Wednesday, October 8, 2008
(NaturalNews) This year saw the first commercial planting of genetically modified (GM) sugar beets in the United States, with that sugar to hit the food supply soon after.
Farmers across the country will soon be planting Monsanto's Roundup Ready sugar beet, genetically engineered for resistance to Monsanto's herbicide glyphosate (marketed as Roundup). John Schorr, agriculture manager for Amalgamated Sugar, estimates that 95 percent of the sugar beet crop in Idaho will be of the new GM variety in 2008, or a total of 150,000 out of 167,000 acres.
Approximately 1.4 million acres of sugar beets are planted in the United States each year, primarily in Minnesota and North Dakota's Red River Valley, as well as the Pacific Northwest, Great Plains and Great Lakes areas.
In response to the anticipated flood of GM sugar onto the food market, the consumer group Citizens for Health has launched an email campaign to pressure three major sugar and candy companies to refuse the new product. In 2001, American Crystal Sugar, Hershey's and M&M Mars all promised that they would not use GM sugar; Citizens for Health is asking consumers to email those companies from the group's Web site and urge them to keep that promise.
"Since half of the granulated sugar in the U.S. comes from sugar beets, the infiltration of GE sugar beets represents a significant alteration of our food supply," Citizens for Health says on its Web site. "Unlike traditional breeding, genetic engineering creates new life forms that would never occur in nature, creating new and unpredictable health and environmental risks."
In 1999, candy companies' refusal to purchase GM sugar scuttled Monsanto's first attempt to introduce Roundup Ready sugar beets.
On another front, a coalition of farmer and environmental groups is seeking to block the planting of the GM beets through a federal lawsuit. The plaintiffs in the case - the Center for Food Safety, High Mowing Organic Seeds, the Organic Seed Alliance and the Sierra Club - are represented by lawyers from the Center for Food Safety and Earthjustice.
In 2005, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) changed the classification of Roundup Ready sugar beets from regulated to deregulated, meaning that the GM beets could be planted without a special permit. But the lawsuit alleges that the USDA failed to properly conduct an environmental review into the impacts of this deregulation.
"The law requires the government to take a hard look at the impact that deregulating Roundup Ready sugar beets will have on human health, agriculture and the environment," said Greg Loarie of Earthjustice. "The government cannot simply ignore the fact that deregulation will harm organic farmers and consumers, and exacerbate the growing epidemic of herbicide resistant weeds."
Critics point out that Roundup Ready crops encourage increased chemical use, with dangerous effects on both human health and the environment. In addition to contaminating soil and water, pesticides leave potentially dangerous residue on food plants themselves.
Citizens for Health says that this is a particular concern in light of the Environmental Protection Agency's recent compliance with a Monsanto request to increase the allowable levels of glyphosate residue on sugar beet roots by 5000 percent.
"Sugar is extracted from the beet's root, and the result is more glyphosate pesticide in our sugar," the group said.
Another concern is that such plants encourage the development of "superweeds" that are resistant to Roundup.
"Just as overuse of antibiotics eventually breeds drug resistant bacteria, overuse of Roundup eventually breeds Roundup-resistant weeds," said Kevin Golden of the Center for Food Safety. "When that happens, farmers are forced to rely on even more toxic herbicides to control those weeds."
USDA data reveals that in the 10 years after the 1994 introduction of Roundup Ready crops, herbicide use increased by 15 times. This has led to a concurrent increase in superweeds. While no cases of Roundup-resistant weeds were known in the U.S. corn belt in 2000, this year the roster of such weeds includes marestail, common and giant ragweed, waterhemp, Palmer pigweed, Cocklebur, lambsquarters, morning glory and velvetleaf.
Ninety-nine percent of U.S. superweeds are resistant to Roundup.
GM crops may also cross-breed with non-GM plants of the same or closely related species. The primary seed-growing region for sugar beets - the Willamette Valley of Oregon - is also a major seed-growing area for the closely related organic chard and table beets. Since all these species are wind pollinated, the chances of contamination are very high.
"Contamination from genetically modified pollen is a major risk to both the conventional and organic seed farmers, who have a long history in the Willamette Valley," said Matthew Dillon, director of advocacy for the Organic Seed Alliance. "The economic impact of contamination affects not only these seed farmers, but the beet and chard farmers who rely on the genetic integrity of their varieties."
Crops contaminated by cross-pollination with GM varieties can no longer be certified organic.
Since corn syrup is an even more widely used sweetener than sugar and the majority of corn grown in the United States is also Roundup Ready, food safety advocates note that nearly all sweetened food in the United States will soon be GM. Because U.S. law does not require labeling of GM ingredients, consumers of products from candy to breakfast cereal will soon be unknowingly exposed to engineered sugar, with unknown health consequences.
"As a consumer, I'm very concerned about genetically engineered sugar making its way into the products I eat," Neil Carman of the Sierra Club said.
Sources for this story include: www.citizens.org, www.organicconsumers.org.
Friday, May 30, 2008
At Your Ehealth Source we are dedicated to your health. Please read the following statement from our Physician concerning acetaminophen and the benefits of our pharmacies compounded medications.
Most people believe that Tylenol (acetaminophen or APAP) is safe, but it can cause serious liver damage and even acute liver failure if it is taken in high enough doses. In fact, it is one of the leading causes of liver failure in the
An FDA advisory panel recommended several times that products containing acetaminophen should carry a warning on the label about the risk of liver toxicity. In January 2004, the FDA launched a new public education campaign warning consumers about the potential risks of acetaminophen and other pain-relievers.
