Tag Archives: pesticides

EPA Sued For Its Conditional Approval Of Nanotechnology Pesticide

nanotechnology
By: Between the Lines |

The International Center for Technology Assessment and the Center for Food Safety filed a joint lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on July 27 challenging the agency’s conditional approval of the antimicrobial pesticide product called, “Nanosilva.” The pesticide under scrutiny, which will be used in textiles and plastics, employs nanotechnology that breaks down silver into particles more than 1,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair. Conventional silver has been used as an antibacterial products for centuries, as it releases ions that are deadly for many bacteria and fungi. However, watchdog groups and scientists are increasingly concerned about the growing number of consumer products that contain nanoparticles that could pose unique hazards and long-term risks. Unless regulations are imposed, nanoparticles of silver, that combat stains and odors, may soon be embedded in children’s toys, clothing, plastics and fabrics.

The lawsuit filed against the EPA in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals seeks to block the sale of the Nanosilva pesticide in the marketplace without the legally required analysis of the product’s effect on human health, wildlife and the environment. EPA’s conditional approval of Nanosilva means that the pesticide can be sold over the next four years while the manufacturer, Nanosilva LLC of Georgia, performs the required testing.

Between The Lines’ Scott Harris spoke with Jaydee Hanson, policy director with the International Center for Technology Assessment, who discusses his group’s lawsuit against the EPA and the health and safety concerns surrounding nanotechnology.

For more information visit International Center for Technology Assessment at icta.org.

Related Links:

Pesticide Drift Threatens Organic Farms

 Organic farmer Margot McMillen holds a grape leaf damaged by pesticide drift on her farm, Terra Bella Farm, in central Missouri.      Kristofor Husted/Harvest Public Media

Organic farmer Margot McMillen holds a grape leaf damaged by pesticide drift on her farm, Terra Bella Farm, in central Missouri.
Kristofor Husted/Harvest Public Media

Chert Hollow Farm sits nestled between rows of tall trees and a nearby stream in central Missouri. Eric and Joanna Reuter have been running the organic farm since 2006. That means they don’t plant genetically modified crops and can only use a few approved kinds of chemicals and fertilizers.

“We’ve traditionally raised about an acre and a half of pretty intensively managed produce, so it’s a very productive acre and a half,” Eric Reuter says.

Their neighbors grow acres of conventional corn and soybeans, and they mostly got along. That is until one July evening in 2014. Joanna Reuter was transplanting some broccoli when a sound caught her attention.

“I basically heard this loud noise,” she says. “It was coming north to south, and I basically yelled, ‘What the ‘beep’ is that?’ “

They spotted a crop duster passing unusually close to their property. Shortly after experiencing headaches and irritation, they knew the wind had blown something chemical onto their land. Without knowing what it was, they were left in the lurch, with a big asterisk on the authenticity of their organic crops.

“We were concerned about how do we properly market ourselves, because we feel very strongly about openness and honesty,” Eric Reuter says. “We felt a little odd about marketing farm shares and such for the next year as a sustainable, chemical-free farm.”

They’ve opted not to sell their produce this year and hope the contaminated soil will rebound for next year. It’s a big hit for their small business.

And for the crop duster? He received a warning letter. The farm next door did not respond to my requests for an interview.

“We’re more susceptible to that kind of contamination than we thought,” Eric Reuter says. “And that raises the stakes significantly for a farm like ours.”

In the U.S., farmers use nearly 900 million pounds of pesticides every year to protect their crops from weeds and insects. Sometimes those chemicals drift to neighboring property, which can ruin crops on organic farms.

Although conventional farms can also get hit with unwanted pesticides, it’s the $40 billion organic industry that’s most vulnerable. As more organic farms pop up, these kinds of disputes will only be more common.

Kaci Buhl of the National Pesticide Information Center says there’s no clear picture of how common pesticide drift is for the nearly 20,000 organic farms nationwide.

“The data would get better, and possibly resource allocation would increase, if there was more consistent reporting,” she says.

Each state’s agency responsible for handling pesticide-drift investigations — typically, it’s the state agriculture department or the equivalent — deals with the probes differently.

Organic farmers Margot McMillen and Julie Wheeler check on their tomato plants. They moved the plants into a greenhouse to protect them from pesticide drift.  Kristofor Husted/Harvest Public Media

Organic farmers Margot McMillen and Julie Wheeler check on their tomato plants. They moved the plants into a greenhouse to protect them from pesticide drift. Kristofor Husted/Harvest Public Media

Organic farmers Margot McMillen and Julie Wheeler check on their tomato plants. They moved the plants into a greenhouse to protect them from pesticide drift.

Kristofor Husted/Harvest Public Media

Missouri Department of Agriculture spokesperson Sarah Alsegar says the department does its best, but is sometimes limited by the turnaround time of lab analysis, as well as gathering records from the pesticide applicators in the region.

That’s why the organic industry is pushing for national regulations that prioritize drift investigations and consider stricter penalties for negligent farms. Farmers say investigations into chemical drift can drag on for months, and penalties vary.

“Once we do have a federal approach to pesticide drift, I suspect we’ll be a lot more coordinated in our responses, and potentially, have better prevention strategies and more timely reaction to events when they do occur,” says Nate Lewis with the Organic Trade Association.

Lewis says that drift needs to remain on the forefront of policy efforts, especially as organic acreage grows and farmers become more aware of pesticide drift. Currently, there is no federal policy outlining pesticide drift investigations or recourse.

Paul Schlegel with the American Farm Bureau Federation says unless the drift problem escalates, the current state regulatory system that handles drift incidents works. The focus should be on improving education and drift-reduction technology.

“I think you would probably find in the organic sector as whole, there’s a greater reluctance to accept pesticides as a whole,” he says.

Ultimately, he says, pesticides are part of the food production landscape all farms just have to navigate.

Recently, organic farmer Margot McMillen was traipsing through her muddy farmland, about 25 miles from Chert Hollow. At her farm, called Terra Bella Farm in central Missouri, she grows all sorts of vegetables.

While scanning her crops after a recent rain, she noticed some possible pesticide damage on her grape vines.

“This curling of the leaf is real characteristic, and there’s a real thinness of that leaf,” she says, cradling the leaf in her hand. “To me they look like little fists (saying), ‘Help, help.'”

McMillen is all too familiar with curled up foliage. She says in 2014, pesticide drift destroyed $25,000 worth of her tomatoes. The state agriculture department confirmed drift occurred, but couldn’t identify the culprit.

Even if her contaminated produce had survived, it was no longer sellable as organic. Pesticide drift puts McMillen and much of the organic industry in a tough spot.

“It’s so out of our hands,” she says.

This year, she says, she’s been forced to grow her plants “defensively.” Large bushes now block the wind from the road. She moved crops over a hillcrest, away from other farms, and moved the tomatoes inside the greenhouse.

“Everybody (who) doesn’t use [pesticides] is running into this problem,” she says.

McMillen says she knows her farm is still vulnerable. She says a federal policy would help, but planting defensively — even through it’s not foolproof — is the best she can do for now.

Source: NPR

This story comes to us from Harvest Public Media, a public radio reporting collaboration that focuses on agriculture and food production.

Bad Science? Most Lab Rats Exist On Contaminated, GMO Diet

lab rat
By: Pat Thomas | The Ecologist – 

Lab Rats Used in Safety Studies Eat Feeds Laced with Pesticides, Herbicides and GMOs.

A new scientific study has found that laboratory rats used in health and toxicity studies are routinely given feeds contaminated with herbicides, pesticides and GMOs, writes Pat Thomas, potentially invalidating the results of crucial safety tests on GMOs, agrochemicals, medical drugs and other substances, on which health and environmental regulators base critical decisions.

In the face of uncertainty we often look to science to help us make sense of things.

This is particularly true in complex areas such as GMOs where adverse effects may be difficult to predict or may even be masked by other aspects of our lives and diets.

The potential link between GMOs and cancer is a good example. Do GMOs cause cancer? Many people believe they do, but cause and effect studies of this are rare.

Certainly some studies have shown a higher incidence of tumours (and tumours can be different from cancer) in animals fed GMOs and their associated herbicide glyphosate. Others have shown that the glyphosate, used widely on and absorbed by GMO crops, is an endocrine disrupter and thus can be a trigger for cancer.

Indeed the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization, has recently concluded that glyphosate is a ‘probable human carcinogen‘.

But in the real world, lots of things are known to cause cancer and so it is difficult to know how much or little GMOs contribute to the rising incidence of this disease. We can’t know because the tests aren’t being done, for example, to find out if, for example, glyphosate might combine in food or in our bodies with other chemicals we are commonly exposed to to promote cancer, or to make it more aggressive.

