucks brought 400 tons of low-level radioactive waste to the facility, which is not permitted to accept this type of waste.

The landfill’s other neighbors? Estill County Middle School and Estill County High School, which have a combined enrollment of 1,200 public school students.

Neighbors and parents are outraged, and the community is demanding to know how this could have happened. State agencies are also asking a lot of questions.

Poor federal oversight and inconsistent state regulations

One big part of the problem is the poor and inconsistent federal oversight and mess of state regulations governing this kind of waste. There is no single government agency completely responsible for radioactive waste from horizontal oil and gas operations, leading the Center for Public Integrity to call it “orphan waste.”

Therefore, each state must figure out how to deal with. It. New York, for example, has banned fracking, but it does still allow waste disposal with very weak overnight. Meanwhile, Ohio has not formalized waste rules at all.

Hydraulic fracturing produces wastewater that measures in the hundreds of thousands of tons in the Ohio Valley area. The drilling process concentrates the radioactive materials that naturally occur deep inside the earth, and this waste is hazardous not only to the environment, but also public health.

A number of state agencies are now investigating the landfill for accepting this waste. Although it is not quite as hazardous as nuclear power plant waste, the Environmental Protection Agency admits that the radioactive materials that are found in drilling waste do pose risks.

The radioactive leachate can contaminate groundwater over time, and the radioactive dust carries its own set of problems. Worst of all, radioactive waste is known to last centuries, outliving the engineered lifespan of liners found in many landfills.

Vivian Smith said: “We are getting older and we feel like we’re kind of vulnerable to illnesses with what’s going on at the landfill.”

Like many people in the area, she is disheartened that this type of act was able to take place and wonders what could happen to the children attending the nearby schools.

“Knowing that there was nothing going on to protect us, I think it’s like the henhouse was not guarded and the fox got in,” she added.

This is just the latest example of how the inconsistency in state regulations ends up causing mistakes and general confusion.

EPA needs to do more

The EPA did recently take a step in the right direction by banning the disposal of fracking waste water at any publicly owned treatment works. This measure is aimed at preventing the contaminants contained in this waste, such as chemical additives and heavy metals, from entering public water systems.

However, this may not have a noticeable impact in places like Pennsylvania, where most energy companies have found other disposal methods following a call by former governor Tom Corbett to end the practice. Nevertheless, it should help deter new efforts to dispose of the waste at public plants during the future gas rushes that the state is bracing for.

Many western Pennsylvanian residents living along the Monongahela River still remember having to use bottled drinking water in 2008 and 2009 after fracking waste that was not properly treated was pumped into the Mon by municipal sewage plants when the natural gas boom first hit the area.

The Pennsylvania Director of environmental group Clean Water Action, Myron Arnowitt, said: “We are pleased to see EPA set clear rules to stop this practice. Pennsylvania residents have learned the hard way that when the oil and gas industry is allowed to use sewage plants as their dumping sites our water becomes undrinkable.” However, much more needs to be done to deal with the problem.

With so many potential sources of water contamination out there, many people are rightfully concerned about whether their own drinking water is truly safe for consumption. In light of this, Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, is leading an effort to test water samples from around the country for free. He has tested more than 200 samples so far, and instructions for submitting samples can be found on the EPA Watch website. The test results of the first hundred samples are published in the Natural Science Journal.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources include:

http://woub.org

http://woub.org

http://science.naturalnews.com/pubmed/11071686.html

http://naturalsciencejournal.com/

Obama Grants EPA More Power To Regulate Harmful Chemicals…But Doesn’t Do Nearly Enough To Protect Kids From Toxic Substances

Chemical Safety Act
Source: NaturalNews.com
David Gutierrez
July 18, 2016

On June 22, President Obama signed into law a massive overhaul of the federal rules for regulating toxic chemicals, implementing a plan to test the safety of 64,000 chemicals currently on the market.

But critics have blasted the bill as a half-measure that moves so slowly as to be practically useless, and it gives a free pass to many of the most dangerous chemicals.

The chemical safety system in this country is so broken that normally apolitical doctors’ organizations are now openly calling for urgent action.

“Before we can prescribe medicine, we have to prove it’s safe,” said Dr. Jeanne Conry, a former president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). “So how come with the chemical industry, we assume everything is safe and have to prove there’s harm?”

Pesticides get free pass

The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act is considered the first major update to U.S. environmental laws in 20 years, and is also the first major update of the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. The original law has been largely condemned for lacking teeth: Of the 62,000 chemicals on the market in 1976, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) used the Toxic Substances Control Act to ban just five.