Some people are more susceptible to acetaminophen toxicity and can experience liver damage even at the recommended dose. A study by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that about 20% of people with acetaminophen-related liver toxicity had taken less than the recommended daily amount. For other people, a dangerous dose is not much higher than the recommended dose—that is, the “window” between a therapeutic dose and a toxic dose is smaller for acetaminophen than it is for many other drugs. Some experts also believe that taking acetaminophen for several days in a row may cause a dangerous build-up of the drug in the body.
Acetaminophen is more likely to cause liver toxicity at near-normal doses when used by people who drink alcohol. In fact, people who drink regularly may be more prone to liver damage even if they do not consume alcohol and acetaminophen at the same time. There appears to be added risk even if people take acetaminophen a few hours, or in some cases longer, before or after drinking. Since the mid-1990s, the Tylenol package has included a warning against drinking alcohol when using the drug.
Like many drugs, acetaminophen is metabolized by the liver. If the normal processing pathway is overwhelmed by a high dose, a different pathway known as the cytochrome P450 enzyme system kicks in. When this happens, a toxic metabolic byproduct called NAPQI is produced that can kill liver cells. Alcohol and many other drugs also use the cytochrome P450 processing system, and the risk of a “bottleneck” is greater if the liver has to deal with both acetaminophen and these other substances at the same time.
The following FDA tips can help prevent acetaminophen-related liver toxicity:
• Do not take more than the recommended dose of 4 grams within a 24-hour period (for example, 12 regular strength or 8 extra strength Tylenol tablets)
• Do not take acetaminophen for more than 10 days in a row
• Avoid drinking alcohol; this is important for people with hepatitis whether or not they use acetaminophen
• People who do consume 2-3 alcoholic drinks per day should not take more than half the usual recommended dose of acetaminophen (2 grams within 24 hours)
• People with advanced liver fibrosis or cirrhosis should avoid acetaminophen
• Write down how much acetaminophen you take, and when, if you have trouble remembering
• Check the labels of all medications; small doses of acetaminophen in combination remedies can add up to big trouble.
• Gender. Females are more susceptible than males are to most forms of drug-induced liver disease—especially drugs that can cause chronic hepatitis, such as methyldopa (Aldomet)- a drug used to treat hypertension (high blood pressure).
• Genetics. Some people have a genetically based impaired ability to break down potentially hepatotoxic drugs into safe byproducts, such as phenytoin (Dilantin)—a drug used to treat seizures.
• Dose. The higher the dose the greater the risk of liver toxicity. This applies to drugs, such as acetaminophen (Tylenol), which are by nature, potentially toxic to the liver.
• Duration. For some drugs, such as methotrexate (a type of chemotherapy) and acetaminophen, the longer it is used, the greater the likelihood of liver damage or even cirrhosis/liver failure.
• Kidney damage. People with poorly functioning kidneys are more prone to the hepatotoxicity of some drugs, such as tetracycline- an antibiotic.
• HIV. The presence of HIV (the virus which causes AIDS), increases the likelihood of hepatotoxicity from certain drugs, such as sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim (Septra).
• Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). People with these autoimmune disorders are more prone to the hepatotoxic effects of aspirin and acetaminophen than people without these disorders.
• Obesity. Obesity increases the susceptibility of halothane and acetaminophen-induced liver injury. (Halothane is a type of anesthesia.)
• Nutritional status. Either fasting or a high protein diet can increase a person’s susceptibility to acetaminophen-induced liver injury.
Doctors appear to be aware of Tylenol's potential to cause severe liver damage according to a recent survey. Professors at the In a study, researchers had been hired by the drug company Purdue Pharma LP, maker of the prescription painkiller Hydrocodone, to find out why abnormal liver tests were showing up in people using a combination drug containing the acetaminophen and the hydrocodone. Purdue Pharma stopped its hydrocodone study early because of the abnormal liver tests. Researchers Watkins and Kaplowitz thought they would find the culprit in hydrocodone's interaction with acetaminophen. "Our jaws dropped when we got the data," Watkins said. "It doesn't have anything to do with the hydrocodone. It's good ol', garden-variety acetaminophen."
In a study, researchers had been hired by the drug company Purdue Pharma LP, maker of the prescription painkiller Hydrocodone, to find out why abnormal liver tests were showing up in people using a combination drug containing the acetaminophen and the hydrocodone. Purdue Pharma stopped its hydrocodone study early because of the abnormal liver tests. Researchers Watkins and Kaplowitz thought they would find the culprit in hydrocodone's interaction with acetaminophen. "Our jaws dropped when we got the data," Watkins said. "It doesn't have anything to do with the hydrocodone. It's good ol', garden-variety acetaminophen."
Additional studies and reports:
WebMD: JAMA (Journal of The American Medical Association):
JAMA (Journal of The American Medical Association):
American Liver Foundation:http://www.liverfoundation.org/db-relation/news/1319/NewsID
If you are currently on or considering the use of narcotic analgesic for your pain, I strongly recommend the greater liver safety profile of compounded hydrocodone with significantly lower acetaminophen doses (e.g. Hydro/APAP 15/100). Take a look at www.YoureHealthSource.com for different dosage strengths and combinations. Take good care of yourself!!!
