A group of scientists is calling for major federal action in order to deal with the threat posed by Monsanto’s GMO crops, now petitioning the EPA to address the issue head on. The group of 22 academic corn experts are drawing attention to the immense failure of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn, which is developing mutated and resistant insects as a result of its widespread usage. Corn is critical not only as a food staple, but is heavily used in ethanol production, animal feed, and much more. As GM corn becomes the norm, currently taking over 94 percent of the supply, these scientists are seriously concerned about the future of corn production.

Joseph Spencer is one outspoken member of the group, a corn entomologist with the Illinois Natural History Survey, part of the University of Illinois. Spencer states that what is happening is no surprise, instead it is something that needs to be addressed. Warning the EPA over the dangers, the experts sent a letter on March 5th to the agency explaining their worries regarding long-term corn production prospects in light of GMO crops failures. Specifically, the experts are worried about the lack of protection presented by GMO crops against rootworms.

The EPA has already acknowledged that Monsanto’s GMO crops are creating resistant rootworms, which are now ravaging the GMO crops as they mutate to the biopesticide used known as Bacillus thuringiensis (BT). The EPA found that the resistant rootworms, which are evolving to resist the insecticide,  are currently found Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota and Nebraska. After the EPA evaluated documented cases of severe crop damage as well as reports from entomologists, the EPA stated “Monsanto’s program for monitoring suspected cases of resistance is ‘inadequate’”.

Essentially, the GMO crops are doing the opposite of their supposed purpose — leading to more damage from rootworms as they become mutated to resist the defense of the crops. And Monsanto has answered by simply further genetically modifying the Bt, which research shows is extremely ineffective.

“When insecticides overlay transgenic technology, the economic and environmental advantages of rootworm-protected corn quickly disappear,” the scientists wrote.

It’s time for the EPA and other agencies to address the serious threats to nature and human health presented by Monsanto’s genetically modified creations.

The EPA pesticide and herbicide approval program requires industry manufacturer applicants to fund the studies that are submitted.  This means that if companies like Monsanto or Dow Chemical have a new product, they are required under EPA rules to pay for all of the safety testing when they apply for approval of a new weed or bug killer.

In the absence of independent testing and oversight, there appears to be a wide open door for potential fraud as manufacturer applicants could cherry pick their studies and simply use ones that show favorable results.

Templates were devised by to make industry manufacturer applicants’ study data uniform in a 2002 NAFTA deal struck between the EPA and Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PRMA).  Templates are used so that the EPA and PRMA can approve of applicants’ poisons more quickly and with fewer resources.  The agencies hope to review approved pesticides only every 15 years.

You can find the profile of these testing templates on the EPA website.

States Carry the Primary Responsibility

On the EPA’s website, they say that after a pesticide is registered (approved) by the EPA, states may have more strict laws regarding poisons and it is up to the manufacturer to comply with state laws in order to register their product in the state.

And here’s the kicker: the EPA says, “Ultimately, states have the primary responsibility (called primacy) for pesticides used within state border”.  This can be interpreted to mean that the EPA has absolved itself of accountability and that the states are liable (responsible) for regulating pesticides for safety.

This clause makes it clear that state power supersedes the federal EPA’s rubber stamp approval process for pesticides and herbicides.  States should ensure the safety of citizens from harmful chemicals.

EPA’s Scandalous Abuse of Taxpayer Money

The EPA employs more than 17,000 people and has enjoyed a budget of around $7.5 billion in years prior to the implementation of Obama’s Stimulus bill that enhanced executive agencies’ scope and power.  The EPA’s budget ballooned above $10 billion in 2010 and 2011.  What did taxpayers get for the extra billions spent?  Not much when it comes to protecting the very people who fund the EPA.

Here’s an example:

Don Huber has warned that glyphosate herbicide (the most common brand is Monsanto’s Roundup Ready product) can cause infertility and miscarriages in farm animals, in addition to disease in plants.  A Spanish study found that glyphosate is polluting groundwater.  And numerous other studies point to extremely negative effects from glyphosate.

But the EPA is dragging its feet in taking action in banning glyphosate herbicide and are only conducting a study to be completed by 2015.  The worst part about the EPA’s “study” is that it will rely heavily on industry manufacturer data instead of doing any independent research.  In fact, chemical poison giants like Monsanto, Dow Chemical, Syngenta and BASF formed a 19-member task force to generate the data that the EPA is seeking.

