Posts Tagged Toxic
by: Dr. Mercola
August 7, 2012
This benefit is dubious at best, as there is practically no difference in tooth decay rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated countries, and no difference between states that fluoridate a high versus low percentage of their water.
Yet, while fluoride in drinking water does NOT decrease rates of tooth decay, numerous studies show that this chemical has a wide array of devastating health effects – one of them being lowered IQ.
Yet Another Study Links Fluoride to Lower IQ Levels
A review of brain studies involving the use of fluoride has concluded that one of the adverse effects of fluoride exposure on children is damage to their neurological development.1 According to the Harvard researchers, children who lived in high-fluoride areas had “significantly lower IQ than those in low fluoride areas,” with the authors noting:
“The results support the possibility of an adverse effect of high fluoride exposure on children’s neurodevelopment.“
This just adds to the growing number of animal and human studies demonstrating the damage fluoride inflicts on your brain, including your pineal gland. The results of one study looking at children’s intelligence in two towns – one with fluoridated water and one without – were particularly revealing, with about 28 percent of the children in the low-fluoride area scoring as “bright, normal or higher intelligence” compared to only 8 percent in the high-fluoride area.2
Further, 15 percent of children in the high-fluoride city had signs of mental retardation, compared with only 6 percent in the low-fluoride city. And the study even accounted for other potential variables, such as lead exposure, iodine deficiency or a history of brain disease or head injury. There have been over 23 human studies and 100 animal studies linking fluoride to brain damage.
by: Anthony Gucciardi
July 26, 2012
If the scientific link between fluoride exposure and a noted decreased in IQ is a conspiracy theory, then perhaps the Harvard researchers who just confirmed such a link should be tarred and feathered by the ‘evidence-based’ medical media. In a telling review of a variety of studies that have demonstrated just how significantly fluoride can damage the brain and subsequently your IQ, Harvard University scientists stated ”our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children’s neurodevelopment.”
The most outstanding component to the study is where it was published. Authors published their conclusion online in the July 20th edition of the prominent journal Environmental Health Perspectives, a federal government medical journal stemming from the United States National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. The very same government that has continually asserted that water fluoridation is both perfectly safe and ‘effective’ at aiding the health of citizens who consume it on a daily basis.
In the past, the US government has actually been forced to call for lower fluoridation levels as previous research had also drawn a link between fluoride exposure and a host of neurotoxic effects. In the latest research by Harvard, it is made even more explicitly clear just how toxic fluoride can be to the body. In a written statement, researchers state:
“The children in high fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ than those who lived in low fluoride areas.”
Fluoride Lowers IQ, Sparks Tumor Growth
This should come as no surprise to those who have followed fluoride research over the past several years. As far back as 1977, for instance, epidemiological studies performed by the head of the Cytochemistry Section at the National Cancer Institute Dr. Dean Burk revealed that fluoride exposure led to increased tumor growth – even at levels as low as 1 ppm (the standard for United States drinking water). Beyond revealing an accelerated tumor growth rate of 25% in his research, fluoride was found to produce melanotic tumors, transform normal cells into cancer cells and increases the carcinogenesis of other chemicals.
In 1977, Dr. Burk estimated that fluoridation has actually caused about 10,000 deaths according to his research.
It will come as no surprise, then, that even the EPA — an agency charged with protecting the people — has classified fluoride as a substance with ”with substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.” Perhaps the EPA is also run by blubbering conspiracy theorists. In another entry by study authors, it is explained how fluoride actually attacks the brain in unborn children and essentially launches a direct assault on their neurological development:
”Fluoride readily crosses the placenta. Fluoride exposure to the developing brain, which is much more susceptible to injury caused by toxicants than is the mature brain, may possibly lead to damage of a permanent nature.”
But will the United States government answer to the study? As mentioned, many studies have exposed the same correlation of IQ-crushing fluoride intake. Paul Connett, Ph.D. and director of the Fluoride Action Network was one of the many activists to speak out regarding the last study to highlight the association. At the time, there were 23 former studies on the matter, and Connett felt that this 24th study was by far the strongest. And what was done? Unfortunately, it was brushed under the rug by mainstream health organizations who continue to assert that fluoride is perfectly safe. Some even recommend supplementing with fluoride pills.
