Smart Health Talk
Join Us:
  • Home
    • Suggest Topics
  • Show Schedule
    • US EPA Glyphosate Assessment 1984
    • Top Organic Product Recommendations
    • Sign Up for Alerts
    • Organic and Non GMO Resources
    • March Against Monsanto Global
    • March Against Monsanto States A-M
    • March Against Monsanto States N-Z
    • Say No GMOs Miscellaneous
    • Say No GMOs Global
    • Say No GMOs A-G
    • Say No GMOs H-Q
    • Say No GMOs R-Z
    • Say No GMO Various Organizations
  • Howard Vlieger - MAAM Interview
    • Moms Across America March Zen Honeycutt
    • Jay Feldman Beyond Pesticides
    • Farmed Salmon Infected With Viruses
    • Vermont Rep. Kate Webb on GMO Bill
    • Howard Vlieger Slide Show
    • SB 1381 Label GMOs California
    • GMOs for Dummies
    • GMOs, phthalates, antibiotics making us fat!
    • GMO French Study
    • Russian GMO Worldwide Reality Show
    • Vandana Shiva on GMOs
    • Genetic Roulette Movie
    • Opponents of Prop #37
    • GMO Produce Labeling Myth
    • Dr. Benbrook Interview
    • Pesticides in Our Food
    • PESTICIDE RISK
    • Elle Cochran and Kate Webb
    • Elle Cochran Hawaii GMO Labeling
    • GMO Videos Hawaii
    • Venus Williams Videos
  • Podcast Vanishing Bees
    • Judy Hoy on Potato Pesticide Related Mutations
    • Antibiotic Resistance & Organic Meats >
      • Bacteriophages
    • Honey Bee Extinction
    • Kettle Pop Expo West
    • Sue Nesbitt Olympic Coach
    • Sue Nesbitt Press Release
    • Podcast GlobalGardensOnline.com
    • Videos GlobalGardensOnline.com
    • Press Release GlobalGardensOnline.com
    • Theo Stephan Pecan Pie Recipe
    • Dr. Tarique Perera Mental Health
    • Dr. Al Plechner Top Veterinarian
    • Heartburn Remedies and Gypsy Tea
    • Kevin Sorbo for Kids
    • Roasted Chicken Gluten Free Meal
    • Sustainable Seafood & Organic Shopping
    • David Binkle LAUSD Foodservice
    • Dr. Michael Hansen & Vegan Eating
    • Local Urban Foragers-Alvarado Bakery-Elle Cochran
    • Tyson Flick-Chef Rene-Eric Hoffman-Katrina Frey-Starkie Sowers
    • Dan Bahou Recycling-LAUDS Foodservice
    • Goodbelly-Vanishing of the Bees-Seasnax-Tasty Brand-Really Raw Honey-Nature's Path
    • Sustainable Seafood-Three Sisters Farm
    • Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream Goes GMO
    • Numi Non GMO Teabags vs GMO Corn Plastic Teabags
    • Tieman's Coffee-Veggie Grill-Waldorf Salad-Highland Springs Ranch-Stacy Hall-ElaineCSA-Mozzarella Salad
    • Highland Spring Ranch-CSA
    • Stacey Hall-Elaine McFadden Intro to Show
  • Gardening
    • Two Minute Gardening Tips
    • More Gardening Ideas
    • Companion Planting
    • What's in Season
  • News
    • Expo West
    • Rodale Institute Coach Mark Smallwood
    • Coach Smallwood from Rodale Research Institute On The Road
    • LA Green Festival
    • Expo West 2014 New Product Highlights
    • TransPacific Partnership Agreement
    • Dr. Benbrook Press Release
    • Blog
    • Public Health
    • Christmas Holiday Recipes
    • Kid Fun Christmas
    • Organic Recipe Blog
    • Organic Product Blog
    • EPA Mercury Announcement
    • Everyday is Earth Day >
      • Earth Day Quiz
      • Earthcasts
      • Earthcasts from Space
      • Earth Children
  • Resources
    • More Resources
    • Organic Stocking Stuffers
    • Fast Organic Holiday Ideas
    • Holiday Recipes
    • Green Halloween Treats
    • Organic Treats
    • Favorite Organic Valentine Treats >
      • Valentine Organic Chocolate Gifts Large View
    • Easter Organic Chocolate Gifts
    • Organic Easter Baskets
    • Organic and Vegan Chocolate Favorites
    • Organic Hard Candy Chewies & Gummies
    • Keepin' It Hot Chicken Dinner >
      • Cooking the Meal
      • Prepare "Keeping it Hot Chicken"
    • Seafood Resources >
      • Sustainable Seafood Resources
      • Sustainable Seafood Shopping
      • Seafood Recipes
      • More Seafood Recipes
      • Seafood Nutritional Benefits
      • Seafood Education
      • Farmed Salmon Viruses Explained
    • 10 Smart Health Resolutions >
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #1
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #2
      • Calories Burned During Activities
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #3
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #4
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #5
    • 10 Smart Health Resolutions Con't >
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #6
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #7
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #8
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #9
      • 10 Smart Health Resolutions #10
    • Signs of a Heart Attack
    • America Recycles Day Broadcast 2014
    • Recycling Information >
      • 15 Tips for Recycling Day Anniversary
      • Recycling Tips
      • Recycled Products
      • Recycling Centers
      • What You Can and Cannot Recycle
      • Waste Reduction
      • Plastic Pollution-Expert Advice-Aly the Albatross
    • Sulfite Containing Foods
    • Aspartame Risks
    • GMO Tryptophan Verified - Energy Drinks and Kids
  • About Us
    • Listen Live on the Radio
    • Listen 24-7 With Podcasts
    • Listen Live on Your Computer
    • Listen Live on Your Cell Phone
    • Smart Health Talk Theme Song
    • Contact Us

Stop the State and County From Spraying Pesticide in Your Neighborhood

10/1/2017

0 Comments

 
Picture

What to do before and when they come to spray your home.

An ongoing Mediterranean fruit fly quarantine in the Sun Valley section of Los Angeles is requiring fruit removal in the central zone of infestation, an area with more than 1,200 properties. CDFA has turned to the California Conservation Corps (CCC) for assistance with this task. Approximately 50 CCC members are going door-to-door in the search for host fruit trees and are expected to wrap-up their work this week. This video shot last year shows a similar operation as it unfolded during another Medfly eradication project in nearby Panorama City.
CALL THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND TELL THEM YOU OPT OUT OF THE SPRAYING.
Many people can have negative health outcomes from exposure to this pesticide!
0 Comments

Insurers Have History of Abandoning the Sick - Why Leaving?

8/1/2017

0 Comments

 

We know that insurance companies use 30% of their revenue for administration where Medicare uses only 2%.  So what are they using the other 28% of all that money?  
​Click here to find out more on single payer/universal healthcare programs from around the world and what some people have to say about using a form of those system in the USA.

Insurance companies use revenue to identify the sick or those most at risk of getting sick. To increase profits by not having to pay for sick care, the most logical thing is cover less sick people and more healthy people.

Once you are flagged as having a preexisting condition, they know the odds are your going to cost their company money for care, treatments, surgery, and drugs.  From then on they don't want you.

Before Obamacare there were already many rural areas around the United States were residents only had one insurer to choose from.  That was one of the problems Obamacare hope to solve.  