Conclusion

It appears that the EPA’s approval process is skewed to favor industry.  The EPA is slow to respond when industry products cause harm.

This is a big deal because the next generation of GMOs that already has preliminary approval from the USDA, will be sprayed with Dow Chemical’s 2,4-D herbicide (half of the recipe of Agent Orange that is contaminated with dioxin).

The EPA approved 2,4-D herbicide years ago and it is commonly used on lawns and golf courses.  The EPA says that dioxin, at its current levels, does not pose a serious health risk.  However, if 2,4-D products become popular, and American farms are doused in the poison, we can look forward to increased levels.  The EPA says on its own website that current levels of dioxin are “uncomfortably” close to levels that will cause problems.  Dioxin causes cancer, birth defects, organ damage and many other diseases.

EPA approval does not preempt more stringent state laws and is supported by court decisions.

American veterans and the entire country of Viet Nam affected by Agent Orange have been shafted beyond imagination due to corruption within the US government and US courts. US courts have protected Monsanto and Dow Chemical from liability and criminal prosecution. The US government has shielded Monsanto and Dow from the massive cost of medical treatment for victims and environmental remediation cleanup costs that would drive these corporations into bankruptcy.

Before we delve further into the issue, it’s important to detail what exactly dioxin is. Dioxin has a half life of 100 years or more when it is below the surface, leached into soil or embedded in river or stream sediment. Dioxin was generated as a byproduct of herbicide 2,4,5-T made by Monsanto and Dow, the top 2 producers of Agent Orange. It causes cancer, birth defects, liver damage and other major health problems.

Monsanto & Dow’s 2,4,5-T dioxin laden-herbicide was used in the US for agricultural purposes in the 1940′s before it was used for chemical warfare in Viet Nam from the early 1960′s through 1971. It was phased out in the late 1970′s. Now, let’s discuss the political situation behind this carcinogen.

US Government and US Court Dioxin Cover-Ups

• President Reagans’s administration, in cahoots with the CDC, thwarted a $43 million Congressional Study of Agent Orange in 1987 to protect itself and its corporate pals Monsanto & Dow from accountability to US veterans and the people of Viet Nam.

• US Courts dismissed veterans’ Agent Orange lawsuits based on a Supreme Court precedent, known as the Feres Doctrine, freeing the government of responsibility for deaths and injuries related to military service.

• The Supreme Court refused to hear American and Vietnamese victims’ lawsuits against Monsanto, Dow and other Agent Orange manufacturers on 3 separate occasions. Remember that the Supreme Court collects their checks from the federal government.

Atrocious Criminal Acts By Monsanto & Dow

• Agent Orange makers hide behind government contractor immunity, despite the fact that dioxin contaminated herbicide 2,4,5-T was produced long before they were contractors for the government (50 million tons of the herbicide was sprayed in the US per year). No modifications were used for Monsanto & Dow’s herbicide — half the ingredients in Agent Orange — so the immunity defense falls flat.

• Boehringer, a German 2,4,5-T herbicide producer notified Dow in 1957 about dioxin hazards and that dioxin could be eliminated by slow cooking the herbicide for about 12 hours. It appears that Dow and Monsanto continued cooking 2,4,5-T quickly in 45 minutes. Higher output led to higher profits. Monsanto’s formula contained high levels of dioxin and was dirtier than Dow’s product.

• Monsanto was not only aware in 1950 that dioxin was a health danger, but they also created a fraudulent health study.

• In 1965 Dow met in secret with other Agent Orange manufacturers to discuss the toxicity hazards of dioxin and their fear over a government investigation and restrictive regulations.

US Veterans Shafted By the Kangaroo Court

Judge Jack Weinstein of the US Federal Court of the Eastern District of New York committed the following offenses in several class action suits filed by veterans against Monsanto & Dow:

• Weinstein appointed attorneys to represent the veterans and then intimidated the attorneys into agreeing to a ‘nuisance’ settlement of $180 million- nowhere near enough money to cover the medical treatment of hundreds of thousands of injured vets.