In regards to the last breaking study, Connett stated:
“In this study we found a significant dose-response relation between fluoride level in serum and children’s IQ…This is the 24th study that has found this association, but this study is stronger than the rest.”
Will the latest Harvard-backed study be ignored by major public health organizations, or will serious change be initiated?
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
By: Willow Tohi
[NaturalNews] Last week, 16 jewelry retailers and suppliers were sued by the state of California for selling jewelry with more than 1,000 times the allowable lead, as lead-free. Many of the defendants are repeat offenders, and include manufacturers, shippers, sellers, distributors, and traders that do business in California.
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has publicized this issue a great deal, and despite the public’s concern, they have traced hundreds of styles of jewelry that violate the lead standards to these defendants over the last three years. All of the jewelry was labeled as lead-free, or in compliance with lead standards. Some of the jewelry was intended for small children, who are especially susceptible to adverse health effects from exposure to lead.
Without regard to public safety
California’s attorney general is concerned that the unlawful practices of the defendants can result in acute and chronic health effects for adults and children. Toxic metal exposure can cause headaches, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, anemia, loss of appetite, constipation, muscle soreness, and neurological impairments such as loss of balance, loss of ability to concentrate, seizures, encephalopathy, coma, even death.
For children, who are especially sensitive to lead poisoning since their bodies and brains are still developing, even mild cases could cause behavior problems, inattention, and learning disabilities, as well as a host of physical health effects. Lead in children’s jewelry is even more dangerous if it is placed in the mouth, as children are prone to do, or even swallowed, which would result in higher lead absorption.
Lead is used in jewelry for several reasons:
• It makes the base metal easier to shape
• It makes the jewelry feel heavier
• It’s cheaper to use than other metals
• It is sometimes used as a stabilizer in some plastics such as PVC, which is used in costume or children’s jewelry.
In California, children’s jewelry cannot contain lead content exceeding 600 parts per million. The legal state limit for adult jewelry is 60,000 parts per million. Most of the tested pieces were several hundred times over those limits.
Attorney General Harris says the defendants are selling their stuff in pursuit of profit, without regard for public safety. She is seeking injunctions and civil penalties.
Not just lead – cadmium too
There are still a lot of products on the market with high levels of two neurotoxins: lead and cadmium, which can cause permanent brain damage. Cadmium in another metal to watch for in children’s jewelry. Cadmium is more often associated with cigarette smoke than jewelry. It is highly toxic and is a known human carcinogen. Earlier this year the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s (CPSC) chairwoman warned parents against buying cheap jewelry for their kids, such as that from dollar stores or gumball dispensers, and even places like Claire’s, Walmart, and other chain stores. A lot of the jewelry on the market that doesn’t meet the safety requirements of no more than 0.03 percent cadmium by weight was made in China. Most jewelry tested for cadmium exceeded the CPSC’s proposed limits by more than 100 times.
Several watchdog organizations are in the process of cracking down on cadmium as well as lead. Some states are cracking down too, such as California and Rhode Island. There are still no federal regulations on safe levels of these metals. Over the last decade, there have been approximately 5,000 emergency room visits each year by children who had swallowed inexpensive jewelry. Parents can check recall lists and the CPSC website for information on unsafe products, but it’s easier and safer to just take away any cheap metal jewelry.
Sources for this article include:
by: Sayer Ji, Founder
July 23, 2012
The scientific literature indicates that there are at least two dozen adverse health effects linked to exposure to mineral oil, a crude oil derivative. New research indicates these fat-soluble hydrocarbons are accumulating to disturbing levels in our bodies, and affecting newborns by contaminating breast milk.
How did they get there? Mineral oil is legally allowed to be added to our foods, drugs and cosmetics, where they accumulate in our bodies over time, with the highest concentrations found in our fat deposits. One autopsy study performed in 1985, revealed that 48% of the livers and 46% of the spleens of the 465 autopsies analyzed showed signs of mineral-oil induced lipogranuloma (a nodule of necrotic, fatty tissue associated with granulomatous inflammation or a foreign-body reaction around a deposit of an oily substance), indicating just how widespread pathological tissue changes associated with exposure really are.
