4 Proofs the USDA Doesn’t Care About Your Health

Nation of Change

4 Proofs the USDA Doesn’t Care About Your Health

By Anthony Gucciardi

Despite being tasked to defend public health, the USDA instead continues to not only go against public interest, but recklessly endanger the public with unacceptable and outright ludicrous policies that threaten your health on a routine basis. Perhaps most compelling is the fact that not only does the USDA allow for the widespread use of GMO crops, which have been pinpointed by scientific research as harmful to your health, but the USDA has now announced that they will be extraditing the approval process for these genetically modified creations.

What’s more, the organization actually said that one major hurdle they had to face when speeding up the regulation process — which cuts the regulatory time period in which GMO crops are studied for safety in half — was public interest. Does this sound like an organization that actually cares about your health? Here are 4 proofs that the USDA cares more about securing corporate profits than your health.

1. USDA Chooses Monsanto Sales Over Public Safety

Could it be possible that the USDA is actually turning a blind eye to the known adverse effects of Monsanto’s GMO crops, such as organ damage, in order to secure Monsanto’s growth and subsequent sales? In the original Bloomberg report announcing that the USDA was giving a ‘special’ speed review for Monsanto’s future crops, experts explained that the move was to secure the financial future of Monsanto — not to help farmers, citizens, or the United States.

Steve Censky, chief executive officer of the American Soybean Association, states it quite plainly. This is a move to help Monsanto and other biotechnology giants get an edge over competition.

It is a concern from a competition standpoint,” Censky said in a telephone interview.The same statements are re-iterated by analyst Jeff Windau in the same interview: “If you can reduce the approval time, you get sales that much faster,” said Windau

If you can reduce the approval time, then you can get sales much faster – an act of sacrificing legitimate safety measures for corporate gain.

2. USDA Ignores Pesticide Suspect in Dwindling Bee Population

Bees are at the core of our agricultural system, so with the news that they are dying off quite quickly, you would think that the USDA would do everything in its power to get to the root of the problem. This, of course, is not the case. While there have been a number of theories behind the downfall of the bee population, one leaked document revealed that a bee-killing pesticide put in use by the EPA may be to blame. Further records show that the USDA was fully aware of this fact, and just let it happen.

Amazingly, the USDA also knew the pesticide was a threat to human health. Still, they did nothing.

3. Mutant Insects? No Way, Monsanto’s GMO Corn is Perfectly Safe

Mutant insects don’t seem to bother the USDA either. Despite reports — including one by the EPA — that Monsanto’s Bt crops are spawning heavily resistant ‘mutated’ insects, the USDA continues to allow these crops on your dinner table. Bt is a ‘biopesticide‘ toxin incorporated into genetically modified crops in order to kill different insects, though it is highly ineffective. At least 8 populations of insects have developed resistance, with 2 populations resistant to Bt sprays and at least 6 species resistant to Bt crops as a whole.

As a result, significantly more pesticides must be used to make up for the failed GMO crops.

4. USDA Approves New Monsanto Corn Despite 45,000 Comments in Opposition

In a move that really shows that the USDA doesn’t care about what you have to say (the very individuals the organization was created to work for), the organization recently approved Monsanto’s ‘drought tolerant’ genetically engineered corn despite massive opposition. They gave the green light to Monsanto despite receiving nearly 45,000 public comments voicing opposition and only 23 comments in favor since comments opened.

This article was published at NationofChange at: http://www.nationofchange.org/4-proofs-usda-doesn-t-care-about-your-health-1330526966   All rights are reserved.

New Study Links Relaxers To Fibroids

New Study Links Relaxers To Fibroids


(BlackDoctor.org) — A new study in the American Journal of Epidemiology has linked hair relaxers to uterine fibroids, as well as early puberty in young girls.

Scientists followed more than 23,000 pre-menopausal Black American women from 1997 to 2009 and found that the two- to three-times higher rate of fibroids among black women may be linked to chemical exposure through scalp lesions and burns resulting from relaxers.

Women who got their first menstrual period before the age of 10 were also more likely to have uterine fibroids, and early menstruation may result from hair products black girls are using, according to a separate study published in the Annals of Epidemiology last summer.