Besides wanting the ACA to fail, insurance companies might just be up to business as usual by moving out of high disease rate districts to eliminate those most at risk of getting sick and costing them money. We decided to look at some maps and see if the low coverage areas are also the high risk areas.  We know that pesticides are causing cancer and many other health problems.  There are parts of the country where the use of toxins and contamination levels is greater than other places.  

If in charge of screwing people out of care they deserve and maybe paid for decades on a policy, and could eliminate entire populations most at risk, would go to the data.  So we did.
We started with the latest cancer death data.  Age Adjusted Death Rates for the United States by County 2006-2010
All Cancer Sites
All Races (Includes Hispanic) All Sexes

Picture
As you can see, some states in the graphic above did not submit any data.  
Red is the worst on the scale and dark blue is the best ranking for lower cancer rates.
Take a close look and you can see the clusters of cancer cases.  Keep checking back to it.
The graphic below shows how states rank for overall cancer incidence.
Picture
Next we wanted to look at where we stand with the amount of insurers available around the country as well as other maps that show pesticide use.  She what it looks like when we overlay maps.  

We used a map that highlight areas with only one insurer choice or no insurer choice which seemed small, but probably reflects many people that need care.  Click all graphics for larger view.
Picture

We know this pesticide "Chlorpyrifos" is not good because scientists all over the world have shown it destroys the brains of our children. Even before they are born.  Can cause all kinds of health and behavior problems such as autism symptoms as well as lower their IQ.

Find out more about what this pesticide does and why we are against the legislation that stopped the phasing out of its use in favor of the continued use and exposure to our children and everyone else it touches, especially our pregnant women.  Go there now.

Picture
Picture

Here we are trying to compare the amount of cancer cases with the areas where there is only one insurer or none.  We want to note if the same areas that we are find cancer are high pesticide use areas.  Some areas could have multiple exposures and rate high on multiple maps.

We see the red areas where the insurers are leaving or there has only been one available since before Obamacare.
Picture
Picture

We know that glyphosate is the most widely used pesticide in the United States with Atrazine rated second most used.  The amount used has greatly increased over the years not decreased.  

Dr. Stephanie Seneff has many warnings about glyphosate after years of research with Dr. Anthony Samsel.  Find that information here.
Roundup's main function was to kill weeds and it did until the weeds got smart and became resistant.  Now there are multiple resistant weeds in most states.  

Glyphosate is now on the California Prop 65 list as "cancer causing."  Every product sold in the State that contains Monsanto glyphosate will require a "cancer warning" on the label.  

Papers the uncover the collution between Monsanto, the EPA, and scientists make it clear that no one should assume this product is safe, but instead use the precautionary principal to test before using anymore.

Dr. Seralini did test glyphosate over a two year period.  The tumors were massive, the results well done, and Europe was ready to ban it until Monsanto unleased their plan to destroy the research.  Click here to find out more about Dr. Seralini's research.  
Picture
Picture
This runoff shows that surrounding areas are also contaminated with pesticides and nitrogen that can kill a lake and everything in it.  Factory farms are the perfect example of this abuse.  
See for yourself here.
Picture
Picture
There are chemicals that may have been dumped all around the country to get rid of it and avoid toxic waste disposal fees, these chemicals where so bad they could linger for decades or even hundreds of years.  PCBs are some of the worst of the worst and can be found in every living person in the country, even a newborn baby.  Yes they are that persistant!  

We need to remember where they are dumped because they are impacting peoples health right now.  Monsanto just lost a case regarding PCBs.  Atrazine is already one of the worst in the world and why banned in over 150 countries.  Syngenta payed their way for EPA approval status.  

The scientist that researched their poison found it chemically castrates frogs and changes their sexual orientation.  

​Found in every waterway in the USA!  Syngenta tried to discredit this brave scientist and was exposed when their email were revealed.  His story could be a Hollywood movie. Go here to watch the interview.  How it changes sexual orientation with exposure to large amount of hormones.
Picture
Picture
0 Comments

EPA and Neonicotinoid Pesticide Approval

7/24/2017

0 Comments

 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Notice: Registration Reviews: Neonicotinoid Risk Assessments; Summary Response to Comments, and Updated Neonicotinoid Work Schedule

Comment by July 24th here: ​https://www.regulations.gov/comment?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0844-1090
SMART HEALTH TALK HAD SOMETHING TO SAY TO THE EPA ABOUT NEONICOTINOID PESTICIDES:
Picture
See attached files including graphic on total bees killed in Canada and USA from neonicotinoid pesticides.  More than ONE TRILLION BEES KILLED in Canada alone!  

We try and say that bees, butterflies, and other beneficial insects are safe at one part per billion exposure to these pesticides, but Dr. Jonathan Lundgren found that was not true.  He was able to determine that at ONE PART PER BILLION BEES AND BUTTERFLIES DIE!

SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURE SHORT COMMUNICATION 
Non-target effects of clothianidin on monarch butterflies
Jacob R. Pecenka, Jonathan G. Lundgren, Sven Thatje 2015

Abstract:
Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) frequently consume milkweed in and near agroecosystems and consequently may be exposed to pesticides like neonicotinoids. We conducted a dose response study to determine lethal and sublethal doses of clothianidin using a 36-h exposure scenario. We then quantified clothianidin levels found in milkweed leaves adjacent to maize fields. Toxicity assays revealed LC 10 , LC 50 , and LC 90 values of 7.72, 15.63, and 30.70 ppb, respectively. Sublethal effects (larval size) were observed at 1 ppb. Contaminated milkweed plants had an average of 1.14 ±0.10 ppb clothianidin, with a maximum of 4 ppb in a single plant. This research suggests that clothianidin could function as a stressor to monarch populations.


Also attached is a Rodale Institute study that was done using the scientific method and looked at every type of farming over the course of 40 years to find which was the most effective at crop yields, use of resources, and regenerative. 

What they found was that organic farming had yields just as high as GMO/pesticide farming, needed less water because organic matter in the soil was higher, soil microbes were present in high concentrations in organic farmed soils, the kind that REVERSE CLIMATE CHANGE.  

Roundup Glyphosate and other pesticides, herbicides, and insecticides have killed 90% of the soil microbes and fungi that pull carbon from the air and lock it in the soil making the nutrition available to plants so no need to add chemical fertilizers.

We've killed 90% of carbon sequestering soil microbes since we're using all these poisons and are now at 410 ppm carbon air.  Last time it was this high was when dinosaurs walked the earth.

By stopping the use of pesticides and transitioning to organic we can get back to a safer 350 ppm. Right now we are looking at catastrophic events that could cause loss of life and billions/trillions of dollars in property damage. Much of that will be irreversible. 

Everyday we wait, we are speeding up the process as the concentration of carbon keeps getting higher, and can actually reach a point of no return.

I've interviewed many scientists on pesticides, and heard many disturbing stories of what they have done to harm life, but when I found out that neonicotinoids actually contain nicotine like tobacco and that it is ADDICTIVE TO BEES/insects, that was just about the sickest thing I ever heard.  Pesticide makers created something that is addictive and kills bees, then people are forced to eat the poison after killing all of the bees and other good insects and who know what all after it is released into the environment.

It is weak plants that insects are attracted to, and that is practically all we grow now. Weak plants devoid of nutrition.

As a registered dietitian I believe in healing with food, but how can you heal with poisoned food that is lacking the nutrition and antioxidants that belong in them?  Answer is you can't.  All you can do is watch disease rates climb like they are right now.

This is not a food system. Instead it is a system that slowly poisons people and makes them sick not strong.