It’s important to remember that the absence of evidence of harm is not the same as proof of safety. For this and so many other reasons there is no scientific consensus on the safety of GMOs.

Now, with the publication of a new study, we have even more cause to question the science of GMO safety and even the wider world of toxicological testing.

‘Doing’ science

Before we look at the results of the study let’s look at how we ‘do’ science.

Toxicity studies are most commonly conducted in rats. Setting aside the rights and wrongs of animal testing, many scientists believe that studying effects on rodent health has a reasonable predictive value for how a substance might affect human health.

But there are unique problems with ‘lab rats’ which scientists have been wrestling with for years.

The main problem is that they are so unhealthy to begin with.

Some of this is down to the fact that laboratory rats are sedentary and can develop all the same diseases that humans develop from being inactive. They can also be stressed and this too has an impact. Genetics also plays a part. The genetic manipulation used to produce strains of laboratory rats can leave them more vulnerable to disease than normal rats.

As a result, populations of laboratory rodents across the world develop high rates of so-called ‘spontaneous’ diseases. For instance, after two years the average incidences of mammary fibroadenomas and pituitary adenomas among certain kinds of Sprague Dawley rats can be up to 71% and 42% respectively.

When a scientist tests a toxic substance, for instance in the diet, he or she will generally divide a group of rodents into a control group, which eats a normal diet, and a test group, whose diet includes the toxic substance. Interpreting the results of the study requires that we make some assumptions about the health and ‘normalcy’ of the ‘control group’.

Such assumptions, however, have come under fire in a new study by French scientists which looks at the toxicity of the ‘normal’ diet of the lab rat.

A question mark

The scientists tested 13 samples of proprietary feed. All of the samples contained significant amounts of pesticides and other contaminants.

Traces of the herbicide glyphosate (both glyphosate itself and its breakdown product AMPA) were detected in 9 of the 13 diets; and 11 of the 13 diets contained ‘Roundup Ready’ GMOs that are grown with large amounts of glyphosate, the main active ingredient of Monsanto’s Roundup formulation.

Traces of the insecticides pirimiphos methyl, deltamethrin, chlorpyrifos methyl and ethyl, and malathion were also found in the rats’ food along with significant traces of heavy metals (mostly lead and cadmium) and PCBs.

The study found that the contamination levels recorded in the food were high enough to cause serious diseases and disrupt the hormonal and nervous systems of the animals in control groups.

What this means is that instead of comparing a clean, healthy diet with a contaminated diet, scientists are comparing a contaminated diet with an even more contaminated diet.

The contamination of the ‘control diet’, which can make the rats sick, effectively masks the true toxic effect of the test diet – essentially making it seem less toxic than it actually is. This effect could be why we see so many studies showing ‘non-significant’ toxicity of some very highly toxic substances in animal trials.

This applies especially to ‘endocrine disruptor’ chemicals which are active at very low ‘trace’ levels of parts per billion. Tests that examine toxic effects at such very low concentrations would produce null results if the feed is already contaminated at comparable or higher levels.

Supporting evidence

This new study is not the only to determine that rat chow can be contaminated.

Last year some of the scientists involved in the current French study analysed the rat chow used in a conventional GMO canola feeding experiment and found that it contained 18% of the Roundup tolerant maize NK603, 14.9% of MON810 (a modified Bt insecticide producing GMO) and 110 ppb of glyphosate and 200 ppb of AMPA (the breakdown product of glyphosate).

They argued that such a level of contamination invalidated the authors’ conclusions about the safety of the variety studied and were a threat to sensible regulation of GMOs.

Earlier this year in the US Dr Anthony Samsel, an independent scientist and consultant, analysed the Purina diet routinely used in animal feeding experiments designed to test the safety of GMOs. His findings showed that three of the standard Purina feeds formulated for rats, mice and other mammals contain both GMOs and glyphosate.

Scientists questioning the science

Rat chow manufacturers like Purina don’t routinely test for these contaminants, and make no guarantees for the purity of their feeds in this regard. Yet these feeds are used every day, in laboratories around the world in feeding experiments.

No certification regarding the purity of test feed is required by journal editors or by food safety regulators either in the EU of the US – and this has been going on for decades.

Scientists are now beginning to speak out about these problems and their implications for the regulation of toxic substances.

GRACE (GMO Risk Assessment and Communication of Evidence) is a publicly funded EU research project. The results of its work are guiding future methods and criteria that will be used in the EU to assess the risks of genetically engineered plants for cultivation or use in feed and food.

But a recent report from the group Testbiotech demonstrated contamination of the control group feed used in the GRACE Project study of MON810 maize and called for the study to be retracted.

Heroes … and villains

The scientists who are speaking out on this issue are heroes and should be congratulated. Instead they have been met with the full force of a well-financed sceptic army whose sole job is to detect and stamp out any criticism of GMO food and the science behind it.

But the lock-step, knee-jerk reactions of groups like the Genetic Literacy Project are looking increasingly dumb in the light of the rapidly changing landscape of GMO science.

There is no escaping that the problem of contaminated laboratory diets are a serious regulatory issue since all of our safety regulations for toxic substances are based on the results of this kind of animal testing.

It’s also human health issue – possibly predictive, but certainly reflective of our own toxic diets and the ‘background’ damage they do to our health, as well as how hard it is to determine cause and effect when it comes to the multiple toxins we are routinely exposed to.

It is also an animal welfare issue, particularly if scientists know that they are routinely feeding contaminated food to their animals and they keep on doing it anyway.

For all these reasons we must take a much harder look at the science of GMOs and the places it can lead – but also mislead – us.


Pat Thomas is a director of the campaigning group Beyond GM, founder of GM-free Me, and a former editor of The Ecologist. This article first appeared on the GM-free Me website.

Monsanto Bids To Take Over Syngenta – A Move To Assure A Pesticide-Saturated Future?

monsanto-company-mon-makes-45-billion-initial-bid-for-syngenta-ag-adr
By: Mercola.com |

Monsanto recently made a bid to take over European agrichemical giant Syngenta, the world’s largest pesticide producer. The $45 billion bid was rejected, but there’s still a chance for a merger between these two chemical technology giants.

Monsanto is reportedly considering raising the offer, and as noted by Mother Jones,1“combined, the two companies would form a singular agribusiness behemoth, a company that controls a third of both the globe’s seed and pesticides markets.”

As reported by Bloomberg,2 the possibility of Monsanto taking over Syngenta raises a number of concerns; a top one being loss of crop diversity.

“…[A] larger company would eventually mean fewer varieties of seeds available to farmers, say opponents such as [science policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety, Bill] Freese.

Another is that the combined company could spur increased use of herbicides by combining Syngenta’s stable of weed killers with Monsanto’s marketing heft and crop development expertise.

‘Two really big seed companies becoming one big seed company means even less choice for farmers,’ said Patty Lovera, assistant director of Food and Water Watch, a policy group in Washington.

‘From a public health and environmental perspective this is a complete disaster,’ said Bill Freese… ‘The more I look at this, the more it worries me and the more it needs to be opposed.’”

What’s in a Name?

According to one analyst, the takeover might boost Monsanto’s reputation, as Syngenta has been “less publicly enthusiastic” about genetically engineered (GE) crops.

Personally, I don’t foresee Monsanto ever being able to shed its toxic reputation, no matter how it tries to rebrand itself. It recently tried to do just that by declaring itself “sustainable agriculture company.”

But actions speak louder than mere words, and there’s nothing sustainable about Monsanto’s business. Taking on the Syngenta name would do nothing to change the obnoxious dichotomy between Monsanto’s words and deeds.

In fact, Mother Jones astutely notes that by trying to acquire Syngenta, Monsanto contradicts “years of rhetoric about how its ultimate goal with biotech is to wean farmers off agrichemicals.”

It’s quite clear Monsanto has no desire or plans to help farmers reduce the use of crop chemicals. On the contrary, it has and continues to push for the increased use of its flagship product, Roundup.

Neonicotinoid Pesticide Implicated In Monarch Butterfly Declines

NGS Picture ID:1353541
By: Jérôme Rigot, PhD | The Cornucopia Institute

USDA researchers have identified the neonicotinoid insecticide clothianidin as a likely contributor to monarch butterfly declines in North America. The USDA research was published online April 3rd, 2015 in the journal Science of Nature.

Neonicotinoids have been strongly implicated in pollinator declines worldwide; they are neurotoxins that are partially banned in the European Union. A recent report indicates (see references at the end of full article) that neonicotinoids, such as clothianidin (Bayer), are a particular hazard because, unlike most pesticides, they are soluble molecules. From soil or seed treatments they can reach nectar and are found in pollen.

Neonicotinoids are now the most widely used pesticides in the world. Up until now there has been negligible research on the effects of neonicotinoids on butterflies.  This new report is therefore the first to link neonicotinoids to monarch butterfly survival and reproduction.

