Archive for the ‘pollution/contamination/toxins’ Category

Bisphenol-A poses major health risks

Tuesday, December 29th, 2009

We first wrote about bisphenol-A (BPA) about two years ago. In that article, we noted that while parents were shying away from plastic baby bottles containing the substance, they were largely unaware that BPA was actually found in larger quantities in most liquid baby formulas because it leaches from the linings of the cans used to package them. Powdered infant formulas, because they needed to be diluted with water, were deemed likely to be a lower source of the substance, but by no means exempt from suspicion.

We recently came across the video below, which does a good job of explaining the dangers and sources of BPA. This substance is of concern not only for infant formulas, but for food packaging and preparation in general, since BPA is used in many plastics used to store and prepare food and beverages, as well as to line all cans sold in the U.S. Since BPA is a serious endocrine disruptor linked to both breast and prostate cancers and is found in the bodies of 93% of the U.S. population, this is bad news for Americans. Any soda you buy—because it will come stored either in a can or a plastic bottle—is likely to be contaminated with the substance. The same follows for virtually any packaged food or beverage, including, for example, canned vegetables. Yet, independent studies performed on BPA even in extremely low doses indicated that the chemical was disruptive to both male and female reproductive systems. It has been linked both to breast and testicular cancer.

This video follows the history of BPA and shows how the EPA has spent millions of taxpayer dollars earmarked for screening chemicals such as BPA without apparently doing anything. It also interviews scientists concerned with this toxic pollutant.

YouTube Preview Image
You might also like:
The Big Picture (beyond our site):

Dental amalgams revisited

Monday, December 14th, 2009

There’s a new report out that says mercury fillings—the so-called “silver” dental amalagam most of us have in our teeth—may not be so harmful after all. Using x-ray analysis, Graham George of the University of Saskatchewan analyzed the surface of mercury-based fillings that were about 20 years old and compared those to the surface of new amalgam fillings.

The old fillings had lost up to 95 percent of their mercury. What’s more, their mercuric composition had changed. While new fillings contain metallic mercury, the old ones contained primarily beta-mercuric sulfide (metacinnabar), according to the paper George and colleagues published in the American Chemical Society journal, Chemical Research in Toxicology in late October.

Over the past week or so, that paper’s conclusions have been finding their way into the scientific press. So maybe those mercury fillings aren’t so toxic after all, the journalists have been saying. At least, not after they’ve been in your mouth for about 20 years.

The Mad Hatter

The only problem is that the harm scientists have been claiming from amalgam fillings comes from the mercury vapors given off by those fillings, not by the direct action of food or saliva against the fillings themselves. Mercury vapor is what put the “mad” in mad hatters, a nineteenth-century reality independent of the writings of Lewis Carroll. Indeed, the primary reason mercury thermometers have become so rare is that if one breaks, despite the low vapor pressure of mercury, the air of a small room such as a bathroom can easily exceed the acceptable limit of the dangerous fumes, even at room temperature. When mercury is heated, the vapors become far more toxic. What’s more, the lungs provide the most efficient path for absorption of mercury.1 2 3

So while we believe the authors of this article had good intentions, we reject the notion that mercury fillings are not harmful. If after 20 years most of the mercury from those fillings is gone, where do you suppose it went? Probably into your body, a substantial portion of it absorbed through your lungs and digestive tract as inhaled fumes.


  1. For one of the more bizarre recent accounts of death due to mercury vapor, click here.
  2. For the damage done to a teen who came across elemental mercury and played with it, here is another story.
  3. This Time magazine article details how 170 people were exposed to elemental mercury because two teenagers found a large quantity. If you have doubts about the harmful nature of elemental mercury, read this.

You might also like:
The Big Picture (beyond our site):

Fluoride affects IQ, brain development and thyroid function

Thursday, October 22nd, 2009

If you’ve read our previous articles on fluoride—Fluoride message still not getting through and Fluoride still not safe, despite tooth-decay data—you already know most of the information here. However, there is something about seeing the actual authorities speak on camera that makes it all the more convincing and reassuring. Phyllis Mullenix is here, as are Drs. Robert Carton and William Herzy (former president and current vice president of the EPA Union, respectively) and Arvid Carlsson (Nobel Laureate in Medicine), as well as other scientific and governmental luminaries too numerous to mention.

Yes, fluoride does cause brain and skeletal damage. Yes, it is harmful to the thyroid and pineal glands. And our children are getting overdosed with it. And yes, as we reported before, it is a toxic waste that’s being disposed of in our water supplies at some additional local expense.