• Weinstein rejected the veterans’ expert studies, instead of allowing a jury to decide on the credibility of the expert witnesses; Weinstein created a new rule of law from the bench.

• Weinstein based his ruling on Monsanto’s expert study that was later proven to be fraudulent.

•  Weinstein dismissed all other veterans’ lawsuits against Monsanto and Dow.

•  Weinstein took over a case that was unlawfully transferred to his federal court as it had been filed in the state of Texas. He dismissed that case.

•  Astonishingly, Weistein created a second new rule of law to protect Monsanto and Dow. Weinstein invented immunity for government contractors!

Weinstein’s excuse for the government contractor defense was that if contractors were made to pay, they would pass the cost on to the government, so they were therefore immune. Weinstein’s new law was created from the bench instead of law passed through Congress!

Weinsteins’s law has now been extended to all government supply contractors (even non-military contractors) in the courts.

Viet Nam

Approximately 11 million gallons of Agent Orange was dumped on Viet Nam between 1962 to 1970. It is estimated that Agent Orange is responsible for 400,000 deaths, 3 million victims of disease and 500,000 children born with birth defects.

Over 14 million acres of Vietnamese forests were sprayed. Agent Orange was also dumped in water supplies.

In 2004, Vietnamese victims filed a lawsuit against Dow, Monsanto and other manufacturers of Agent Orange. Judge Weinstein (yes, the same Judge Weinstein) presided over this case and dismissed it. Weinstein used the excuse that Monsanto and Dow had government sovereign immunity that extended to them because they were government contractors. He also ruled that Agent Orange was not considered a poison during that period, under international law.

The Supreme Court refused to hear this case, too.

The stated purpose of using Agent Orange was to deny the enemy cover in forested areas through defoliation. However, the US Army did contract studies in 1943 of the effects of 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D (the other ingredient of Agent Orange) on cereal grains, including rice, and developed the concept of using aerial herbicide spraying to destroy enemy crops to disrupt the food supply. Obviously, poisoning the enemy, farmland and civilians was a chemical warfare strategy used by the US government.

Monsanto Immunity

Currently, there is a court case pending against Monsanto’s dioxin contaminated 2,4,5-T herbicide filed by parties who lived near the plant where it was produced in West Virginia. The judge in that case, Paul G. Gardephe, denied Monsanto immunity! Judge Gardephe asserted that because Monsanto burned dioxin waste in open pits and the US government was not aware of this practice, nor did they evaluate it for hazard, Monsanto’s contractor defense was denied.

Fate of US Veterans

In 2003, the Supreme Court affirmed a lower court decision allowing veterans to sue Monsanto, Dow and other Agent Orange manufacturers directly.

The government has responded, under the Obama regime, by passing the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010, which allows the automatic funding of veterans’ Agent Orange claims. While Monsanto & Dow appear to have considerable liability, the cost of healthcare and hospitalization of affected veterans is paid by American taxpayers.

More than 2 million Americans served in Viet Nam. The Veterans Administration claims they have no idea how many vets have been treated for Agent Orange injuries, or how much taxpayer money has been spent. The EPA is also involved in the cover-up and has been delaying an assessment report on dioxin since 1985 to protect plastic, chlorine, paper, herbicide and agricultural industries.

For more information:

http://www.usvetdsp.com/agentorange.htm

http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1991/07/mm0791_06.html

http://japanfocus.org/-Fred_A_-Wilcox/3662

Boehringer Monsanto Dioxin Report

The industry-controlled EPA promised to release its dioxin hazard reassessment report, but blew its own deadline – again.  Amazingly, the original dioxin toxicity report was due out in 1985.  Dioxin is extremely toxic and can cause cancer, birth defects, liver damage and many other harmful effects.

Monsanto and Dow Chemical were the top 2 dioxin producers, a byproduct of the herbicide 2,4,5-T; 300 million pounds of their dioxin-laden herbicide pollutes 400 million acres across the United States.  Herbicide 2,4,5-T is half the recipe for Agent Orange; the poison was phased out by the late 1970′s.

Dioxin released in the air increased 10% from 2009-2010. Of course Dow Chemical is currently the #2 producer of dioxin in the US.

Dow Chemical has spent $12 million lobbying the EPA since the EPA announced its intent to reassess dioxin. On the flip side, American taxpayers bankrolled the EPA for over $10 billion in 2010 alone.