In their experiments the USDA researchers showed that clothianidin can impact monarch caterpillars at doses as low as 1 part per billion (ppb). The effects seen were on caterpillar size, caterpillar weight, and caterpillar survival. The lethal concentration (LC50) was found to be 15 ppb.

In this research project, the caterpillars were exposed to clothianidin-treated food for only 36 hours. However, the researchers noted that in agricultural environments caterpillar exposure would likely be greater than in the experimental conditions set for this project; furthermore, in nature butterfly caterpillars would also be exposed to other pesticides, including other neonicotinoids.

In sampling experiments from corn-growing areas in South Dakota the researchers found on average over 1 ppb clothianidin in milkweed plants.

Based on this study’s results, the USDA researchers concluded that “neonicotinoids could negatively affect larval monarch populations.” They added, “Although preliminary, this study clearly shows that monarch larvae are exposed to clothianidin in the field at potentially harmful doses of the toxin.”

More on this from Independentsciencenews.org at:
http://www.independentsciencenews.org/news/new-research-links-neonicotinoid-pesticides-to-monarch-butterfly-declines/

Full article: http://www.bioscienceresource.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Pecenka-and-Lundgren-2015-Early-On-line.pd

Comment from Cornucopia scientist Jérôme Rigot, PhD, Farm and Food Policy Analyst:

The study states: “The lethal concentration (LC50) was found to be 15 parts per billion.”: This is a very low level; however, the implications are that much lower levels of neonicotinoids as well as synergistic effects with other pesticides at very low levels (1 ppb or less), as suggested in the text, would significantly and negatively affect caterpillars’ health.

Extrapolating from the study results, the synergistic action of pesticides, even at levels below 1 ppb (levels that may not be detected by the EPA’s current analytical equipment), can significantly and detrimentally impact the health of organisms (including humans) that come in contact (e.g., ingest) with a vegetable or fruit that has been sprayed from seed to harvest by a variety of pesticides and likely is covered by and/or contains a number of pesticide residues at trace levels.

Parkinson’s Disease: Could Pesticides Be A Cause?

pesticides_main

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a movement disorder that generally impairs speech and motor skills and is characterized by tremors and muscular rigidity. There is still a lot to learn about the symptoms and effects of Parkinson’s disease, but recently, a new study concluded with interesting results.

How Is Parkinson’s Disease Contracted?

There are many forms of Parkinson’s disease that appear to be idiopathic, meaning doctors aren’t sure of the causes. Some cases are linked to drug toxicity, medical disorders, or head trauma. The latest observation that medical scientists are exploring is a possible link between pesticides and Parkinson’s Disease.

According to new research [1] into the causes of Parkinson’s Disease, two specific insecticide classes were cited as significantly associated: organochlorines and organophosphorus compounds. While the research isn’t exhaustive or definitive, the results compiled thus far are enough to warrant closer examination by the medical community.

Did Anyone Know that These Chemicals Posed a Health Risk?

The answer is yes. It’s not news that pesticides are harmful. The Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) was set up by the World Health Organization to create international safety guidelines for food. They researched the threat, dismissed the evidence of dangers presented to them, and approved seven dangerous toxic chemical compounds, including organochlorines in pesticides.

The Price We Pay for Scientific Advancement?

I have provided a wealth of health-related information explaining even more about the dangers of pesticides and other chemicals that we’re exposed to regularly, with the sanction of the government.

With this new link to Parkinson’s disease, perhaps more attention will be paid to the poisons known as pesticides, insecticides and herbicides. Scientists will have to seriously rethink their ideas about excessive use of chemicals in lieu of non-toxic crop rotation practices, and other such safe practices.

References:

  1. Dana B Hancock, Eden R Martin, Gregory M Mayhew, Jeffrey M Stajich, Rita Jewett, Mark A Stacy, Burton L Scott, Jeffery M Vance and William K Scott. Researching causes of Parkinson’s disease. BMC Neurology 2008 March 6, 8:6.

Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, NP, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM has studied natural healing methods for over 20 years and now teaches individuals and practitioners all around the world. He no longer sees patients but solely concentrates on spreading the word of health and wellness to the global community. Under his leadership, Global Healing Center, Inc. has earned recognition as one of the largest alternative, natural and organic health resources on the Internet.

6 Facts About Pesticides That Will Make You Angry

danger pesticides

Many Americans recognize pesticides in produce as a problem, but should you really be worried? Well, it definitely pays to be aware, if nothing else. Pesticides are linked to all sorts of health problems, after all. Let me share 6 facts about pesticides that are sure to make you angry.

  1. Pesticides Have Completely Ruined Strawberries

Toxic pesticides like fumigants are all over our strawberries—even organic ones! These poisons are released into the soil to kill off diseases, weeds, and pests before they become a problem, but now you’re left with a toxic gas in the environment—and on the berries. Fumigants are also linked to cancer. [1] Is that really something you want in your body? And while the USDA is researching alternatives, no projects are looking at strawberries. [2]

  1. Pesticides Are Destroying Male Fertility

So if strawberries are treated with fumigants, it stands to reason other fruits and vegetables use pesticides as well. When it comes to pesticides, though, there’s no such thing as safe conventional produce, but avocado, sweet corn, and pineapple seem to have the lowest residue levels. [3] But residues could even be harming male fertility. A study suggested men who eat lots of produce could have sperm counts 50% lower than men who consume smaller amounts of vegetables and fruits, and that the men who at the most fruits containing pesticides experienced 32% more abnormally shaped sperm. [4]

     3. Pesticides Are Polluting the Water Supply

In the Midwest, where farming can be big business, fertilizer runoff is polluting the water supply. Iowa’s largest water utility is even “threatening to sue three rural counties” under the Federal Clean Water Act because of drinking water contamination. [5] The main concern here is nitrates in the water, which could poison—even kill—infants. Pesticides are such a widespread problem that they’re even making their way into our oceans. Whale meat from Norway was imported to Japan; tests confirmed that it had twice the legal limit of the toxins. [6]

  1. Pesticides Are Ruining Good Wine

In some places, toxic pesticides have even made drinking to escape your problems impractical. Take some wines in France, for instance. A report found that some “300 French wines from the 2007 and 2008 vintages of the Rhône and the wider Aquitaine region,” 90 percent of those had pesticide contamination. [7]

  1. Pesticides Lead to Antibiotic Resistance

A recent study suggested glyphosate—the main ingredient in the weed killer Roundup—and two other common herbicides (2,4-D and dicamba) could be connected to antibiotic resistance. [8] After exposure to the toxins, bacteria reacted differently to common antibiotics like ampicillin, ciprofloxacin, and tetracycline. And with glyphosate also recently ruled “possibly carcinogenic to humans” by the World Health Organization (WHO), this latest study is just one more reason to stay away from herbicides. [9]

  1. Pesticides Linked to Autism

Clearly, glyphosate is bad news, but Monsanto Company—its creator—doesn’t think so: it even wants a retraction of that WHO report! But it’s not just cancer that could be a concern; one study suggested that because of glyphosate toxicity in our food supply, 1 in 2 children will have autism by the year 2025. [10] That’s a radical claim, yes, but also a potentially devastating one that can’t be ignored.

One Final Thought

We can’t even rely on the government to protect us. The EPA just says to not worry about pesticide exposure; the agency has even set “tolerance levels” for the consumer—how reassuring. And, in many cases, the laws about pesticides aren’t even being enforced. In Europe, however, they’re trying to further regulate toxic pesticides, and the U.S. is having a fit. After all, if Europe were to strictly regulate the toxins, the U.S. could stand to lose out on a multi-billion dollar import business. Unfortunately, even when our health is on the line, our government can only see dollar signs.

What do you think about pesticides? Tell us your thoughts in the comments below.

References:

  1. Weisenburger, D. Human health effects of agrichemical use. Human Pathology. 24 (6).
  2. United States Department of Agriculture. National Program 308: Methyl Bromide Alternatives. United States Department of Agriculture.
  3. Environmental Working Group. EWG’s 2015 Shopper’s Guide to Pesticides in Produce™. Environmental Working Group.
  4. Chiu, Y. H. et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and their pesticide residues in relation to semen quality among men from a fertility clinic. Human Reproduction.
  5. Rao, M. A closely watched fight brewing over nitrates in Iowa water. Star Tribune.
  6. The Japan Times. Norway whale meat dumped in Japan after pesticide finding. The Japan Times.
  7. Sciolino, E. In France, Pesticides Get in Way of Natural Wines. New York Times.
  8. Kurenbach, B. et al. Sublethal Exposure to Commercial Formulations of the Herbicides Dicamba, 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid, and Glyphosate Cause Changes in Antibiotic Susceptibility in Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. mBio. 6 (2).
  9. International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs Volume 112: evaluation of five organophosphate insecticides and herbicides. World Health Organization.
  10. Alliance for Natural Health. Half of All Children Will Be Autistic by 2025, Warns Senior Research Scientist at MIT. Alliance for Natural Health.

Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, NP, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM has studied natural healing methods for over 20 years and now teaches individuals and practitioners all around the world. He no longer sees patients but solely concentrates on spreading the word of health and wellness to the global community. Under his leadership, Global Healing Center, Inc. has earned recognition as one of the largest alternative, natural and organic health resources on the Internet.

Glyphosate Among Chemicals Causing Cancer In Argentinian Village

Argentina Agrochemicals

A group of professors at the University of Cordoba, Argentina, detected incidence rates of cancer and other diseases that triple the provincial and national averages.

After conducting a study with thousands of people, the professors recommended that grain storage plants, pesticides and other agrochemicals be kept outside the city center.

The higher than normal incidence in various types of cancer was detected in the village of In Monte Maíz, a small town located 440 kilometers west of Buenos Aires. With only 8,200 inhabitants Monte Maíz, asked the University of Córdoba to investigate what they perceived as an increase in serious illnesses.

Medics, university students and experts of the Center for Environmental Research, University of La Plata participated in the study.

The research found that the gross rate of cancer incidence was of 707 per 100,000 inhabitants, compared to 264 in the province of Córdoba and 217 throughout Argentina.

The main types of tumors that were detected included breast, colon, prostate, thyroid and skin. A total of 21.6% of the cases occurred in people whose age was under 44, a segment of the population that is represented by only 11.6% at the provincial level.

Cancer is the leading cause of death in Monte Maíz, 33.4% of the total deaths in 2014. In Argentina, cancer comes second as the cause of death at a rate of 20% and behind cardiovascular disease.

The researchers recommended the mayor to relocate the deposits of agrochemicals and also the grain, since toxic substances would also be released from them.

During the study conducted by experts, they found glyphosate, cypermethrin and cloropiritos residues in soil samples. “The rural area totals 65,000 hectares, where people spray 630,000 liters of pesticides annually,” says the report.

The document also expresses concern about an open dump located 800 meters from the village, notes the existence of stagnant water from past floods and a drainage channel with harmful waste products from local industries.

Cancer is not the only concern in Monte Maíz. The rate of spontaneous abortions amounted to 9.9% of pregnant women, compared to the 3% national average.

Children with congenital malformations account for 2.9% in the last 10 years, compared to 1.9% as the national average.

Doctors also drew attention to the amount of pulmonary disease, hypothyroidism and lupus.

Argentina is the third largest producer of soybeans in the world. In 2012, at the first trial on agrochemical pollution in this country, a court in Cordoba sentenced a farmer to three years suspended sentence to a farmer and a pilot whose planes fumigate the inhabitants of a neighboring district of the city while spraying chemicals on a nearby plantation.


Luis R. Miranda is an award-winning journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief at The Real Agenda. His career spans over 18 years and almost every form of news media. His articles include subjects such as environmentalism, Agenda 21, climate change, geopolitics, globalisation, health, vaccines, food safety, corporate control of governments, immigration and banking cartels, among others. Luis has worked as a news reporter, on-air personality for Live and Live-to-tape news programs. He has also worked as a script writer, producer and co-producer on broadcast news. Read more about Luis.

Revealed: A Secret Monsanto Document In The Maui GMO Case

gmo free

By: Jon Rappoport | NoMoreFakeNews.com

Imagine you are a lawyer arguing a case before a judge. There is no jury. The judge will decide the outcome.

The judge tells you, “Look, the other side, your opponents in this case, have filed documents with me. These documents are at the heart of their argument. I can’t allow you to read the documents. I can only give you access to heavily redacted versions. You’ll have to do the best you can. I have read the full documents. Your opponents, of course, know every word of those documents. But you don’t. And you won’t. Good luck. Limp along as well as you can.”

That’s what we’re talking about here.

(The link to the document is located at the bottm of this article.)

Last Election Day, the people of Maui County voted to halt all local GMO and pesticide experimentation being carried out by Monsanto and Dow.

During the temporary halt, a complete independent investigation would be done, to find out exactly how harmful the pesticides and GMOs were.

But the legal and binding vote was suspended, because Monsanto and Dow immediately sued.

The case is now hung up in Federal Court.

I’ve just learned that Monsanto filed documents “under seal,” to make its case in the proceeding now before Federal Judge Susan Oki Mollway.

Monsano requested the court make the documents secret, and the previous Judge, Barry Kurren, agreed to it.

Here, in legalese, is Kurren’s decision:

“ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION TO FILE UNDER SEAL IN PART THE DECLARATIONS OF SAM EATHINGTON, JESSE STIEFEL, AND ADOLPH HELM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION re 13- Signed by Judge BARRY M. KURREN on 11/14/2014.

‘IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ ex parte application is GRANTED. Accordingly, the subject declarations shall be filed by the Court under seal, and redacted versions may be filed with the Plaintiffs’ Motion.’”

That means the lawyers for the voters of Maui can’t see those Monsanto documents. Not in full. They can only read redacted versions of Monsanto making its case for continued GMO/pesticide experiments on Maui—contravening the demands of Maui voters.

What kind of court is this?

Judge Mollway, who will decide the case, can read everything Monsanto offers in its defense, but the lawyers against Monsanto have no full access and, therefore, can’t argue their side from full knowledge.

This echoes of cases where prosecutors claim “national security” as an issue. In those instances, documents are either excluded as evidence, or only redacted versions are allowed in.

Is this what we’re dealing with here? Monsanto’s concerns have become, in a federal court, a matter of national security?

Below, you will see a link to one such redacted Monsanto document. You will see the many blacked out lines.

One section (no.7) states: “…Monsanto currently owns or leases approximately 784 acres of farmland on the island. Certain specific locations on Maui are uniquely suitable to multi-season/cycle breeding and research.” The next 14 lines of the section are blacked out.

It’s not much of a stretch to infer those 14 lines are blacked out to conceal Maui locations of Monsanto facilities. You mean the addresses and names of Monsanto stations and growing fields on Maui are a secret?

Suppose, in your city, in your region, a major corporation was carrying out, on a regular basis, experiments with new, non-commercial, toxic pesticide chemicals and genetically altered organic materials. And suppose you were told that the permanent facilities of that corporation in your region were located at secret sites. How would you feel about it?

Wouldn’t that raise significant suspicions in your mind? Wouldn’t you want to know exactly what was going on at each and every one of those facilities? And if you were denied that information, as well as the names and addresses of the locations, wouldn’t you infer the secrecy was covering up something harmful to you?

Whole sections of the Monsanto court document are blacked out (e.g., no. 8 and 9). What do they say? Only the Judge and Monsanto know. The lawyers representing the voters of Maui don’t have a clue.

Section 10 states: “The current [Monsanto] workforce in the County [of Maui] has been trained over many years at the precise pollination techniques required and to perform other specialized tasks.” The next two lines are blacked out. Why? Because Monsanto considers further explanation of what these workers do to be proprietary secrets? This is what the Maui voters want to know about, because they, the people of Maui, are on the receiving end of the secret wind-blown pesticide and GMO experiments.

Section 11 of the court document is quite strange. It states: “And the US Department of Agriculture [USDA] sets requirements for how regulated field trials of new GE [genetically engineered] crops must be conducted.” The next 12 lines are blacked out. Why? Are the USDA regulations themselves a secret? Is there something about these regulations Monsanto doesn’t want the public to know? The “field trials” are at the heart of what the people of Maui are objecting to. How toxic are the secret experimental pesticides? How dangerous to health are the secret experimental GMOs?

Section 13 mentions a corn-crop disease called Goss’s Wilt. Then, six lines are blacked out. Why? What is Monsanto hiding from the people of Maui?

How in the world can the lawyers representing the voters of Maui argue their case in federal court when all this information is being withheld from them? The answer: they can’t.

Is some of Monsanto’s federally funded biowarfare research (contracted by the US National Institutes of Health)—the details of which Monsanto won’t disclose—taking place on Maui?

The lawyers representing the people of Maui should be filing new motions to declare this case an impossible travesty. Until the lawyers can read every word of the documents Monsanto has filed with the court, there is no case, there is no proceeding, there is only a con job, with Monsanto the preordained winner by default.

And until the alternative media covers the Monsanto-Maui case and blows it up into the scandal it is, there will be no chance of justice.