That is what has happened to the USA.  We have an epidemic of obesity, disease, autism in our children (Dr. Stephanie Seneff is predicting with current trends autism will be 80% in boys in 15 years), high infant mortality with low life expectancy.  It is even hard to find healthy recruits for the military so I would call that a threat to national security.

Where will the poisoning end?  Will we just keep making stronger ones and spray more and more poison even though we are already at over a billion gallons last year.  Nature figured it out and why the herbicides don't kill weeds anymore.  This means pesticide makers like Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, Syngenta have failed to do as promised. Instead these pesticides are sprayed now more than ever, use has not declined as promised and we have an epidemic of pesticide resistant weeds.  

We need to go back to regenerative, sustainable farming practices that don't involve GMO seeds or all of these poisons. Let's support small local farmers, not corporate agriculture that grows mono crops that are there to feed cattle to be sold to other countries, replace diversity of crops, and are used to make a new version of a fast/junk food that compromises our health and add another burden on the healthcare system while cutting our countries productivity.

A great country has a healthy, fit population with excellent healthcare for all.  We are so far from that right now and taking down the planet and everyone on it with us.  Just look at what happens to the health of populations once our fast food companies move into town.  How are we supposed to be proud to be Americans when we are the home of Monsanto and pharmaceutical companies that push their products on people and destroy lives.

We need to get rid of most of these pesticides and learn to live without them!  They are destroying our country and the people in it.
READ THE RODALE INSTITUTE WHITE PAPER THAT PROVES ORGANIC FARMING REVERSES CLIMATE CHANGE FASTER THAN ANYTHING ELSE WE ARE DO ON
​THE PLANET RIGHT NOW!  GO TO OUR SECTION WHERE WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION.
Picture
Picture
0 Comments

How Cycling Can Prevent and Help Treat Parkinson's Disease

7/11/2017

0 Comments

 

Researchers at the Cleveland Clinic are finding that cycling is
helping patients stop the symptoms of Parkinson’s, and can even
​do something that medicine can’t do.

Find Out About this Non Evasive Treatment for Mental Illness

This treatment is working for patients that have had no results from medications or other treatments and even "cures" them for the need of anything else after completing the course.
Go to this webpage.
Picture
0 Comments

Why Your Confused About Food Labels

7/11/2017

0 Comments

 
0 Comments

​Why your Grassfed Products Should Also be Organic

7/6/2017

0 Comments

 

Make your grass fed products USDA Certified Organic. Grass used for grazing farm animals can be sprayed with Roundup. USDA Organic is the only way to be sure Roundup or other toxic pesticide were not used.

Picture
Zen Honeycutt​ uncovered in her travels to New Zealand that it can be a practice of farmers to kill old grass so new more nutritious grass will grow.  

It was so weird to me to have her say that during this interview because I had just bought about 5 blocks from New Zealand grassfed cheese at Aldi's Market for what I thought was a great deal.  Normally always buy organic, but thought why would this product have Roundup if the cows are just eating grass?  

Did think there was a possibility the farmer was also supplementing the cows diet with GMO products, but allowed myself to go against my organic rule.  

Then a week later Zen comes on the show and tells me this story!  Blew my mind and realized the only food you can really trust is organic.  Grace Gershuny​ who wrote the original USDA Organic program guidelines told us that even the lowest level of organic is ALWAYS better than anything conventional.  Thought that was good advice because so many people rationalize not buying organic because they think you can't trust it.  

Bottom line the amount of pesticides in organic is going to be practically nothing compared to conventional and whether have a NON GMO certified seal or not ORGANIC IS ALWAYS NON GMO and is actually redundant on organic products and in my opinion misleading because makes people think they cannot trust other organic products when GMOs are NEVER ALLOWED IN ORGANIC.  

Please watch the video since Zen says it best and it is our goal for people to become teachers because we are told so many lies, it is people helping each other that will protect our future children and the planet, not big corporate!
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture

Protect Yourself or Someone You Love
Click for More

Picture

0 Comments

Warren Buffet Thinks Single Payer Healthcare Good for Country & Businesses

6/30/2017

0 Comments

 

Bottom line it benefits big corporate that is using and putting harmful poisonous pesticides, GMOs, and other toxic chemicals into our food and environment, mostly in low income areas and around farm workers to make it hard for them to have access to healthcare because then the exposure and effects such as birth defects will be documented and the real numbers for exposure will be revealed and known to all.

Single payer healthcare means 100% of Americans can get preventative care to reduce the huge burden of disease on our system, and go to the doctor as needed which again can catch illness early when treatment is at a lower cost.  Long term disease and need for drugs, along with how patients are treated the last two years of life is the biggest burden to the entire system!

Picture

One of the major arguments against a single payer system in the USA is it will be too expensive for businesses.  Single payer is cheaper because pricing can be leveraged against the power of numbers (330 Million Americans) so  big suppliers like pharmaceutical companies and other healthcare related industries currently gouging and ripping off the system can agree to our terms or be told we will go to Canadian or other companies that are willing to agree.  Single payer also takes the billions of dollars going into the pockets of insurance companies and redirects it to healthcare services.  

Medicare uses 2% of member fees for administration and 98% for services and is very good at paying since have a streamlined, uncomplicated system with one set of codes and forms while insurance companies use 30% for administration and 70% for services.  There are so many insurance companies and each has their own forms and codes. One hospital can need 400+ employees to handle billing with only two needed for Medicare.  

Insurance companies have been known to automatically deny 50% of claims submitted to them without even reviewing in hopes there will be no refiling of the claim and they out out of paying all together also known as slippage.  That denial of services can mean extra long wait times for getting their treatment, may never get it, and can die in the process of waiting.  The extra work to have to refile and pay employees is a huge expense for doctors offices and most certainly cuts into their profits.  Hard to put a price on the loss of a loved one and possibly a key bread winner that supports a family.  Actually the whole country looses the loss of productivity, and the family may then have to collect disability or government assistance on their own.

Warren Buffet is known as one of the best businessmen that ever lived because he takes little risk and goes for long term secure investments.  His success is almost unmatched.  

Mr. Buffet sees a single payer system as making good financial sense for businesses and thinks it will help them in many other ways too.  Workers benefit as well and do not have to stay stuck in a job they hate because they can't afford to leave and risk losing their healthcare plan.  The single payer system where every American has healthcare will force businesses to treat employees better because they can leave without the risk of loosing their healthcare insurance and can be to their benefit to keep trained employees.

Picture
The amount of bankruptcies related to healthcare is as high as 62%!  All it takes is one major illness to take a person that has spent a lifetime of paying bills on time and buying a house into financial ruin where they loose a lifetime of savings, their health, and their financial rating.  It can happen to anyone at anytime.  All it takes is a diagnosis of a condition or disease, emergency, or accident.
Picture
Picture

Hear what Warren Buffet had to say to PBS News Hour Host Judy Woodruff on why he believes single payer makes sense for US business.

As much as insurance companies want to make us think we don't have a choice, we do.  The American people need to be telling our government what WE WANT in a healthcare program and not let insurance companies, big corporate pharmeceuticals a healthcare organizations dictate what we can and cannot have.  Your chances of dying if you don't have insurance increase by 40%.  

​Currently insurance companies spend a big chunk of admin costs having employees look for the sick members so they can start the process of "getting rid of them" so won't have to pay for their treatment or long-term care.  The numbers of people that have died after their insurance dropped them or refused to cover their treatment has to be in the millions.  How can we justify the legal elimination of a life for profit? 