The Lautenberg Act allows the EPA to test the safety of chemicals now on the market, and sets a timeline for doing so. It also gives the agency the authority to ban certain substances, such as asbestos, and limits the secrecy around certain proprietary toxic chemicals to 10 years.

But, though the law calls for testing of about 64,000 chemicals, it only requires the testing of 20 at a time – a pace so slow as to be meaningless, critics say. Additionally, the new powers given to the EPA under the act do not apply to pesticides.

One of the biggest criticisms of the Lautenberg Act is that it does not change the fundamental problem with chemical regulation in the United States: that chemicals are presumed safe until proven dangerous. There is no requirement that any safety testing be performed on a chemical before it is introduced into consumer or industrial products.

Epidemic of brain damage

Just days after the signing of the Lautenberg Act, the journal Environmental Health Perspectives published a consensus statement by a wide coalition of doctors, scientists and health advocates, including normally apolitical groups such as ACOG. The statement called for a massive overhaul in toxics regulation in the United States, citing a growing epidemic of neurodevelopmental disorders in children.

“We as a society should be able to take protective action when scientific evidence indicates a chemical is of concern, and not wait for unequivocal proof that a chemical is causing harm to our children,” the statement reads.

The consensus statement emerged from an effort known as Project Tendr (Targeting Environmental Neuro-Developmental Risks), and is just one of many such articles slated to be published in top pediatrics, endocrinology, nursing and epidemiology journals in the coming months.

Rates of developmental disabilities are rising faster than can be explained by changes in diagnostic criteria. Between 1996 and 2008, the percentage of children with such disabilities rose from 12.8 to 15 percent.

The Project Tendr statement singles out a variety of toxic chemicals implicated in neurological damage that the government has not adequately acted to remove from the environment. These include organophosphate pesticides, lead in old pipes, flame retardants in household items and clothing, endocrine-disrupting phthalates in plastics and cosmetics and certain air pollutants related to fuel combustion.

In a toxic environment, protect your health with the Health Ranger’s Organic Turmeric Gold from the Natural News Store. Turmeric has up to eight times the antioxidant power of vitamin C, and even more than grape seed extract. This liquid turmeric formula is organic, and is extracted with non-GMO alcohol.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Shock Finding: Oil & Gas Industry Dumping Toxic Fracking Waste Into Public Water Treatment Plants Incapable Of Filtering Contaminants

Fracking
Source: NaturalNews.com
L.J. Devon
June 24, 2016

There’s an invasion underway, a constant onslaught of chemical attacks that are more sinister and more life-threatening than faraway armies with tanks. This chemical invasion is occurring on many levels today, and it impacts the cells of many unsuspecting people. The invasion is invisible to the eyes, but under the microscope it is ever so real.

This vicious invasion is taking place silently in the very water that the population drinks. The people who are impacted are clueless, oblivious and defenseless. They have no idea what’s going on, as fracking chemicals and displaced heavy metals invade their bodies, tainting their lifeblood and minds.

With cancers spreading, sleep problems mounting and mental health deteriorating, it’s very important for the people to know what kind of enemy they are up against. In a world where personal property and human health are no longer respected or protected, it’s important for people to know how to filter their water effectively for self defense.

Oil and gas industry a major contributor to the mental health problems of the day

The oil and gas industry is a major contributor to this vicious invasion. The toxic slew of chemicals left over after hydraulic fracturing are often taken to public water treatment plants that are incapable of filtering out the contaminants. For years, publicly owned treatment plants have received large amounts of fracking waste water that they cannot effectively treat. As a consequence, the waterways are filled with toxic byproducts, as the public is silently poisoned, every cell in their bodies under attack.

During the recent gas boom in Pennsylvania, fracking waste water was pumped right into the Monongahela River. In 2008 and 2009, towns along the river were instructed to use bottled water, since the water outside their homes and near municipal sewage plants was being poisoned.

In 2011, during the natural gas boom, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett called on oil drilling companies to stop sending fracking wastewater to public treatment facilities. At that time, the oil-drilling technique of hydraulic fracturing came under advanced scrutiny. Fracking wastewater contains a toxic slew of total dissolved solids, organic and inorganic chemicals, and technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material (TENORM), that is very difficult to properly dispose of and filter out. Some of these compounding chemicals poison the water and land near drilling sites. Large amounts are taken to public treatment plants that are not even capable of filtering the waste water. When treatment plants fail to handle fracking waste, the toxic slew is discharged straight into the waterways. The wastewater can even inhibit the treatment plant from filtering out regular waste. This causes harmful byproducts to form in the water.

