Tag Archives: FDA

Despite Irrefutable Evidence of TOXICITY and DEATH, Monsanto’s EPA Friends RAISE Allowable Glyphosate (Monsanto Roundup) Levels

men are from mars women are from venus politicians are from uranus

Great news!  You no longer have to worry about excessive levels of glyphosate, the toxic chemical found in Monsanto’s Round-up pesticide, in your food or in the feed that livestock consumes.Why not?  Well, the Environmental Deception Protection Agency has looked over the situation, and in their infinite wisdom, raised the safety threshold of glyphosate that is allowed to be in consumable goods.

OpEd

By Daisy Luther
Intellihub.com

June 19, 2013

The EPA’s change of heart means that the the allowed glyphosate level in animal feed will rise to 100 parts per million (ppm) and 40 ppm in oilseed crops. Thankfully, there’s no need for us to worry because they’ve assured us that the new allowable levels are only “minimally toxic” to humans.

The EPA is the agency that is charged with protecting the air we breathe, the soil in which we grow our food and the water that we drink. Unfortunately the only responsibility they seem to take seriously is their commitment to furthering the agendas of big business.  This decision to allow more Roundup to drench the food supply comes immediately after two major, peer reviewed studies have proven that glyphosate is deadly.

The first study found that glyphosate increases the breast cancer cell proliferation in the parts-per-trillion range.

An alarming new study, accepted for publication in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology last month, indicates that glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide due to its widespread use in genetically engineered agriculture, is capable of driving estrogen receptor mediated breast cancer cell proliferation within the infinitesimal parts per trillion concentration range.

The study, titled, “Glyphosate induces human breast cancer cells growth via estrogen receptors,” compared the effect of glyphosate on hormone-dependent and hormone-independent breast cancer cell lines, finding that glyphosate stimulates hormone-dependent cancer cell lines in what the study authors describe as “low and environmentally relevant concentrations.”

Another study found that consumption of glyphosate causes intestinal and gut damage, which opens the door to numerous human diseases, such as diabetes, gastrointestinal disorders, heart disease, obesity, autism, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s

However, another classification of allergy-type food is emerging and getting recognized for adverse effects on the human intestinal tract and gut. Those foods are genetically modified organisms known as GMOs or GEs. There is scientific research indicating intestinal damage from GMO food and the article “Glyphosate’s Suppression of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and Amino Acid Biosynthesis by the Gut Microbiome: Pathways to Modern Disease” discusses how the inordinate amount of pesticides sprayed on GMOs leaves residues in GMO crops that, in turn, are being traced to modern diseases.  (source)

The Organic Consumers Association is very concerned.  They are behind a petition to lobby the EPA to lower the allowable glyphosate levels instead of raising them. (Find it HERE)  The OCA cites numerous reasons why the EPA’s current move is a deadly mistake:

Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the world.  According to the EPA, at least 208 million tons of Roundup were sprayed on GE crops, lawns and roadsides in the years 2006 and 2007. In 2007, as much as 185 million pounds of glyphosate was used by U.S. farmers, double the amount used just six years ago.

2009 study found that Americans use about 100 million pounds of glyphosate annually on their lawns and gardens. It’s safe to assume all these number are much higher now. Why? Because GE crops are now being invaded by new strains of herbicide-resistant “superweeds” requiring higher and higher doses of poison.

Beyond Pesticides has assembled extensive documentation of past research linking glyphosate to increased cancer risk, neurotoxicity and birth defects, as well as eye, skin, respiratory irritation, lung congestion, increased breathing rate, damage to the pancreas, kidney and testes.

Glyphosate also endangers the environment, destroys soil and plants, and is linked to a host of health hazards. The EPA’s decision to increase the allowed residue limits of glyphosate is out of date, dangerous to the health of people and the environment and scientifically unsupportable. (source)

 

So why would the EPA make this ruling?

Because instead of being an unbiased agency looking out for public interest, they are merely puppets for the biotech industry.  They spread disinformation from beneath a cloak of benevolence and authority.  They use the trust that people have put in them to deceive and manipulate the public in favor of big business.

Here are some examples of their incestuous partnerships:

The EPA has been accused of covering up crimes committed by public health enemy #1, Monsanto, as well as Dow Chemicals.  The EPA’s investigation proved that Monsanto knowingly tainted Lysol (used by moms everywhere to sanitize babies’ toys) with dioxin.  However, no criminal charges have been forthcoming as of this publication.

monsanto protection act plant organic gardenThe EPA also quietly closed an investigation of Monsanto’s twisted cover-up in the Nitro, West Virginia herbicide plant accident that exposed hundreds of workers to deadly carcinogen dioxin, which can still be found in nearby streams and lakes. Despite the fact that this investigation simply disappeared, Monsanto agreed in February to pay $93 million dollars to residents of Nitro in order to settle a class action lawsuit.

The EPA has refused to ban a pesticide made by Dow Chemicals, the controversial 2,4-D, the same substance used in Agent Orange. This pesticide will be used on corn crops that have been genetically engineered to be resistant to the toxin.  Agent Orange causes cancer, hormone disruption, genetic mutations and neurotoxicity and will be soon be coming to a corn field near you.

The EPA has refused a petition to ban BPA in industry, citing a lack of scientific evidence of the negative effects of the chemical. BPA is commonly found tainting canned goods, especially soup, and bottled water that has been exposed to heat. (Author’s note:  It would probably be very expensive for industry to have to replace all those containers with BPA-free cans and bottles.) (source)

The EPA pulled an identical sleight of hand when radiation from the Fukushima disaster began to reach the United States in 2011.  They raised the acceptable levels of radiation, stopped measuring it, and even tried to convince us that a little radiation was actually good for us:

The EPA is right on top of things with their response, of course. First, they promptly closed down 8 of 18 radiation measuring stations in the hardest hit area, California.  Then, to further calm the good people of the nation, the EPA magically changed the numbers.  They’ve raised the amount of radiation that we can safely absorb and ingest.  It wouldn’t do for the large factory farms to be unable to sell their tainted produce or for the huge dairies to be stuck with all that radioactive milk.

The radiation in our food supply is of so little concern to the EPA that they’ve actually begun to tell us that a little bit of radiation is good for us. According to a report citing the EPA, a bit of radiation can prevent cancer, instead of causing it.

Since our minds can be at ease now, the EPA has decided that they are no longer planning to monitor the radiation levels in our food supply.  They will return to their previous practice of only monitoring random samples every three months.  Yep.  Really.  The Environmental Protection Agency of the United States is no longer monitoring radiation levels in our food and water supplies as of April 14th.  That will definitely keep them from getting those inconveniently high readings that might affect Big Agri’s prosperity.  (source)

The government’s consumer protection agencies are hopelessly corrupted.  The FDA, the EPA, and the USDA are all servants of Big Food, Big Pharma and Big Agri.  We are on our own.  The public outcry will be muffled in the mainstream media because, well, Big Food, Big Pharma, and Big Agri own them too – you need only look at the advertisers to see this.

Therefore, we have to resort to other means to spread the word. We have to be so loud and so adamant that even the sleepiest individual will have no option but to see what is going on.  So, your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to “out” the EPA for this disastrous decision.

  • Share information via social media
  • Protest publicly
  • Sign the petition mentioned above and persuade everyone you know to sign it too
  • Contact the EPA directly and let them know your thoughts on this matter (please be civil)
  • Here’s the phone number for the office of the EPA’s administrator – give him a call:  (202) 564-4711
  • Write letters to the editor of all of your local publications
  • Make comments on message boards for the mainstream media (they’ll get deleted but a few people might read them first)
  • Don’t purchase processed foods or any foods that may contain GMOs, including factory farmed meats.  The animals are given GMO feed throughout the course of their entire lives

Please understand, the system is irrevocably corrupted. Only by shedding light on this corruption can we make a change.  People are being lulled into compliance, all the while, feeling that there are measures in place to ensure that what they consume from the grocery store is not poison.

Food safety should not be in the hands of the highest bidder.

Facebooktwitterrss

Government Has Known Marijuana Shrinks Tumors Since 1974 … So They Banned Research

marijuana safest therapeutic substances known to man dea

In 1974 researchers learned that THC, the active chemical in marijuana, shrank or destroyed brain tumors in test mice.

But the DEA quickly shut down the study and destroyed its results, which were never replicated — until now.

May 30, 2000  |

The term medical marijuana took on dramatic new meaning in February, 2000 when researchers in Madrid announced they had destroyed incurable brain tumors in rats by injecting them with THC, the active ingredient in cannabis.

The Madrid study marks only the second time that THC has been administered to tumor-bearing animals; the first was a Virginia investigation 26 years ago. In both studies, the THC shrank or destroyed tumors in a majority of the test subjects.

Most Americans don’t know anything about the Madrid discovery. Virtually no major U.S. newspapers carried the story, which ran only once on the AP and UPI news wires, on Feb. 29, 2000.

The ominous part is that this isn’t the first time scientists have discovered that THC shrinks tumors. In 1974 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice — lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.

The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on the events in his book, “The Emperor Wears No Clothes.” In 1976 President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies, who set out — unsuccessfully — to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the “high.”

marijuana safest therapeutic substances known to man deaThe Madrid researchers reported in the March issue of “Nature Medicine” that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC. “All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation … Cann

abinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats.” The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

The Spanish researchers, led by Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutense University, also irrigated healthy rats’ brains with large doses of THC for seven days, to test for harmful biochemical or neurological effects. They found none.

marijuana cures cancer and government has known since 1974

“Careful MRI analysis of all those tumor-free rats showed no sign of damage related to necrosis, edema, infection or trauma … We also examined other potential side effects of cannabinoid administration. In both tumor-free and tumor-bearing rats, cannabinoid administration induced no substantial change in behavioral parameters such as motor coordination or physical activity. Food and water intake as well as body weight gain were unaffected during and after cannabinoid delivery. Likewise, the general hematological profiles of cannabinoid-treated rats were normal. Thus, neither biochemical parameters nor markers of tissue damage changed substantially during the 7-day delivery period or for at least 2 months after cannabinoid treatment ended.”

Guzman’s investigation is the only time since the 1974 Virginia study that THC has been administered to live tumor-bearing animals. (The Spanish researchers cite a 1998 study in which cannabinoids inhibited breast cancer cell proliferation, but that was a “petri dish” experiment that didn’t involve live subjects.)

In an email interview for this story, the Madrid researcher said he had heard of the Virginia study, but had never been able to locate literature on it. Hence, the Nature Medicine article characterizes the new study as the first on tumor-laden animals and doesn’t cite the 1974 Virginia investigation.

“I am aware of the existence of that research. In fact I have attempted many times to obtain the journal article on the original investigation by these people, but it has proven impossible.” Guzman said.

In 1983 the Reagan/Bush Administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966-76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer, who states, “We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared.”

marijuana cures cancer and government has known since 1974marijuana cures cancer and government has known since 1974Guzman provided the title of the work — “Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids,” an article in a 1975 Journal of the National Cancer Institute — and this writer obtained a copy at the University of California medical school library in Davis and faxed it to Madrid.

The summary of the Virginia study begins, “Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabinol (CBN)” — two types of cannabinoids, a family of active components in marijuana. “Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size.”

The 1975 journal article doesn’t mention breast cancer tumors, which featured in the only newspaper story ever to appear about the 1974 study — in the Local section of the Washington Post on August 18, 1974. Under the headline, “Cancer Curb Is Studied,” it read in part:

“The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered.” The researchers “found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent.”

Guzman, writing from Madrid, was eloquent in his response after this writer faxed him the clipping from the Washington Post of a quarter century ago. In translation, he wrote:

“It is extremely interesting to me, the hope that the project seemed to awaken at that moment, and the sad evolution of events during the years following the discovery, until now we once again Œdraw back the veil‚ over the anti-tumoral power of THC, twenty-five years later. Unfortunately, the world bumps along between such moments of hope and long periods of intellectual castration.”

News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article. This writer stumbled on it through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report web page. The New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors.

Raymond Cushing is a journalist, musician and filmmaker. This article was named by Project Censored as a “Top Censored Story of 2000.”

http://www.alternet.org/story/9257/pot_shrinks_tumors%3B_government_knew_in_%2774

Facebooktwitterrss

Pigs Fed GMO Foods Have Leaky Gut Syndrome, Enlarged Uterus, Many Other Disease Symptoms

pigs fed gmo sicker than pigs fed natural

Irritable bowl disease, leaky gut syndrome, reflux, gastritis… when you consider that pigs have a similar digestive system to humans, the results of this brand new study of pigs who were fed GM crops are “striking and statistically significant.”

Pigs on the GM diet were 2.6 times more likely on average to get severe stomach inflammation than control pigs: females were 2.2 times more likely, males were 4 times more likely.

Females had an average 25% heavier uterus than non-GM-fed females, a possible indicator of disease that requires further investigation.

For all of the “pro GMO” crowd who’s preparing to debunk the study methods, the following parameters were carefully organized in the study:

– it was led by a researcher with outstanding and relevant credentials in organic chemistry, nutritional biochemistry and metabolic regulation, epidemiology and biostatistics (so they can’t claim a “quack” scientist did the study);

– it was conducted at a commercial pig farm, versus in the lab (so they can’t claim that it’s not a real world situation);

– it was conducted under strict scientific controls that are not normally present on farms (so they can’t claim that farm research is invalid);

– it was conducted for a full five months–which is the standard length of time pigs are fed prior to slaughter (so they can’t claim that it was not a normal lifespan);

– it was conducted using the same pigs bred and raised on commercial pig farms (so they can’t claim it was a “pig prone to problems”);

– it was conducted using the standard GM corn and soy diet used on commercial pig farms (so they can’t claim that the GM levels were higher than normal, or that they used a non-valid feed source);

– it was confirmed by third party veterinarian autopsies who were not told whether a pig had had a GM diet or the control diet (so they can’t claim a bias in the findings);

– it was published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Organic Systems (so they can’t claim there was no peer review).

Read the full report here:
http://gmojudycarman.org/new-study-shows-that-animals-are-seriously-harmed-by-gm-feed/#prettyPhoto

Check out the biography of the lead researcher:
http://gmojudycarman.org/about-us/

Facebooktwitterrss
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!