Posts Tagged Toxic
by: Lisa Garber
July 13, 2012
There’s nothing quite like an ice-cold glass of rocket fuel on a summer afternoon. Perchlorate, a key ingredient in rocket fuel, can be found in almost everybody in America. Perchlorate in drinking water has been an issue for quite some time, and has been contaminates our ground and drinking water and everything quenched by it—people, lettuce, cows.
Perchlorate in Drinking Water – Rocket Fuel Contaminating Food and Water
This environmental pollutant and toxin is even changing the meaning of “organic.” The Journal of Environmental Science and Technology says that perchlorate contaminates 32 percent of organically grown produce—twice the number attributed to conventional produce!
That an ingredient used by the pyrotechnics industry ends up in your refreshing beverage (and your burger, and your salad) is no accident. Exxon Valdez was an accident. Perchlorate in our bodies is a result of negligence.
In most cases, perchlorate in drinking water occurs due to improper disposal at military bases, chemical plants, and rocket testing sites. Concerned citizens and representatives have rallied and pressured the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the toxin, but it took them almost 10 years to announce its first federal drinking water standard for perchlorate. One might guess that the EPA dragged its feet due to pressures from big businesses and the military, reluctant to spend more money on public health and being held fiscally respsonible for damages to organic farmers and the population in general.
A Cause of Hypothyroidism
Why should we worry about perchlorate in drinking water and subsequently, our bodies? Aside from the sheer insult of paying extra money for organic produce only to get a little extra rocket fuel in our suppers, perchlorate has been linked to hypothyroidism.
Perchlorate impedes iodide uptake, which is why doctors in the 1950s used it to treat hyperthyroidism. (While hyperthyroidism is gets its name from an overactive thyroid, hypothyroidism is the condition of the thyroid gland making insufficient amounts of thyroid hormones.) It may not be a coincidence that diagnoses of this condition is on the rise in our military-industrial nation.
Research your region’s perchlorate contamination to stay in the know. If you regularly drink from well water, consider testing it for perchlorate contamination.
by: Elizabeth Renter
July 3, 2012
The best interests of humanity were long ago abandoned by corporate giants in favor of the almighty dollar. But would companies really make false promises and put babies on the line to boost their bottom line? Well, yes, they would. Baby formula manufacturers first started putting synthetic fatty acids called DHA and ARA in formula about a decade ago. Despite complaints over the years and questionable marketing practices by the companies, these DHA/ARA-enhanced formulas remain on the market today.
DHA/ARA-Enhanced Baby Formula
DHA and ARA are long-chain fatty acids that are naturally present in human breast milk. However, the DHA and ARA in baby formula is synthetic – not natural. Instead, they are produced by a company called Martek Biosciences Corp. They are made in a lab with algae and fungus, and then extracted with hexane, a neurotoxin.
Since the DHA/ARA formulas began showing up on shelves, the FDA has been flooded with complaints from consumers. Letter after letter found parents dealing with sick and unhappy babies – babies who did a complete 180-degree turnaround when taken off the formula.
Initially, according to this AlterNet report, the FDA alerted Martek that they would be convening a group of scientists to look into concerns about the synthetic DHA and ARA. But Martek responded, telling the FDA that such research would “not be productive.” For whatever reason, the FDA agreed and didn’t look any further at the formula additive.
Many formulas have used these synthetic substances and have been called out for calling their products “The Breast Milk Formula,” and suggesting theirs was even better than the breast.
Prior to the additives being placed in bottles, Martek marketed them to companies saying:
Even if [the DHA/ARA blend] has no benefit, we think it would be widely incorporated into formulas as a marketing tool and to allow companies to promote their formula as “closest to human milk.”
And there it is– the recognition that a substance may or may not be useful, the seeming disregard of any potential risks, all for the admitted marketing tool and the money that it would bring in.
This detailed report from Cornucopia.org shows that upset tummies and fussy attitudes might not be the only negative mark of DHA/ARA infused formula. They reveal that in Martek’s own studies, lab rats showed a “significant increase in relative liver weights.” And this is from the manufacturer’s studies. Imagine what an impartial study might find.
by: Lisa Gerber
July 3, 2012
Every can of Coke contains about 10 teaspoons of sugar—an inflammatory, an energy sapper, and a leading cause of tooth decay—but it’s the 10mg of alcohol in every liter that might concern consumers the most. A new report reveals that many leading soda brands — including Coke and Pepsi — contain a small amount of alcohol per bottle. The findings are particularly startling for those who object alcohol for religious or spiritual reasons and may be unknowingly consuming it through Coke and Pepsi beverages.