EPA admits new infrastructure is needed to process fracking wastewater

The Environmental Protection Agency is just now coming up with a rule to stop oil drilling operations from disposing of their fracking waste at publicly owned treatment works.

The EPA’s new rule intends to defend the public, but without the proper infrastructure to filter out the contaminants, fracking will only continue, the damage unrestrained. What will oil drilling companies do with their fracking waste water, as innovation for water treatment infrastructure is stifled? As the energy sector rushes to dispose of their toxic waste water, and with no incentive to innovate, tons of toxic waste water are going to end up in the environment – irrespective of the EPA’s good intentions. The EPA admits on its website: “This potentially harmful wastewater creates a need for appropriate wastewater management infrastructure and practices.”

Clean Water Action, an environmental group that supports the EPA’s new rule, said that oil drilling companies are finding new ways to dump their wastewater, sealing it in underground injection wells, running it through ineffective industrial treatment plants and “recycling” it.

Self defense against heavy metals and chemicals a top priority

If we don’t start taking at-home water filtration seriously, our ability to function on a day-to-day basis will continue to deteriorate. There’s already a monstrous chemical invasion taking place through our pesticide and herbicide intense agricultural systems. The more we accept this chemical inundation, the more we will decline – both physically and mentally.

Some of the most insane acts of violence that occur in our culture begin with a poisoned brain. How might toxic heavy metals and chemicals from fracking waste water, herbicides, pesticides, along with psychotropic drugs, contribute to mass shootings? As these chemicals disrupt the endocrine system of the human body, cause gut dysbiosis and destroy the nervous system, people’s behavior and thinking processes are altered in ways society cannot yet understand or fully comprehend.

With the above in mind, if you are concerned about what’s lurking in your town’s water, send in a sample to EPAWatch.org, and they’ll test it for your for free.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

New Chemical Bill – Thousands Of Years To Test 64,000 Chemicals For Safety

Toxic Substances
Source: Mercola.com
Dr. Mercola
June 21, 2016

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which took effect in 1976, allows high-production volume chemicals to be launched without their chemical identity or toxicity information being disclosed.

It also makes it very difficult for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take regulatory action against dangerous chemicals. For starters, the act only gives the EPA 90 days to determine if a new chemical poses an unreasonable risk prior to it entering the market.

The EPA states they typically don’t get the toxicity data in time to make such determinations, and as such, the EPA has only regulated five chemicals and requested testing for 200 since 1976. There are about 64,000 chemicals in use right now that are not regulated or tested for environmental repercussions.1

An overhaul of the TSCA is desperately needed and has been for decades, making this month’s Senate approval of an update a monumental occasion. Last month, the House approved the update to the TSCA, and it will now be signed into law.

There are some problems with the update, however — especially it’s timeline. As Bloomberg reported:2

“By the time EPA finishes work on the chemicals it has prioritized, the children of today’s children will have been exposed to them — probably for years.”

TSCA Update: Safety Tests Can Take up to 7 Years Per Chemical

There’s no doubt that the EPA should be testing more chemicals for safety, but the TSCA update doesn’t go far enough to protect Americans.

On the bright side, the new agreement would give the EPA authority to require companies to provide safety data for untested chemicals and also prevent chemicals from coming to market if they haven’t been tested for safety.

It also removes the 90-day limit for the EPA to determine chemical risks and, at least on the surface, eliminates a requirement that chemical regulations had to take into account the cost of compliance. Other notable improvements include:3

  • The EPA will be required to determine whether a chemical meets a set safety standard before it enters the market.
  • The EPA must consider a chemical’s effects on particularly vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women and children.
  • The EPA must quickly review chemicals known to persist in the environment and build up in humans.
  • Companies will no longer be allowed to keep data secret due to “trade secret” and other confidentiality claims.

The EPA has already identified 90 chemicals as high priority, and such chemicals are supposed to take precedence.

However, the bill’s language was created after close work with the American Chemistry Council in order to ensure it would “win the support of industry.”4 As such, while the bill requires the EPA to begin conducting safety tests on roughly 64,000 chemicals, they only have to test 20 chemicals at a time.

Further, each chemical has a seven-year deadline, such that it will be a very long time before potentially toxic chemicals stop being used. As Bloomberg reported:5

“An analysis by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), which has criticized the TSCA rewrite as too weak, estimates that EPA needs 28 years to complete risk evaluations on the 90 chemicals in its work plan, 30 years to finalize related regulations on those chemicals, and 35 years to implement the resulting rules.”