Here is a link to the Monsanto court document I’ve been referring to:

Declaration of Sam Eathington, Vice President of Global Plant Breeding, Monsanto

Declaration of Sam Eathington, Vice President of Global Plant Breeding, Monsanto


original article: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/04/10/revealed-a-secret-monsanto-document-in-the-maui-gmo-case/

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

7 Toxins Harming Your Brain Right Now

Brain X-ray001

Some of the most common substances found in everyday life are harming our cognitive function right now. Along with pesticides, you have substances like BPA, phthalates, mercury, lead, benzene, and flame retardants that are affecting you, even if you don’t realize it. Hidden in your home and office, you are exposed to toxic chemicals on a daily basis, and your brain is taking the brunt of it.

7 Toxins Harming Your Brain

Your brain controls every aspect of your body, giving directions to cells and the nervous system. It is essential for supporting good mood and clear thinking, helping to improve your overall quality of life. Here are seven of the most harmful and pervasive toxins you should look out for in order to support brain health.

  1. BPA

BPA is a known endocrine disruptor that interferes with how your body regulates hormones. Not only does it affect reproductive health, but it can also affect brain function, learning abilities, and how your memory works. [1] And it’s not just plastic that contains BPA; items that are BPA free aren’t always much better. The substitutes used for BPA (Bisphenol F and S or “BPF” and “BPS”) have been linked to behavioral issues, as well. [2]

     2. Phthalates

Phthalates are present in more everyday things than you might think. Similarly to BPA, phthalates are found in many products that contain plastic and things like household cleaners, cosmetics, personal hygiene products, and even food. There is a wide variety of phthalates, but the most notable versions are BBzP (butyl benzyl phthalate), DnBP (dibutyl phthalate), and DEHB (di-2-ethyl hexyl phthalate).

Phthalates have been linked to ADHD, asthma, diabetes, neurodevelopmental problems, and more. [3] California is spearheading the move against phthalates by asking that four specific types must be listed on labels (many do not have to be listed at all). Even big corporations like Target and WalMart have promised to reduce the amount of or even eradicate the use of harmful toxins like phthalates in products they stock.

  1. Mercury

I’ve covered the dangers of mercury extensively in other articles. The base reason is that it has been linked to kidney problems, respiratory failure, and other neuromuscular complications; however, the elemental form of mercury is the most toxic. [4] Due to this knowledge, many people have switched off from thermometers and other products containing mercury.

  1. Lead

Lead poisoning isn’t a problem of yesterday, it’s a problem today — a huge problem. The biggest issue is that lead affects so many parts of the body in such harmful ways. Not only can it affect organs and tissues, but it can affect whole systems of the body like the digestive, reproductive, and nervous systems. You absolutely need to take conscious steps to reduce your exposure to lead, including making your home safer for your children.

  1. Benzene

Benzene is found in fuel and motor vehicle exhaust, but can also be found in detergents and pharmaceuticals. [5] Why is something so problematic used so frequently? Benzene is even classified as carcinogen, [6] it’s highly flammable, and benzene poisoning can pass from mother to fetus. The best way to reduce your exposure to benzene is to distance yourself from gasoline or waste plants and to avoid cigarette smoke at all costs. As quoted by the CDC, “Average smokers take in about 10 times more benzene than nonsmokers each day.” [7] Just one more reason not to smoke!

  1. Flame Retardants

Normally, something that helps to quell a fire is heralded as useful and sometimes heroic. However, a disturbing discovery was made by a researcher from Texas. The discovery showed that flame retardants were found in the breast milk of American women. [8] How could this happen? It turns out that flame retardants can be found virtually anywhere in food, furniture, and building materials. We’re around these items every day and breathe in the toxins that emanate throughout the day.

Attributed to the spread of human civilization, it’s unbelievable just how widespread traces of flame retardant chemicals are. Not even bald eagles are safe. Out of 33 dead eagles tested from 2009 to 2011, every one but two had all four flame retardant components for which scientists were testing. [9] It’s important to educate yourself about flame retardant compounds and make sure they’re not abundant in your home. [10]

  1. Pesticides

Mostly everyone is familiar with the negative effects of pesticides, but new developments further strengthen the argument against using pesticides on foods we consume. Perhaps the biggest and most shocking development to come to light is that pesticide exposure is now linked to Parkinson’s disease. [11] The best way to avoid undue exposure to pesticides is to choose organic food!

Protecting Your Brain

Now that you’re a bit more informed about seven toxins you might not have known about before, you can get started on protecting yourself from the harmful effects, both short term and long term. Turmeric shows powerful antioxidant protection for the brain, and it’s often advised to take this in extract form to ensure best results. Eating an organic diet, reducing the use of furniture made with flame retardants, and using glass containers instead of plastic are also helpful steps.

References:

  1. Nordqvist, Christian. What is BPA (bisphenol A)? Is BPA harmful? Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 26 Sep. 2014.
  2. Ketchiff, Mirel. The Scary Truth About BPA-Free Plastic. SHAPE. 2015.
  3. Westervelt, Amy. Phthalates are everywhere, and the health risks are worrying. How bad are they really? The Guardian. 2015.
  4. EPA. Health Effects of Mercury. EPA.gov. 2014.
  5. EPA. Benzene. EPA.gov. 2013.
  6. ATSDR. Benzene. ATSDR. 2011.
  7. ATSDR. Public Health Statement for Benzene. CDC.gov. 2015.
  8. Blum, Deborah. Flame Retardants are Everywhere. NY Times. 2014.
  9. Betts, Kellyn S. More Evidence for PBDEs as Neurotoxicants: Cohort Study Corroborates Earlier Findings. EHP. 2014.
  10. Bienkowski, Brian. Michigan’s Bald Eagles Full of Flame Retardants. Environmental Health News. 2015.
  11. Bret Stetka. Parkinson’s Disease and Pesticides: What’s the Connection? Scientific American.

Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, NP, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM has studied natural healing methods for over 20 years and now teaches individuals and practitioners all around the world. He no longer sees patients but solely concentrates on spreading the word of health and wellness to the global community. Under his leadership, Global Healing Center, Inc. has earned recognition as one of the largest alternative, natural and organic health resources on the Internet.

5 Unsettling Things In Your Drinking Water

cloudy-water-background-images-blueglass1

The public water supply doesn’t just provide us with the water we drink. We use this water to take a shower, to water our plants, and to wash our pets. Water is essential, but the majority of our water supply is full of nasty compounds that are slowly destroying our health, whether we realize it or not. Without the proper filtration system in place, you are being exposed to a large supply of chemical toxins, including pesticides, pharmaceutical medications, and even animal excrement.

5 Nasty Things in Your Water

This post is not just meant to gross you out, it’s meant to inspire positive action in your own home. By reading the following facts about the water you’re drinking and showering in, you’ll be shocked and hopefully lulled into switching to a cleaner source of water. Here are some of the facts you need to know about the water you are exposed to every day.

1. Pesticides Are Invading Our Water

Pesticide and fertilizer runoff is a serious concern in many states, especially recently for the Midwestern states. [1] Pesticides infiltrate every aspect of our life already; our food, clothes, and indoor environments are sprayed with the chemicals. Even if you are consuming an organic diet, not having the proper precautions in place for your drinking water can still, unfortunately, expose you to the toxins you are attempting to avoid.

2. Medications Find Their Way into Drinking Water

Studies have been consistently showing that our water supply is being contaminated with pharmaceutical medications. [2] Antibiotics and antidepressants are commonly found in trace amounts in drinking water these days, possibly contributing to a host of issues. Having antibiotics in your system for a prolonged period, for example, can increase the risk of becoming resistant to antibiotics, potentially compromising your future health in the rare case of illness. Antidepressants, when consumed through the drinking water in small amounts over a long period of time, may also have unseen interactions with proper brain chemistry.

3. Phthalate Water, Anyone?

Phthalates are common chemicals found in plastics, typically used to improve flexibility. They are easily released into the environment, and some research suggests they may be carcinogenic. [3] Other research is showing that phthalates may negatively affect thyroid health which, in turn, affects hormones, weight, and mood. [4]

4. Animal Poop is Hiding in Your Water

You probably don’t want to hear this, but it’s best to know now: animal poop may be lurking somewhere in your water. Of course, it’s just trace amounts; however, isn’t any amount considered unacceptable? A recent study reported that pig excrement and bacteria were found in North Carolina drinking water, so if you live near here, you probably want to contact your local officials to get more information about the water you and your family are drinking. [5]

5. Arsenic Pollutes California Water

A new report shows that California’s public drinking water violated safety requirements more than 1,000 times for the fiscal year of 2012-2013, citing high levels of nitrates and arsenic. [6] Arsenic can cause skin issues and increase cancer risk, so any level of this contaminant in drinking water is totally unacceptable.

Actions You Can Take

Investing in a high-quality water filter is the best way to keep your water clean and free of contaminants. Distilled water is also a great water source that has been purified and can be a great addition if you haven’t yet transitioned to an at-home water filter. Even filtering the water you bathe in can be helpful for decreasing the chemicals you are exposed to on a daily basis. Be sure to continue eating a healthy diet that is rich in antioxidants because these compounds will help protect your body from toxins already present in your environment.