Corporate industries stand to lose everything if the word about dioxin gets out, including manufacturers who use chlorine in products like paper, weed killers, and plastic manufacturers. The biggest source of dioxin absorption in humans is meat, dairy and eggs.  Industrial agriculture has also lobbied hard to stop the release of the EPA report to cover up the danger lurking in food.

Dioxin polluters would go out of business if people understood how dangerous it was and stopped using bleached products, chlorine, weed killers, and caustic plastic.

Almost every man, woman and child in the US has measurable dioxin levels in their bodies.

The US government continues to protect polluters like Monsanto and Dow Chemical for the horrors that they have caused.  If the EPA’s dioxin report is ever released and criminal polluters were prosecuted and subsequently had to pay for human health and environmental damage, they would go bankrupt.

Here is a brief timeline of EPA stalling:

• January 26, 2012: Thousands of individuals and organizations from across the United States have written to the EPA requesting the agency to finalize this study once and for all.

• January 10, 2012: Representative Ed Markey (D-MA), Ranking Member of the Natural Resources Committee and senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, sent the EPA a letter urging the agency to complete the dioxin study.

• January 2012: EPA announced dioxin releases increased by 18% from 2009-2010, and dioxin air releases increased by 10%.

• December 2011: American Chemistry Council and coalition of agricultural trade associations pressure EPA to delay release of EPA’s noncancer dioxin study, scheduled to     be released the end of January 2012.

• August 2011: EPA announced its final plan for completing their study on dioxin, which the EPA has been working on since 1985.

• April 2011: Rep. Markey and 72 members of Congress sent a letter to the EPA calling on the agency to release this study.

Source articles:

http://chej.org/2012/01/environmental-and-health-groups-call-on-epa-to-finalize-study-on-one-of-the-most-toxic-chemicals-on-the-planet/

http://michiganmessenger.com/45416/epa-misses-dioxin-deadlines

http://markey.house.gov/press-release/markey-epa-no-more-delays-dioxin-health-assessment

Dioxin is the most toxic man-made chemical known regarding damage to health and the environment.  The EPA has withheld a study about dioxin for decades in order to protect large industries that produce dioxin while manufacturing herbicides and pesticides, plastics, chlorine, bleach, and other chemicals.  In addition, industrialized agriculture (Big Ag) has pressured the EPA to withhold the report because dioxin becomes concentrated in animal products like meat, eggs and dairy.

The non-cancer portion of the EPA report is due out by the end of January 2012, with the cancer portion to follow at some unspecified date.

Dioxin is an umbrella term for a class of super toxic chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, liver disease, immune system damage and many other health problems.  There is no safe ‘threshold’ dose as our bodies have zero defense against dioxin, according to health consultant Jonathan Campbell.

Dioxin has a half life of over 100 years in the environment when it is below the surface or dumped in waterways.

Prior Dioxin Contamination

Monsanto and Dow Chemical were the largest producers of 2,4,5-T herbicide that created dioxin as a byproduct and was used as an agricultural herbicide before the 1950′s.  Monsanto, Dow Chemical and other makers of dioxin-contaminated herbicide 2,4,5-T produced 50 MILLION pounds of these chemicals per year for agricultural uses in the US!  Since 1947, more than 300 million pounds of dioxin laden 2,4,5-T was sprayed on more than 400 MILLION acres of US land, mostly on farms and agricultural property.

The 2,4,5-T dioxin-containing herbicide was later combined with 2,4-D to create Agent Orange for chemical warfare against Viet Nam.

Both Monsanto and Dow Chemical were aware, since the 1950′s, that German company Boeringer was able to produce herbicide 2,4,5-T without any detectable dioxin by slow cooking the chemical for about 12 hours.  But Monsanto and Dow ignored this information and cooked their 2,4,5-T batches in 45 minutes or less, thus contaminating the product with dioxin — presumably for higher profits.

Monsanto and Dow Chemical were also aware that dioxin caused health problems. Monsanto and Dow Chemical would go bankrupt if they were actually held accountable for their crimes against humanity and the environment. The herbicide 2,4,5-T was phased out in the late 1970′s.