States May Lose Ability to Restrict Toxic Chemicals

Congress caved in to industry and allowed a single regulatory system to oversee the industry, and also allowed companies the right to seek a federal waiver from the rules for certain chemicals.

Under the new agreement, states may lose their power to regulate chemicals they deem toxic. In return, language was inserted to allow states to restrict a chemical’s use only if the federal risk review takes more than 3 ½ years. As The Washington Post reported:6

“The EWG’s Scott Faber, the organization’s vice president for government affairs, said the EWG walked away from the bill because it represents ‘only a slight improvement’ on ‘the worst environmental law in the books.'”

Other Glaring Problems With the Chemical Bill Update

The EWG pointed out several other notable failures in the new legislation:

  • State action against chemicals can be suspended for more than three years while the EPA completes its safety review. The EWG reported:7

“States have been the only cops on the chemical safety beat, regulating scores of chemicals and driving marketplace innovation. Any legislation that claims to be better than current law would permit state action until an EPA rule is final.”

  • No adequate funding is required from the chemical industry, which means there’s a good chance the EPA will lack the funding needed to review toxic chemicals already on the market. According to the EWG:8

“To make TSCA better than the status quo, Congress should provide enough funding to review the most dangerous chemicals in a generation — not a century … The compromise only provides about half of what’s needed.”

  • Cost is not fully eliminated from the EPA’s decision-making process, even though it’s purported to have been removed from considerations.

The EWG noted that the bill contains “poison pill provisions that could keep the EPA tied in legal knots” and “negotiators should have at least removed vague requirements that rules be ‘cost-effective.'”

  • The EPA will be able to classify chemicals as “low hazard,” but there is no set definition of what low hazard means. The EWG explained:

“Since the compromise allows the industry to dictate up to half of the chemicals EPA will assess for safety, you can bet a lot of their favorite chemicals will soon be bearing this stamp of approval.”

Many Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals Are Unsafe at Any Level

The European Commission is in the process of creating regulations for endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Endocrine disruptors are chemicals known to interfere with development and reproduction, and they may cause serious neurological and immune system effects.

The disruptions occur because such chemicals mimic hormones in your body, including the female sex hormone estrogen, the male sex hormone androgen, and thyroid hormones.

Endocrine-disrupting chemicals may block hormonal signals in your body, or interfere with the way the hormones or receptors are made or controlled.9 Your normal hormone levels may be altered, or the chemicals may change the way such hormones travel through your body.

They’ve been implicated in a host of diseases from cancer and infertility to obesity and diabetes — and they’re found in countless consumer items such as cosmetics, plastics and pesticides.

In 2009, the European Parliament declared that endocrine-disrupting chemicals would not be allowed on the market, and they enlisted the European Commission to determine criteria to identify these chemicals.

The chemical industries then called for an “impact assessment” to be released before the criteria could be released. Environmental Health News explained the repercussions:10

“National health authorities, industry and NGOs are thus in suspended animation awaiting a decision on these criteria for identification — a regulatory tool that will then enable restrictions or, more radically, prohibitions on the use of certain endocrine disruptors.

Today, seven years later, these criteria still do not exist. This impact assessment, with its highly confidential conclusions (as secret as the location of the fountain of youth), is largely responsible for this delay. It was not originally part of the plan, but industry called for it as a way to weaken the regulation.

[This year] Sweden curtly reminded the Commission that the Court ‘prohibits the use of economic considerations to define criteria.’ So what is the nature of the ‘economic considerations’ contained in the pages of the impact study under lock and key?

In addition to the impact on the industry, will they take into account the cost of diseases related to exposure to endocrine disruptors in Europe, which was estimated by independent studies to be at between 157 billion and 288 billion euros per year?”

For Endocrine Disruptors, Low Doses May Be More Toxic

It’s unknown whether the European Commission or the EPA will take into account the fact that sometimes, low doses of chemicals have the potential for great harm.

Many studies assume a linear dose-response relationship for the chemical and any given effect. That is, they assume that if a chemical causes organ damage at 200 parts per million (ppm), it will cause greater damage at higher exposures and less damage at lower levels.

This is a dangerous assumption, because for many toxins, including some endocrine-disrupting chemicals, harm is exerted even at very small doses. Patricia Hunt, Ph.D., a geneticist at Washington State University, explained that endocrine disruptors like bisphenol A (BPA), which act like hormones, “don’t play by the rules.”