References:

  1. Maya Rao. A closely watched fight brewing over nitrates in Iowa water. StarTribune.
  2. Ben Sutherly. Unused meds go down the drain, worrying environmentalists. The Columbus Dispatch.
  3. Lopez-Carrillo L, Hernandez-Ramirez RU, Calafat AM, et al. Exposure to phthalates and breast cancer risk in northern Mexico. Environ Health Perspect. 2010 Apr;118(4):539-44. doi: 10.1289/ehp.0901091.
  4. Li, N, D Wang, Y Zhou, M Ma, J li and Z Wang. Phthalates in drinking water affect thyroid hormone, finds lab study. Environmental Science and Technology. doi: 10.1021/es101254c.
  5. Brian Bienkowski. Pig poop fouling North Carolina streams; state permitting questioned. Environmental Health News.
  6. Sharon Bernstein. Arsenic, nitrates among pollutants in California drinking water: report. Reuters.

Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, NP, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM has studied natural healing methods for over 20 years and now teaches individuals and practitioners all around the world. He no longer sees patients but solely concentrates on spreading the word of health and wellness to the global community. Under his leadership, Global Healing Center, Inc. has earned recognition as one of the largest alternative, natural and organic health resources on the Internet.

Poisoned Earth, Poisoned Children

pesticides

For decades, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has known that Dow’s chlorpyrifos pesticide, marketed under names like Dursban and Lorsban, is dangerous to children and farmworkers. And yet, the EPA has allowed the continued use of this dangerous pesticide on golf courses, on parks and on farms—where it drifts onto food. In her recent article, “Pesticides, Birth Defects and Brain Damage in Children,” Dr. Janette Sherman, MD, says that chlorpyrifos “is a serious risk to health and intellect for people working and living in proximity to fields.” Sherman also said that detectable levels of chlorpyrifos in New York City children raises the question of exposure via food. According to Sherman:

Although the neurotoxicity of pesticides has been known for decades, recently, several national magazines, have named the pesticide, chlorpyrifos (Dursban/ Lorsban), as an agent causing loss of intelligence, as well as birth defects and structural brain damage.

Known to damage children’s brains, Dow’s chlorpyrifos is now up for review by the EPA. Will the EPA finally ban Dow’s chlorpyrifos? Or will the agency continue to allow Big Ag to poison our children? Tell the EPA: Stop Letting Dow Chemical Poison our Children with Chlorpyrifos!

The Top 4 Reasons For The Bees Dying Off (VIDEO)

colony-collapse-hero

Why are all the bees dying off? It has been a few years since the world started to become aware of the phenomenon of bees dying off, and labeled it CCD (Colony Collapse Disorder). It is a grave concern, for we are totally dependent upon the bees to pollinate and help food grow. Einstein famously said that if bees disappeared from the Earth, humanity would only survive for around another 4 years. The subject of bees dying off has been in the news again lately, with a study done by researchers from Queen Mary University of London (QMUL), Macquarie University in Sydney, Washington University in St Louis and the University of Sydney. Their study concluded that the problem may be bee stress. They found that stress factors were leading to older bees dying more quickly than normal, leading to a situation where younger bees had to begin foraging earlier than they would have otherwise, which in turn was leading to a younger foraging population, poorer performance and quicker deaths of foragers.

If this study is correct and bees stress is the cause of CCD, it leads then to a further question: what are the stress factors causing bee numbers to decline? Some have attributed the bees dying off to a particular cause, but in my opinion, the bees are actually under a quadruple assault, and Monsanto and its Big Agra pals are only half the problem.

Why are the Bees Dying Off? Reason #1: Neonicotinoid Pesticides

It has become well known especially in Russia and Europe that neonicotinoid pesticides are linked to bees dying off. Consequently, Europe restricted the use of 3 neonicotinoids for two years starting December 1st, 2013. Neonicotinoids are a relatively new class of insecticides that have a chemical structure very similar to nicotine (hence their name), and work by severely disrupting the central nervous system of insects, leading to paralysis and death. Common neonicotinoids are imidacloprid, acetamiprid and clothianidin, with Bayer’s imidacloprid the most widely used insecticide in the world.

Numerous studies have linked neonicotinoids and CCD, such as:

– this 2012 Xerxes study which found that “few field studies have been properly designed or conducted over a long enough period of time to assess the full risks to bees. Nevertheless, the overall evidence points to the fact that neonicotinoids are harming bees”;

– this 2014 study which found that neonicotinoids were highly likely to be responsible for triggering CCD in honey bee hives that were healthy prior to the arrival of winter; and

– this 2013 study by the EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) found that neonicotinoids posed an unacceptably high risk to bees, and that the industry-sponsored science (more junk science or corporate science) which Bayer and friends had given the authorities was flawed and contained data gaps not previously considered. Big Agra companies falsifying date? Surprise, surprise.

Pesticides of course go hand-in-hand with GMOs, the next factor.

Why are the Bees Dying Off? Reason #2: GMOs

Most of the reports about bees dying off over the last 7 years or so have pointed the finger at neonics and other pesticides, and not specifically at GMOs. Yet GMOs by definition require pesticides; they have been genetically engineered to withstand synthetic chemical pesticides; so it is fair to say GMOs are themselves the issue, since pesticides will inevitably accompany them wherever they are planted. Farmers such as this one in Campeche, Mexico lost entire organic honey crops due to fumigation of nearby GM corn crops, for instance.

GMOs themselves may be contributing to bees dying off due to the fact that they are drenched in glyphosate, the toxic chemical patented by Monsanto and the main active ingredient of RoundUp. Glyphosate is ubiquitous in the environment, turning up in the urine of almost all Europeans and in almost all the blood of foetuses. As Dr. Huber’s research paper stated:

“The exposure, physiological damage, and biological impact of glyphosate are consistent with all of the known conditions related to CCD.”

Access to real data on this issue of GMOs and bees dying off may be more difficult now, because Monsanto bought out Beeologics in September 2011, a bee company which had been studying CCD as well as Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus (IAPV). Monsanto nows control the flow of information and products coming from Beeologics for colony collapse disorder (CCD).

Why are the Bees Dying Off? Reason #3: EMF

EMF (Electro-Magnetic Frequencies), being by nature invisible, are an overlooked cause of the bees dying off, but an important one nonetheless. So many animals in the natural world, especially flying ones, use energetic frequencies and magnetics for many purposes such as orientation and navigation. Swiss researched Daniel Favre states in his study that “honeybees possess magnetite crystals in their fat body cells and they present magnetic remanence (Gould et al. 1978; Keim et al. 2002). These magnetite structures are active parts of the magnetoreception system in honey- bees (Hsu and Li 1994; Hsu et al. 2007).” His study found that:

“mobile phone handsets have a dramatic impact on the behavior of the bees, namely by inducing the worker piping signal. In natural conditions, worker piping either announces the swarming process of the bee colony or is a signal of a disturbed bee colony.”

Favre also stated:

“In one experiment, it was found that when a mobile phone was kept near a beehive it resulted in a collapse of the colony in 5 to 10 days with the worker bees failing to return home, leaving the hives with just queens, eggs, and hive-bound immature bees.”

It appears that manmade EM fields are disrupting bee colonies. As the video clip above shows, mobile phone radiation compromises the bees’ cryptochrome and their sense of direction and connection with the Earth’s magnetic field.

Why are the Bees Dying Off? Reason #4: Geoengineering

This last reason is the most sinister of all why the bees are dying off. As the video clip above shows, bees can easily get caught up in the strange polymer fibers which are being sprayed from above via geoengineering programs. Some of the fibers have been found to be “alive” in the sense that they move by themselves, automatically. They have been implicated the horrible yet widely unacknowledged Morgellons Disease (see carnicominstitute.org for further info on this).

However, because the public at large is still in mass denial about the existence of geoengineering, there is unlikely to any debate at all about whether to stop the abominable practice of it, even if we are shooting ourselves in the foot by doing it.

Bees are under attack from many angles. Awareness needs to be raised on this crucial issue before we decimate the entire bee population – and ourselves in the process.

Sources:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/02/04/1422089112.abstract

http://ento.psu.edu/publications/are-neonicotinoids-killing-bees

http://www.bulletinofinsectology.org/pdfarticles/vol67-2014-125-130lu.pdf

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/3066.pdf

http://www.theyucatantimes.com/2013/02/1500-colonies-of-honeybees-die-in-campeche/

http://www.gmoevidence.com/dr-huber-glyphosate-and-bee-colony-collapse-disorder-ccd/

http://genevalunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/favre.pdf

http://www.carnicominstitute.org/html/articles_by_date.html


Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of the global conspiracy, from vaccines to Zionism to false flag operations and more, and also including info on natural health, sovereignty and higher consciousness.