French Scientists Find Alcohol Hiding in Coke and Pepsi
On June 27, Paris-based National Institute of Consumption (INC) revealed that half of the most popular sodas contain minute traces of alcohol. These sodas include Coca-Cola, Pepsi Cola, Coca-Cola Classic Light, and Coke Zero. Many cheaper supermarket versions are actually alcohol-free.
Admittedly, 10mg per liter isn’t much (it’s about 0.001 percent alcohol). Because the Qur’an forbids consumption of alcoholic beverages, though, some Muslims may take issue with that small percent, even if the Committee of the Mosque of Paris deems it still in line with their religious beliefs. Others who have decided to abstain from alcohol may also be outraged.
So, what is alcohol doing in soda? Michel Pepin, the scientific director for Coca-Cola France, says that traces of alcohol come from the process of making soda rather than the initial ingredients of its secret recipe. The amount is, however, legal. In fact, even orange juice has some alcohol because ethanol occurs naturally in many citrus fruits, particularly toward the end of harvest season, when the yeasts have had more time to convert sugar into alcohol.
Massive Sugar Content Spikes Disease Rates
Meanwhile, sugar and artificial sweetener consumption has been linked repeatedly with obesity, diabetes, cancer, and heart disease. A 2009 study even found that almost half of high-fructose corn syrup (usually in the top two ingredients of soda) contained toxic mercury. So no matter how you look at it, soda is definitely a health destroyer.
by: Sayer Ji
June 25, 2012
Conservative estimates indicate that the 2010 BP oil disaster released over 200 million gallons of oil into the Gulf, followed by at least 1.8 million gallons of dispersants. While the use of dispersants helped mitigate the public relations disaster by preventing the persistent formation of surface oil, as well as keeping many beaches visibly untouched, they also drove the oil deeper into the water column (and food chain) rendering a 2-dimensional problem (surface oil) into a 3-dimensional one. Additionally, research indicates that dispersants prevent the biodegradation of toxic oil components, as well as increasing dispersant absorption into fish from between 6 to 1100 fold higher levels.
Since the event, both the mainstream media and the government have acted as if the oil disappeared, and that no significant health risks remain for the millions still consuming contaminated seafood from the Gulf.*
Now, a new study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives has revealed that the 2010 BP Gulf oil disaster resulted in widespread contamination of Gulf Coast seafood with toxic components from crude oil.1 In fact, levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in shrimp were found to exceed the FDA’s established thresholds for allowable levels [levels of concern (LOCs)] for pregnant women in up to 53% of Gulf shrimp sampled.
June 22, 2012
We’ve all seen the “BPA-free” labels affixed prominently to new plastic products. And many of us have fallen for the ruse, purchasing these new water bottles and food storage containers thinking we can still enjoy the convenience of plastics without the hormone-altering BPA. But what manufacturers are using in place of BPA might not be any safer. It’s known as ‘BPS‘ and as a matter of fact, it could be even worse.
Bisphenol-A (BPA) has made headlines over the past several years for the growing awareness of its dangers. Namely, it mimics estrogen in the body, throwing hormones out of whack. Although the United States and Europe have banned BPA in baby bottles, Canada remains the only country that has officially declared BPA as a “toxic substance.” Because of this, many people have smartly begun shunning plastics, opting for glass or metal, or choosing the new slick and expensive drinking bottles labeled “BPA-free”.
In place of BPA, manufacturers have begun using something called bisphenol-S (BPS). Unfortunately, there is no indication that BPS is any safer. On the contrary, it could be even worse than the villainized BPA. So, why are manufacturers using it? Well, because they can!
There is little information available on BPS at this point. Scientific research is lacking, and because there is little to say that it’s bad for you, manufacturers don’t have to worry (yet) about the repercussions of putting it in their products and selling it to unknowing consumers.