Take good care of yourself!!!
Monday, April 21, 2008
(NaturalNews) Following the unprecedented recall of 143 million pounds of beef that was potentially contaminated with mad cow disease, the USDA has decided that it's okay for children and consumer to eat that beef as long as it is comingled with beef from other cows. This startling decision appeared in a USDA memo reported in the Wall Street Journal, which stated:
"If a processor or grinder has records demonstrating that products were produced using less than 100% of recalled Westland meat for the meat component, then there is no need...to retrieve that 'commingled' product."
This statement from the USDA reveals that the agency believes the recalled beef is so dangerous that nobody should eat it, but it's safe enough to eat alongside beef from other cows. This is a curious -- if not downright laughable -- stance to take on public safety. If the meat is potentially contaminated with mad cow disease (which is the whole reason why it was recalled in the first place), then mixing mad cow disease-contaminated meat with non-contaminated meat does not reduce the potential danger of the "commingled" meat in any way whatsoever.
Video: See the exclusive video clip on Factory Farms and Slaughterhouse Cruelty
USDA nonsense and the betrayal of the public
How does adding another cow's meat to the downer cow's meat make the downer cow's meat any safer? It doesn't, of course, but the USDA isn't really interested in consumer safety. That's why they've issued this statement that means a meat packing company can use 99% of its beef from mad cow disease "downer" cows, and 1% of its beef from healthy cows, and it's all declared "safe" by the USDA with no need to recall the beef!
Now you can see why I consider the USDA to be such a joke. Much like the FDA, the USDA is primarily focused on protecting the profits of the industry it claims to regulate. What's important to the USDA is promoting beef, not protecting the public, and that's exactly why you also see these intentional delays in the USDA issuing beef recalls. These delays are specifically designed to limit the financial losses associated with beef recalls by making sure most of the meat is already eaten by consumers before the recall is issued.
It's yet another campaign of extreme incompetence -- or perhaps fraud -- by the USDA, an organization that believes too much in promoting milk and beef products that it has insisted for decades that all Americans eat more beef and drink more milk. That's the whole point behind the USDA's laughable food guide pyramid -- a marketing document designed to fatten up the population by telling consumers to eat and drink more animal products, regardless of the health consequences. Read Food Politics by Marion Nestle to get the full story on the fraud behind the USDA's food guide pyramid.
Better yet, download my free Honest Food Guide (www.HonestFoodGuide.org) - a replacement for the USDA's ridiculous food guide pyramid. The Honest Food Guide has been downloaded over one million times, and it tells the truth about foods that enhance health vs. foods that destroy health. Beef, milk and other animal products are in the "destroys health" category, and that's even when they aren't contaminated!
America faces the facts on animal cruelty and the criminal beef industry
What's especially notable in all this talk about beef slaughterhouses (which was only made possible by the Humane Society's secret video, by the way) is that for the first time, Americans are having to face up to the fact that they're eating meat that is cruelly extracted from the bodies of cows using torturous, criminal processes that expose these cows to excruciating pain.
For as long as I can remember, Americans have simply pretented to not know where their meat really came from. They would buy and eat meat products under the hallucination that somehow all this meat was extracted from cows without any sort of harm or pain. They were kidding themselves, of course, but through clever beef marketing and slaughterhouse secrecy, the industry was able to hide the truth about its criminal activities for many decades.
But now, all of a sudden the discussion about cruelty to cows and slaughterhouse practices is front page news. All of a sudden Americans are being forced to look in the mirror and realize what kind of industry they're supporting. Of course, many consumers just blame the slaughterhouse. "It's THEIR fault!" they say, as if their own purchasing of that very same beef had nothing to do with it. The disconnect works like this: "The slaughtering of cows is BAD, and it's THEIR fault, but the eating of the beef we buy is just fine, no problem!" In this way, consumers fail to connect their own purchasing demand with the cruel treatment of cows in factory farms and slaughterhouses across America and around the world.
When it comes to food, Americans don't really want to know where it comes from. They'd rather not think about or talk about it. They hold their noses when they swallow, and they talk about comedy TV, or politics or sports... anything to take their minds off the truth hidden in the steak they're swallowing for dinner. Nobody dares acknowledge the truth about what they're eating: Angry flesh torn from the bodies of screaming, suffering cows who are exploited and killed by profit-hungry slaughterhouse owners who care nothing about other living creatures.
The beef industry exemplifies everything that's wrong with America today: Extreme greed, the exploitation of living beings for profit, a shocking lack of compassion, non-stop pollution, environmental destruction and the complete disregard of consumer safety.
Watch the video: See the exclusive video clip on Factory Farms and Slaughterhouse Cruelty
If you eat red meat from factory-farmed cows, you are part of the problem. You are directly supporting the destruction of the environment and the torture and killing of cows. If you eat meat from factory-farmed cows, you are willfully participating in a system of extreme evil that operates without ethics and without any concern for living creatures or the natural environment.
There is no such thing as "cruelty-free" meat. All meat is taken from the carcass of an animal that once breathed, lived, observed and experienced. When you consider your dietary choices, think carefully about what practices you wish to promote and what businesses you wish to see succeed.
The best way to end cruelty to cows is to stop buying beef. Eat no more red meat. That includes meat from cows and pigs. If you must eat animal meat, consider switching to chickens and fish. There is still cruelty in those industries, no doubt, but the experiences of fish are much lower in intelligence than those of a cow, which is an intelligent mammal.
Better yet, eat quinoa, which is a complete protein containing all eight essential amino acids. Or supplement your protein from free-range eggs, spirulina or broccoli juice. You can get all the protein you need from plants by juicing them and drinking the juice. (Cooking destroys about half the protein content of plants, so eat them raw to get your protein.) There is absolutely no requirement for meat in the human diet. Consumers only eat meat because they were trained to do so by their parents. In the long run, that practice is entirely unsustainable, and the future of humanity depends on switching to a primarily plant-based diet.
Remember: Boycott red meat and you'll help end cruelty to cows. It's as simple as this: If consumers stop buying red meat, slaughterhouses will stop killing cows!
Be part of the solution. End cruelty to cows. Stop eating red meat (and save yourself from mad cow disease at the same time).
About the author: Mike Adams is a holistic nutritionist with a strong interest in personal health, the environment and the power of nature to help us all heal He is a prolific writer and has published thousands of articles, interviews, reports and consumer guides, reaching millions of readers with information that is saving lives and improving personal health around the world. Adams is a trusted, independent journalist who receives no money or promotional fees whatsoever to write about other companies' products. In 2007, Adams launched EcoLEDs, a manufacturer of mercury-free, energy-efficient LED lighting products that save electricity and help prevent global warming. He's also the founder and CEO of a well known email mail merge software developer whose software, 'Email Marketing Director,' currently runs the NaturalNews email subscriptions. Adams volunteers his time to serve as the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, and pursues hobbies such as Pilates, Capoeira, nature macrophotography and organic gardening.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Originally published February 8 2008
Governor Schwarzenegger Backed Immoral Sex Pheromone Spraying Continues...by Rami Nagel
(NaturalNews) Sometimes bad dreams do come true. My bad dream was that the government issued quarantine, and forced everybody to be vaccinated for some fake disease. In my dream, I took my family, and fled to the hills to avoid being vaccinated.
Now, nine months later, this dream has come true. In an emergency, I relinquished my rental contract and moved my pregnant partner and three and a half year old daughter out of Santa Cruz, CA, to avoid being exposed to potentially deadly chemicals.
The chemicals, known by their trade names as Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F, have been sprayed via state owned airplanes in September and October in Monterey County California. These same aerial chemicals, despite their known health risks, were sprayed on two nights (11-8, 11-9) over the people of Santa Cruz County. The purpose of this spray is to control the mating/reproductive habits of the light brown apple moth (LBAM). The prevailing belief is that the mating habits of this moth needs to be controlled because the USDA believes that the moth might cause 100 million dollars of damage (Realize that this figure is not a fact, but based on a government guess).
The way Checkmate works is by attempting to disrupt the mating habits of the LBAM, by cluster bombing infested cities with billions of miniature time-release plastic microcapsules filled with synthetic moth sex pheromone. The pheromone gives of a scent, which supposedly confuses the male moths who then cannot find the female moths and instead will attempt to mate with other moth's or anything that gives off that pheromone smell.
Government's Pesticide Experiment Program
The California Department of Food and Agriculture's own doctor acknowledges, in court documents, that the aerial application of this chemical has not been tested. Let me repeat this so you understand, chemicals are being sprayed on young children, nursing mother's, people with asthma, lung problems, heart problems, the elderly, the disabled, the homeless and the chemically sensitive - and this chemical formulation has NEVER been tested on even a piece of dirt, let alone, humans. The newly designed Faroes Statement, the consensus of over 200 scientists, calls for a precautionary approach with respect to exposure of fetuses and children to environmental toxins. The consensus is that exposure of fetuses or children to chemicals can cause increased susceptibility to disease and disability later in life. In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has specific directives and codes that state that they should not experiment with pesticides on pregnant women, or infants. It is a fact, since this aerial pesticide has not been proven to control the moth's mating habits and has not been proven safe to animals or humans, that this is an experiment.
In Monterey, approximately 100,000 residents were exposed to untested chemicals to control the mating habits of less than 750 moths. In Santa Cruz County, over 100,000 residents will be exposed between 11/06/07 � 11/09/07 to untested chemicals to control the mating habits of less than 9,000 moths. This is not a one time application, but will continue monthly beginning again in February, for nine months, and then repeated for up to a total of three years. Again, this program designed to eradicate the moth at best will only control the moth's mating habits; it will not eliminate the moth. At worst, the program will be ineffective, cost tax payers millions of dollars, and cause permanent disability to residents and their pets. All this harm is over a little moth that has yet to cause even $1.00 of damage in California.
Did you know that each aerial application of Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F costs approximately $3.5 million and that $3 million is paid directly to the manufacturer Suterra, LLC of Bend, Oregon?
The projected expense of this eradication "attempt" will cost tax payers over $70 million dollars just to spray Monterey and Santa Cruz counties the proposed 9 times. These monthly sprays are already scheduled for next year to begin in March. The California Department of Food and Agriculture has created a map which shows the spray area to grow and encompass various portions of the entire San Francisco Bay Area, click on the Central Coast (www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/PDEP/lbam/maps.html) . The United States EPA has authorized an emergency permit which could allow the CDFA to aerially spray the state of California until the year 2010. This Light Brown Apple Moth Eradication could cost California tax payers more than $500 million dollars when all is said and done, which is five times the projected amount of losses to the agricultural industry if the moth were to infest the state. Ridiculous and frivolous spending on untested, unproven and toxic methods of "attempted" pest eradication are unacceptable actions taken by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the California Department of Food and Agriculture. This is not a state plan, but is a plan that is sponsored, endorsed, and largely funded by the EPA and the USDA.
Documented and Undocumented Pesticide Damage to Humans
While the moth may cause an estimated $100 million of crop damage, one cannot put a price tag on the damage that Checkmate's chemicals cause to humans. In Monterey County, the first county in California to be sprayed with Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F, documented affidavits show that citizens got sick, ill or suffered life threatening reactions to the toxic spray. One infant in the City of Monterey nearly died from inhalation of the experimental biochemical, and now has permanent lung damage. Dozens of women in cities throughout the Monterey Peninsula are reporting problems with their reproductive systems after exposure to the pesticide, including: sudden, severe and irregular menstrual cycles, extreme cases of tender and swollen breasts, and the recurrence of menopause symptoms in older women. Other side effects of both Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F include: asthma and sudden breathing difficulties, chest pain, vomiting, lethargy, fatigue, and extreme mood swings. Some people have coughed up blood and have gotten bloody noses from Checkmate exposure.
If you are familiar with chemical exposure, then there is something to note which is of great alarm. If you have ever smelled paint, bleach, or something toxic like that, it takes a significant and potent amount of the chemical to make one sick. It is not typical that such small and minute amounts of chemicals can cause such severe damage as described above. The explanation for the severe side effects, is that the chemicals are in miniature balls of volatile plastic called microcapsules; thus chemicals can be introduced deeply into the body through swallowing or inhalation of the micro-sized particles. It is as if this "agricultural" product acted more like a drug on humans, than as a pesticide on moths.
Thousands of residents, including myself, have undocumented pesticide damage. I lived forty miles from the October-Monterey spray zone, and on the last day of aerial spraying, my entire family became ill. My three and a half year old daughter vomited. I had severe intestinal distress and could not eat for several days. I felt nervous and anxious, as if I had the caffeine equivalent of 10 cups of coffee. And for the first time in my life, I had for two days orange/red colored urine (I am now recovered). I did not link these symptoms to pesticide exposure until days later upon talking and hearing about dozens of other Santa Cruz residents who were experiencing the same or similar symptoms, on or near the same day. Their symptoms included severe vomiting and dark yellow/red colored urine. Recently I learned that this exposure may not have been from pesticide drift, but from a rogue plane releasing chemicals where it was not supposed to. Witnesses have recently linked the red color to the Checkmate formulations, seeing small red droplets where the Checkmate has contacted metallic objects.
The questions I ask myself are: What type of chemical, in such small doses, causes such profound harm? Why does a chemical claimed to be harmless to humans by the EPA, the CDFA and Governor Schwarzenegger have a significant and severe effect on the female reproductive system?
Microcapsules = Microwarfare
The aerial application of Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F are pheremone filled miniature plastic sphere-like particles (microcapsules), generally the same size as the width of a human hair. Each capsule is a biologically "loaded gun" due to its own chemical make-up and that of the pheromones held inside. Research indicates that the capsules are likely made out of a urea-formaldehyde polymer, the industry standard. This is an extremely volatile plastic which, under UV rays, degrades over a time period estimated to be anywhere from 30-90 days. These "agricultural" microcapsules have never been tested safe for humans. Thus, the life of these microcapsules inside our bodies is truly unknown as are the health risks of inhaling or swallowing them. Preliminary research on the microcapsules has revealed that some of them are as small as 10 microns, a size known to be dangerous to humans, with an average capsule size of 25-30 microns. Another investigation suggested that the large capsules may be made up of a cluster of smaller 3-4 micron size capsules.
Many of the chemicals used to make the Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F products have been deemed harmful for human consumption, like butelated hydroxyl tolune (BHT). For example: on the label for BHT it says (in big letters) "Do not inhale this product. Dangerous to respiratory health." Yet people in the spray zones in California to this day are still being exposed to BHT via the microcapsules. The symptoms documented by Monterey County residents can be directly correlated to the warning labels of BHT, and several other chemicals. BHT, is also known as DBCP, a dangerous pesticide known to cause sterility in men. Recently, Dole Food Company lost a lawsuit in which Nicaraguan Banana farmers were exposed to DBCP. In pending lawsuits, thousands of South American Farmers are claiming that they were harmed by exposure to DBCP.
Within these microcapsules is an endocrine disrupter which attaches itself to estrogen receptors and forces the activation and constant production of estrogen to occur in the human body. This happens for men, women and children. This chemical is called 2 hydroxy 4n octyloxybenzophenone. The warnings surrounding the exposure to this toxic chemical can be directly correlated to the documented symptoms of women living within the spray zone in Monterey County. These are health concerns which CANNOT be overlooked or swept under the carpet. The projected long term effects of exposure to Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F are unknown, undocumented and until now - not even a thought in the minds of those who are authorizing the spraying, and manufacturing the chemical.
In addition to the horrible documented health effects of coming into contact with Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F, there is a great chance that it will not even prove to be an effective investment. The EPA's own documents state that such a microcapsule cannot successfully release pheromone, and that "The studies show that only a small proportion of the microcapsules actually release any pheromone or only a portion of the total pheromone loaded into the capsule is capable of ever being released." Science and competent intelligence does not seem to be the methodology of this spray program; in light of such statements made, the technology cannot work.
The EPA masks their "emergency approval" of Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F behind the assertion that the pheromones in the products are safe. They then make the scientific leap and pronounce the entire pesticide is safe to be sprayed on residential neighborhoods, schools and water ways. This arrogant assertion by the CDFA and the EPA comes, again, without ANY LEGITIMATE TESTING. Under the "emergency exemption" (also known as Section 18), regulations allow the EPA to disregard the important 3% of "inert" ingredients. The "emergency exemption" allows this disregard even though many of those ingredients are not even inert, and are actually part of the "active" ingredients. The EPA then reaches the conclusion, "EPA believes use of these pheromone products, including aerial application over residential areas, presents negligible risks to human health and the environment." Again, these exemption laws are designed for agricultural fields like a field of apple orchards, or grapes, not for cities. This is another case of ridiculous, frivolous and blatant disregard for human health by Governor Schwarzenegger, the CDFA and the EPA.
In addition to the aerial application which focuses on the agriculture industry, microcapsules are used in medical and military technology. In medical technology, microcapsules are used to time-release drugs into the body. The medical capsules are made out of a bio-compatible material that the body can easily absorb. Director of Public Affairs at the CDFA Steve Lyle claims that their capsules are bio-compatible too because they are made largerly from urea. Mr. Lyle contents that this urea is equivelent to the urea our body produces and is thus a "basic biodegradable building block.." The material saftey data sheet for urea (www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/u4725.htm) clearly shows that "Supersensitive individuals with skin or eye problems, kidney impairment or asthmatic condition should have physician's approval before exposure to urea dust." It further explains how urea is a noxious chemical to humans. In military technology, microcapsules they can be used for chemical shields, or for experimental "non-lethal" weapons (That means the weapon does not cause immediate death). These thoughts do not leave one with a pleasant taste about how these microcapsules are being used in our neighborhoods and communities, especially for just a moth.
The over 30 billion microcapsules sprayed over Monterey County last month are not bio-compatible; and yet children are playing in them, dogs are rolling around in them, and people are inhaling them. And the state plans to continue to spray more communities over and over again begining early in 2008.
Like pollen, the miniature capsules can float in the air and they can stick to surfaces people touch. Imagine hundreds of synthetic microscopic plastic balls floating in the environment and then entering your nose, mouth, eyes and ears. Is this safe? What happens when those minuscule plastic balls are inhaled? We know what happens. They get lodged in your lungs, you cough profusely to expel them, and you go into respiratory distress. Some Monterey County residents report asthma attacks increasing, others report coughing so hard and for such long durations that they cough up blood. One healthy adult male in the sprayed Salinas area, who jogs five miles daily, now has developed asthma since the last two aerial sprays. For the first time in his life, he must use an inhaler to help him breathe. The local doctor he sees is out of inhaler samples because he has given them all away.
These and other serious side effects associated with the aerial application of Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F are being captured by citizen groups daily. Local doctors are refusing to document that their patients' symptoms have any relation to the aerial spraying. One doctor even told his patient (who was very ill from the spraying) that he would have to consult with this lawyer before discussing the matter further. An attorney representing the CDFA declared to a judge in Monterey County superior court during a hearing where a local environmental organization was suing the CDFA to stop the aerial spraying, that the CDFA has no intention on monitoring or following up on any of the health concerns or complaints that have been or will be filed in association with this aerial application. This is another blatant disregard for the health and well being of citizens. The CDFA can pay $3.5 million dollars to spray the residents of Monterey County, but cannot and will not spend a penny to assure citizens and residents that their health is of consequence to this program. This is repulsive! This is a crime!
Cities Are the Targets!
If you examine the CDFA reports (www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/PDEP/lbam/maps.html) you will see the cause for grave alarm. The LBAM aerial spraying program does not target agricultural fields with this agricultural technology, but rather targets mostly residential and urban areas that are great distances from crops and fields.
It does not take a rocket scientist to connect the dots:
1) A biochemical never tested before is being sprayed on cities and not agriculture.
2) The chemical has never been tested on moths, animals, or humans for safety or efficacy.
3) An emergency exemption is used for a moth which is not dangerous to humans; nor does it cause significant crop damage, especially in California's warm climate regions.
4) Minute doses of the chemical causes reproductive effects on women, and likely men.
5) Some of the chemical ingredients have no material safety data sheets regarding human exposure, and samples of the pesticide have never been independently scrutinized except by the EPA.
6) The majority of the funding of this project comes from the USDA and Commodity Credit Corporation funds, these funds are managed by George W. Bush appointees.
7) Plans are being put in place to continue aerial spraying over other populated portions of California, including San Mateo, San Francisco, Oakland, and many regions in Southern California. The moth has a peculiar habit of living in cities.
8) The spray plan does not include all the moth finds, but rather mostly moth finds in cities. For a spray plan to work to control these insects, a buffer zone should be created around all the moths; such that none escape the spray, but this is not what is being done.
9) People who have been sprayed feel significantly impacted, physically and emotionally.
10) People who understand the situation respond to it, as if they are being attacked.
11) Preliminary research shows the microcapsule particles to be of a dangerous size.
12) Microcapsules are used to deliver drugs deep into the human body.