Study: Eating Organic Limits Toxic Pesticide Exposure

organic food

Although they are extremely toxic, organophosphate pesticides remain some of the most commonly used insecticides today. A variety of fruits and vegetables are regularly treated with organophosphates, including green beans, apples, grapes, and peaches.

The Dangers of Organophosphate Pesticides

This highly toxic type of pesticide has been linked to numerous health problems, including reduced testosterone, leukemia, and Parkinson’s disease. Organophosphate pesticide exposure may also be associated with attention and developmental disorders in young children.

According to a recent study, adults may greatly reduce their exposure to organophosphates by eating organic produce. [1] The study found that people who eat organic, even occasionally, tend to have significantly lower levels of pesticides in their system.

To conduct the study, scientists gathered data on the dietary habits of more than 4,000 people living in different cities in the US. They collected information on the frequency with which participants reported eating organic foods, as well as the different types and amounts of produce eaten. To calculate pesticide exposure, scientists compared typical consumption of certain produce items with their average pesticide residue levels.

After collecting this data, they compared the calculated pesticide exposure to levels of pesticides found in the urine of participants. Participants who occasionally ate organic produce had significantly lower levels in their urine, while people who frequently or always ate organic typically had around 65 percent lower levels than participants who seldom or never ate organic.

The study only reconfirms existing theories about the benefits of eating organic fruits and vegetables to reduce pesticide exposure. This is particularly important for fruits and vegetables that typically are treated with more pesticides. Produce such as apples, strawberries, celery, grapes, and bell peppers tend to contain a lot of pesticides, while avocados, pineapples, and sweet corn are generally lower in pesticides.

How to Avoid Pesticides

Buying organic foods can be pricey, making it difficult for those on a smaller budget; however, going organic can be more affordable if you shop at local farmers markets, join a Community Supported Agriculture program, and purchase produce in season. While you can limit the amount of pesticides you are consuming through your diet, there are some pesticides that linger in the air. In this case, you may want to try methods for supporting your lungs.

References:

  1. Lindsey Konkel. Eating Organic Produce Can Limit Pesticide Exposure. Live Science.

Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, NP, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM has studied natural healing methods for over 20 years and now teaches individuals and practitioners all around the world. He no longer sees patients but solely concentrates on spreading the word of health and wellness to the global community. Under his leadership, Global Healing Center, Inc. has earned recognition as one of the largest alternative, natural and organic health resources on the Internet.

Dirty Dozen And Clean Fifteen (Infographic)

 fruits and veggies

By: Garrick |Juicing with G –

In this day and age, our environment is bombarded with pesticides from insect killers in our homes to pest killers that farmers use to ward off insects that could potentially devastate their crops. On a worldwide level over 5.6 billion pounds of pesticide is used per year and in the United States alone over 1 billion pounds of these pesticides is used by different industries – yes that includes farms that grow the vegetables and fruits we eat daily.

Pesticide has been linked in numerous studies to various types of ailments like infertility and cancer. And in children the danger is higher because their bodies don’t have fully developed immune systems just yet. Children exposed to pesticide are at risk of brain cancer, ASD, AD/HD and Endocrine disruption.

The dangers are real and we need to do our best to minimize pesticide exposure. One of the best ways to do that is using the Dirty Dozen and Clean Fifteen to know which fruits and vegetables have the most and least amount of pesticide residue.

This is the infographic version that will show you the dirty dozen in an easy to understand format to help you shop smarter. When I say shop smart, that means not buying everything organic because that would be very expensive, shopping smart means that you’ll only buy organic for those items listed in the dirty dozen. For the rest, go for conventionally grown produce.

When you scroll down the infographic, you will find a bonus, 5 places where you can buy organic produce at cheaper price (compared to buying it in a grocery). Make sure to check that out.

 Dirty Dozen Infographic


Garrick is the founder of Juicing with G where he regularly shares recipes, health tips and product reviews that will help people navigate the world of juicing without making the same mistakes he did. You can also follow him on Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest.

 

6 Immediate Health Benefits Of Not Believing Mainstream Media

mainstream news

Truth seekers who long ago figured out that mainstream media is all lies and staged news coordinated by central intelligence (CIA) to manipulate the opinion of the masses, know that living a life free of mainstream media news is extremely fulfilling if not downright fun. Many of us are used to the idea that no mainstream media in our lives means a better life. But how many of us have considered the details of why this is true? The benefits of living in a life where you do not believe mainstream media news are profound. Positive factors carry deep into our lives in ways many of us don’t realize or have ever taken time to consider. Many of us have taken these benefits, which all lead back to health, for granted for so long that we don’t even know they are there.

So let’s consider some of these benefits in no particular order:

1- More in touch with yourself

When you disconnect yourself from the 24/7 lies that mainstream media has become, especially since the legalization of propaganda which was implemented in the United States by an amendment to the 2012 NDAA, you will notice you will became a bit more aware of yourself than you were before. By virtue of not having a pundit on a TV screen representing the same tiny group of super giant mainstream media corporations telling you what you are supposed to believe, you will automatically start thinking more on your own and thus increase you own self awareness.

When the human brain is not told what to do, it will automatically think independently. In other words, for the average person not pathologically infected with mainstream media mind-control poison every day, this means returning your brain back to normal. Remember, humans were never meant to sit in front of a cathode ray tube flickering at their brains at high rate while a voice tells you every single day what it is you are supposed to think.

This ‘return to normal’ should not be underestimated. “Normal” is a big deal and it is normal to be in touch with your own thoughts, intuition and interpersonal analysis of the world around you without a weird electronic, bright, flickering machine telling you what to think.

The health benefits of being more in touch with yourself are clear to see. People who are more in touch with themselves are in touch with their feelings and emotions and thus able to function more effectively as humans. Interacting more effectively with others and being more honest with your own thoughts, feelings and emotions then leads to greater relationship and an overall richer more fulfilling life.

2- Increased self-confidence

By shutting off mainstream media you will get back many things. One of those factors is self-confidence. You may be thinking, how can this be? Actually, when you consider how mainstream media political news drains your emotions with engineered fear then you may begin to see how cutting it off may increase self-confidence.

Every single day mainstream media believers are subjected to political psyops, scaremongering, staged shootings, scary police stories or staged terror. All of it presented as reality to those who actually believe mainstream media news. Thus, without realizing it, their sense of self-reliability, the sense of trust in their own ability to protect themselves and thus their sense of self-confidence slowly goes out the window. Not to mention all the stories mainstream media presents showing their brainwashed audience arrest stories, debt collection, new laws about government fines etc. From beginning to end, the mainstream media news is designed to strip you of your sense of self-reliability and self-confidence so that you will put your confidence in government and police.

3- Save vast amount of mental energy

Mainstream media lies come at their victims on a daily bases, 24/7. With psyops and government lies being scripted every day now, it doesn’t take a mathematician to calculate that this is a lot of information. Information is now being processed every day by central intelligence, all of it designed to control what you think. Most truth seekers don’t realize that disinformation, mass mind control, propaganda and mass cognitive infiltration is a full time process.

As I’ve mentioned before, humanity as a whole understands the concept of being lied to. However, humanity is not really designed to cognitively wrap its head around the concept of being lied to 24/7. When we think of someone lying to us, we think of lying as a singular event. Generally, we wouldn’t keep someone around in our lives that knowingly lied about everything every single day. The species dislikes or is intolerant of the concept of being lied to knowingly. For this reason many people simply choose to not believe that mainstream media and thus government would lie to us every single day (cognitive dissonance). They would rather just deny this is happening to keep things (mentally) easier and more stable. So if things are mentally easier believing mainstream media, then how can we save mental energy by not believing mainstream media news?

Although brainwashed mainstream media watchers seek to make things easier by ignoring the reality outside of mainstream media news, I believe this only backfires on them. You can try to deliberately forget or ignore mainstream media news thinking you’ll deal with this news later if you have time, but the reality is that you are filing and circulating these stories somewhere in your head. How do I know this? The stories put out by media which are scripted by CIA are actually intended to appeal to your lower brain functions of fear, helplessness and despair. This unforgettable sense of helplessness, fear and despair only builds up deep in your mind as you worry about the next story and the next, and the next. All of this requires mental energy to process. The problem is that you will be burning mental energy on things that are not even true thus blocking the energy that you could put into something else (like doing real research and verifying their claims).