Picture
Picture
Picture

Listen to our interview with Zack Kaldveer, a long time health advocate who gives us the low down on how our healthcare system has been manipulated by big corporations and insurance companies that put profit over people's lives and are pocketing BILLIONS that could be used for care and saving American lives. 

Picture
Click for larger view.

This is the direction the Republican plan wants to take US Citizens

Picture

Imagine what it would be like for millions of Americans if we had a universal healthcare plan like Denmark and over 35 other countries.

Picture

People and doctors want a single payer system!

Picture
Picture
The overhead for insurance companies can go as high as 30% where the high for Medicare is 2%.  How do insurance companies spend that 30%?  They hire people to research their members and identify who is sick or on their way to being sick.  Once someone is tagged, the insurance company works to get rid of them.  

Insurance companies can deny life saving services.  These are the true death panels and have been responsible for millions of deaths.  People that have paid premiums for even decades, now need drugs, surgery, or other treatments and are denied and dropped.  INSURANCE COMPANIES ONLY WANT PEOPLE THAT ARE WELL NOT SICK.

Those without insurance coverage have a 40% higher risk of dying. Expect 200,000 people to die so rich can get richer since GOP plan is a transfer of money from poor/middle income to the rich.  Money for lives.
Picture

Healthcare costs continue to rise for workers and employers, while insurance company profits also skyrocket pocketing BILLIONS IN JUST 6 MONTHS. They need billions to build those giant skyscrapers and have no problem denying life saving treatments.  Business should be embracing single payer system according to Warren Buffet above.
Picture
Click for larger image
Picture
Click for larger view.

The US is spending twice as much and not getting much bang for our buck with positive health outcomes.  US is far behind other universal, single payer countries in both life expectancy and infant mortality!  What a rip off.  We die so insurance companies can get richer and legally steal from the taxpayers in charges and rising prices

Picture
Picture
Greed of pharmaceutical companies without spending caps or contracts where discounts can be negotiated like when you have a single payer system with the power of 330 million people behind it like endorsed by Warren Buffet above!
Picture
Picture
Drugs for treating skin/topical diseases are just as out of control as those used internally.
Picture
Yes USA has some of the best quality, safest treatment in the world, but are these prices really justified compared to what other countries charge?  Could it be that they have a single payer system?
Picture

Nation’s Pediatricians, EWG Urge EPA to Ban Pesticide that Harms Kids’ Brains

Picture
AAP EWG Chlorpyrifos Letter.pdf
TUESDAY, JUNE 27, 2017
​
On June 27, 2017, the American Academy for Pediatrics and EWG sent the letter attached and below to Environmental Protection Agency Adminsitrator Scott Pruitt on the agency's recent decision to pull back a scheduled ban on the pesticides chlorpyrifos.
--
June 27, 2017
Scott Pruitt
Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20460  
Dear Administrator Pruitt:
The American Academy of Pediatrics is a nonprofit professional organization of 66,000 primary care pediatricians, pediatric medical specialists, and pediatric surgical specialists dedicated to the health, safety, and well-being of infants, children, adolescents, and young adults.
The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit advocacy organization dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. EWG has a long history of advocating for safer chemical policies and reducing the use of dangerous pesticides like chlorpyrifos.
We are writing to express concern at the agency’s recent reversal on its proposal to revoke tolerances for chlorpyrifos. In particular, we are deeply alarmed that the EPA’s decision to allow the continued use of chlorpyrifos contradicts the agency’s own science and puts developing fetuses, infants, children, and pregnant women at risk.
Children are Uniquely Vulnerable to Risks from Pesticides
Children are not small adults – they have key neurological, physical, developmental, and behavioral differences from adults that make them uniquely vulnerable to chemical exposures. By size and weight, children drink more, breathe more, and have more skin surface area to body weight relative to adults, making their bodies more sensitive to pesticides and other chemicals. Their brains and nervous systems are still making connections and maturing, processes that are particularly sensitive to interference by pesticides. Children come into contact with pesticides daily through air, food, dust, and soil, and on surfaces through home and public lawn or garden application, household insecticide use, application to pests, and agricultural product residues.[1]
Epidemiologic studies associate pesticide exposure with adverse birth outcomes, including preterm birth, low birth weight, congenital abnormalities, pediatric cancers, neurobehavioral and cognitive deficits, and asthma. The evidence is especially strong linking certain pesticide exposure with pediatric cancers and permanent neurological damage. [2] Some birth cohort studies of American children have found associations between pesticide exposure and neurobehavioral and cognitive defects like lower IQs, autism, and attention deficit disorders.[3]   
Chlorpyrifos Poses Specific Risks to Children
There is a wealth of science demonstrating the detrimental effects of chlorpyrifos exposure to developing fetuses, infants, children, and pregnant women. Like other organophosphate pesticides, chlorpyrifos interferes with enzymes in the nervous system. Symptoms in people acutely overexposed to chlorpyrifos can range from runny noses and drooling to nausea, vomiting, headaches, muscle cramps, and even loss of coordination. Severe poisoning can cause unconsciousness, convulsions, difficulty breathing, paralysis and death.[4]
Chronic chlorpyrifos exposure in utero is associated with changes in social behavior, brain development, and developmental delays.[5] A long-term Columbia University study following children born before and after a ban on in-home use of chlorpyrifos took effect found that the children born before the ban had much higher exposure levels, tended to be smaller, have poorer reflexes, and weigh less.[6] Toddlers with higher exposures were behind in both motor and mental development by age three. They were also greater than five times more likely to be on the autism spectrum, greater than six times more likely to have ADHD-type symptoms, and greater than 11 times more likely to have symptoms of other attention disorders.[7] The Columbia study[8] and similar long-term studies conducted at the University of California, Berkeley, and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City[9] found lower IQs for children with prenatal chlorpyrifos exposure.
Children face unique exposure risks. EPA estimates that children ages 1 to 12 are exposed to significantly more chlorpyrifos through their diets per pound of body weight than adults.[10] Chlorpyrifos is authorized for use on nearly 50 food crops, including fruits, vegetables, and nuts. In annual tests for pesticide residues on conventionally grown produce, the U.S. Department of Agriculture found chlorpyrifos on commonly eaten fruits and vegetables, including in especially high concentrations on fruits like peaches and nectarines.[11]
Even low residues of exposures to neurotoxic pesticides such as chlorpyrifos contribute to aggregate risks. EPA’s own calculations suggest that babies, children and pregnant women all eat much more chlorpyrifos than is safe. EPA has estimated that median or “typical” exposures for babies are likely five times greater than its proposed “safe” intake, and 11 to 15 times higher for toddlers and older children. Pregnant women are also impacted – a typical exposure is five times higher than it ought to be to protect her developing fetus from harm.[12] EPA’s 2016 Risk Assessment found that chlorpyrifos causes harm to children’s brains from prenatal exposures, and that this harm occurs at levels far lower than EPA’s acute poisoning regulatory endpoint.[13]
EPA’s Decision Contradicts the Agency’s Science
The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) takes an explicitly precautionary approach to pesticide safety and children’s health. Under the FQPA, EPA must revoke permitted pesticide residue levels, or tolerances, if it determines those levels are no longer safe. Safe under the FQPA means that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and other exposures for which there is reliable information.”[14] Thus, while uncertainty about a pesticide’s safety can be the basis for removing tolerances, it cannot be the basis for continuing use of that pesticide and potentially exposing people to risk.
Additionally, EPA is required under the provisions of FQPA to give special consideration to in-utero exposures, and to children and infants, particularly with regards to neurological differences from adults, when evaluating pesticide safety. For that reason, the FQPA requires EPA to apply an additional tenfold safety factor to account for data gaps and potential pre- or postnatal toxicity to children.[15]    
EPA has consistently found that chlorpyrifos is not safe, particularly in regard to in-utero exposure and exposures to children. In December 2014, EPA found unsafe drinking water contamination from chlorpyrifos as part of its risk assessment.[16] In October 2015, EPA proposed to revoke all tolerances because it could not determine that aggregate exposure to residues of chlorpyrifos were safe to children or the general population under the requirements of the FQPA.[17] In November 2016, EPA did yet another risk assessment using a more sensitive point of departure, determining the risks were even greater than previously thought and reiterating the need to revoke tolerances.[18]
We are deeply alarmed by EPA’s decision not to finalize the proposed rule to end chlorpyrifos uses on food – a decision that was premised on the need for further study on the effects of chlorpyrifos on children before finalizing a rule. EPA’s previous risk assessments and several consultations with EPA’s Science Advisory Panel makes clear the potential for adverse health effects to children as a result of exposure to chlorpyrifos. The risk to infant and children’s health and development is unambiguous. The clear statutory language of the FQPA requires that EPA revoke tolerances in the face of uncertainty. EPA has no new evidence indicating that chlorpyrifos exposures are safe. As a result, EPA has no basis to allow continued use of chlorpyrifos, and its insistence in doing so puts all children at risk.  
We urge EPA to rely on the established science and to take action to revoke all tolerances for chlorpyrifos, as proposed in 2015. America’s children today and in the future deserve and demand no less.
Sincerely,
Fernando Stein, MD, FAAP
President American
Academy of Pediatrics                                
Ken Cook
President
Environmental Working Group
[1] American Academy of Pediatrics, Policy Statement: Pesticide Exposure in Children, 130 Pediatrics e1757, e1757-58 (2012), http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/130/6/e1757.ful...
[2] Id. at e1759-60.
[3] Id. at e1760. 
[4] National Pesticide Information Center, Chlorpyrifos, http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/chlorpgen.html (last visited April 13, 2017).
[5] Id.
[6] Virginia A. Rauh, ScD., Discussion of Analyses of Prenatal Chlorpyrifos Exposure and Neurodevelopmental  Outcomes, Columbia School of Children’s Environmental Health,  https://archive.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/meetings/web/pdf/rauh.pdf (last accessed April 13, 2007).
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] University of California Berkley, Center for the Health Assessment of Mothers and Children of Salinas (CHAMACOS), http://cerch.berkeley.edu/research-programs/chamacos-study (last visited April 13, 2017). See also Engel SM, Bradman A, Wolff MS, Rauh VA, Harley KG, Yang JH, Hoepner LA, Barr DB, Yolton K, Vedar MG, Xu Y, Hornung RW, Wetmur JG, Chen J, Holland NT, Perera FP, Whyatt RM, Lanphear BP, Eskenazi B. Prenatal Organophosphorus Pesticide Exposure and Child Neurodevelopment at 24 Months: An Analysis of Four Birth Cohorts. Environ Health Perspect. 2016 Jun;124(6):822-30. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1409474. Epub 2015 Sep 29. PubMed PMID: 26418669; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4892910. See also Engel SM, Wetmur J, Chen J, Zhu C, Barr DB, Canfield RL, Wolff MS. Prenatal exposure to organophosphates, paraoxonase 1, and cognitive development in childhood. Environ Health Perspect. 2011 Aug;119(8):1182-8. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1003183. Epub 2011 Apr 21. PubMed PMID: 21507778; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3237356.
[10] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos Acute and Steady State Dietary (Food Only) Exposure Analysis to Support Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197 (Nov. 18, 2014), https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197.
[11] U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Pesticide Data Program, https://www.ams.usda.gov/datasets/pdp (last visited April 13. 2017).
[12] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos Acute and Steady State Dietary (Food Only) Exposure Analysis to Support Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197 (Nov. 18, 2014), https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197.
[13] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos: Revised Human Health Risk Assessment for Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0653-0454 (Nov. 3, 2016), https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0653-0454.
[14] 21 U.S.C. § 346a(b)(2)(A)(ii).
[15] 21 U.S.C. § 346a(b)(2)(C).
[16] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos: Acute and Steady State Dietary (Food Only) Exposure Analysis to Support Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197 (Nov. 18, 2014), https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197.
[17] 80 Fed. Reg. 69,080, 69,081 (Nov. 6, 2015).
[18] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos: Revised Human Health Risk Assessment for Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0653-0454 (Nov. 