Current Sources of Dioxin Emissions

While dioxin may be produced naturally by forest fires and volcanoes, man-made dioxin emissions are the primary source of contamination.  Dioxin has risen dramatically due to an increase in manufacturing of chlorinated organic chemicals (weed killers) and plastics.  Here is a list of some of the top sources of dioxin emissions:

•  Plastics made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC). This includes products ranging from shampoo bottles to wall paper to plumbing pipes.
• Incinerating trash (municipal city burning and individual household backyard burning).
• Herbicides (weed killers) and pesticides that contain chlorine.
• Paper bleaching — most paper products are contaminated.
• Medical waste mass-burn incinerators.

After reading this list, it becomes apparent that many industries, especially chlorine manufacturers, herbicide makers, plastic producers and paper mills would be severely affected if dioxin were properly regulated or eliminated.  Industrialized farming (Big Ag) also has a big stake in the EPA’s upcoming report because the largest source of human absorption of dioxin is through consuming animal products like meat, dairy and eggs.

View a chart of the top 30 dioxin polluters in the US.

EPA Drags Its Feet in Reporting on Dioxin Hazards

The EPA has delayed its Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of TCDD (dioxin) report for decades due to pressure from Big Industry.  For example, President Bush delayed the report in a “last-minute gift” to the chemical industry just before leaving office.  Another example is when the EPA and the Chlorine Institute (later the Chlorine Chemistry Council of the American Chemistry Council) were chummy co-sponsors of a conference on dioxin in 1990, indicating that the industry may have undue influence over the EPA.

The EPA has a history of shielding Monsanto from accountability.  In the town of Nitro, West Virginia, the Big Monsanto plant produced dioxin-contaminated 2,4,5-T herbicide from 1948 to 1969 and they burned the waste in open pit fires.  The EPA has conducted study after study but has failed to force remediation that could cost Monsanto as much as $4 billion.

How To Avoid Dioxin

•  A vegan diet is recommended, especially for nursing mothers.  Beef and pork contain the highest concentrations of dioxin.  Freshwater fish is unsafe.

•  Use only oxygen bleach products instead of chlorine bleach

•  Use unbleached paper products

•  Avoid herbicides (weed killers) and pesticides that contain chlorine

Read the rest of health consultant Jonathan Campbell’s suggestions to avoid dioxin.

Conclusion

It is obvious that collusion between our taxpayer-funded government and Big Industry has resulted in the death and disease of untold numbers of Americans.  The criminals of Big Industry will not stop producing dioxin-laced products until they are held accountable.

Hemp can replace many plastics: it is natural, biodegradable, uses little water and no herbicides or pesticides are necessary.  Ron Paul is an outspoken critic of the failed war on drugs that prevents the use of industrial hemp.  Industrial hemp should not be classified as a drug.

Primary Information Sources:

http://www.southernstudies.org/2012/01/dumping-dioxin-on-dixie.html

Agent Orange Products Liability Litigation (page 43)

http://www.cqs.com/edioxin.htm

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2012/01/food-industry-concerned-about-epas-dioxin-limits/

Doctors are warning United States government officials and gas producers about the dangers of hydraulic fracking, the controversial act of pumping water and chemicals underground in order to facilitate the flow of oil or gas. As previously admitted by the EPA, reports have revealed that fracking is leading to groundwater pollution that could be endangering your health.

Jerome Paulson, a pediatrician at George Washington University School of Medicine in Washington, is calling upon gas producers who are heavily involved in fracking to finance studies examining the safety of the process. Until then, he is calling for hydraulic fracking to come to a freeze. While there are many corporations involved with fracking, top independent producers include Chesapeake Energy Corp. and Devon Energy Corp., both of Oklahoma City, and Encana Corp. of Calgary.

Due to concerns over the process, Paulson is not alone in his quest to end fracking. Adam Law, an endocrinologist at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York, shares the vision of Dr. Paulson. In an interview, Law discussed how studies are necessary in order to go forward with fracking, if they make way for the continuation of the process at all:

“We’ve got to push the pause button, and maybe we’ve got to push the stop button.”

Another spokesman over the dangers of fracking is Representative Ed Markey of Massachusetts, a senior Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “We need to understand fully all of the chemicals that are shot into the ground, that could impact the water that children drink,” he said. The representative also stated that the industry is attempting “to block that information from being public.”