It’s all here. A must-view.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7547385139152764985
You might also like:
The Big Picture (beyond our site):

Of vaccines, mercury, autism and Julie Gerberding

Friday, August 14th, 2009

Editorial

former CDC head Dr. Julie Gerberding

former CDC head Dr. Julie Gerberding

We came across a post on the autism site Adventures in Autism by Ginger Taylor claiming that former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) chief Julie Gerberding, who stepped down from that agency in January of this year, has since accepted a position with public relations giant Edelman.

The Edelman website confirms this, and we quote:

Edelman has created the Global Task Force on H1N1 Influenza to help its clients and partners navigate the communications challenges associated with the potential outbreak of H1N1 flu. The task force comprises a network of public health and crisis communications specialists, including former U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Julie Gerberding, who are ready to help organizations engage their internal and external stakeholders early and protect their reputations.

Perhaps this is vindication for those Gerberding critics who claimed that while she was head of CDC, her interest was more in protecting careers and reputations than in saving lives. We don’t know.

We do know that the transition back and forth between agencies in the public sector and such major industries as the oil, chemicals, food and pharmaceuticals industries supposedly regulated by those corresponding agencies has been an easy one to make of late, a situation that we find mildly upsetting. We say “mildly” because, while we could easily work ourselves into a sleepless frenzy over this, it happens all the time. That would leave us sleepless for life were we to agonize over it too much.

Gerberding has every right to represent the same large pharmaceutical companies she was accused of representing all along, and at least now her paycheck does not come directly from our taxes. (It is siphoned off, instead, via the extra healthcare costs we pay for healthcare we may or may not receive, depending upon our ability to pay for it after having supported with our taxes massive government agencies that are supposed to be guarding us. For more on these issues see the interview with a CIGNA exec and Michael Moore’s Sicko.)

Corporate vs. public interests

We wouldn’t mind the job security conferred upon the ruling elite by these arrangements nearly so much if only those public servants were more diligent in their defense of the public (as opposed to corporate) interests while serving their brief tenure in public posts. But so few of them have actually been able to switch off the defending-corporate-interests part of their personalities while allegedly serving the public.

If you read Ginger Taylor’s references to Gerberding it becomes clear that she feels intense frustration at Gerberding’s frequent calls for more research that were then followed by total inaction in instigating such research.

Taylor, meanwhile, is a Maine housewife living the daily frustration and horror of parenting a child disabled by autism. It is one thing to sit and read countless papers (as we do) trying to decipher the contradictions among research reports to arrive at some sort of informed opinion on the subject and quite another to have witnessed, as Ginger Taylor and too many other parents have, the transformation of a formerly healthy child to a sick and damaged one after receiving a shot or a series of shots.

Cause and effect are total abstractions in the first case and heartless assassins in the second. If you watched your child or spouse regress from a healthy state to an autistic or demented one, wouldn’t you too be bitter or at least hostile towards the vaccine and mercury amalgam manufacturers who continue to claim there is no relation at all between these afflictions and their products?

As for Gerberding, she probably makes the sort of next-door neighbor you would visit with for hours given the opportunity. But we can understand Taylor’s feelings towards her. That frustration comes through in the interview below of Julie Gerberding by Dr. Sanjay Gupta, with text insertions provided by Ginger Taylor. Following that, we have also posted an interview with John F. Kennedy, Jr, who has performed extensive research on the thimerosal issue.

Thimerosal and vaccines

Thimerosal, in case you’ve forgotten, is a preservative used in many vaccines. Kennedy’s article Deadly Immunity, published in Rolling Stone and Salon.com is a must read on that subject.

While we’re on the subject of mercury and autism, we would like to add that we don’t think the thimerosal in vaccines (or that in mercury fillings, for that matter) is the sole cause of autism and other apparently mercury-related injuries and illnesses. We do believe that many individuals have been injured by the mercury in vaccinations and in mercury fillings, don’t get us wrong.

But the body is a complex organism and there are often multiple paths to the same result. A lack of vitamin D, for example, might induce similar disorders and certainly does induce asthma, Alzheimer’s and diabetes, to name just three among many. Pregnant mothers and infants have grown increasingly deficient in this important vitamin in recent years (See our piece Vitamin D, the versatile vitamin for more on that.)

Holistic approach works best

But there are other culprits as well. Aluminum not only exacerbates the presence of mercury, but can fill in for it as a damaging agent. Fluoride is another toxin that can cause untold damage, particularly when combined with aluminum. Even monosodium glutamate, aspartame and other excitotoxins may play a role. All these toxins—mercury, aluminum, fluoride, glutamate and aspartame, as well as vitamin D deficiency—have been implicated in the onset of dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. They can also cause, in various combinations or singly, childhood-onset disorders such as autism.

For many individuals, the sheer number of vaccinations given to children these days may be the cause. Not only are the additives such as thimerosal cumulative in their effects, the assault on a young immune system that each of these vaccinations represents has to be considered cumulative as well. Then too, the measles antigen suppresses the immune system for up to several months. During this period, another vaccination that might otherwise be tolerated by a given individual may cause disastrous results.