Doing your own research on a topic, while it also uses up mental energy, is energy well spent because it has direction and purpose. Blindly believing mainstream media news on the other hand, leaves one with directionless, wasteful scaremongering energy being thrown around in your head. All of this deleterious to your mental health. Consolidating this thought process for other (purposeful, non-propaganda) issues is inevitably good for your brain and your mental well being. Remember, you are what you fill your brain with. No one would go to see the same magician do the same tricks every day of their life. After a while it would be considered a waste of time and (mental) energy. It’s the same with mainstream media news.

Freeing up this mental activity for more purposeful ones will of course contribute to your quality of life, mental health, good sleep, and thought process such as memory and creativity.

4- Decreased stress levels

Without saying it, it is obvious that if all mainstream media does is pump out one psyop scaremongering story after another, then not believing mainstream media would (as with overall mental energy discussed above) instantly relieve you of this stress. Yes, it is also stressful to realize how much mainstream media lies every day. However, as truth seekers we have a different paradigm we live by. One by which we don’t look to government and police to solve our problems. Instead we realize government and police is the problem. As truth seekers we tend to channel the stress of seeing mainstream media-government lies pile on and on, and we tend to be on the lookout for new solutions. As truth seeking non-mainstream media believers we tend to see through the scaremongering story (less stressful) and use healthy stress to create solutions which begin by simply exposing mainstream media news. As all truth seekers know, exposing mainstream media lies and sharing articles, videos and links, comes with a feeling of deep accomplishment and gratitude which mainstream media believers are not even capable of understanding.

At the very least stress is channeled from one of helplessness (e.g. ISIS is coming, be afraid) to one of hope (e.g. ISIS is a psyop, let’s keep exposing it and wake everyone up thus ultimately exposing and ending the ISIS operation). The stress surrounding a sense of hopelessness where one thinks their only sense of safety depends on government and police, is not natural and is not a stressful state of mind that humans were designed to live under. Thus freeing oneself from mainstream media news instantly relieves this engineered perception that leaves the average person fearful and hopeless. The fear and hopelessness directly leads to stress. Stress has been directly linked to many diseases including cardiovascular disease, asthma, diabetes, premature death and other diseases.

5- Improved relationships

With the benefits of being more in touch with yourself, increased confidence, conservation of important mental energy and lowered stress levels in your life, it is no surprise that dropping mainstream media (mental junk food) news from your life and your mind can and will naturally improve all your relationships. Those around you will naturally notice that you are thinking clearer, are more aware, and have a more focused interest in things that are important and awareness of what they are saying.

I believe the human mind is purified and given a full tune-up when you remove CIA lies from it. The magnitude of what this effect can have on the human brain is highly underestimated. As someone that dropped mainstream media news years ago, I can honestly say I’ve become a much more genuine person unaffected by day to day propaganda. People will notice a more steadiness to your personality and that reflects on your character and trustworthiness. Consistency in life is important and when your paradigm is consistent and not subject to spontaneous day to day government psyops, that will reflect in your personal relationships.

Some may be thinking, what? My relationship got worse since I became a truth seeker. If so, that’s because those around you are still asleep in the matrix. Many of us have family and friends who are not ready to wake up to the truth and yes, that can be a relationship killer. However, truth really does bring people together. The reason those around are against you now that you seek truth is because you ruin their paradigms with the words you speak.

For those who have people around them that are free of mainstream media news, you know the relationship benefits firsthand. Ultimately, all of us will surround ourselves with those who connect with us and understand our paths. For those who have been awakened for long and exercise wisdom, you know how much better your relationships can be even in scenarios where those around you are still asleep. So if you are still struggling with this, give it time.

For everyone else, for those looking to date, you probably know that common fundamental beliefs in a relationship will make or break your relationship. Find that partner that understands the basics of our current information war and you’ll find a very fulfilling relationship. One that is far more meaningful than any relationship in mainstream media believing world where government literally controls the emotions of tomorrow which can and will impact your relationship.

6- Cognitive protection against next psyop

Finally, isn’t it a nice feeling knowing that tomorrow’s psyop will not effect you the way it will effect everyone else? Personally, I love the sense of power this foreknowledge gives me. It’s a gift most of us ignore. Yes, knowledge is a gift and with this power of knowledge comes wisdom. In the world we live in today, virtues like knowledge and wisdom are reduced to non-existent. CIA doesn’t want you to obtain knowledge and they certainly don’t want you to understand what true wisdom is. Nevertheless these virtues are very real and very powerful gifts that we should all share because they are some of the key factors that give us the assurance and mental protection we need for tomorrow.

Because of the knowledge we share we can reach that point where we hear about the next terror attack or shooting and know almost as the news transpires that it’s likely another false flag. If you are still worried about being called a “conspiracy theorist” then you may still be under their spell. Yes, absolutely it is still a good idea to let stories evolve and wait for the facts before making a judgment. But those that are completely awakened know the patterns, the oddities and the signs of these false flags. Sometimes its not absolutely necessary to know exactly what happened. We know that either way the control system will spin a story within seconds to their benefit. We also know that for the most part, only stories that they’ve “approved” make it to the headlines to begin with. These factors all contribute to the protective effect we get from not believing mainstream media news. This protective effect comes with a sense of calmness in the middle of panic, level-headedness in the process of “breaking news”, and a sense of even-keel in the 24/7 media staged circus. All of this is extremely beneficial to your mental heath.

If you get nothing else out of this article, try to understand and appreciate the power and the wonder of being truly free from CIA mainstream media scripted and focused lies designed as mind control to keep the controllers in power. Step back and see this greater picture and you’ll understand more clearly and appreciate the overall message in this article.

Living in a state of freedom from mass mind control is very much a big deal. As I’ve written in the past, the power of watching false flags in real time is a rush only humble and honest truth seekers can understand. This should serve as a reminder that life is a big game with many big ideas and many big concepts all in motion at once all around us. This singular concept of 24/7 government controlled information being fed to the masses, in my opinion, is the key to unlocking all of humanities answers, solutions, and problems. That’s right, all of them. I honestly believe getting humanity focused on the information war is the answer to all of our problems. Together we can and will out-think any and all government agencies and find ways to out-think and dismantle all of their psychological operations orchestrated against humanity. Just knowing that this possibility exists should be enough to induce all of these reassuring health benefits in all of our personal lives. Can you acknowledge and recognize these health benefits in your life?


Bernie Suarez is an activist, critical thinker, radio host, musician, M.D, Veteran, lover of freedom and the Constitution, and creator of the Truth and Art TV project. He also has a background in psychology and highly recommends that everyone watch a documentary titled The Century of the Self. Bernie has concluded that the way to defeat the New World Order is to truly be the change that you want to see. Manifesting the solution and putting truth into action is the very thing that will defeat the globalists.

New Research: GMO Food Far Worse Than We Think

genetic-mutation-wheat

Disturbing new research published in the Journal of Applied Toxicology indicates that genetically modified (GM) crops with “stacked traits” – that is, with multiple traits such as glyphosate-herbicide resistance and Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) insecticidal toxins engineered together into the same plant, are likely to be far more dangerous to human health than previously believed, and all of this is due to their synergistic toxicity.

The natural resistance that most plants have to the chemical glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup, has been engineered into many GM plants, so that fields can be sprayed indiscriminately with herbicide without the plants having to worry about destroying the crops. While the GM glyphosate-resistant plants survive, they subsequently contain residues of glyphosate and its various metabolites (e.g. aminomethylphosphonic acid) that present a significant health threat to the public.

In this latest study the glyphosate-containing herbicide Roundup was tested on human embryonic kidney cells at concentrations between 1 to 20,000 parts per million (ppm). It was found that concentrations as low as 50 ppm per million, which the authors noted were “far below agricultural dilutions,” induced cell death, with the 50% of the cells dying at 57.5 ppm.

The researchers also found that the insecticidal toxin produced by GM plants known as Cry1Ab was capable of causing cell death at 100 ppm concentrations.

Taken together the authors concluded

“In these results, we argue that modified Bt toxins are not inert on nontarget human cells, and that they can present combined side-effects with other residues of pesticides specific to GM plants.”

These disturbing findings follow on the heels of other recent revelations that have discovered that Roundup is toxic by several orders of magnitude more than previously believed. Only 5 days ago (Feb. 14, 2012) the journal Archives of Toxicology reported that Roundup is toxic to human DNA even when diluted to concentrations 450-fold lower than used in agricultural applications.  This effect is likely due to the presence of the surfactant polyoxyethyleneamine within the Roundup formulation which may dramatically enhance the absorption of glyphosate exposure into exposed human cells and tissue.


Article Contributed by Sayer Ji, Founder of GreenMedInfo.com.

Sayer Ji is an author, researcher, lecturer, and advisory board member of the National Health Federation. He founded Greenmedinfo.com in 2008 in order to provide the world an open access, evidence-based resource supporting natural and integrative modalities. It is internationally recognized as the largest and most widely referenced health resource of its kind.