Even low-level exposure — levels to which people are currently being exposed — may be enough to damage developing eggs and sperm, for instance. In one of Hunt’s studies, researchers found disruptions to egg development after rhesus monkeys, which have human-like reproductive systems, were exposed to either single, daily doses of BPA or low-level continuous doses.11

Your Body Is Not a Toxin Dumping Ground

It’s virtually impossible to avoid all of the toxic chemicals in your environment, but that doesn’t mean you have to sit silently by while corporations use your home, your water, your air and your body as a convenient toxin dumping ground. Until change occurs on a global scale, you can significantly limit your exposure by keeping a number of key principles in mind.

  • Eat a diet focused on locally grown, fresh, and ideally organic whole foods. Processed and packaged foods are a common source of chemicals, both in the food itself and the packaging. Wash fresh produce well, especially if it’s not organically grown.
  • Choose pastured, sustainably raised meats and dairy to reduce your exposure to hormones, pesticides and fertilizers. Avoid milk and other dairy products that contain the genetically engineered recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH or rBST).
  • Rather than eating conventional or farm-raised fish, which are often heavily contaminated with PCBs and mercury, supplement with high-quality krill oil, or eat fish that is wild-caught and at little risk of contamination, such as wild-caught Alaskan salmon, anchovies and sardines.
  • Buy products that come in glass bottles rather than plastic or cans, as chemicals can leach out of plastics (and plastic can linings), into the contents; be aware that even “BPA-free” plastics typically leach endocrine-disrupting chemicals that are just as bad for you as BPA.
  • Store your food and beverages in glass, rather than plastic, and avoid using plastic wrap.
  • Use glass baby bottles.
  • Replace your non-stick pots and pans with ceramic or glass cookware.
  • Filter your tap water for both drinking and bathing. If you can only afford to do one, filtering your bathing water may be more important, as your skin readily absorbs contaminants. Most tap water toxins, including fluoride, can be filtered out using a reverse osmosis filter.
  • Look for products made by companies that are Earth-friendly, animal-friendly, sustainable, certified organic, and GMO-free. This applies to everything from food and personal care products to building materials, carpeting, paint, baby items, furniture, mattresses, and others.
  • Use a vacuum cleaner with a HEPA filter to remove contaminated house dust. This is one of the major routes of exposure to flame-retardant chemicals.
  • When buying new products such as furniture, mattresses or carpet padding, consider buying chemical-free varieties containing naturally less flammable materials, such as leather, wool, cotton, silk and Kevlar.
  • Avoid stain- and water-resistant clothing, furniture, and carpets to avoid perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs).
  • Make sure your baby’s toys are BPA-free, such as pacifiers, teething rings and anything your child may be prone to suck or chew on — even books, which are often plasticized. It’s advisable to avoid all plastic, especially flexible varieties.
  • Use natural cleaning products or make your own. Avoid those containing 2-butoxyethanol (EGBE) and methoxydiglycol (DEGME) — two toxic glycol ethers that can compromise your fertility and cause fetal harm.
  • Switch over to organic toiletries, including shampoo, toothpaste, antiperspirants, and cosmetics. The EWG’s Skin Deep database can help you find personal care products that are free of phthalates and other potentially dangerous chemicals.12
  • Replace your vinyl shower curtain with a fabric one or use glass doors.
  • Replace feminine hygiene products (tampons and sanitary pads) with safer alternatives.
  • Look for fragrance-free products. One artificial fragrance can contain hundreds — even thousands — of potentially toxic chemicals. Avoid fabric softeners and dryer sheets, which contain a mishmash of synthetic chemicals and fragrances.

    Read More At: Mercola.com

Top 10 Ways Food Is Being Used RIGHT NOW As A Chemical Delivery System To Poison Brains

[Editor’s Note]

For those seeking additional information into two of the most harmful toxins we face, out of the many listed below, please read:

Breakaway Guide To Fluoride
Breakaway Guide To Aspartame

Food chemicals

Source: NaturalNews.com
S.D. Wells
June 15, 2016

Right now in Venezuela, if you don’t support the socialist government, you don’t eat. The tyrannical government is buying up nearly all the food there and is redistributing rations only to families that show their support for the ruling political party. In America, most people believe that the mass media, including television and newspapers, print the truth about politics, sports, food and medicine, when actually nearly every report and every advertisement is scripted based on corporations that manufacture toxic food, medicine and personal care products.