Please review these links:
“Trumpcare isn’t popular. But universal healthcare would be,” by Kate Aronoff, The Guardian; June 28, 2017
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/28/trumpcare-popular-universal-healthcare

“Memo to Democrats: You Need a Clear Message for Universal Health Care,” by Mehdi Hasan, Think Progress; June 28 2017 https://theintercept.com/2017/06/28/memo-to-democrats-you-need-a-clear-message-for-universal-healthcare/

Here's another: “A Very Brief Primer on Single-Payer Health Care,” by Kevin Drum, Mother Jones; July 1, 2017 http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/07/a-very-brief-primer-on-single-payer-health-care/​

Senate Health Bill Gives Huge Tax Cuts to Businesses, High-Income Households
www.foxbusiness.com/features/2017/06/22/senate-health-bill-gives-huge-tax-cuts-to-businesses-high-income-households.html
0 Comments

US taxpayers will pay government USD 3 million to persuade them to like GM foods

5/7/2017

0 Comments

 
Picture
Deal allocates $3 million to “consumer outreach and education regarding agricultural biotechnology,” which includes genetic engineering of food and commodity crops
In a sinister development, US taxpayers will fund a government propaganda drive to persuade them to like GM foods.
--
The government is going to counter "misinformation" about GMO foods
By Caitlin Dewey 
The Washington Post, May 3 2017
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/05/03/the-government-is-going-to-try-to-convince-you-to-like-gmo-foods/?utm_term=.11a08be39fc2

The Food and Drug Administration will fund a campaign to promote genetically modified organisms in food under a bipartisan agreement to keep the government funded through the end of September.

The deal to avert a government shutdown allocates $3 million to “consumer outreach and education regarding agricultural biotechnology”, which includes genetic engineering of food and commodity crops. The money is to be used to tout “the environmental, nutritional, food safety, economic, and humanitarian impacts” of biotech crops and their derivative food products.

More than 50 agriculture and food industry groups had signed on to an April 18 letter urging the funding to counter “a tremendous amount of misinformation about agricultural biotechnology in the public domain”. But some environmental groups and House Democrats have derided the provision as a government-sponsored public relations tour for the GMO industry.

“It is not the responsibility of the FDA to mount a government-controlled propaganda campaign to convince the American public that genetically modified foods are safe,” said Rep. Nita M. Lowey (D-N.Y.), who attempted to get the measure struck from the bill last month. “The FDA has to regulate the safety of our food supply and medical devices. They are not, nor should they be, in the pro-industry advertising business,” Lowey said during a congressional hearing

It’s unclear what the FDA campaign will look like, or when it will launch. The $3 million allocated is little more than a speck in the FDA’s total allocated budget of $2.8 billion.