In the United States, the FDA has approved mineral for use in cosmetic products, as well as a food additive up to 10 mg/kg a day. For a 150 lb adult (68.03 kilograms) this is the equivalent of 680 milligrams a day, or 248 grams (over half a pound!) a year.
Friday, July 20, 2012
By: S. D. Wells
[NaturalNews] Ever notice when you meet someone who eats mainly organic, who works out often, is financially stable and always in that “sharing” mode, that no matter what happens around them, they stay in that “gear,” that energetic and positive attitude just stays illuminated and seems to levitate over the negativity? Some people just seem to reach their potential every day, in almost every way. If you haven’t noticed this, start paying attention, because they’re out there, and they are loving life. There is also a reason many people never reach their potential in life, never finalizing that idea that would have made them wealthy, and they’re just kind of “getting by,” not really applying themselves or making the most of their opportunities and gifts. (http://www.fi.edu/learn/brain/exercise.html/)
Believe it or not, a fairly rigid diet of organic food, drinks, herbs, vitamins, minerals, Dead Sea salts and natural spring water enables human beings to reach their ultimate HEALTH POTENTIAL and use more than 15 percent of their BRAIN each day. (http://skeptics.stackexchange.com)
Most people who do not consume these foods, supplements and spring water daily often use the same excuse when confronted with the organic choice: “It’s too expensive.” This is simply NOT TRUE. Organic food is only more expensive when you shop at stores which either cater to processed food lovers or high endorganic/health supply stores. Many mid-size grocers like Trader Joes and local farmer’s markets are quite reasonable, and even Whole Foods offers many organic items at the same prices you would find the “bad” foods at if shopping the big chain grocers like Farm Fresh, Food Lion and Kroger.
Embrace reality and change your habits
Once you come to grips with the fact that organic food is affordable, you have to pull in the reigns on your SALT AND SUGAR habit. Don’t panic! Your taste buds will return to normal after you come off the high fructose corn syrup and the monosodium glutamate. Once you quit the deep fat fried habit and the super-salted meat and French fries, you’ll start tasting the true flavors of vegetables and fruits again, and realize exactly what it is you’re missing.
When you consume organic foods, your body and brain function at maximum capacity. Your body is not struggling to digest and filter out toxins, gluten, hormones, antibiotics, fluoride, bleach (white rice, white bread, white flour, white sugar, white pasta), artificial sweeteners, radioactive fish, genetically modified corn and soy, and the list goes on.
When you consume organic foods, your cells aren’t being strangled by preservatives like sodium benzoate, BHA, BHT, and your water isn’t polluted with BPA (bisphenol-A).
When you cut out processed foods and synthetic food agents from your daily intake, your energy doesn’t tap out five to ten minutes into a workout, or a jog. You last 30 minutes, an hour, and eventually longer!
When you stop buying foods and products that cause cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer’s and arthritis, you STOP DONATING MONEY TO DISEASE, and you begin the repair and refortification of your own system. You stop wasting money going to the doctor for colds, flues, viruses, bacterial infections, allergies, bronchitis, cavities, heart disease, headaches, fibromyalgia, irritable bowels, colon polyps, prostate problems, breast cancer check-ups.
by: Lisa Garber
July 18, 2012
Earlier this year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration declared bisphenol A relatively safe (cough, cough). But due to the growing awareness that BPA is actually highly toxic, even the FDA’s ‘safe’ statement hasn’t stopped many plastics and papers manufacturers from replacing the estrogen-mimicking compound with its close cousin, bisphenol S. And the revenue has been worth the change, even if BPS isn’t any safer than BPA. In fact, you may be more exposed to the BPS chemical now than you were to BPA before.
Why BPA is Unsafe
Despite the FDA’s announcement, research continues to raise red flags over BPA. Endocrinology, a publication of The Endocrine Society, featured a study in which mice received low doses of BPA and thereafter experienced effects on the brain and social behaviors.