Interestingly, there has already been studies regarding the effects of fracking on the drinking water in local areas, with the findings being quite negative. The chemicals involved in the fracking process are highly toxic, and the presence of these chemicals in the drinking water poses a serious risk to your health.  New EPA findings could significantly impact the fracking debate, providing substantial evidence that these chemicals are in fact ending up in the water supply.

The real question is whether or not the EPA will take the appropriate steps to reduce or even stop fracking, after ignoring the threat for quite some time. The EPA declaration immediately received criticism and rebutal from the oil and gas industry as well as one United States senator. Oil and gas companies have long claimed that fracking is completely safe, ignoring all information put forth that highlights the potential dangers to human health. In contrast, environmentalists across the nation rejoiced as the issue was brought to the public spotlight and debate spectrum.

With mainstream doctors, the EPA, and countless activists around the nation protesting the health-threatening nature of hydraulic fracking, isn’t it time that an independent investigation was conducted?

The EPA has finally admitted that fracking, the controversial act of pumping water and chemicals underground in order to facilitate the flow of oil or gas, is causing groundwater pollution. The chemicals involved in the fracking process are highly toxic, and many activists have been speaking out against fracking due to the threat to public health that the technique poses. Many viral videos have actually shown residents of fracking towns lighting their tap water on fire due to the high gas content.

The new EPA findings could significantly impact the fracking process, with the possibility of future regulations going into place to halt the environmental impact of fracking. The real question is whether or not the EPA will take the appropriate steps to reduce or even stop fracking, after ignoring the threat for quite some time. The EPA declaration immediately received criticism and rebutal from the oil and gas industry as well as one United States senator. Oil and gas companies have long claimed that fracking is completely safe, ignoring all information put forth that highlights the potential dangers to human health. In contrast, environmentalists across the nation rejoiced as the issue was brought to the public spotlight and debate spectrum.

“This is an important first indication there are potential problems with fracking that can impact domestic water wells. It’s I think a clarion call to industry to make sure they take a great deal of care in their drilling practices,” said Steve Jones with the Wyoming Outdoor Council.

Fracking Leading to Water Contamination, Environmental Consequence

One documentary entitled “Gasland” has highlighted the health effects of fracking, including the extreme water contamination. In the documentary, which has garnered mainstream attention and brought the issue of fracking to the attention of many, filmmakers interview citizens of fracking regions as well as observing the effects of fracking on the environment. You can view a 10 minute trailer below:

Bottled water regulation operates on a different level than tap water. It is treated as a food in the United States, and is therefore subject to the rules and regulations of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Tap water regulation, on the other hand, is performed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and does not undergo the same rules of regulation. Additionally, the EPA’s set of rules for tap water is much more strict than those of the FDA’s for bottled water.

Bottled Water and Water Treatment

Not all bottled water goes through the FDA, however; an estimated 60-70% of bottled water is not covered by FDA rules. Bottled waters which are sold only within 1 state don’t adhere to the FDA’s rules and regulations. With about 60-70% of bottled water only being sold in one state, that same percentage is basically ignored by the FDA. Government regulation, if any, is left to the state governments.

Some bottled water doesn’t even need to go through the FDA due to labeling. The FDA has a definition of “bottled water” that exempts many bottled water’s from FDA regulation. The following products are NOT bottled water (by FDA standards) if the ingredient label simply says; “water”, “carbonated water”, “disinfected water”, “filtered water”, “seltzer water”, “soda water”, “sparkling water”, or “tonic water”. Evidently, there must be a great deal of controversy at the government level over what should be considered bottled water.

But most importantly, bottled water doesn’t need to meet the high standards that city tap water must meet in terms of water treatment, contamination, and other testing.

• On the federal level, it is not mandated that bottled water be any safer than tap water – chemical pollution standards are nearly identical.

• Depending on the contaminant being tested for, the FDA requires water treatment testing for contaminants only once a week, once a year, or once every four years. The EPA requires testing several times a day for contaminants.

Various studies performed by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) prove that the testing performed by the FDA is in dire need of improvement. One of the extensive studies, which has been considered “groundbreaking”, shows the following results:

• 9 out of 10 of the best selling bottled water brands either don’t disclose information about the source of the water, contamination testing, or if and how it is purified.