The budget specifies only that the initiative be developed in collaboration with the Department of Agriculture, and include the “publication and distribution of science-based educational information”. An attempt by Democrats to redirect the project’s funding to pediatric medical projects within FDA was unanimously voted down by Republicans.

A 2016 study by the Pew Research Center found that 39 percent of American adults believe that genetically modified foods are worse for health than their conventional equivalents — an assessment with which the vast majority of scientists disagree. Nearly 90 percent of the members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science believe GMOs are safe to eat, according to another Pew study.

“Clearly, communication of the benefits of biotechnology from the scientific community has not gone well, and this presents an opportunity to engage with the public in a more meaningful dialogue,” said Mark Rieger, the dean of the University of Delaware’s College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, who signed the industry letter. “We see it as a communication issue, not a political one.”

But critics argue the issue is inherently political, given the financial ties between lawmakers and the ag biotech industry. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, agribusiness interests donated more than $26.3 million to political campaigns, including those of several congressmen who sit on the House agriculture appropriations subcommittee.
Rep. Robert B. Aderholt (R-Ala.), the chair of that subcommittee and a defender of the GMO education funding, received $10,000 from Monsanto in 2016.

“This is a really clear example of big ag influencing policy,” said Dana Perls, the senior food and technology campaigner for the environmental group Friends of the Earth. “The Trump administration is putting big ag before consumer desire and public health … Consumers do not want this.”

Critics have also questioned whether it’s the government’s job to communicate this particular information — and whether that information, as written in the budget, oversteps what scientists really know. While there’s a widespread consensus that GM crops are safe, there are valid and lingering questions about the environmental and social impacts of GMOs.
Last year, an academic analysis of 14 years of farm data found that an uptick in GM seed plantings goes hand-in-hand with increased herbicide use, for instance. Some herbicides have been found to contribute to health problems in animals and humans.

Many of the touted benefits of GMOs haven’t materialized, either, argues Andy Kimbrell, the executive director of the Center for Food Safety, a D.C. nonprofit that has filed numerous legal challenges against the makers of GM crops.
An October analysis by the New York Times found that the technology does not significantly increase yields. And few GM products with tangible consumer benefits — such as better taste or nutrition — have yet made it onto the U.S. market.
“So yes, that gives them a marketing problem,” Kimbrell said. “But Monsanto has plenty of money to advocate for GMOs ... Why do we need to use taxpayer dollars?”

One possible answer, from industry’s perspective, is that taxpayer dollars are already funding a Department of Agriculture initiative to label GM foods. Last year, Congress passed a bill mandating that food companies disclose the GM ingredients in their products, and USDA has said it is actively working on the standards for those labels.

Patrick Delaney, a spokesman for the American Soybean Association, said it will be important for consumers to understand those labels once they roll out, likely after September 2018.
​
“We recognize that there is a need for better and more accessible information on what this technology is and what it provides to consumers, he said by email. “We supported (and still support) that $3 million in funding for biotech education ... to better inform the public about the use of biotechnology in food and agricultural production.”
​
0 Comments

Our Government is Allowing Chlorpyrifos Pesticides that Attack Our Children's Brains

5/2/2017

2 Comments

 

There is no doubt the Chlorpyrifos pesticides are destroying the brains of our children which can start before they are even born.  These toxic pesticides are being sprayed all around us and are used on our food. After the research summarized below as well as many other studies that verified these findings, the gov't was on track for stopping the use of Chlorpyrifos, but the Trump administration has reversed that and will allow their use to continue. Chemical industry influence and profits trumps protection of our children.  Money and power can buy policy decisions and allow poisoning us all even though we have choices.

Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture

Nation’s Pediatricians, EWG Urge EPA to Ban Chlorpyrifos Pesticide that Harms Kids’ Brains Lowering IQ
​

Go to the EWG link here or click here for link to PDF of Pediatrician/EWG letter.

On June 27, 2017, the American Academy for Pediatrics and EWG sent the letter attached and below to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt on the agency's recent decision to pull back a scheduled ban on the pesticides chlorpyrifos.
--
June 27, 2017
Scott Pruitt
Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20460  

Dear Administrator Pruitt:

The American Academy of Pediatrics is a nonprofit professional organization of 66,000 primary care pediatricians, pediatric medical specialists, and pediatric surgical specialists dedicated to the health, safety, and well-being of infants, children, adolescents, and young adults.

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit advocacy organization dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. EWG has a long history of advocating for safer chemical policies and reducing the use of dangerous pesticides like chlorpyrifos.

We are writing to express concern at the agency’s recent reversal on its proposal to revoke tolerances for chlorpyrifos. In particular, we are deeply alarmed that the EPA’s decision to allow the continued use of chlorpyrifos contradicts the agency’s own science and puts developing fetuses, infants, children, and pregnant women at risk.

Children are Uniquely Vulnerable to Risks from Pesticides
Children are not small adults – they have key neurological, physical, developmental, and behavioral differences from adults that make them uniquely vulnerable to chemical exposures. By size and weight, children drink more, breathe more, and have more skin surface area to body weight relative to adults, making their bodies more sensitive to pesticides and other chemicals. Their brains and nervous systems are still making connections and maturing, processes that are particularly sensitive to interference by pesticides. Children come into contact with pesticides daily through air, food, dust, and soil, and on surfaces through home and public lawn or garden application, household insecticide use, application to pests, and agricultural product residues.[1]

Epidemiologic studies associate pesticide exposure with adverse birth outcomes, including preterm birth, low birth weight, congenital abnormalities, pediatric cancers, neurobehavioral and cognitive deficits, and asthma. The evidence is especially strong linking certain pesticide exposure with pediatric cancers and permanent neurological damage. [2] Some birth cohort studies of American children have found associations between pesticide exposure and neurobehavioral and cognitive defects like lower IQs, autism, and attention deficit disorders.[3]   

Chlorpyrifos Poses Specific Risks to Children
There is a wealth of science demonstrating the detrimental effects of chlorpyrifos exposure to developing fetuses, infants, children, and pregnant women. Like other organophosphate pesticides, chlorpyrifos interferes with enzymes in the nervous system. Symptoms in people acutely overexposed to chlorpyrifos can range from runny noses and drooling to nausea, vomiting, headaches, muscle cramps, and even loss of coordination. Severe poisoning can cause unconsciousness, convulsions, difficulty breathing, paralysis and death.[4]

Chronic chlorpyrifos exposure in utero is associated with changes in social behavior, brain development, and developmental delays.[5] A long-term Columbia University study following children born before and after a ban on in-home use of chlorpyrifos took effect found that the children born before the ban had much higher exposure levels, tended to be smaller, have poorer reflexes, and weigh less.[6] Toddlers with higher exposures were behind in both motor and mental development by age three. They were also greater than five times more likely to be on the autism spectrum, greater than six times more likely to have ADHD-type symptoms, and greater than 11 times more likely to have symptoms of other attention disorders.[7] The Columbia study[8] and similar long-term studies conducted at the University of California, Berkeley, and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City[9] found lower IQs for children with prenatal chlorpyrifos exposure.

