ESSAY OF THE WEEK
British Columbia’s pacific salmon, considered an essential species for the ecosystem, have been disappearing since the early 1990s. Biologist Alex Morton, who has followed and studied the decline for nearly 30 years, knows who’s to blame: fish farms. It seems that when commercial fish farms moved into the area, the wild salmon became infected with a number of life-threatening conditions, including parasitic sea lice, the highly lethal “salmon influenza” and other viruses.
The Canadian government is covering up Morton’s research and trying to silence her.
Today, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) is set to approve the first genetically engineered salmon for sale in the U.S. Over the objections of more than 40 members of Congress and half a million U.S. consumers, the FDA says the GE salmon poses no threat to the environment, because the fish will never escape their “farms.”
Watch this full-length documentary, and you’ll know why this is a dangerous decision. And why you want to avoid factory-farm fish. (Learn More)
Some day soon, you might tuck into a plate of salmon without knowing that the fish you are eating was genetically engineered. The so-called AquAdvantage salmon, a salmon genetically engineered to grow faster than normal salmon, just moved one step closer to legalization. If so, it will be the first genetically engineered (GE) animal allowed for consumption in the United States. Thus, every part of the regulatory process related to the GE salmon sets a precedent for all future GE animals in the United States — and so far, according to experts, that precedent is a sloppy, inadequate one.
To create the GE salmon, the Boston-based public company AquaBounty Technologies inserted DNA from another salmon species and an eel-like fish into the genome of an Atlantic salmon. The new genes make the GE salmon produce growth hormone all year round instead of just for three months a year as they normally would. This helps them grow to market size in 16 to 18 months instead of the usual 30 months required for an Atlantic salmon.
To prevent any GE salmon from escaping into the wild, surviving, and reproducing there, AquaBounty will only produce female GE salmon, each with three sets of DNA instead of the normal two. Triploids, as organisms with three sets of DNA are called, are infertile. Therefore, producing only female, triploid GE fish should provide two mechanisms of preventing reproduction should any fish escape into the wild. (Obviously, it takes a bit of scientific tinkering to create an all-female triploid fish population and the process used to do this might make your stomach turn.)
AquaBounty will produce salmon eggs in Prince Edward Island, Canada. Then it will transport them to an inland facility in Panama, where it will grow the fish, harvest, and process them. The firm claims no live fish will ever enter the United States. (Read more)
Whether or not the FDA chooses to approve genetically modified salmon for sale in the marketplace, supermarkets themselves have decided to take a stand in the form of a mass boycott. One that would serve to crush the profits of the unlabeled seafood abomination.
In a move that signifies the growing opposition to genetically modified creations from a grassroots level all the way to corporate understanding of consumer demand, chains like Whole Foods, Trader Joe’s, Aldi, and others are now all reporting that they will refuse the sale of AquaBounty Technology’s modified salmon (also known as AquaAdvantage, the same GM fish Congress blocked from FDA approval back in 2011 due to serious concerns). This is particularly good news when you consider the fact that the seafood biotech company is not just hard at work pushing unlabeled genetically modified salmon into the food supply. (Read Full Article)
Regardless of their reputation, credentials, experience or background, proponents of vaccines can never answer or justify one simple question: Why are the pharmacokinetics, specifically the rates of bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of vaccine ingredients including any of the toxic extraneous components never studied?
To the ordinarily sane person, injecting a heavy metal such as mercury into the human body (no matter how small or insignificant an amount) seems counterproductive to the advancement of health. There is no such thing as a safe dose of any poison, especially mercury.
To add to this insanity, 140 countries agreed on a mercury treaty that does not remove it from vaccines. Have we all lost our minds?
There are dozens of scientific studies on the adverse effects of thimerosal (a mercury based preservative used in vaccines) which have verified its toxicity to living cells and the human body.
Although the FDA gave a two year deadline to remove thimerosal from vaccines after it was banned in 1997, it continued to appear in vaccine formulations and ironically the FDA is now supporting these drugs, not prohibiting them. Year after year, thimerosal appears in influenza vaccinations just in time for every flu season. WHY???
In 2009, eight out of ten H1N1 vaccines had thimerosal. Last year’s 2011/2012 flu vaccine season saw three out of five FDA approved vaccines containing thimerosal. This year, the 2012/2013 season offers three out of six flu vaccines which contain thimerosal and all are FDA approved of course.
Research from the Environment International Journal showed that women with higher levels of mercury exposure are more than twice as likely to have elevated levels of antibodies that are associated with autoimmune disorders such as arthritis and lupus.
In sufficient doses, methylmercury can affect the developing nervous system in the developing fetus and in growing children. In adults, elevated methylmercury exposure can lead to neurological problems, such as memory loss and tremors. Recent studies show that methylmercury exposures can also lead to cardiovascular and immune effects.