• Out of the 173 bottled water brands surveyed, over 50% flunked EWG’s transparency test.

• 18% of the bottled water tested failed to make known the location of their water source.

• 32% disclosed no information regarding the treatment or purity of the water.

Thimerosal is a widely used vaccine preservative that is present in the majority of flu shots and other vaccines. Thimerosal is 49% mercury by volume, an extremely toxic chemical element that wreaks havoc on the nervous system, neurological function, and overall biological function [1]. Each multi-dose flu vaccine vial contains around 25 micrograms of thimerosal, over 250 times the Environmental Protection Agency’s safety limit of exposure.

Mercury, a neurotoxin, is especially damaging to undeveloped brains. Considering that 25 micrograms of mercury is considered unsafe by the EPA for any human under 550 pounds, the devastating health effects of mercury on a developing fetus are truly concerning. Though thimerasol is not entirely mercury, the mercury content is still extremely high, making it very toxic to the human body. Despite highly exceeding the EPA safety standards for mercury content by over 250 times, flu shots are still recommended for children over 6 months and pregnant women.

It seems that the age groups that are urged to receive the flu shot are actually most affected by mercury exposure. Young children, pregnant women, and elderly are the ‘targeted’ demographic of flu shot manufacturers, and these individuals also happen to have the least defense against the elemental neurotoxin mercury.

Dr. Russel Blaylock, a leading neurologist, expains:

A recent study looked at the immune reaction in newborn infants up to the age of one year who had received the HepB vaccine to see if their immune reaction differed from adults getting the same vaccine. What they found was that the infant, even after age one year, did react differently. Their antibody levels were substantially higher than adults (3-fold higher) and it remained higher throughout the study.

In essence, they found that the babies responded to the vaccine by having an intense Th2 response that persisted long after it should have disappeared, a completely abnormal response.

In 2004, the The Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs petitioned the FDA to limit the use of thimerosal in vaccine citing safety concerns. In a reply made public years later, the FDA denied the request despite overwhelming evidence that mercury is harmful to the human body [2] [3] [4].

In addition to mercury, vaccines also contain other toxic fillers and preservatives that have been linked to health conditions such as cancer:

• Aluminum: Also a neurotoxin, aluminum has been linked to Alzheimer’s disease [5] and other cognitive diseases [6].

• Formaldehyde: Among the 8 new substances to be added to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services list of carcinogens.

• Antibiotics: Various forms include neomycin, streptomycin, and gentamicin.

• Triton X-100: A detergent that should not be injected into the human bloodstream.

By recommending flu shots to the public, the CDC and vaccine manufacturers are ignoring the warnings of not only major studies conducted by prominent universities, but also the EPA. The EPA’s safety limit of mercury exposure is being exceeded by over 250 times each shot. In addition to a number of other ‘recommended’ vaccines, flu shots are dished out each year to the public, meaning that this exposure increases to 250 times the limit each year. Over a 10 year period, it is possible to exceed the limit by 2500 times simply by receiving a yearly flu shot.

Sources:

1. Frustaci A, Magnavita N, Chimenti C, et. al; Marked elevation of myocardial trace elements in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiology 1999;33:1578-83
2. Chang YC, Yeh C, Wang JD. Subclinical neurotoxicity of merucyr vapor revcelaed by a multimodality evoked potential study of chloralkali workers. Amer J Ind Med 1995;27(2):271-279.
3. Yang Y-J, Huang C-C, Shih T-S, et al . Chronic elemental mercury intoxication:clinical and field studies in lampsocked manufacturers. 1994;Occup Environ Med 57(1):245-247.
4. Bluhm RE, Bobbitt RG, Wlech LW, et al. Elemental mercury vapour toxicity, treatment and prognosis after acute intensive exposure in chloraklali plant workers. Part 1I. History, neuropsychological findings and chelator effects. Hum Exp Toxicol 1992 11(3):201-210.
5. Bertholf, R. Aluminum and Alzheimer’s disease: prospectives for a cytoskeletal mechanism. CRC-Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 25:195, 1987
6. Krishnan, S. Aluminum toxicity to the brain. Sci Total Environ 71:59, 198