Children face unique exposure risks. EPA estimates that children ages 1 to 12 are exposed to significantly more chlorpyrifos through their diets per pound of body weight than adults.[10] Chlorpyrifos is authorized for use on nearly 50 food crops, including fruits, vegetables, and nuts. In annual tests for pesticide residues on conventionally grown produce, the U.S. Department of Agriculture found chlorpyrifos on commonly eaten fruits and vegetables, including in especially high concentrations on fruits like peaches and nectarines.[11]

Even low residues of exposures to neurotoxic pesticides such as chlorpyrifos contribute to aggregate risks. EPA’s own calculations suggest that babies, children and pregnant women all eat much more chlorpyrifos than is safe. EPA has estimated that median or “typical” exposures for babies are likely five times greater than its proposed “safe” intake, and 11 to 15 times higher for toddlers and older children. Pregnant women are also impacted – a typical exposure is five times higher than it ought to be to protect her developing fetus from harm.[12] EPA’s 2016 Risk Assessment found that chlorpyrifos causes harm to children’s brains from prenatal exposures, and that this harm occurs at levels far lower than EPA’s acute poisoning regulatory endpoint.[13]

EPA’s Decision Contradicts the Agency’s Science
The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) takes an explicitly precautionary approach to pesticide safety and children’s health. Under the FQPA, EPA must revoke permitted pesticide residue levels, or tolerances, if it determines those levels are no longer safe. Safe under the FQPA means that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and other exposures for which there is reliable information.”[14] Thus, while uncertainty about a pesticide’s safety can be the basis for removing tolerances, it cannot be the basis for continuing use of that pesticide and potentially exposing people to risk.

Additionally, EPA is required under the provisions of FQPA to give special consideration to in-utero exposures, and to children and infants, particularly with regards to neurological differences from adults, when evaluating pesticide safety. For that reason, the FQPA requires EPA to apply an additional tenfold safety factor to account for data gaps and potential pre- or postnatal toxicity to children.[15]    

EPA has consistently found that chlorpyrifos is not safe, particularly in regard to in-utero exposure and exposures to children. In December 2014, EPA found unsafe drinking water contamination from chlorpyrifos as part of its risk assessment.[16] In October 2015, EPA proposed to revoke all tolerances because it could not determine that aggregate exposure to residues of chlorpyrifos were safe to children or the general population under the requirements of the FQPA.[17] In November 2016, EPA did yet another risk assessment using a more sensitive point of departure, determining the risks were even greater than previously thought and reiterating the need to revoke tolerances.[18]

We are deeply alarmed by EPA’s decision not to finalize the proposed rule to end chlorpyrifos uses on food – a decision that was premised on the need for further study on the effects of chlorpyrifos on children before finalizing a rule. EPA’s previous risk assessments and several consultations with EPA’s Science Advisory Panel makes clear the potential for adverse health effects to children as a result of exposure to chlorpyrifos. The risk to infant and children’s health and development is unambiguous. The clear statutory language of the FQPA requires that EPA revoke tolerances in the face of uncertainty. EPA has no new evidence indicating that chlorpyrifos exposures are safe. As a result, EPA has no basis to allow continued use of chlorpyrifos, and its insistence in doing so puts all children at risk.  

We urge EPA to rely on the established science and to take action to revoke all tolerances for chlorpyrifos, as proposed in 2015. America’s children today and in the future deserve and demand no less.

Sincerely,

Fernando Stein, MD, FAAP
President American
Academy of Pediatrics                                
Ken Cook
President
Environmental Working Group

[1] American Academy of Pediatrics, Policy Statement: Pesticide Exposure in Children, 130 Pediatrics e1757, e1757-58 (2012), http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/130/6/e1757.ful...
[2] Id. at e1759-60.
[3] Id. at e1760. 
[4] National Pesticide Information Center, Chlorpyrifos, http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/chlorpgen.html (last visited April 13, 2017).
[5] Id.
[6] Virginia A. Rauh, ScD., Discussion of Analyses of Prenatal Chlorpyrifos Exposure and Neurodevelopmental  Outcomes, Columbia School of Children’s Environmental Health,  https://archive.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/meetings/web/pdf/rauh.pdf (last accessed April 13, 2007).
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] University of California Berkley, Center for the Health Assessment of Mothers and Children of Salinas (CHAMACOS), http://cerch.berkeley.edu/research-programs/chamacos-study (last visited April 13, 2017). See also Engel SM, Bradman A, Wolff MS, Rauh VA, Harley KG, Yang JH, Hoepner LA, Barr DB, Yolton K, Vedar MG, Xu Y, Hornung RW, Wetmur JG, Chen J, Holland NT, Perera FP, Whyatt RM, Lanphear BP, Eskenazi B. Prenatal Organophosphorus Pesticide Exposure and Child Neurodevelopment at 24 Months: An Analysis of Four Birth Cohorts. Environ Health Perspect. 2016 Jun;124(6):822-30. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1409474. Epub 2015 Sep 29. PubMed PMID: 26418669; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4892910. See also Engel SM, Wetmur J, Chen J, Zhu C, Barr DB, Canfield RL, Wolff MS. Prenatal exposure to organophosphates, paraoxonase 1, and cognitive development in childhood. Environ Health Perspect. 2011 Aug;119(8):1182-8. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1003183. Epub 2011 Apr 21. PubMed PMID: 21507778; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3237356.
[10] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos Acute and Steady State Dietary (Food Only) Exposure Analysis to Support Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197 (Nov. 18, 2014), https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197.
[11] U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Pesticide Data Program, https://www.ams.usda.gov/datasets/pdp (last visited April 13. 2017).
[12] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos Acute and Steady State Dietary (Food Only) Exposure Analysis to Support Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197 (Nov. 18, 2014), https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197.
[13] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos: Revised Human Health Risk Assessment for Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0653-0454 (Nov. 3, 2016), https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0653-0454.
[14] 21 U.S.C. § 346a(b)(2)(A)(ii).
[15] 21 U.S.C. § 346a(b)(2)(C).
[16] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos: Acute and Steady State Dietary (Food Only) Exposure Analysis to Support Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197 (Nov. 18, 2014), https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0197.
[17] 80 Fed. Reg. 69,080, 69,081 (Nov. 6, 2015).
[18] U.S. Environmental Protection Administration, Chlorpyrifos: Revised Human Health Risk Assessment for Registration Review, EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0653-0454 (Nov. 3, 2016), https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0653-0454.

THEY WILL NEVER STOP UNTIL WE STOP THEM!
Dow, Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Dupont, BASF

Picture
If we are going to stop this attack on our children we need to vote people supporting Chlorpyrifos/toxic poisons out of office, and use our people power to call those in political power to voice our rejection of these actions, be willing to take to the streets to make our voices be heard, and use our dollars to stop big corporate from doing this to us and our children.
Picture
WHO ELSE DOES AN UNBORN CHILD HAVE TO FIGHT FOR THEM? THEY CANNOT FIGHT FOR THEMSELVES, AND DEPEND ON US TO PROTECT THEM.  These pesticide makers don't care about our children only money.  We have to be willing to fight for our children and accept it is probably going to be the case for a long time because we have been sleeping at the wheel and they now have amassed great power and billions of dollars they can use to buy our government officials, place their people in key government positions, and dictate what they want. 

When our children are disabled, it is not only a hardship for the family, but also for society on many levels.  We miss out on new ideas and creativity when our IQ is diminished. Ideas that could create new technologies to make this a better world, leaders and productive members of society that can reach their true potential instead of being robbed and limited of their abilities. 

From a public health standpoint, our systems of support are bombarded with additional financial burdens.  Funding that could be used for higher education, supporting new idea development, and making our country even greater because of the brilliance of our citizens goes for other social services and disability. Limiting our children's potential is a gross act but unfortunately very real right now.  Please do what you can to stop it!