Three hundred African American, African Caribbean, Hispanic, and White women in New York City were studied. The women’s first menstrual period varied anywhere from age 8 to age 19, but African Americans, who were more likely to use straightening and relaxers hair oils, also reached menarche earlier than other racial/ethnic groups.

While so far, there is only an association rather than a cause and effect relationship between relaxers, fibroid tumors, and puberty, many experts have been quick to point out that the hair care industry isn’t regulated by the FDA, meaning that there’s no definite way to fully know just how harmful standard Black hair care products really are.

Fibroid Facts

Fibroids are tumors that grow in the uterus. They are benign, which means they are not cancerous, and are made up of muscle fibers. Fibroids can be as small as a pea and can grow as large as a melon. It is estimated that 20-50% of women have, or will have, fibroids at some time in in their lives. They are rare in women under the age of 20, most common in women in their 30s and 40s, and tend to shrink after the menopause.

According to US studies, fibroids occur up to nine times more often in black women than in white women, and tend to appear earlier. The reason for this is unclear. Also women who are overweight may be more likely to have fibroids. This is thought to be due to higher levels of estrogen in heavier women.

Although the exact cause of fibroids is unknown, they seem to be influenced by estrogen. This would explain why they appear during a woman’s middle years (when estrogen levels are high) and stop growing after the menopause (when estrogen levels drop).

Most fibroids grow within the wall of the uterus. Health care providers put fibroids into three groups based on where they grow:

Submucosal (pronounced sub-myou-co-sul) fibroids grow just underneath the uterine lining.

Intramural (pronounced in-tra-myur-ul) fibroids grow in between the muscles of the uterus.

Subserosal (pronounced sub-sir-oh-sul) fibroids grow on the outside of the uterus.

Some fibroids grow on stalks (also called peduncles, pronounced ped-uncles) that grow out from the surface of the uterus, or into the cavity of the uterus.

Link:
http://blackdoctor.org/news/article/Fibroids/New_Study_Links_Relaxers_To_Fibroids.aspx

AlterNet / By Christopher D. Cook

Big Food Must Go: Why We Need to Radically Change the Way We Eat

This is not a problem we can solve by going vegetarian or vegan, or buying organic and fair trade.
February 26, 2012  |
 Editor’s note: Find Christopher D. Cook’s book, Diet for a Dead Planet: Big Business and the Coming Food Crisis, here.

It is no longer news that a few powerful corporations have literally occupied the vast majority of human sustenance. The situation is perilous: nearly all of human food production, seeds, food processing and sales, is run by a handful of for-profit firms which, like any capitalist enterprise, function to maximize profit and gain ever-greater market share and control. The question has become: What do we do about this disastrous alignment of pure profit in something so basic and fundamental to human survival?

It is time — now, not next year — to de-occupy Walmart. And Archer Daniels Midland. And Tyson Foods. And Monsanto. And Cargill. And Kraft Foods. And the other large corporations that decide what ends up on our plates. Take all our money out, public and personal, from our shopping dollars to school district lunch contracts to the corporate subsidies that uphold these firms’ grip on our food supply, and invest it in a new system that’s economically diverse and ecologically sustainable.

These corporations’ stranglehold over food has wreaked havoc on the environment, our health, farmers, workers, and our very future. It is time for an end to Big Food, and a societal shift to something radically different. We all deserve a future where what we eat feeds community and land, instead of eroding soils, polluting water and air, and tossing away small farmers and immigrant workers as if they were balance sheet losers. (Read more)

Recall: Glenmark Generics Inc. Norgestimate and Ethinyl Estradiol Tablets

Glenmark Generics Inc. Announces a Nationwide Recall of Seven (7) Lots of Norgestimate and Ethinyl Estradiol Tablets USP, 0.18 mg/0.035 mg, 0.215 mg/0.035 mg, 0.25 mg/0.035 mg (Generic) Due to Possibility of Out of Sequence Tablets
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm293347.htm?source=govdelivery

Februray 26, 2012

Recall — Firm Press Release

FDA posts press releases and other notices of recalls and market withdrawals from the firms involved as a  service to consumers,  the media, and other interested parties. FDA does not endorse either the product or the company.