According to the Environmental Science and Technology, BPS is actually of a “comparable potency” to BPA. Also, it is “less biodegradable, and more heat-stable and photo-resistant” than its predecessor BPA. What does this mean? Well, it has the same estrogen-mimicking qualities and it doesn’t degrade as quickly as BPA, so it can stick around in your body for longer periods of time.
This isn’t a new practice—skirting public fears by playing on their ignorance. Plastic manufacturers know that the information about BPS is still in an infancy stage. They know they can get a few good years off of this “BPA-free” label craze before science catches up with them. So, in the meantime, they will keep selling you their new supposedly-safer products and probably even sell them at a higher price!
The bottom line is that we don’t know everything that is now being included in plastics. They are likely an “alphabet soup of toxic chemicals,” according to Mercola. Even canned goods are lined with BPA. Your best bet is to stick with glass whenever possible for food storage, drinking water, and microwaving (if you still do that).
Scotts Miracle-Gro sold bird seed contaminated with toxic poisons, class-action lawsuit seeks damages
Friday, June 22, 2012
By: Jonathan Benson
[NaturalNews] Scotts Miracle-Gro, a popular household name in gardening and lawn care products, is the subject of a new class-action lawsuit that is seeking damages for the company’s willful distribution and sale of bird seed products contaminated with toxic, unapproved insecticides. Courthouse News Service (CNS) reports that plaintiffs from Illinois, Missouri, Minnesota, Arkansas, Kentucky, and New Mexico have jointly filed the new suit, which follows an earlier suit in which Scotts Miracle-Gro pleaded guilty to knowingly selling poisoned bird seed to customers for over two years.
According to the latest suit, Scotts Miracle-Gro sold customers “defective and toxic bird feed products” between November 2005 and March 2008 when it knowingly applied Storcide II (chlorpyrifos-methyl) and Actellic 5E (pirimiphos-methyl), two illegal insecticide chemicals, to several brands of of its bird seed that includeCountry Pride, Morning Song, Scotts Songbird Selections, and Scotts Wild Bird Food. As a result, plaintiffs say they and thousands of others were ripped off by Scotts Miracle-Gro and its “criminal enterprise,” which may have also poisoned countless bird species across the U.S.
“Scotts failed to disclose that its bird seed contained pesticides that were known to be highly toxic to birds,” says the complaint. “Instead, [Scotts Miracle-Gro] knowingly sold millions of units of its defective and toxic bird seed products, knowing the products would be widely used to feed birds at purchasers’ homes, in back yards and in wild and natural environments across the United States.”
Scotts Miracle-Gro apparently started using the two chemicals as bird seed coating to prevent insects from ravaging the product in storehouses prior to shipment and use. But neither Storcide II nor Actellic 5E are approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for use in bird feed, and the EPA specifically recognizes Storcide II as being extremely toxic to birds, fish, and other wildlife, which means it clearly has no place being used in food given to birds.
“Both chemical toxins act as cholinesterase inhibitors that result in overstimulation of the nervous system,” says a piece published by the U.K.’s Guardian about both Storcide II and Actellic 5E. “Small doses of either poison cause symptoms that include nausea, dizziness, and confusion, and higher doses lead to respiratory paralysis and death.”
Scotts Miracle-Gro scientists warned that insecticides threatened birds, company ignored pleas
The suit also alleges that during the summer and fall of 2007, a pesticide chemist and an ornithologist both working for Scott’s Miracle-Gro came forward and warned their company that the use of Storcide II and Actellic 5E in bird feed was a serious threat to birds. Scotts Miracle-Gro allegedly ignored these warnings and continued to use the additives in bird feed for several years. According to the allegations, 73 million units of tainted bird feed were sold during this time.
During this same time, a federal registrations manager who was also employed by Scotts Miracle-Gro intentionally falsified pesticide registration documents for both Storcide II and Actellic 5E, which gave the illusion that both products were permitted for use in bird seed. When asked by the EPA for documents backing the use of the two chemicals, Scotts Miracle-Gro “fabricated correspondence and agency documents … in an effort to deceive the EPA into believing it had registered these products but lost its files.”