YES YOU CAN TRUST THE ORGANIC SYMBOL

Picture

USDA Organic Certification requires a long process, inspections, and proof so don't buy into pesticide companies propaganda generated by the "Merchants of Doubt" that try and discourage you from trusting and buying these product. Grace Gurney who wrote the organic standards for the LAW said that even bad organic is much safer than conventional.  It is actually not fair that the farmer that is not poisoning food, and working harder to create a safe product is burdened with the expense and work of being certified.  We should instead make those using shortcuts that poison people and cause environmental damage, disease and huge healthcare expenses have that burden.

Buying ORGANIC says I refuse to eat foods containing these chemicals or any pesticides. Our top scientists keep saying, "THERE IS NO SAFE DOSE FOR POISON.  PESTICIDES ARE DESIGNED TO KILL CELLS AND THAT IS WHAT IT DOES IN OUR BODY.  OUR SOIL IS ALSO DEAD WITH KEY MICROORGANISMS THAT PROVIDE NUTRITION IN OUR FOOD DESTROYED!  Those same organisms REVERSE CLIMATE CHANGE FASTER THAN ANYTHING ELSE WE CAN DO SO WIN-WIN.  With no market we will make them go away.

Chlorphyrifos = Brain Cell Death

Picture

THE RESEARCH HAS BEEN DONE AND PROVEN!

Prenatal chlorpyrifos exposure alters
​brain structure, affects IQ in children

PictureRauh is deputy director of the CCCEH, which receives grant funding from the NIEHS and EPA. (Photo courtesy of Columbia University)
By Carol Kelly
​
A new NIEHS-funded study reports that when a pregnant woman is exposed to chlorpyrifos, a commonly used pesticide, her child’s developing brain may be damaged, leading to lowered intelligence.

“The prenatal period is a vulnerable time for the developing child, and that toxic exposure during this critical period can have far-reaching effects on brain development and behavioral functioning,” said NIEHS grantee Virginia Rauh, Sc.D., a professor at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health. “We have demonstrated that there is a relatively monotonic dose-response effect, suggesting that some small effects occur at even very low exposures.” 

The evidence comes from researchers who conducted a recent brain imaging study of children exposed prenatally to chlorpyrifos. In addition to Columbia University scientists, the team included researchers affiliated with Duke University Medical Center, Emory University, and the New York State Psychiatric Institute.

This study is the first of its kind to use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Digital images produced from MRI scans are quite detailed and can detect small changes within the brain. 

In the scans, structural changes — abnormal areas of enlargement and indentation across the surface of the brain — appeared among the children whose mothers had been exposed to higher levels of the pesticide. In three of four brain regions, higher chlorpyrifos exposure was consistent with lower full-scale intelligence quotient (IQ) measures in the exposed children.  

The brain abnormalities appeared to occur at exposure levels below the current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency threshold for toxicity, according to the researchers.

Data implications
To conduct the study, certain brain surface features of 40 urban children were examined. The sample size, although modest, nevertheless permits generalization of findings to a larger urban population, because it was a representative community-based sample.

“The group does not have exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs] or second hand smoke, two other exposures that might also have adverse effects on brain development and neurocognitive outcomes,” explained Rauh. “So, the small sample size, common in MRI studies, is balanced by a relatively pure or unconfounded design.”

Although residential application of chlorpyrifos was banned in 2001, the insecticide is still approved for other uses. Chlorpyrifos continues to be present in the environment through its extensive use in wood treatments and public spaces, such as golf courses, parks, and highway medians. People near these sources can be exposed by inhaling the chemical, which drifts on the wind. Additionally, chlorpyrifos is approved for food agriculture, and exposure can also occur by eating fruits and vegetables that have been sprayed. 

“Even if dietary doses from residue on food are low, and we think they are for any one food, what happens if a person is eating five different foods on a daily basis, each with a small amount of chlorpyrifos residue?” posited Rauh. “This is something to think about.” 

Future research to continue examining pesticide effects on children 
“It will be important to continue to follow this cohort of children, to see if the problems resolve or whether they are irreversible, which is an outcome suggested by animal research literature,” said Rauh. “It might be possible to design an intervention to address the moderate cognitive deficits.”

“If the animal studies suggest there may be a problem, and we follow up with human work that is confirmatory, then we would be wise to limit the use of such chemicals when the evidence starts to build up,” added Rauh. “There are plenty of examples of widespread or commonly used exposures, for example, lead and tobacco, where we waited too long to try to reduce exposure, with the unfortunate result of great harm to large numbers of individuals, which might have been preventable had we paid attention to the mounting evidence.”

This research was supported by NIEHS grants for The Columbia Center for Children’s Environmental Health,Prenatal PAH Exposure, Epigenetic Changes, and Asthma, and Health Effects of Early-Life Exposure to Urban Pollutants in Minority Children.

Citation: Rauh VA, Perera FP, Horton MK, Whyatt RM, Bansal R, Hao X, Liu J, Barr DB, Slotkin TA, Peterson BS. 2012. Brain anomalies in children exposed prenatally to a common organophosphate pesticide. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(20):7871-7876.

(Carol Kelly is a research and communication specialist with MDB, Inc., a contractor for the NIEHS Division of Extramural Research and Training.)
​GO TO ARTICLE LINK

Not only are pesticides more toxic than ever because they have been allowed to keep increasing the concentrations in the formulas so more effective as plants and insects become resistant, but to make it easier for farmers who will have to spray fewer times during a crops growing cycle.  It should scare us that pesticides can continue working for a year.

Previously banned pesticides are now being allowed because others no longer work and they are desperate. Instead we can transition to organic where microorganisms and healthy soil strengthen the plants immune system to resist disease.  Insects are not attracted to healthy plants, they are attracted to weak and sick plants which is natures way of natural selection so only the strong survive.  

Research supports much lower pesticide levels in organic and higher nutrition concentrations so more nutrition bang for your buck. Uses less water.  Reducing the total pesticide load should be everyones goal!

Picture

TRUMP ONLY WANTS TO SAVE A "LITTLE BIT" OF THE ENVIRONMENT

2 Comments

Giving the Homeless a Home Makes Financial Sense

4/28/2017

0 Comments

 

Why Public Health Saves Money if Designed Correctly

When you take all of the costs associated with the homeless living on the streets which include costly emergency room visits, Emergency Medical Techs (EMTs/Fire Department Response Teams), putting them in jail versus giving them a home where those costs are avoided
                     THE CITY ACTUALLY SAVES THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS A YEAR!
After the homeless get a home, they can become productive citizens that work, pay rent, and take care of themselves!

Director of the Homeless Program in Salt Lake City Utah
Lloyd Pendleton on Why They Help the Homeless

The Daily Show Presented the Homeless Salt Lake City Program 

Fusion Interviewed Homeless Given a Home

THESE PROGRAMS WORK TO SAVE CITIES MONEY AND TAKE HOMELESS PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS WHICH IS GOOD FOR ALL THAT LIVE THERE AND PRESENTS A DIFFERENT VIEW OF THE CITY TO VISITORS.  SO IN OTHER WORDS A WIN-WIN SITUATION.

People who try and say that helping the poor turns them into moochers so they can justify turning their back on them, and taking away funding are the exact opposite of Director Lloyd Pendleton and citizens of Salt Lake City. 
0 Comments

    Author

    Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.

    Archives

    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.