Glenmark Generics Inc. Announces a Nationwide Recall of Seven (7) Lots of
Norgestimate and Ethinyl Estradiol Tablets USP, 0.18 mg/0.035 mg, 0.215
mg/0.035 mg, 0.25 mg/0.035 mg (Generic) Due to Possibility of Out of
Sequence Tablets

Contact:
Consumer:
1-(888)721-7115

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – February 24, 2012 – Glenmark Generics Inc. USA today issued a voluntary, nationwide, consumer-level recall of seven (7) lots of Norgestimate and Ethinyl Estradiol Tablets USP, 0.18 mg/0.035 mg, 0.215 mg/0.035 mg, 0.25 mg/0.035 mg. The recall is being implemented because of a packaging error, where select blisters were rotated 180 degrees within the card, reversing the weekly tablet orientation and making the lot number and expiry date visible only on the outer pouch. Any blister for which the lot number and expiry date is not visible is subject to recall. This packaging error is limited to the seven (7) lots listed in the table below of Norgestimate and Ethinyl Estradiol Tablets USP, 0.18 mg/0.035 mg, 0.215 mg/0.035 mg, 0.25 mg/0.035 mg. This product is used as an oral contraceptive indicated for the prevention of pregnancy in women who elect to use oral contraceptives as a method of contraception. As a result of this packaging error, the daily regimen for these oral contraceptives may be incorrect and could leave women without adequate contraception, and at risk for unintended pregnancy. These packaging defects do not pose any immediate health risks. However, consumers exposed to affected packaging should begin using a non-hormonal form of contraception immediately. Patients who have the affected product (lot numbers are provided below) should notify their physician and return the product to the pharmacy.

These tablets were manufactured and packaged by Glenmark Generics Ltd. India. and are distributed by Glenmark Generics Inc. USA. This product is distributed to wholesalers and retail pharmacies nationwide between September 21, 2011 and December 30, 2011. This product is distributed by Glenmark Generics Inc. only in the USA.

Get Full Recall List @

http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm293347.htm?source=govdelivery

FYI: 8 Home Remedies that Actually Work

8 Home Remedies that Actually Work

By Woman’s Day | Shine’s Guide to Great Skin – Tue, Feb 21, 2012 6:03 PM EST

By Brynn Mannino

Nobody is naysaying the wonders of modern medicine-what would we do without a medication like penicillin to treat infections? But, as it turns out, everyday items have secret curing powers, too. Next time you don’t want to fork over money to get a common wart removed, consider using duct tape. Already popped two aspirin but can’t get rid of the headache? A pencil could do the trick. Below, get medical explanations behind a few bizarre-albeit brilliant-MacGyver-esque home remedies.

Duct Tape to Remove Warts

In 2002, a group of doctors compared duct tape’s effectiveness with liquid nitrogen in removing warts. After two months of wearing duct tape on a daily basis and using a pumice stone about once a week to exfoliate the dead skin, 85 percent of patients’ warts were gone, whereas freezing only removed 60 percent. “The question is whether there is something in the chemical adhesive itself, or if the occlusion (suffocation) causes the destruction of the wart,” says New York City-based dermatologist, Robin Blum, MD. “The other thinking is that the duct tape causes irritation, which stimulates our body’s immune cells to attack the wart.” Photo: Thinkstock

Learn 4 ways to fight cold sores.      (READ FULL ARTICLE)

What Are We Really Easting?

What Are We Really Eating? Reporter Goes Undercover to Reveal the Real Story of Our Broken Food System

Tracie McMillan talks about her new book and how she went undercover as a farmhand and worker at Walmart and Applebee’s.
February 23, 2012  |
  Tracie McMillan’s The American Way of Eating: Undercover at Walmart, Applebee’s, Farm Fields and the Dinner Table takes us on a vivid and poignant tour of a place we don’t really want to go: the mostly hidden, sometimes horrible world of the workers who form the backbone of our cheap, industrialized food chain. Sound grim? It is, at times, but McMillan’s lively narrative and evident empathy for the people she encounters make her sojourn into the bowels of Big Food and Big Ag a pleasure to read.