Thimerosal is only one of many toxic ingredients that appear in vaccines. There are plenty of others including but not limited to: Formaldehyde (carcinogen), neomycin (immunotoxin), polymyxin (neurotoxin), gentamicin sulfate (nephrotoxin), monosodium glutamate (neurotoxin, excitotoxin), sodium deoxycholate (immunotoxin), hydrocortisone (myelin degenerator), octoxynol 10 (immunotoxin), polysorbate 80 (sterile agent), and beta-propiolactone (carcinogen), polyethylene glycol (system toxin). Keep in mind, this is just a small list of a dozen toxic excipients in vaccine formulations.
The real question is why are neither the short or long-term pharmacokinetic effects which study the bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of vaccines and their ingredients never examined or analyzed?
Why are non-clinical toxicological findings such as the carcinogenesis, mutagenesis or impairment of fertility never evaluated?
How can a physician possibly inform a patient of any risks regarding vaccines if their formula constituents and their pharmacokinetics have never been studied on human beings?
Ok, maybe it’s more than one, but why will nobody ever answer these questions?
Take your pick at almost any vaccine insert or research your own, and look under the heading Pharmacokinetics or Non-Clinical Toxicology and you will find either no listing of these at all, or a listing of them with the statement “not evaluated” or “not clinically significant” meaning they haven’t studied it, or they took an extremely small sample size/term so that essentially the long-term safety evaluation is clinically impossible to determine. It’s their scapegoat because they know any long-term pharmacokinetic study, whether before clinical efficacy trials or after, will show how harmful many of these ingredients actually are once they bioaccumulate after days, weeks, months and even years.
Why do they not want us to know the determination of the fate of these substances being administered to human beings?
Forget about what side of the fence you are on in terms of vaccines. Shouldn’t any person receiving a vaccine that has been designated as safe be fully informed of the risks including the non-clinical toxicological implications or at least how the ingredients will generally behave within the human body? If the answer is yes, then why are these specifics never studied or evaluated to any depth?
Dave Mihalovic is a Naturopathic Doctor who specializes in vaccine research, cancer prevention and a natural approach to treatment.
By Mike Barrett
While we may be under the impression that our system of government is here to protect us, corporations—and the politicians getting paychecks from them—do a fair job of making that difficult. This manner of “legislative capture” is manifesting itself in a host of appalling ways far beyond those listed here. Here are 8 ways corporations are poisoning our food supply, humans, and mother earth.
1. Sugary Drinks, Diet Drinks are Addictive and Fattening
Sugary drinks, especially soda, run rampant in the U.S., with corporations shelling out millions to advertise to both children and adults. Kids are taking in 7 trillion calories of sugar each year from soda alone, with sodas making up 15-25% of the daily recommended caloric intake for kids aged 2 to 19. Sugar-sweetened sodas can contain upwards of 200 calories per can, but even artificially sweetened drinks should not be considered safe. Several studies show that artificial sweeteners—like cancer-linked aspartame—can contribute to tooth decay, obesity, kidney damage, and depression.
2. Bisphenol A and Other Chemicals in Canned Goods
BPA is a hormone disrupting chemical used in canned goods and plastic bottles. The chemical, which is labeled as “toxic” in other nations, had a chance to be banned of March 2012. In a move that angered activists within the US and even internationally, the FDA ruled against the ban. This ubiquitous chemical has been linked to:
- Hyperactivity in girls
- Breast cancer
- Reproductive issues
- Hastened puberty
- Feminization in boys
- Damaged arteries
3. Buying Out and Creating Organic Companies
You may not know this, but many organic companies are actually owned and operated by major corporations like Coca-Cola or Kellogg. Companies like Honest Tea and Odwalla may appeal to health conscious shoppers, but they are actually owned by Coca-Cola. Another popular ‘health’ brand is Kashi, owned by the Kellogg corporation. Some products from these companies may be ’100% organic’, but do you really trust their labeling practices? Or perhaps more important, do you really want to give support to the corporate producer?
Further, these large corporations are buying out some of the companies many natural-health advocates have grown to love. One example is when New Chapter, a vitamin and supplement company offering worthy products since 1892, was bought out by mega-corporation Proctor & Gamble.
4. Antibiotics are Making People Fat
These days, physicians are a little stab-happy with their antibiotics, often to just please the patient with a medical solution (a placebo effect, if you will). But it could be setting us up for lifelong obesity – at least that’s what some research has to say. In addition to killing “bad” bacteria, antibiotics kill “good” bacteria in the gut, thereby disrupting digestion even in the long run. There’s also mounting evidence that antibiotics may be promoting diabetes and metabolic syndrome—but not killing the cold and flu viruses that parents think they are (antibiotics cannot kill viruses, only bacteria).