Chlorpyrifos linked to Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD)
To make matters even worse, the active ingredient in Storcide II, chlorpyrifos-methyl, is one of the many chemical poisons linked to causing Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), the mysterious bee collapse phenomenon that has been observed all across the world. A paper published in both the American Bee Journal (ABJ) and Bee Culture explains how chlorpyrifos is one of several insecticides that has been found in bee pollen samples (http://www.beeccdcap.uga.edu/documents/CAPArticle16.html).
So Scotts Miracle-Gro illegally used highly-toxic insecticides in bird feed for several years, fabricated documents submitted to government agencies, ignored warnings by its own scientists that the chemicals were dangerous, and exposed countless millions of bees to chemicals that are more than likely contributing to their demise. Is this the kind of company the natural health community should continue supporting?
The plaintiffs are seeking compensatory damages, treble statutory damages, costs of suit, and reasonable attorneys’ fees as part of their lawsuit. Numerous violations are also cited in the suit, including several state fraud laws and the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, also known as RICO.
You can view a full copy of the class-action lawsuit against Scotts Miracle-Gro here:
Sunday, March 18, 2012
By: J. D. Heyes
[NaturalNews] A new study has found there are higher levels of potentially toxic manganese in a number of residential neighborhoods that are located near industrial or manufacturing sites at various locations around the country.
The study, conducted by researchers from Kansas State University (KSU), Columbia University and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Department of Environmental Health Sciences, found varying levels of manganese in analyzed samples of airborne particulate matter from Sacramento County, Calif., Pinellas County, Fla., Anoka County, Minn., Harris County, Texas and Maricopa County, Ariz.
While not much research has been done on just what levels of manganese are thought to be toxic, if any, Saugata Datta, assistant professor of geology at KSU, says the most recent research on the element, as it relates to air quality, is not looking good.
“Manganese is an element that was originally thought to have a lot of nutritional aspects for humans and was relatively harmless health-wise,” he said. “But more recently that thinking is changing. Manganese is a neurotoxin at certain levels when in water, so there is a question about if it’s toxic in air, too.”
High manganese levels problematic
The level of manganese measured at each of the five sample sites, researchers say, ranged from 0.01 micrograms/mg to 0.67 micrograms/mg. In addition, “sample compositions also varied in types of manganese, which included manganese-2 oxide, manganese-3 oxide, manganese-2 acetate, manganese-2 pyrophosphate and manganese-2 sulfate at various levels at each location,” said a synopsis of the study.
“Because the levels of manganese have not been monitored very much, it’s hard to say whether these are high, low or average levels,” Dattanoted. That said, studies of whether manganese has implications on human health have shown it to be problematic, he said.
“Toxicological studies have linked airborne particulate matter containing manganese to respiratory and cardiovascular health. Additionally, long-term inhalation of manganese has been attributed to manganism, an irreversible disease similar to Parkinson’s,” said the study synopsis.
Researchers also said levels of manganese found in areas near gas, power and petroleum manufacturing and refinery sites were higher even than those found near the industrial sites.
Arsenic and manganese connection?
Datta is also conducting research on India’s groundwater, which contains manganese and arsenic. According to preliminary data, researchers have discovered that if arsenic is found in ground water, so, too, is manganese. The KSU team may have also found that as higher levels of arsenic are found, there are lower levels of manganese, and vice versa, though they offered no explanation of this phenomenon.
“These studies are a unique set of work that not many people are looking at,” Datta said. “We’re attacking manganese, understanding the toxicity levels and understanding its chemistry in both air and in water. Both are pathways to be ingested by humans.”
“In air most of it is caused by vehicles and industries, but in water it is affected by sediments that leach out,” he continued. “We want to attack back.”
The element arsenic is a metalloid that is generally found in many minerals, usually in conjunction with sulfur and metals. It’s most often used to strengthen alloys of copper and especially lead, such as car batteries. A 1999 study by the National Academy of Sciences found that arsenic in drinking water causes bladder, lung and skin cancer, and may cause kidney and liver cancer. It can also cause harm to the central and peripheral nervous systems, as well as heart and blood vessels, and causes serious skin problems, and may be responsible for birth defects and reproductive problems.
Manganese is a metal with important industrial metal alloy uses, particularly in stainless steels. It, too, is a commonly occurring element, most often found in minerals. A study in Canadafound that increased levels of the mineral in waterresulted in a measurable decrease in the intellect of children who drank the water.
Source: Natural News