So a holistic approach to this problem works best. For the sake of argument, if you consider health to be the absence of disease and its contributing factors, you could define health, in this context as adequate vitamin D and other vitamins in the absence of mercury, aluminum, aspartame, MSG and fluoride from the diet and the environment.

Start adding any of these toxins back in, and you dramatically increase the risk of any given child displaying autism.

So, while a given parent may witness a child becoming autistic after, say, a flu vaccination (most flu vaccines still contain mercury) that doesn’t mean another parent may not witness either a different result from mercury or a different cause of autism.

The heartbreak of autism

In any case, it certainly does not mean that any of these parents should have to put up with ridicule or indifference on the part of the medical establishment and even less so on the part of our government. And it certainly does not mean that the CDC should continue to allow thimerosal and other forms of mercury to remain in vaccines. Nor should the FDA continue to allow it to be used in tooth fillings, for that matter.

Whereas in Europe the phrase “First, do no harm” is paramount, the United States has developed a different set of standards. Ours is more along the lines of “Do not interfere with business.” The health and welfare of our citizens, sadly, takes a back seat to the profits of corporations.

That situation has got to change.

As the Kennedy interview makes clear, autism is a disease with a well-defined history. It was first described in 1943 by Dr. Leo Kanner of Johns Hopkins University. Kanner had studied 11 children between 1938 and 1943, to which he ascribed this new disease.

Thimerosal was invented in the 1920s and first put into use in vaccines in the 1930s. So those who equate autism with the use of thimerosal have a solid base on which to stand. In fact, the House Government Reform Committee that studied the history of autism and thimerosal concluded in its final report, “This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal, a known neurotoxin.” The FDA and other public-health agencies failed to act, the committee added, out of “institutional malfeasance for self protection” and “misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry.”

You can read all about it here.

Editor’s note, August 13, 2009: We have added the following video (The Truth About Vaccines) from the Shoot ‘Em Up website. The clip can also be found on the Maryland Coalition for Vaccine Choice website. The people who shot the Shoot ‘Em Up documentary from which this video clip is derived produced a feature-length film on the subject. You can purchase that film on DVD from their website. Meanwhile, watch the clip here by clicking on the image below.

YouTube Preview Image

Dr. Julie Gerberding Autism interview with Dr. Sanjay Gupta of CNN – March, 2008, edited by Ginger Taylor.

YouTube Preview Image

Below, the Kennedy interview with Joe Scarborough is about Kennedy’s research on autism and thimerosal, a preservative used in many vaccines. This is a subject that both Scarborough and Kennedy know much about. (Scarborough has first-hand experience with autism.)

Keep in mind too that Scarborough is an ultra-conservative, while Kennedy is—well, a Kennedy.

YouTube Preview Image
You might also like:


The Big Picture (beyond our site):

Children exposed daily to untested personal-care products

Monday, December 3rd, 2007

(Source: Environmental Working Group) – From baby shampoo to diaper wipes, children are exposed every day to products containing chemicals that have not been assessed for their hazards to children, according to an investigation by Environmental Working Group (EWG) of children’s personal-care products. In an online survey of more than 3,300 parents, EWG found that the average child is exposed through body-care products to 27 chemicals a day that have not been found safe for children, including some associated with cancer, brain and nervous system damage, allergies and hormone disruption.

In fact, these chemicals are common ingredients in baby shampoo, lotion, diaper cream, sunscreen, and other body care products sold for use by chidren. “Children are more at risk than adults from many chemical hazards, but we have no special standards to protect them,” said Jane Houlihan, EWG’s vice president for research.

Children are typically more vulnerable to chemicals than adults. A child’s skin is 30 percent thinner than an adult’s, and can absorb greater amounts of chemicals from the skin surface. Children breathe in more air (and air pollution) relative to their weight than adults, and the blood-brain barrier that helps block chemicals from penetrating brain tissue is not fully formed until a baby is six months old. Even then, many chemicals cross this barrier and target developing brain tissue, with potential life-long harmful effects.

According to EWG findings,

  • 82% of children are exposed every week to one or more ingredients with the potential to harm the brain and nervous system.
  • 69% of children are exposed every week to one or more ingredients that may disrupt the hormone system, and 3.6% of children are exposed to ingredients with strong data linking them to cancer, including chemicals classified as known or probable human carcinogens.
  • 80% of children’s products marked as gentle and non-irritating contain ingredients linked to allergies and skin or eye irritation according to government and industry sources.

The safety of baby products falls under the purview of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, unlike the situation for drugs and food additives, the FDA has no power to require that cosmetics be tested for safety before they are sold. And due to other loopholes in the law, manufacturers are free to make any claims they wish, such as “safe” and “ultra mild,” without proof, and many do just that.