Because BPA is environmentally persistent, its effects are long-lasting and trans-generational as well. In the aforementioned study, prenatal exposure to mice correlated with raised levels of anxiety, aggression, and cognitive difficulties.
Maybe mice are mice and people are people, but our exposure to BPA is nothing to be overlooked. We eat food from cans with BPA. We store leftovers in containers with BPA. We drink water from BPA-laden bottles. We handle thermal paper and thereby BPA at the workplace. We essentially live, breathe, and eat BPA.
And now we have to worry about the BPS chemical instead?
Increased BPS Chemical Exposure
Not much is yet known about BPS—the compound replacing BPA in products like thermal paper—but the outlook is gloomy.
In 2005, Japanese scientists compared the hormone-mimicking effects of BPA and 19 similar compounds (including BPS chemical) on human cells. Although they found BPS’s effects to be slightly weaker than its cousin’s, new research shows that we may be absorbing more BPS through our skin than we were absorbing BPA.
Kurunthachalam Kannan of the Wadsworth Center at the New York state Department of Health led a research team in analyzing 16 types of paper from the U.S., Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam. All receipt paper analyzed contained BPS.
“People who handle thermal paper in their jobs may be absorbing much more BPS,” the analysts said—19 times more, according to their research.
If you’re concerned about your BPS exposure, keep in mind that BPA-free (and BPS-laden) receipts have those telltale red fibers in the paper. To reduce your exposure:
- Wash your hands after touching thermal paper.
- Save paper—and yourself—and tell the cashier to not print the receipt.
- Avoid putting receipts in bags with food.
- Store necessary receipts in folders or drawers to avoid unnecessary contact.
- If you are the cashier, consider investing in gloves.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
By: Ethan A. Huff
[NaturalNews] Growing awareness about the prolific presence of the hormone disruptor bisphenol A (BPA) in plastics, receipt paper, money, and various other consumer products and materials has led to the widespread removal of this highly toxic chemical from many products in recent years. But bisphenol S (BPS), the chemical now being used in place of BPA in many “BPA-free” products, may be just as harmful — if not more harmful — than BPA.
A new study published in the ACS journal Environmental Science & Technology is the first to analyze the presence of BPS in consumer products, and particularly in both thermal and recycled paper products. According to Kurunthachalam Kannan and colleagues who conducted the study, BPS is similar to BPA in that it mimics estrogen, and can cause severe endocrine disruption as a result of repeated exposure.
For their study, which was funded in part by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and the Department of Science and Technology of Shandong Province, Kannan and the team tested 16 different types of paper and paper products, including thermal receipt paper, paper currencies, flyers, magazines, newspapers, food contact papers, airplane luggage tags, printing paper, paper towels, and toilet papers.
They found that every single tested sample of thermal receipt paper, which is used by most retailers nowadays to print purchase receipts, tested positive for BPS at concentrations ranging from 0.0000138 milligrams per gram (mg/g) to 22.0 mg/g. This is roughly the same range level that has been observed in thermal receipt paper for BPA in earlier studies.
BPS is up to 19 times more absorbable in the skin than BPA
The research team also found that 87 percent of currency bill samples, which were collected from 21 different countries, contained BPS in varying levels. BPS was also observed in 14 of the other paper products sampled as well, including in 52 percent of recycled paper samples tested, which indicates that this largely unknown chemical is quietly hiding in all sorts of paper products that millions of people are exposed to every single day.
Perhaps the most disturbing finding about BPS; however, is the fact that BPS absorbs into the skin at much higher rates than BPA. According to the study, BPS is capable of absorbing at a rate up to 1900 percent higher than BPA, which makes it potentially much more harmful than BPA at altering hormone levels.
According to a 2005 study out of Japan, BPS is only slightly less potent than BPA at mimicking the female hormone estrogen in the body. However, other studies have shown that BPS is far less biodegradable than BPA, and is actually the most persistent bisphenol compound among eight of the most common bisphenol compounds tested. (http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org)
Sources for this article include: