Foods, Health and Disease, Uncategorized

China refuses GMO grain imports from the United States

Health and Wellness Associates

EHS – Telehealth

 

China refuses GMO grain imports from the United States

 GMOcorn

 China has decided to suspend the issuance of permits for the importation of animal feed produced in America that is made with corn. China is not known for having exceptionally high standards, which is what makes this so disturbing.

 

Three trading executives discussed the turn of events with Bloomberg Business Week not too long ago. Dried distillers’ grains, also known as DDGS by industry professionals, can no longer be exported from America to China. The reason for this puzzling decision is because the Chinese government fears that MIR 162 corn, a GM strain that the Chinese have not approved, carries a high risk of contamination.

 

China was once the largest buyer of this American corn byproduct, which is produced in the process of making ethanol. More than 40 percent of the corn grown in the United Sates is used to make ethanol, and China bought 34 percent of the United States’ DDGS exports.

 

Of course, this turn of events is not really all that surprising. China rejected several shipments of corn that proved to be contaminated by MIR 162. In one instance, the government rejected 1.1 million metric tons of Syngenta corn that was tainted. The  Chinese government also turned away 758 tons of corn. It is therefore understandable that the Chinese government simply decided to suspend importation of corn-based animal feeds.

 

So China probably thinks we’re purposefully trying to contaminate their food supply with GMOs. Could you blame them? Our government has contaminated our own food supply with them!

 

On the bright side, AG Web reports that a class-action lawsuit has been filed against Syngenta, MIR 162’s creator and manufacturer, on behalf of American farmers. The corn was genetically engineered to be more resistant to insects, and was approved by the U.S. in 2010. The corn, also known as Agrisure Viptera, was marketed and promoted before it had received import approval from China. The ensuing turmoil over China’s rejection of the product  has left farmers shortchanged.

 

James Pizzirusso, a partner with the Hausfeld law firm in Washington, D.C., has said, “Syngenta must be held accountable for its blatant misrepresentations to U.S. corn farmers. By promoting and marketing a genetically-modified corn seed before the seed had received import approval from China, Syngenta placed its own profit margins over corn farmers’ livelihoods.” Pizzirusso also notes that China’s rejection of the MIR 162 corn has been a nightmare for affected farmers, causing losses equating to more than 1 billion dollars.

 

Syngenta has also been sued by both Cargill and Trans Coastal Supply Co. for their losses due to China’s rejection of products contaminated with MIR 162. Cargill has sued for a cool $90 million, while Trans Coastal Supply Co. blames Syngenta for $41 million in losses. Naturally, Syngenta believes that it is not at fault at all. In fact, they all but pat themselves on the back for providing farmers access to their “new technologies.”

“Dr P. Carrothers of Health and Wellness Associates says, ” The bottom line is, if corn is not good enough for animals in Europe and China, it definately is not good enough for humans in the United States.  But they are still able to sell it!”

 

 

Health and Wellness Associates

Archived

healthwellnessassociates@gmail.com

WordPress:  https://healthandwellnessassociates.co/

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/HealthAndWellnessAssociates/

Twitter: 

Health and Wellness Associates       @Healtha98410402

 

 

Advertisements
Health and Disease, Uncategorized

Monsanto may soon face “FLOOD” of lawsuits from cancer victims of Roundup herbicide

Health and Wellness Associates

EHS – Telehealth

 

Monsanto may soon face “FLOOD” of lawsuits from cancer victims of Roundup herbicide

 

 

monsantolawsuits.jpg

Monsanto, the maker of the world’s most popular weed killer Roundup, could soon be facing an unrelenting flood of lawsuits from people who got cancer from their product.

On Tuesday, a federal judge decided to allow three expert witnesses to give their testimony pertaining to Roundup’s carcinogenicity. U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that the three experts could testify, and he even went so far as to say that their opinions were not “junk science.” The judge will be residing over more than 400 of the lawsuits against Monsanto.

In his opinion, Chhabria wrote: “So long as an opinion is premised on reliable scientific principles, it should not be excluded by the trial judge; instead the weaknesses in an unpersuasive expert opinion can be exposed at trial, through cross-examination or testimony by opposing experts.”

The firm is currently defending itself in a trial with 46-year-old Dwayne Johnson, who says he became ill with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after he used Roundup for more than two years in his role as a school groundskeeper in California. The dying man is just the first in a list of around 4,000 people with similar lawsuits.

Johnson’s lawyer, Timothy Litzenburg, and Monsanto have agreed not to talk to the media until a jury is in place, but as the representative of hundreds of other victims, he has spoken in the past about the direct link between the rise in Roundup use and the spike in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Another of his clients, 68-year-old coffee bean farmer Christine Sheppard, likened Monsanto’s antics to those of the tobacco industry. She said: “They hid reports linking its weed killer to cancer.” She’s suing them because she’d like to see the product banned and removed from store shelves so others won’t have to suffer like she did.

 

Monsanto knew that Roundup caused cancer and sold it anyway

It’s important to note that this case is not only about Roundup causing cancer but also the fact that Monsanto has long known these products can be deadly and went out of its way to hide it.

The EPA has helped them by ignoring data illustrating the link between non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and glyphosate. The Scientific Advisory Panel found that they threw out studies that shed the products in a negative light, including one that showed farmers who were exposed to the chemical had a 27 to 50 percent higher risk of cancer than control groups.

Should the jury side with Johnson in his case, Monsanto can expect to be flooded with similar lawsuits, with thousands of plaintiffs waiting to see what happens. According to investigative journalist Carey Gillam, the litigation could potentially go on for decades and cost billions of dollars to Monsanto and its new owner, Bayer.

Not surprisingly, Monsanto Vice President Scott Partridge said that the opinions of the experts Judge Chhabria is allowing to testify are “shaky.” He says that “robust” evidence proves glyphosate has “absolutely no” connection to cancer. He’s repeated the lie so often that he might even be starting to believe it.

The real question now is whether or not it will hold up in court. Monsanto doesn’t shy away from using tactics like fabricating and manipulating data, discrediting scientists and other experts who are brave enough to tell the world how dangerous their products are, and mounting deceitful PR campaigns designed to pull the wool over the public’s eyes.

An attorney for the plaintiffs in the upcoming lawsuits, Michael Baum, expressed relief that the judge resisted Monsanto’s efforts to get the suits thrown out, adding that he was looking forward to getting his clients their day in court.

 

Health and Wellness Associates

Archived : MA

healthwellnesssassociates@gmail.com

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/HealthAndWellnessAssociates/notifications/

Twitter:

@Healtha98410402

 

 

 

Foods, Health and Disease, Lifestyle, Uncategorized

Toxic Weed Killer Found in Most Foods Sold in the US

Health and Wellness Associates

EHS Telehealth

 

menmeeting

Toxic Weed Killer Found in Most Foods Sold in the US

 

Earlier this year, researchers from University of California San Diego School of Medicine reported there’s been a dramatic increase in glyphosate exposure in recent decades and, subsequently, the level found in people’s bodies.1 As one would expect, the introduction of so-called “Roundup Ready” genetically engineered (GE) crops led to a massive increase in the use of Roundup, the active ingredient of which is glyphosate.

 

Glyphosate has also become a popular tool for desiccating non-GE grains, legumes and beans, which has further spurred the use of the chemical. Between 1974 — the year glyphosate entered the U.S. market — and 2014, glyphosate use in the U.S. increased more than 250fold.2,3 Globally, glyphosate use has risen nearly fifteenfold since 1996, two years after the first GE crops hit the market.

 

Farmers now apply nearly 5 billion pounds (over 2 billion kilograms) of glyphosate to farm crops each year, worldwide.4 Approximately 300 million pounds are applied on U.S. farmland. According to the researchers, few people had detectable levels of glyphosate in their urine in 1993 when the study began.5 By 2016, 70 percent had detectable levels.6 Overall, between 1993 and 2016, the glyphosate levels in people’s bodies increased by 1,208 percent.

 

Food Testing Reveals Widespread Glyphosate Contamination

While Monsanto still argues that Roundup (and glyphosate in general) is perfectly safe, mounting research tells a very different story, which is why it’s becoming increasingly crucial to assess just how much glyphosate is in our food. Unfortunately, while both the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pesticide Data Program and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) measure pesticide residues in foods, neither of them includes glyphosate in their official testing.

 

The USDA promised to begin glyphosate testing in 2017, yet mere days before the testing was scheduled to begin, the plan was called off. The reason has never been disclosed. The only time the USDA tested for glyphosate was in 2011, when 300 soybean samples were tested and all were found to be contaminated.

 

Meanwhile, the FDA began a limited testing program for glyphosate in 2016, in which high levels of glyphosate was found in oatmeal products and honey, but the agency did not release the results publicly. Now, internal FDA emails obtained by investigative journalist Carey Gillam7 through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests reveal Roundup has been found in virtually all foods tested, including granola and crackers. Gillam writes:

 

“[T]he internal documents obtained by the Guardian show the FDA has had trouble finding any food that does not carry traces of the pesticide. ‘I have brought wheat crackers, granola cereal and corn meal from home and there’s a fair amount in all of them,’ FDA chemist Richard Thompson wrote to colleagues in an email last year regarding glyphosate … broccoli was the only food he had ‘on hand’ that he found to be glyphosate-free …

 

Separately, FDA chemist Narong Chamkasem found ‘over-the-tolerance’ levels of glyphosate in corn, detected at 6.5 parts per million [ppm], an FDA email states. The legal limit is 5.0 ppm. An illegal level would normally be reported to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but an FDA supervisor wrote to an EPA official that the corn was not considered an ‘official sample.’”

 

Independent Testing Also Highlights Massive Glyphosate Problem

The Health Research Institute Labs (HRI Labs) is an independent laboratory that tests both micronutrients and toxins found in food, and is often hired to test foods claiming to be non-GMO, “all natural” and/or organic. One of the toxins HRI Labs is currently focusing on is glyphosate, and the public testing being offered (see below) allows them to compile data on the pervasiveness of this chemical in the food supply.

 

HRI was recently tasked with testing Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, which was also found to contain glyphosate. The samples were provided by the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) and Regeneration Vermont, which are concerned about the environmental impact Ben & Jerry’s dairy producers are having in Vermont. Using sensitive state-of-the-art testing equipment to look at the quality of the ingredients, 10 of the 11 ice cream samples were found to contain substantial levels of glyphosate.

 

HRI Labs has investigated a number of other foods as well, including grains, legumes and beans. Most if not all of these types of crops need to dry in the field before being harvested, and to speed that process, the fields are doused with glyphosate a couple of weeks before harvest. As a result of this practice, called desiccation, grain-based products, legumes and beans contain rather substantial amounts of glyphosate. Quaker Oats, for example, was found to contain very high levels.

 

Orange juice also contains surprising amounts of glyphosate. As it turns out, weeds in orange groves are managed by spraying glyphosate, which ends up in the oranges as the roots of the orange trees pick it up through the soil. A similar situation is occurring in vineyards, which is why many wines are contaminated.

 

HRI Labs has also analyzed more than 1,200 urine samples from U.S. residents. This testing is being done as part of a research project that will provide valuable information about the presence of glyphosate in the diet and how lifestyle and location affects people’s exposure to agrochemicals. Here are some of their findings to date:

 

76 percent of people tested have some level of glyphosate in their system

Men typically have higher levels than women

People who eat oats on a regular basis have twice as much glyphosate in their system as people who don’t (likely because oats are desiccated with glyphosate before harvest)

People who eat organic food on a regular basis have an 80 percent lower level of glyphosate than those who rarely eat organic. This indicates organic products are a safer choice

People who eat five or more servings of vegetables per day have glyphosate levels that are 50 percent lower than those who eat fewer vegetables

How Is Glyphosate Affecting Human Health?

Glyphosate mimics glycine (hence the “gly” in glyphosate), a very common amino acid your body uses to make proteins. As a result, your body can substitute glyphosate for glycine, which results in damaged proteins being produced. According to research published in the journal Entropy in 2013, the main toxic effects of glyphosate are related to the fact that it:8,9

 

Inhibits the shikimate pathway, found in gut bacteria in both humans and animals

Interferes with the function of cytochrome P450 enzymes, required for activation of vitamin D in the liver, and the creation of both nitric oxide and cholesterol sulfate, the latter of which is needed for red blood cell integrity

Chelates important minerals, including iron, cobalt and manganese. Manganese deficiency, in turn, impairs mitochondrial function and can lead to glutamate toxicity in the brain

Interferes with the synthesis of aromatic amino acids and methionine, which results in shortages in critical neurotransmitters and folate

Disrupts sulfate synthesis and sulfate transport

Glyphosate also disrupts, destroys, impairs or inhibits:10

 

The microbiome, thanks to its antibiotic activity

Sulfur metabolism

Methylation pathways

Pituitary release of thyroid stimulating hormone, which can lead to hypothyroidism

The chemical has also been linked to certain cancers. In March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a research arm of the World Health Organization, reclassified glyphosate as a Class 2A probable carcinogen11 based on “limited evidence” showing the weed killer can cause Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and lung cancer in humans, along with “convincing evidence” linking it to cancer in animals.

 

Since then, more than 3,500 individuals have filed lawsuits against Monsanto, claiming the weed killer caused their Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Many of the cases in this multidistrict litigation are being handled in federal court in San Francisco under one judge. Internal documents obtained during discovery have been released by plaintiff attorneys, and have become known as “The Monsanto Papers.”

 

Disturbingly, some of this evidence reveals the EPA has protected the company’s interests by manipulating and preventing key investigations into glyphosate’s cancer-causing potential.

 

According to toxicologist Linda Birnbaum, director of the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Services, even minor exposure could have a detrimental effect on human health. “Even with low levels of pesticides, we’re exposed to so many, and we don’t count the fact that we have cumulative exposures,” she told Gillam.

 

Monsanto Sued for Misleading Consumers

In addition to the lawsuits against Monsanto over Roundup’s cancer-causing effects, the company is also being sued for false and misleading labeling.12 The lawsuit, which accuses Monsanto of falsely claiming glyphosate “targets an enzyme found in plants but not in people or pets” on the Roundup label was filed in April 2017 by the OCA and Beyond Pesticides.

 

As noted above, glyphosate affects the shikimate pathway, which is involved in the synthesis of the essential aromatic amino acids phenylalanine, tyrosine and tryptophan. While the shikimate pathway is absent in human and animal cells, this pathway is present in the gut bacteria of mammals, including humans.

 

So, by way of your gut bacteria, it still wields a significant influence on human health. Aside from a probable cancer link, Roundup’s effect on gut bacteria also suggests the chemical may play a significant role in digestive issues, obesity, autism, Alzheimer’s disease, depression, Parkinson’s disease, liver diseases and many other chronic health problems.

 

Monsanto filed a motion to have the case dismissed, saying the label is accurate because “the enzyme targeted is not produced by the human body or found in human cells,” but U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly rejected the motion.

 

In his May 1 ruling, Kelly stated “The court concludes that Plaintiffs have adequately pleaded a claim that the statement at issue was false or misleading,” and that “defendants cannot dispute that the label’s statement that the enzyme at issue is ‘found in plants, but not in people’ is, at least on one reading, literally false.”

 

How Much Glyphosate Do You Have in Your Body?

According to Gillam, the FDA should publish its glyphosate test results sometime toward the end of this year, or early 2019. Time will tell whether this actually happens or not. The good news is you no longer need to rely on the government when it comes to glyphosate testing. You can test your own levels, thereby assessing your own individual exposure. As mentioned earlier, HRI Labs has developed home test kits for both water and urine.

 

If your levels are high, you would be wise to address your diet and consider buying more organic foods. You may also want to consider some form of detoxification protocol, and take steps to repair the damage to your gut caused by glyphosate and other agrochemicals. Chances are, if your glyphosate levels are high, you probably have a number of other pesticides in your system as well.

 

Fermented foods, particularly kimchi, are potent chelators of these kinds of chemicals. Taking activated charcoal after a questionable meal can help bind and excrete chemicals as well. Remember to stay well-hydrated to facilitate the removal of toxins through your liver, kidneys and skin.

 

Using a sauna on a regular basis is also recommended to help eliminate both pesticides and heavy metals you may have accumulated.

 

Health and Wellness Associates

Archived

Dr J Mercola

312-972-9355

Healthwellnessassocaites@gmail.com

https://www.facebook.com/HealthAndWellnessAssociates/?modal=composer

Lifestyle, Uncategorized

How Monsanto Promotes Worldwide Infertility

monsanto

 

How Monsanto Promotes Worldwide Infertility

 

Monsanto has a long and infamous history of manufacturing and bringing to market such chemicals as DDT, Agent Orange, aspartame, Roundup and dioxin1 — chemical compounds from which society continues to feel the effects.

 

In an effort to distance the current corporation from past deeds, Monsanto refers to the company prior to 2002 as “the former Monsanto” in their news releases.2 However, nothing has really changed aside from their PR machine.

 

While Monsanto has branched into genetic engineering (GE) of plants, the sale of patented GE seeds simply feeds the need for the company’s pesticides. Monsanto is STILL primarily a purveyor of toxins, not life.

 

Monsanto began forging a unique and financially advantageous relationship with the U.S. government starting with the company’s involvement in the Manhattan Project that produced the first nuclear weapons during World War II. During the Vietnam War they were the leading producer of Agent Orange.

 

The specialization in the production and distribution of toxic chemicals continues today.

 

Their influence over government runs so deep that despite the fact 64 other countries have been labeling genetically engineered (GE) foods for years, the U.S. now has the distinction of being the first country to un-label GE foods at the urging of a company producing mass amounts of GE seeds.

 

Monsanto and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

 

In the latter part of the 1920s, Monsanto was the largest producer of PCBs. This chemical was used in lubricant for electric motors, hydraulic fluids and to insulate electrical equipment.3 Old fluorescent light fixtures and electrical appliances with PCB capacitors may still contain the chemical.

 

During the years PCB was manufactured and used, there were no controls placed on disposal. Since PCBs don’t break down under many conditions, they are now widely distributed through the environment and have made the journey up the food chain.4

 

Between the inception and distribution of the product and its subsequent ban in the late 1970s, an estimated 1.5 billion pounds were distributed in products around the world.5

 

Monsanto was the primary manufacturer of PCBs in the U.S. under the trade name Aroclor. Health problems associated with exposure to the chemical were noted as early as 1933 when 23 of 24 workers at the production plant developed pustules, loss of energy and appetite, loss of libido and other skin disturbances.6

 

According to Monsanto’s public timeline, it was in 1966 that “Monsanto and others began to study PCB persistence in the environment.”7 However, seven years earlier, Monsanto’s assistant director of their Medical Department wrote:

 

“… [S]ufficient exposure, whether by inhalation of vapors or skin contact, can result in chloracne which I think we must assume could be an indication of a more systemic injury if the exposure were allowed to continue.”8

 

In 1967, Shell Oil called to inform Monsanto of press reports from Sweden, noting that PCBs were accumulating in mammals further up the food chain. Shell asked for PCB samples to perform their own analytical studies.9

 

With full knowledge of the devastation expected to the environment and humanity, it wasn’t until 11 years later, in 1977, that Monsanto reportedly pulled production on PCB.10

 

PCBs Are Probable Human Carcinogens

 

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Toxicology Program, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIEHS) have identified PCBs as either probable, potential or reasonably likely to cause cancer in humans.11

 

If it seems like these agencies are couching their words, they are. Human studies have noted increased rates of liver cancer, gall bladder cancer, melanomas, gastrointestinal cancer, biliary tract cancer, brain cancer and breast cancer when individuals had higher levels of PCB chemicals in their blood and tissue.12

 

However, the EPA limits the ability of researchers to link a chemical as a carcinogen unless there is conclusive proof. While this proof is evident in animal studies, you can’t feed these chemicals to humans and record the results. Thus PCBs are a “probable” carcinogen in humans. Other health effects from PCBs include:

 

Babies born with neurological and motor control delays including lower IQ, poor short-term memory and poor performance on standardized behavioral assessment tests

Disrupted sex hormones including shortened menstrual cycles, reduced sperm count and premature puberty

Imbalanced thyroid hormone affecting growth, intellectual and behavioral development

Immune effects, including children with more ear infections and chickenpox

Once PCBs are absorbed in the body they deposit in the fat tissue. They are not broken down or excreted. This means the number of PCBs build over time and move up the food chain. Smaller fish are eaten by larger ones and eventually land on your dinner table.

 

Chemical Poisoning Begins Before Birth

 

A recent study at the University of California demonstrated that PCBs are found in the blood of pregnant women.13 Before birth, the umbilical cord delivers approximately 300 quarts of blood to your baby every day.

 

Not long ago, researchers believed the placenta would shield your developing baby from most pollutants and chemicals. Now we know it does not.

 

The umbilical cord is a lifeline between mother and child, sustaining life and propelling growth. However, in recent research cord blood contained between 200 and 280 different chemicals; 180 were known carcinogens and 217 were toxic to the baby’s developing nervous system.14

 

The deposits of chemicals in your body or the body of your developing baby are called your “body burden” of chemicals and pollution.

 

A steady stream of chemicals from the environment during a critical time of organ and system development has a significant impact on the health of your child, both in infancy and as the child grows to adulthood.

 

Tracey Woodruff, Ph.D., director of the University of California San Francisco Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, was quoted in a press release, saying:

 

“It was surprising and concerning to find so many chemicals in pregnant women without fully knowing the implications for pregnancy. Several of these chemicals in pregnant women were at the same concentrations that have been associated with negative effects in children from other studies.

 

In addition, exposure to multiple chemicals that can increase the risk of the same adverse health outcome can have a greater impact than exposure to just one chemical.”

 

Butyl Benzyl Phthalate — Another Monsanto Product

 

Butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), also manufactured by Monsanto, was recently implicated in cell fat storage.15 This specific phthalate was found in human fluids and had an effect on the accumulation of fat inside cells.

 

BBP is used in the manufacture of vinyl tile, as a plasticizer in PVC pipe, carpets, conveyer belts and weather stripping in your home and office.

 

Like other phthalates used in the production of plastics, BBP is not bound to the product and can be released into your environment. It may be absorbed by crops and move up the food chain.16 The biggest source of exposure is food.

 

Drive-through hamburgers and take-out pizzas may be increasing your intake of phthalates. The danger is not in the food itself but in the products used to handle it. The study analyzed data from nearly 9,000 individuals, finding the one-third who had eaten at a fast food restaurant had higher levels of two different phthalates.17

 

Potentially, BBP may adversely affect your reproductive function. However, at lower doses it also has an effect on your kidneys, liver and pancreas.18 Increased risks of respiratory disorders and multiple myelomas have also been reported in people who have exposure to products manufactured with BBP.19 An increasing waistline from BBP exposure may also reduce your fertility.

 

Low Sperm Count and Infertility Affecting Animals and Humans

 

A 26-year study of fertility in dogs, published recently, has distinct similarities to infertility rates in humans. In this study, researchers evaluated the ejaculate of nearly 2,000 dogs. Over the 26 year period, they found a drop in sperm motility of 2.4 percent per year.20

 

Additionally, both the semen and the testicles of castrated dogs contained by PCBs and phthalates, implicated in other studies to reduction in fertility. Phthalates have been implicated in both decreased sperm motility and quality of your sperm,21 affecting both fertility and the health of your children.22

 

Researchers used dogs in this study as they live in the same environment as their owners, and often eat some of the same food. This correlation between sperm function and concentration, and environment and food in dogs and humans is significant.

 

In those 26 years there was also a rise in cryptorchidism in male pups (a condition where the testicles don’t descend into the scrotum) born to stud dogs who experienced a decline in sperm quality and motility.23 Cryptorchidism and undescended testicles, occurs at a rate of 1 in 20 term male human infants and 1 in 3 pre-term babies.24

 

Problems with infertility are also affecting marine animals at the top of the food chain. In the western waters of the Atlantic, the last pod of Orcas are doomed to extinction. High levels of PCB have been found in the fat of over 1,000 dolphins and Orcas in the past 20 years. Now taking a toll on the animal’s fertility, this pod of Orcas has not reproduced in the 19 years it has been under study.25

 

Orcas were living in the North Sea until the 1960s. At that time PCB pollution peaked in the area and the Orca whales disappeared. The same happened in the Mediterranean Sea, where the whales flourished until the 1980s. This pod off the coast of the U.K. is the last living pod in that area.

 

Monsanto’s Argument in PCB Lawsuits

 

 

Although Monsanto denies culpability and knowledge of the danger behind the chemical PCB, you’ll discover internal documentation in this video that they did, in fact, know of the danger while manufacturing and distributing the product. Monsanto is currently embroiled in several lawsuits across eight cities and the argument is over who owns the rain. The cities are suing Monsanto in Federal Court, saying PCBs manufactured by Monsanto have polluted the San Francisco Bay.26

 

Monsanto attorney Robert Howard argues that because the city does not own the water rights, the city does not have the right to sue. And, because the PCBs have not damaged city property, such as corroding pipes, Howard claims it is a state problem. Scott Fiske, attorney for three cities, countered with the city’s regulatory interests in management of storm water as a fundamental function of the city.27

 

While Fiske claims he can prove Monsanto knew the product was hazardous as early as 1969, Howard maintains the company should not be liable for the use of the chemicals it produced.

 

In 2001, Monsanto attorneys in the Owens v. Monsanto case, acknowledged only one health threat from exposure to PCBs: chloracne, and instead argued that since the entire planet has been contaminated, they are innocent of all liability.28 The attorney for Monsanto was quoted in the Chemical Industry Archives, saying:

 

“The truth is that PCBs are everywhere. They are in meat, they are in everyone in the courtroom, they are everywhere and they have been for a long time, along with a host of other substances.” 29

 

The cities currently engaged in lawsuits against Monsanto for damage to the environment and waterways include Berkley, Oakland, San Jose, Portland, Spokane, Seattle, Long Beach and San Diego. All eight cities attempted to combine their cases against the agrochemical giant but were unsuccessful when one judge found the issues were different enough to warrant separate cases.30

 

Monsanto’s Deep Pockets

 

Monsanto petitioned the Federal Court to dismiss Portland’s lawsuit, claiming it would countersue, adding years to the process. It is likely Monsanto would increase the scope of the case and include companies who used the product and released the PCBs.31 Meanwhile, three plaintiffs in St. Louis received better news in May 2016 when a jury awarded them a total of $46.5 million, finding Monsanto negligent in the production of PCBs.32

 

This suit claimed Monsanto sold PCBs even after it learned about the dangers, bringing to court internal documents dated 1955, which stated: “We know Aroclors [PCBs] are toxic but the actual limit has not been precisely defined.”33 To date this win over Monsanto has been rare. Williams Kherkher, attorney for the plaintiffs, explained in EcoWatch:34

 

“The only reason why this victory is rare is because no one has had the money to fight Monsanto.”

 

Kherkher and other firms pooled their resources in this case and expect wins in upcoming lawsuits. The firm has accumulated the names of approximately 1,000 plaintiffs with claims against Monsanto and PCBs.

SAD NEWS: House Passes DARK Act Compromise

 

The House passed a compromise to the DARK Act that will force food distributors to disclose the presence of genetically engineered (GE) ingredients with a smartphone scan code. President Obama has signed the bill that removes states’ rights for labeling GMOs. The bill is full of loopholes, which may allow genetically modified ingredients to slip through unannounced.

 

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), aka GE foods, are live organisms whose genetic components have been artificially manipulated in a laboratory setting through creating unstable combinations of plant, animal, bacteria and even viral genes that do not occur in nature or through traditional crossbreeding methods.

 

GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is “safe and beneficial,” and that it advances the agricultural industry. They also say that GMOs help ensure the global food supply and sustainability. But is there any truth to these claims? I believe not. For years, I’ve stated the belief that GMOs pose one of the greatest threats to life on the planet. Genetic engineering is NOT the safe and beneficial technology that it is touted to be.

 

The FDA cleared the way for GE Atlantic salmon to be farmed for human consumption. Thanks to added language in the federal spending bill, the product will require special labeling so at least consumers will have the ability to identify the GE salmon in stores. However, it’s imperative ALL GE foods be labeled clearly without a smartphone scan code because not everyone owns a smartphone.

 

The FDA is threatening the existence of our food supply. We have to start taking action now. I urge you to share this article with friends and family. If we act together, we can make a difference and put an end to the absurdity.

 

Boycott Smart Labels Today

 

When you see the QR code or so-called Smart Label on a food product, pass it by. Products bearing the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association’s (GMA) Smart Label mark are in all likelihood filled with pesticides and/or GMO ingredients.

 

The GMA’s 300-plus members include chemical technology companies, GE seed and food and beverage companies. Monsanto, Dow and Coca-Cola are just some of the heavy-hitters in this powerful industry group, which has showed no qualms about doing whatever it takes to protect the interest of its members.

 

Don’t waste your time searching through their website, which may or may not contain the information you’re looking for. If they insist on wasting your time and making your shopping difficult, why reward them with a purchase?

 

A little known fact is that the GMA actually owns the “Smart Label” trademark that Congress has accepted as a so-called “compromise” to on-package GMO labeling, and that’s another reason why I believe the Smart Label mark is the mark of those with something to hide, such as Monsanto.

 

 

 

Will you financially support a corrupt, toxic and unsustainable food system, or a healthy, regenerative one? There are many options available besides big-brand processed foods that are part of the “GMA’s verified ring of deception.” You can:

 

Shop at local farms and farmers markets

Only buy products marked either “USDA 100 percent Organic” (which by law cannot contain GMOs), “100 percent Grass-Fed” or “Non-GMO Verified”

If you have a smartphone and you don’t mind using it, download the OCA’s Buycott app to quickly and easily identify the thousands of proprietary brands belonging to GMA members, so you can avoid them, as well as identify the names of ethical brands that deserve your patronage

Last but not least, encourage good companies to reject QR codes and to be transparent and clear with their labeling. This will eventually ensure that all GMO foods can easily be identified by the GMA’s “verified ring of deception” mark that is the Smart Label.

 

Campbell’s, Mars, Kellogg’s, ConAgra and General Mills all vowed to voluntarily comply with Vermont’s GMO labeling law by labeling all of their foods sold across the U.S. Will their plans change now that the law has been passed by Congress and signed by the President? That remains to be seen, but if you like these companies, I would encourage you to reach out to them and ask them to remain steadfast in their promise.

 

Please Share with Family and Loved Ones, and don’t forget Your Facebook Friends

 

Health and Wellness Associates

Archived: 2016  JM

312-972-WELL

Health and Disease

Monsantos cancer causing herbicide is found in 80% of feminine hygiene products

femininehygiene

Are you putting Monsanto in your vagina? 85% of tampons and feminine hygiene products contaminated with cancer-causing glyphosate herbicide

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, over 50 American women were killed by their tampons. Although the FDA and the feminine hygiene industry have gone to tremendous lengths to try to memory hole this true history (and label it just a “rumor”), tampons made from certain non-natural fibers were found to harbor deadly bacteria and release a sufficient quantity of chemicals to kill or injure over a thousand women.

As the Organic Consumers Association has published:

The worst offenders were Procter and Gamble’s ultra-absorbent Rely tampons. According to the book Soap Opera: The Inside Story of Procter and Gamble, the company dismissed consumer complaints about the tampons for years. A 1975 company memo disclosed that Rely tampons contained known cancer-causing agents and that the product altered the natural organisms found in the vagina. Rely tampons were taken off the shelves in 1980, but many women claim they left a legacy of hysterectomies and loss of fertility.

Among health-conscious women, the toxicity of mainstream tampons has long been an issue of concern. “Just as I say heck no to Cottonseed oil, it is for the same reason I say heck no to sticking toxic cotton up into my nethers,” writes Meghan Telpner. “Did ya know that 84 million pounds of pesticides are sprayed on 14.4 million acres of conventional cotton grown each year in the US.”

She continues:

The rayon/viscose used in Tampax is made from wood pulp. Last I checked, there were no such thing as rayon trees and trees don’t magically turn into rayon- it takes hundreds of chemicals. The chlorine bleaching of wood pulp is where the greatest danger lies. The process creates chlorinated hydrocarbons, a hazardous group of chemicals with byproducts that includes dioxins, some of the most toxic substances known. Parts per million my cooch! There are no safe levels dioxins, they are impossible to break down and so keep building up in our tissues.

Now Monsanto’s toxic herbicide has been found in 80% of feminine hygiene products

Fast forward to 2015. Now

glyphosate, the chemical found in Monsanto’s “RoundUp” herbicide used on genetically modified cotton crops, is being discovered in the vast majority of feminine hygiene products.

The research team from National University of La Plata headed by Damian Marino revealed their research findings last weekend. Note carefully that such research wouldnever be conducted in a U.S. university because they’ve been infiltrated and bought off by Monsanto. Example: Discredited professor Kevin Folta at the University of Florida, who was caught receiving $25,000 from Monsanto after publicly lying that he had no financial ties to the herbicide company. Even though Folta has been exhaustively exposed as a liar and a violator of university ethics, the University of Florida sees nothing wrong with such deceptions. Click here to read the secret letter where Monsanto agrees to pay him $25,000.

“A team of Argentine scientists found traces of glyphosate in 85% of personal care and feminine hygiene products containing cotton and commonly purchased in drugstores and supermarkets,” writes Revolution News.

“The study looked at a sampling of products from pharmacies and supermarkets in the area of La Plata, and analyzed cotton swabs, gauze and articles for feminine use. The results from all commercial products detected 85% glyphosate and 62% AMPA (metabolite or derivative of glyphosate). Almost 100% of the cotton produced in Argentina is transgenic and glyphosate applications are made while the cocoon is open.”

Also reported by Revolution News:

“The report left us shocked,” said Dr. Medardo Ávila Vázquez, a conference participant and from Cordoba.

“We had focused our attention on the presence of glyphosate in food, but did not think the products we use in all hospitals and health centers in the country to cure patients are contaminated with a carcinogenic product. The authorities must give an immediate response to this situation.”

Glyphosate is known to cause cancer, but propagandists are paid to cover up the truth

Glyphosate is a known cancer-causing chemical. The World Health Organization has

classified it as “probably carcinogenic,” and many other studies clearly link it to an endocrine disruption process that leads to cancer.

The EPA conspired with Monsanto for decades to deceive the public into thinking glyphosate was harmless, even after knowing the molecule was extremely dangerous.

Forbes.com, named “America’s most evil news publisher” by EVIL.news, has been instrumental in publishing Monsanto’s propaganda via the corporation’s paid professional propagandists such as Henry Miller and Jon Entine. Both have been exposed as “GMO mercenaries” who betray humanity and advocate the chemical poisoning of the world in exchange for money.

Glyphosate has even been found to promote cancer at parts per trillion concentrations, meaning that even low-level exposure from tampons might lead to deadly cancers in women. (The GMO industry says women who are concerned about GMOs are “anti-science” and too stupid to understand technology.)

It is inarguable that the human vagina readily absorbs chemicals found in tampons. When those tampons are made from GMO cotton — the vast majority of cotton that’s commercially grown — they almost always contain glyphosate that gets absorbed through vaginal walls and enters the bloodstream.

This means that even beyond glyphosate contamination in food, women must now consider the possibility that they are being poisoned from glyphosate in the vagina via genetically modified cotton used in tampons and other hygiene products.

To all the bought-off female journalists who are pushing Monsanto’s agenda — like Tamar Haspel of the Monsanto-infiltrated Washington Post — SHAME ON YOU for advancing the chemical industry’s war on women.

Why you should only use organic feminine hygiene products

The only sure way to avoid GMOs in your vagina is to

source certified organic feminine hygiene products made from organic cotton or other organic materials.

It’s easy for consumers to forget that their blue jeans are made from GMO cotton saturated with glyphosate… or that the cotton gauze in their first aid kits are also made with GMO cotton and glyphosate. In fact, even cotton swabs and cotton balls are usually GMO.

So if you really want to stop putting  Monsanto in your vagina (or your ears, nose and other place in your body), you’ll need to meticulously source organic, non-GMO products for such needs.

Monitor all the real-time breaking news on organics at Organics.news or visitAlternativeNews.com throughout the day.
Health and Wellness Associates

Archived Article

  1. Adams

312-972-Well