“In the absence of adequate regulation, the manufacturers of children’s products should take responsibility to inform and protect their customers,” said Michael Passoff, associate director of the As You Sow Foundation, which supported the study. As You Sow represents shareholders in engaging publicly held companies to adopt more progressive social and environmental policies

“Something shouldn’t be marketed to kids if it’s not proven safe for them,” said Passoff.

Concerned parents should consult EWG’s comprehensive Safety Guide to Children’s Personal Care Products.


You might also like:
The Big Picture (beyond our site):

Fluoride still not safe, despite tooth-decay data

Sunday, June 1st, 2008

The headline of a recent news post from Reuters reads, Flouride in tap water may help older teeth too. To the casual reader, this headline seems to indicate that protecting the teeth of old people is just one of the many benefits of fluoridated tap water. But according to a growing array of scientists and health activists, nothing could be further from the truth. (more…)


You might also like:
The Big Picture (beyond our site):

Fluoride message still not getting through

Saturday, July 25th, 2009

Sometimes we come across pieces in our files that never made it into “print” because they still had a few unfinished paragraphs or sentences, or maybe we just didn’t find time that week to do a final edit, after which it was forgotten. We think of them as orphans. This is one of those that we’ve come back to, finished and updated. We hope you find it useful, if much belated.

We saw it today on our own home page, right at the top of the list of the Reuters news feeds: Many Americans still do not get fluoridated water. The ensuing article quotes Dr. William Bailey of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Division of Oral Health as bemoaning the tragedy that more Americans aren’t getting fluoridated water. Then, further down the list, we found a headline to an article on a related subject that set our hackles on end: US Mayors Agree to Phase Out Bottled Water.

Now don’t get us wrong: we’re no huge fan of bottled water. Yes, we understand that the plastic bottles are not only a huge waste-disposal problem, but generally unhealthy in their own right because of the plastic or its components leaching into the water. And so many of the commercial bottled waters are just bottled tap water sold by the likes of Coke and Pepsi anyway. (The worst of these are highly fluoridated as well.)

So we think of the American obsession with buying bottles of water as—well, misguided. It’s just one of the many things we’ve been brainwashed into doing by the corporate media. Watch enough television, and you’ll start buying bottled water too. And don’t get us started about the current practice of putting flavorings and sugar in the water and calling it a “sports drink.” (Yeah, right!)

However, one of the reasons we hate to say goodbye to bottled water is that it is the only way many Americans can get water that isn’t fluoridated, although the proposal to require fluoridation of bottled water has been put on the table.

So we couldn’t help but wax cynical when we read the following statement in the first-mentioned Reuters article about fluoridated water:

Asked if there is any responsible evidence showing negative health effects due to fluoridated water, Bailey said, “No, not at the levels that we use in community water systems.”

This statement is misleading and irresponsible. (more…)


You might also like:
The Big Picture (beyond our site):

FDA reverses stance on mercury fillings

Wednesday, July 29th, 2009

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Tuesday announced its decision that mercury amalgam fillings—the so-called “silver” fillings most Americans have in their teeth—contain insufficient mercury to warrant concern.

“While elemental mercury has been associated with adverse health effects at high exposures, the levels released by dental amalgam fillings are not high enough to cause harm in patients,” the FDA website proclaims.

A national group called Moms Against Mercury, along with three other organizations, had sued the FDA in 2006 to have mercury fillings removed from the U.S. market. Later that year, an FDA panel of outside experts voted 13-7 against two statements put to them regarding the FDA’s position that mercury amalgam fillings were safe:

  • “Does the draft FDA White Paper objectively and clearly present the current state of knowledge about the exposure and health effects related to dental amalgam?”
  • and “Given the amount and quality of information available for the draft FDA White Paper, are the conclusions reasonable?”
  • The panel’s rejection of these statements caused quite a flurry among pro-mercury and anti-mercury forces alike. Those opposed to the use of mercury in fillings were heartened that at last the government might be listening. The American Dental Association (ADA), which has long favored the use of mercury fillings and supported the FDA’s position, was stirred to action over the possibility that mercury amalgam might finally be banned.

    According to the FDA’s website, Tuesday’s ruling was the FDA’s final word on the subject, to the disappointment of those who were hoping to have mercury banned from dental fillings because of its proven adverse health effects.

    Denmark Norway, and Sweden have banned the use of mercury amalgams. Several other countries do not allow the use of mercury fillings in young people under the age of 18.


    To see a video entitled “How Mercury Causes Brain Neuron Degeneration” produced by the University of Calgary Faculty of Medicine, click here.


    You might also like:
    The Big Picture (beyond our site):