From the fields of California’s Central Valley to the produce aisle of a Michigan Walmart, and lastly, the kitchen of a Brooklyn Applebee’s, McMillan gives a firsthand account of the long hours, lousy wages and difficult conditions that are par for the course in these places. This is tricky terrain for a white, relatively privileged middle-class American woman, and McMillan navigates it with grace and humility, remaining acutely aware of the pitfalls inherent in such a project.

I sat down with McMillan recently to chat about her populist odyssey and found her to be just as down-to-earth and plucky as her prose.

Kerry Trueman: What was the hardest part of going undercover?  (Read more)


Olympians Raise Own Food Fearing Conventional Meat

Olympians Raise Own Food Fearing Conventional Meat

by Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist on February 25, 2012

in Fitness,Green living

Marathoners for China’s Olympic team set to compete this summer in London have gone to drastic measures to avoid banned steroids which could result in disqualification from the 2012 Summer Games.

They are raising their own chickens for food.

 

In addition to home raised poultry, they are eating yak meat from local herdsman in order to avoid eating restaurant and store bought meats which can contain the residue of banned chemicals such as clenbuterol, an anabolic steroid.

Clenbuterol is indeed a problem in the conventional meat industry where it is illegally used in animal feed to increase the leanness and protein content of meat.  People who consume meat from animals fed this steroid can experience headaches, dizziness, heart palpitations and gastic irritation.  Some people need to be hospitalized after exposure.

Clenbuterol has caused grief for top athletes before.  Alberto Contador blamed a steak dinner for his positive test during the 2010 Tour de France.   This case is currently under appeal.

Olympic gold medalist weightlifter Tong Wen cited her love affair with pork chops as the reason when she tested positive for the same agent and was banned from the sport for two years.  Clenbuterol is frequently added to steroid laced pig feed in China.

An official for the Chinese marathon team said:

“Since we don’t have a canteen to provide safe food, we have to cook meals ourselves because it is risky to eat at a street restaurant.” (Read more)

Protect Consumers: Rename Laptops

Why Laptops Should Be Renamed To Protect Consumers

Februray 23, 2012

Recent research published in the journal Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health concluded that the “Laptop is paradoxically an improper site for the use of a LTC [laptop computer], which consequently should be renamed to not induce customers towards an improper use.” [emphasis added]

What lead these reseachers to reach such a seemingly drastic conclusion?

In the study referenced above and titled “Exposure to electromagnetic fields from laptop use of “laptop” computers,” researchers found that electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produced by laptop computers likely induce currents within the adult body, and the bodies of developing fetuses exposed by proxy, to unsafe levels.  They found that in the laptop computers analyzed EMF values were “considerably higher than the values recommended by 2 recent guidelines for computer monitors magnetic field emissions…”

Furthermore:

When close to the body, the laptop induces currents that are within 34.2% to 49.8% ICNIRP recommendations, but not negligible, to the adult’s body and to the fetus (in pregnant women). On the contrary, the power supply induces strong intracorporal electric current densities in the fetus and in the adult subject, which are respectively 182-263% and 71-483% higher than ICNIRP 98 basic restriction recommended to prevent adverse health effects.

The fact that laptop computers may have adverse health effects was confirmed late last year (Nov. 2011) in the journal Fertility and Sterility, which we reported on in this article.  In summary, researchers discovered that laptops connected to the internet through Wi-Fi decrease human sperm motility and increase sperm DNA fragmentation. This was the first human clinical study of its kind to establish that laptop-associated radiation can cause substantial harm to male fertility.

Laptop computers are far more convenient than desktops and difficult to avoid, especially if your livelihood is in any way connected to computer work and the internet. An effort should be made to use them cautiously and to avoid putting them directly on your lap. When circumstances make such exposures unavoidable it is possible that natural substances like turmeric, and propolis, along with other radioprotective substances, can reduce the adverse effects associated with exposure to harmful electromagnetic fields.

Link:

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/why-laptops-should-be-renamed-protect-consumers?utm_source=www.GreenMedInfo.com&utm_campaign=9b05003caa-Greenmedinfo&utm_medium=email

Heart Attacks in Women Under 55 Harder to Detect, Deadlier

Heart Attacks in Women Under 55 Harder to Detect, Deadlier [Video]

Although chest pain is still the number one sign of a heart attack, doctors are finding that women, and especially younger women, experience a number of other symptoms during a heart attack. Those symptoms include fatigue, nausea, shortness of breath and pain or numbness in the jaw, arms or back.