For me, I felt like the airplanes spraying chemicals were attacking my very right to exist and be here. What do you conclude?
Is the Government Negligent, Or Sinister?
The urgent question that I must bring your attention to, is this: Is the government just the biggest, dumbest entity on the planet; where they haphazardly declare an emergency, which this is not one, and then over eagerly dose whole cities with untested chemicals?
Is what we are experiencing part of a sinister plan to poison (or worse) a large populace, who more and more, is choosing an alternative and chemical free lifestyle? It is unclear how much the government is aware of this plan, but it is clear that the government goes out of their way to deny and hide all serious reported health claims.
These may be scary questions to consider or you may find them amusing and absurd. But if you lived in the spray zone and experienced what we have, you might be asking yourself the same questions too.
It is likely that both of these statements are true, that the government is acting in a negligent, and sinister way.
A Time for Mourning
Even if we do not know for sure the intention of the aerial spray, we must begin to acknowledge the great human tragedy that is now playing out before us.
Over 200,000 fellow residents of California, USA, are being exposed, needlessly, to biologically active time-release chemicals. Pregnant women, infants, and the sick will be the most effected, because we know that even the most minute dose of the chemical can find its way into fetuses and affect them, and can find its way into human breast milk. These residents are being exposed to chemicals against their will. Some of them have had to rush to the emergency room for treatment. Others, like myself, have literally fled to protect their lives. Many businesses are and will be devastated as owners decide to move out if their business is affected. Many children's hopes will be dashed when their parents decide to leave the area and the only homes they've ever known, and many sick and elderly people will be torn from their own homes to avoid becoming gravely ill.
There is a war happening right here, on our own soil; as citizens try desperately to assert their right to survive, to exist, and to do so without this obscene government intrusion.
Today is a day to mourn. A day to mourn the ignorance and the violence perpetuated on our own soil. Today is a day to acknowledge the profound and sad fact that our government seems hell bent on turning this world into a war zone. Today is a day to mourn for the children whose growing bodies are being affected by this spray and for the countless people who were not even informed about what the spray means or when it will take place. Today is a day to mourn the liars in the government, who use our tax money to test chemicals on the public and then use our money, again, to pay lawyers to defend their negligent actions in court case after court case.
Today is not a good day, but a day when we are being called upon to surrender our greater reality that includes all of our feelings and experiences, good ones and bad ones. We must look now on what we have become as a nation, and what we have allowed to happen.
I sincerely believe that only through looking at the outer and inner experience and through accepting our own feelings, can we find a way to both make peace within and to take effectual action in the world to stop this violence once and for all.
The Earth is in mourning. She wants to protect her children from harm so badly.
Recent Checkmate Aerial Spray Research Confirms Its Harm
A recently released study about Checkmate LBAM-F by the Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory at
The University of California, Davis confirms the danger of this aerial application. The authors state on page three that, "the microcapsules ranged in size from approximately 10 microns to 190 microns.."
Microcapsules circa the 10 micron size range fall under the category of "particle pollution" according to the American Lung Association (ALA). On the ALA's website they state, ""Particle pollution, called particulate matter or PM, is a combination of fine solids and aerosols that are suspended in the air we breathe... The ones of most concern are small enough to lodge deep in the lungs where they can do serious damage. They are measured in microns. The largest of concern are 10 microns in diameter."
Particle pollution has well documented short and long term health effects, including: death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes; inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults; increased severity of asthma attacks in children; slowed lung function growth in children and teenagers; significant damage to the small airways of the lungs; and increased risk of dying from lung cancer. Children under 18 and adults over the age of 65 will be the ones most harmed by this chemical assault.
A Call to Action
Aerial application of chemicals, whether supposed safe or not, violates the very roots of our democracy and the free will of the people of the United States of America. What choices will residents of this democracy have left if they choose to not be sprayed with potentially deadly chemicals and are then denied that right? If you continue to stand by and let this happen, do you think your city and your county will be immune from the next senseless government incursion? Now there are court cases and legal presidents being set, which our government can use, to justify further hostile actions against its own people.
You cannot continue to sit around and think that you will not be affected by the actions that our government is taking today. You must act because the people here need your help. Every action you take has the potential to help. Your friends and family need you. Your country needs you. This world needs everyone of you to stand up and say loudly and clearly that you have had enough and you will not take this governmental bullying anymore!
Here are suggestions for action:
Call Governor Schwarzenegger who supports the biochemical aerial spraying that harms children and tell his staffers that you order the Governor to immediately halt the spraying.
(916) 445-2841 2841 (press #1, #5, #0)
Fax: (916) 445-4633
See my related story: (www.NaturalNews.com/022158.html)
Call your local senator and congressional representative. And I encourage you to call these California Senators. Federal offices will say that this is a state matter. You tell them that this LBAM eradication plan is funded by the USDA and that this is certainly a federal problem.
(Both California US Government Senators have been sitting on the fence, even though a congressional investigation as to why the USDA and EPA are so eager to spray chemicals on people, in plain violation of their own laws, is called for.)
Senator Diane Feinstein
San Fransisco Office - (415) 393-0707
Senator Barbara Boxer
San Fransisco Office - (415) 403-0100
They want to here our stories,
Send them this link with this article, or post a summary of this article to their e-mail.
The American Civil Liberties Union
The ACLU is a pioneer in human and civil rights, yet they claim that this is an environmental issue. Think again, this is a human rights issue, let them know (www.aclu.org/contact/general/index.html)
The Sierra Club
They should be suing to stop this but rather have laid back in their support, claiming that pheromones are a safer alternatives than insecticides according to the information they are receiving from the EPA. Think Again, pheromones in microcapsules, never tested before on animals or people, could be deadly. The Sierra Club is being intentionally misled into supporting a substance that they know very little about.
Let them know your opinion. National Headquarters 415-977-5500
The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
They are a lead environmental organization who usually has a fabulous track record in fighting against such atrocities as spraying chemicals. However, they have been ardent supporters of pheromone use, stating that the pheromone is safe because the EPA says it is better than traditional pesticides. Note that we were also told that they have not done ANY independent research into the toxic side effects of pheromones and do not have the resources to have their own scientists do any testing. Basically they are taking the EPA and USDA's word that it is safe, even though there are no tests available to show that it is safe or effective.
Call them and let them know how you feel. And ask them why they aren't doing their own tests.
National Headquarters Telephone: (212) 727-2700
Or the San Francisco, CA Office: (415) 875-6100
Talk to your friends about this and other government abuses.
If you can provide us legal, scientific, medical or other expert support contact the author of this article immediately.
Write Articles relating to this topic or to human rights in the United States.
Alert national and international media organizations, use your personal contacts to help the cause; spread this article.
Feel your feelings, let your feelings be present.
Pray, Meditate, Dance, Dream, Act for peace.
Boycott Roll International, owner of Suterra the maker's of Checkmate
Companies include: Fiji Water, Paramount Farms, Paramount Citrus, POM Wonderful, The Franklin Mint, and Teleflora
Some of Checkmate's Published Ingredients:
Here are three published Checkmate ingredients, of particular concern, which have been and will continue to be sprayed upon humans and their environment.
The Material Saftey Data Sheet States:
"Mutagenic for mammalian somatic cells. Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast" "The substance may be toxic to blood, liver, central nervous system(CNS). Repeated or prolonged exposure to the substances can produce target organs damage."
There is no information or documentation about this substance or how chronic exposure to it can effect human health. That means we cannot be certain that even small doses are safe.
This is a Xenochemical that binds to estrogen receptors not just in animals, but in humans. In other words, even in small doses, it signals people's bodies to take a specific biological action. Even small doses could affect hormonal functions by causing the constant production of estrogen. Prolonged exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals is the cause of breast cancer.
Helping Our Peninsula's Environment sued for a restraining order to stop aerial spraying in Monterey and lost because the disputed Checkmate ingredient was not in the EPA's documents; even though the pesticide manufacturer, Suterra, reported that they did use the disputed ingredient in the manufacture of Checkmate. The lawsuit included a document by a former EPA chemist showing how such an aerial spray program is dangerous to both humans and the environment. The lawsuit continues. Text of HOPE's lawsuit is at (www.1hope.org/SPRAYTRO.PDF)
The City and County of Santa Cruz voted to sue the California Department of Food and Agriculture, they too lost their request for a restraining order of the spray, even with a rock-solid case which stated that the county could not perform its functions; such as school, police, protect, and administer the city while aerial spraying continued. They too did not get a restraining order, as their case continues. You can read the court case here
A group of local residents filed suit in Federal Court and also did not get a restraining order, but did get a November 21st, 2007 Federal Court date to have their case more fully considered. Please consider attending this monumental hearing as citizens will stand and defend their civil liberties and right to a healthy life. Docket #0705587
Telling you this truth, about this atrocity, is my prayer and hope for peace.
I leave you with part of this press release by a strong opponent to the aerial spraying, California State Senator John Laird.
"Of greatest concern to me is the notion that speculative economic impacts may be outweighing the need to protect human health. In Monterey County there are reports of more than 200 health complaints associated with aerial spraying. Yet, to date there is no evidence that reports have been analyzed, and a promised 'white paper' on the toxicological data on the pheromone product and the health complaints taken as a whole has not been released. In fact, in his October 26th letter to me, CDFA Secretary Kawamura indicated there are no plans to either study long term effects of the spraying or conduct an epidemiological analysis of the complaints CDFA has received.
In light of the unresolved health complaints and unanswered scientific questions, the "precautionary principle" should serve as a guide. It has been described as a political and moral principle that says if an action or policy could harm the public or the environment, the burden of proof falls on the proponent of the action -- rather than on the public.
It was determined in Superior Court that the County of Santa Cruz failed to meet the burden of proof required to obtain a temporary restraining order against the state. However, in the court of public opinion, the burden of proof ought to be on CDFA to prove LBAM-F and OLR-F are safe prior to spraying it on residential populations monthly for an open-ended period of time."
Further information and research about the Light Brown Apple Moth Aerial Spray program is available at: Hope For Truth
About the authorRami Nagel is a father who cares about the way we affect each other, our children, and our planet through our lifestyle choices. His health background is in hands-on energy healing, Hatha & Bhakti yoga and the Pathwork.
Rami is author of several health resources:
www.curetoothdecay.com - Heal and Prevent Cavities with Nutrition!
www.healingourchildren.net - Learn the Cause and Prevention of the Diseases of Pregnancy and Childhood
www.preconceptionhealth.org - A Program for Preconception Health based on Indigenous Wisdom
www.yourreturn.org - The cause of disease and the end of suffering of humanity.