In fact, U.S. regulatory agencies, including the FDA, EPA and USDA, are run by Monsanto and other chemical giants that breed genetically modified organisms, a.k.a. pesticide-laden foods, that cause cancer, dementia and memory loss. Even the CDC is run by pharma insiders from Merck, Pfizer and GSK (Glaxo-Smith-Kline), who cover up vaccine violence and the chemical warfare that’s disguised as Western Medicine. Over 70,000 chemical food agents have already been approved by the FDA, and if you don’t believe it, that’s because you consume them and are experiencing severe brain fog right now. Will you be voting for Hillary, “Bride-of-Frankenfood” Clinton, in November? That would be a vote for more unlabeled, dementia-causing food, since she and Obama are both “in bed” with Monsanto, the devil of GMO.

Chemical prescription medicine is not the answer to the chronic ills of consuming junk science food, although 200 million Americans wish and think it could be. People burn the candle at both ends, and their lives are shortened and filled with self-inflicted health misery. It’s sad but so true. People eat their way right into cancer and diabetes, and they don’t believe that 90 percent or more of the food found on grocery and supermarket shelves directly causes those preventable “diseases.”

What’s worse is that while those diseases and cell disorders are “brewing” in their bodies, their brains are suffering, being weakened, clogged and fogged, and they simply cannot figure out what’s happening, as their medical doctors lie to them, omitting toxic food as a cause and culprit, all while prescribing more toxins in the form of pills, vaccines, flu shots and personal care products like toxic ointments, lotions and so on.

So, without further ado, here are the top 10 ways food is being used right now as a chemical delivery system to poison the human brain for profit and political manipulation.

Top 10 chemical delivery food systems

#1. Genetic modification or “genetic engineering” of food is a fancy, technical term for the insertion of pesticide genes from insects and foreign organisms into staple crops most Americans consume without giving a second thought to what’s really happening in their bodies – the continued creation of pesticides inside the gut, which contributes to a crippled immune system and dementia.

#2. Intentionally scripted misinformation is posted on several websites to mislead people who seek to find out what’s really in their food. Websites like GMOAnswers.com, Council for Biotechnology Information, and Genetic Literacy Project, are three of the top propaganda websites that promote poisonous food as “science-based” and beneficial for humanity. Nearly every word printed and published by these shills is a lie, and intended to poison the brains of those who seek valid food information.

#3. Junk science is the lab creation of “excitotoxins” – which are food chemicals designed to trick the taste buds and the brain into believing the body is consuming real food, with real flavoring, even though these food drugs are highly addictive and cause chronic damage to the central nervous system and brain cells. The most popular excitotoxins include monosodium glutamate (MSG) and aspartame, a.k.a. “sweet misery.”

#4. Fast food, like McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s, Arby’s, Taco Bell and Hardee’s, is mainly comprised of modified foods full of synthetic preservatives and artificial flavorings that poison the human brain. From GMOs and hydrogenated oils to high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) to phosphoric acid (in soda), the more fast food one consumes the dumber one gets. It’s a direct correlation and an insidious, planned “food science” that makes corporations billions of dollars yearly, on the food end and on the chronic sick care end, where those intoxicated people go for relief from “FFD” (fast food disease).

#5. Artificial sweeteners, namely aspartame, sorbitol, sucralose, saccharin and acesulfame potassium, contribute to irritable bowels and central nervous system disorders. Aspartame causes anxiety and depression, robbing humans of the ability to think positively about life and how to properly live it. Period!

#6. Nearly all foods labeled “diet,” “light” and “zero,” are loaded with chemicals that make you fat, nervous, anxious and depressed. Want to lose weight and boost positive mental health? Eat organic produce and drink spring water!

#7. Canola oil, even organic, is really rapeseed oil, where the poisonous acid has been diluted down to meet FDA guidelines. This is poison that breaks down and strangulates mitochondria (brain cells) and fuels neurodegeneration and brain cell death.

#8. More than 80 percent of U.S. (municipal) tap water is infested with pesticides and toxic herbicides, namely sodium fluoride and glyphosate. These poisons contribute to IQ reduction, dementia, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease.

#9. Children’s candy, gum and over-the-counter medications (although that’s not really food) are loaded with toxic, petroleum-based food dyes that cause ADD, ADHD, cancer and other central nervous system disorders and brain malfunctions.

#10. Last, but certainly not least, we have school food, and hospital cafeteria and room-delivered food. Nary are any food nutrients ever found in this toxic slop that’s fed to our children, and the already sick and wounded folks needing care. What a brain-damaging, crying shame.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com