5. Antibiotics in Livestock are Promoting Bacterial Resistance
Last year, The Guardian wrote about 150 scientists and 50 farmers—including a former FDA commissioner—demanding that Congress regulate antibiotic use in livestock. The European Center for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) has even blamed overuse of antibiotics for the global resistance to antibiotics, which could make antibiotics futile against disease-causing bacteria. And this is not even considering the other ill effects antibiotics have on the animals we eat.
6. Supporting Genetically Modified Foods and Herbicides
If you are into organic foods and have been following GM news, you know that the latest and greatest chance for GM labeling was with California’s proposition 37. Needless to say, the bill was not passed, but Prop 37 did teach us a lot about the interest of various companies and mega corporations. It was no surprise to see biotech giant Monsanto dish out over $4 million to fight the bill, but some people were surprised to see Naked Juice, Kashi, Cascadian Farm Organic, Honest Tea, and some others on the side of anti-GM labeling. As mentioned above, many of these companies are owned by corporations like Coca-Cola or General Mills.
They all support GM food, are anti-GM labeling, and subsequently support the use of herbicides and pesticides. Pesticides that are being used in greater amounts each day thanks to mutated insects that become resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup-ready GM crops.
According to numerous pieces of research, GM foods like Monsanto’s corn have been implicated of contributing to weight gain, organ disruption, tumor development and infertility in rats. Roundup—a glyphosate-based herbicide— is to thank for contributing to water pollution, resistant rootworms and superweeds, and environmental devastation.
7. Herbicides and Insecticides Contributing to Bee Colony Collapse
Although technological products like cell phone towers and cell phones are hurting the bee population, herbicides, insecticides and pesticides brought to us by Bayer, Monsanto, and Dow AgroSciences appear to be the main culprits. It has been shown time and time again that these chemicals are ravaging these tiny insects that are essential for agriculture purposes and pollinating food crops.
“…a document was leaked revealing that a bee-killing pesticide put in use by the EPA may be to blame [for the bee decline]. Adding to the controversy, more records have emerged showing that the USDA was fully aware of the pesticide’s threat to not only bees, but humans…Neonicotinoids, the particular type of pesticides used, are absorbed systemically into plants, including the pollen and nectar. Once the bees begin to pollinate, they also absorb the insecticide, and die.”
Neonicotinoids have been banned in France and Germany, but not the United States.
8. Factory Farms Devastate Land and Sea
If you purchase your meat from a grocery store instead of a farmer’s market or co-op, it was probably raised in a factory farm. Not only are these farms known for extreme animal cruelty (which many undercover videos have gruesomely pointed out), but they are also responsible for polluting groundwater, drinking water, and contributing to massive deforestation. Actually, they produce 100 times more waste than the entire U.S. population.
Run-off from these establishments as well as non-organic crops are contributing to blooms and dead zones in coastal waters. Earlier this year, a scientific paper argued against the case of factory farms feeding the world, but with the USDA and FDA deep in industrial farming’s pockets, it will take considerable time and effort before we see any changes.
This article was published at NationofChange at: http://www.nationofchange.org/8-ways-corporations-are-poisoning-our-food-water-earth-1362318238. All rights are reserved.
Organic Consumers Association
Tell the FDA: NO Frankenfish!
Please sign the petition to the FDA at the bottom of this page.
The first genetically engineered salmon – dubbed “frankenfish” – could be in grocery stores and restaurants as early as 2014. The FDA is expected to approve AquaBounty Technologies’ GE salmon after a 60-day public comment period. If approved, it will be the first approved food from a transgenic animal application to enter the U.S. food supply.
Consumer and environmental activists oppose genetically engineered “frankenfish” for many reasons, including the potential danger it poses to human health, to the environment and to the U.S. fishing economy. Michael Hansen, PhD, senior scientist with the Consumers Union, the advocacy and policy arm of Consumer Reports, called the FDA’s Environmental Assessment (EA) of GE salmon “flawed and inadequate.”
Please sign the petition (at the bottom of the page) if you agree that the FDA should reject should AquaBounty’s genetically engineered salmon, at least until it completes further, more reliable safety testing.
What is frankenfish?