A new study of more than 1 million heart attack patients showed that women under 55 are less likely to seek medical attention for those atypical symptoms and more likely to die in a hospital from a heart attack than men of the same age.

LINK:  http://yourblackworld.net/2012/02/black-news/heart-attacks-women-55-harder-detect-deadlier-video/

NY Court Affirms Towns’ Powers to Ban Fracking

New York Court Affirms Towns’ Powers to Ban Fracking

Februray 23, 2012 – by Lena Groeger

ProPublica, Feb. 22, 2012, 5:51 p.m.

.Opponents and supporters of fracking walk into the last of four public hearings on proposed gas drilling regulations in New York state on Nov. 30, 2011. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

In a decision that could set a national precedent for how local governments can regulate gas drilling, a New York state court yesterday ruled for the first time that towns have the right to ban drilling despite a state regulation asserting they cannot.

At issue was a zoning law in Dryden, a township adjacent to Ithaca and the Cornell University campus, where drilling companies have leased some 22,000 acres for drilling. In August, Dryden’s town board passed a zoning law that prohibits gas drilling within town limits. The next month, Denver-based Anschutz Exploration Corp. sued the town, saying the ban was illegal because state law trumped the municipal rules.

As Anschutz noted, New York law promotes the development of oil and gas resources in the state. State Supreme Court Justice Phillip Rumsey addressed this point in his decision, writing: “Nowhere in legislative history provided to the court is there any suggestion that the Legislature intended — as argued by Anschutz — to encourage the maximum ultimate recovery of oil and gas regardless of other considerations, or to preempt local zoning authority.”

The Dryden case is merely the latest in a string of similar conflicts arising from Colorado to Pennsylvania that pit local communities against state oil and gas laws. It is common for local governments to zone industrial or commercial land, or to institute ordinances for noise or traffic. When it comes to the development of natural resources like oil and gas, the industry contends that local government shouldn’t make those decisions.

In New York, the controversy over state regulation of fracking has been brewing for years. In 2008, New York effectively put drilling on hold while it launched an environmental analysis of fracking, a process that uses a mix of highly pressurized water, sand and other chemicals to crack the earth deep underground. This is the first ruling on an industry effort to use the mineral extraction law to get around local bans.

In addition to the environmental and health concerns over fracking, which we’ve covered in depth, a fundamental issue has been the rights of localities against state or federal laws. According to Eric Goldstein, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council in New York, the right of local governments to determine their own land use has been guaranteed by the Constitution for over a century.

“The argument is simple,” said Goldstein. “New York state laws shouldn’t override the authority of local governments to protect their constituents.”

In New York, two very similarly worded laws govern the regulation of mining and oil and gas drilling. The oil and gas provision gives the state the power to “regulate the development, production and utilization of natural resources of oil and gas.” The town of Dryden argued that it was not trying to regulate fracking but merely trying to protect its citizens and property. It pointed out that courts have allowed towns to ban mining, and said Dryden should be allowed to do the same for fracking. The justice seemed to agree, concluding that the state’s oil and gas laws don’t prohibit localities from barring drilling.

Anschutz’s lawyer, Thomas West, said he was not sure whether the company would appeal the decision. Even if it does so, said Joseph Heath, an environmental attorney in New York, Tuesday’s win could help set a precedent for other communities. Despite the threat of similar lawsuits from a major corporation, local fracking bans and moratoriums have continued to grow in the last few years.

“People are now concentrating on local governments because that’s the best form of protection against fracking,” said Heath.

Such protection is unlikely to come from the states, as New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation has already deferred to the courts. When ProPublica interviewed the commissioner last year, we asked him specifically about the potential for conflict between local municipalities and states. He said it was likely “that the courts will need to decide these issues in a lawsuit between the town and the drilling company, not the state.” Now, it looks as if at least one court has decided.

“[The Dryden case] is an important indicator of how those battles are likely to play out,” said the NRDC’s Goldstein, “although it’s not the final word.”

Article Link:

http://www.propublica.org/article/new-york-court-affirms-towns-powers-to-ban-fracking

« Older entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 62 other followers