AquaBounty Technologies, a Massachusetts-based biotech company, created the “AquAdvantage” salmon by injecting a fragment of DNA from an ocean pout fish, which is a type of eel, along with a growth hormone gene from the Chinook Pacific salmon, into a fertilised Atlantic salmon egg. The result? A salmon that produces growth hormone year round, instead of only during warm weather. This allows the fish to reach market weight in just 18 months, instead of the usual three years. (Read more)
Seen any walnuts in your medicine cabinet lately? According to the Food and Drug Administration, that is precisely where you should find them. Because Diamond Foods made truthful claims about the health benefits of consuming walnuts that the FDA didn’t approve, it sent the company a letter declaring, “Your walnut products are drugs” — and “new drugs” at that — and, therefore, “they may not legally be marketed … in the United States without an approved new drug application.” The agency even threatened Diamond with “seizure” if it failed to comply.
Diamond’s transgression was to make “financial investments to educate the public and supply them with walnuts,” as William Faloon of Life Extension magazine put it. On its website and packaging, the company stated that the omega-3 fatty acids found in walnuts have been shown to have certain health benefits, including reduced risk of heart disease and some types of cancer. These claims, Faloon notes, are well supported by scientific research: “Life Extension has published 57 articles that describe the health benefits of walnuts”; and “The US National Library of Medicine database contains no fewer than 35 peer-reviewed published papers supporting a claim that ingesting walnuts improves vascular health and may reduce heart attack risk.”
This evidence was apparently not good enough for the FDA, which told Diamond that its walnuts were “misbranded” because the “product bears health claims that are not authorized by the FDA.”
The FDA’s letter continues: “We have determined that your walnut products are promoted for conditions that cause them to be drugs because these products are intended for use in the prevention, mitigation, and treatment of disease.” Furthermore, the products are also “misbranded” because they “are offered for conditions that are not amenable to self-diagnosis and treatment by individuals who are not medical practitioners; therefore, adequate directions for use cannot be written so that a layperson can use these drugs safely for their intended purposes.” Who knew you had to have directions to eat walnuts?
“The FDA’s language,” Faloon writes, “resembles that of an out-of-control police state where tyranny [reigns] over rationality.” He adds:
This kind of bureaucratic tyranny sends a strong signal to the food industry not to innovate in a way that informs the public about foods that protect against disease. While consumers increasingly reach for healthier dietary choices, the federal government wants to deny food companies the ability to convey findings from scientific studies about their products.
Walnuts aren’t the only food whose health benefits the FDA has tried to suppress. Producers of pomegranate juice and green tea, among others, have felt the bureaucrats’ wrath whenever they have suggested that their products are good for people. (Read more)
There is a medicinal spice so timelessly interwoven with the origins of human culture and metabolism, so thoroughly supported by modern scientific inquiry, as to be unparalleled in its proven value to human health and well-being.
Indeed, turmeric turns the entire drug-based medical model on its head. Instead of causing more side effects than therapeutic ones – which you can read any drug insert to see is a universally true phenomenon and which ensures the infinite expansion of the pharmaceutical market and all the associated medical services – it has several hundred potential side benefits.
While no food or herb is right for everyone, and everything has the potential for unintended, adverse side effects, turmeric is truly unique in its exceptionally high margin of safety vis-à-vis the drugs it has been compared with, e.g. hydrocortisone, ibuprofen, chemotherapy agents. Furthermore, nothing within the modern-day pharmaceutical armamentarium comes even remotely close to turmeric’s 6,000 year track record of safe use in Ayurvedic medicine.
Despite its vast potential for alleviating human suffering, turmeric will never receive the FDA stamp of approval, due to its lack of exclusivity, patentability and therefore profitability. Truth be told, the FDA’s “gold standard” for proving the value of a prospective medicinal substance betrays the age old aphorism: “he who owns the gold makes the rules,” and unless an investor is willing to risk losing the 800+ million dollars that must be spent upfront, the FDA-required multi-phased double-blind, randomized clinical trials will not occur. For additional details on this rather seedy arrangement read our article on the topic: Why The Law Forbids The Medicinal Use of Natural Substances.
Here at GreenMedInfo.com, we have reviewed over 4,000 study abstracts from the National Library of Medicine’s bibliographic database known as MEDLINE and have discovered over 580 potential health benefits of turmeric, and/or its primary polyphenol known as curcumin. These can be viewed on our turmeric research page which is dedicated to disseminating the research on the topic to a larger audience.
Some of the most amazing demonstrated properties include:
Again, what is so amazing is not that turmeric may have value in six conditions simultaneously, or that it may improve conditions that are completely resistant to conventional treatment, but that there are over five-hundred and eighty additional health conditions it may also be valuable in preventing and/or treating. Consider also the fact that turmeric grows freely on the Earth, and you will understand why its very existence threatens a trillion-dollar plus conventional medical establishment.
Learn more about this research in the video below, and please spread the information to others who may benefit from learning more on the topic
 The Genus Curcuma (Medicinal and Aromatic Plants – Industrial Profiles); CRC; March 2007
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.