RACHELS-CARSON OF TODAY

MERCURY DEFICIENCY THREATENS GLOBAL HEALTH

2012-01-11T12:52:00.000-08:00

http://naturalsociety.com/satire-mercury-deficiency-threatens-global-health/

SATIRE: MERCURY DEFICIENCY THREATENS GLOBAL HEALTH

ANTHONY GUCCIARDI

Are you deficient in the vital nutrient mercury? According to new reports by the CDC (Centers for Disease Creation), you may be direly deficient in mercury, leading to problems like vibrant health and properly functioning organs. Thankfully, a cure does exist.

In response to the widespread deficiency, the CDC is now recommending that everyone consume as much mercury-filled high-fructose corn syrup as possible. It would seem that considering most Americans consume the majority of their calories from high-fructose corn syrup, that deficiency would not arise. However, officials believe that natural health websites may to be blame for halting the heavy consumption of mercury-containing processed foods. According to Jacob Johnson of the AMA (American Monopoly Association), these websites are discouraging individuals from receiving enough mercury in their daily diets:

“What we’re seeing is a number of websites advocating healthy eating and diets free of processed foods. The problem with this is that people are actually starting to become healthy and experience side effects such as happiness, fat loss, and greater success in life. Our concern is that people are not consuming enough mercury-containing processed foods in their diet to help remove the side effects. We have issued a code red health warning to citizens across the globe to increase their intake of processed foods by about 5,000%. Optimally, individuals will consume a diet consisting of only fried potato chips and sodas under our new food guidelines,” stated Johnson.

Side Effects of Serious Mercury Deficiency

You may be wondering how to tell if you are suffering from a serious mercury deficiency. Thankfully, the Centers for Disease Creation has detailed the complete list of side effects associated with this serious condition. It is recommended that you see a doctor to ensure that this is the correct disease, as you may also be suffering from an equally-serious pesticide deficiency which exhibits similar problems. The side effects that you should be aware of when determining whether or not you are deficient in mercury and processed foods are:

Increased activity levels
Elevated mood
Accelerated fat loss
Mental clarity
Improved overall health
Enhanced physical fitness

If you experience ANY of these life-enhancing conditions, the Centers for Disease Creation has stated that you should immediately seek processed food and eat as much as you can, elevating your mercury levels to relieve yourself of these symptoms. Educate your friends and family about the serious threat of mercury deficiency – before they become too healthy!

Explore More:

MERCURY POISONING LINKED TO DOLPHIN DEATHS

http://www.theage.com.au/national/mercury-poisoning-linked-to-dolphin-deaths-20080605-2mbw.html

ATMOSPHERIC MERCURY POISONING FROM DENTAL FILLING CREMATION

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-427368/Cremation-costs-rise-tooth-fillings-poison-living.html

ALASKA MARINE MAMMAL 'MORTALITY EVENTS' = ACUTE RADIATION POISONING

2011-12-29T14:28:00.000-08:00

NOTE FROM JEFF: The area where these anomalous 'mortality events' are occurring are precisely the areas most greatly affected (and still being affected) by the ASTRONOMICAL levels of ioinizing radiation being released from the Fukushima reactor sites (three of which are in extended total meld-down and will soon hit the water-table, resulting in a massive 'hydro-volcanic' explosion; Reactor 4 building on verge of collapse, which will precipitate a fourth melt-down and catastrophic destruction of another spent fuel rod pool. As of July, informed non-mainstream researchers estimated that approximately 1.5 EXA-Becquerels of radio-nuclides hab been released into air, land and ocean; that's 1.5 followed by 18 zeroes. And this was five months ago). What these seals and other marine mammals are showing are the symptoms of acute radiation poisoning with 'textbook' lucidity. There is NO QUESTION that this is the reality, yet 'scientists' and 'officials' hem and haw mentioning 'unknown environmental causes.' It's all a part of the most massive cover-up and disinformation campaign ever waged about a global ecological issue; all governments, bureaucrats, almost all scientists and environmental organizations, with no exceptions I am aware of, are complicit in this extraordinary effort to keep people from realizing the nature and magnitude of what is truly a 'global poisoning event' that is still gathering radio-active steam.

An excellent source of valid information on radiation poisoning see the book by Dr. Nesterenko and Yablokov summarizing their findings based on 25 years of researching the impacts of the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. Their basic conclusion was that in every form of life they studied, from all kingdoms, significant health and genetic damage had occurred across the board.

http://www.nukefree.org/now-free-download-chernobyl-consequences-catastrophe-people-environment

Geneticists have told us since the days of Rachel Carson that at least 25 generations of human beings must be studied before the true nature of the long-term effects of mutagenic agents like pesticides or radio-nuclides can be determined. Here in the early 21st century we are only the third generation since the creatiion of hydro-carbon toxins and synthetic radio-nuclides.

http://enenews.com/diseased-seals-abnormal-brain-growths-undersized-lymph-nodes-found-russia-canada-walruses-next-6-photos-map

Diseased Alaska seals tested for radiation have abnormal brain growths, undersized lymph nodes — Environmental cause indicated — Also found in Russia, Canada — Bacteria becoming blood borne — White spots on liver — Walruses next?

Deaths of Ringed Seals in Alaska an Unusual Mortality Event, Environmental News Service, Dec. 20, 2011

Unusual Mortality Event Declared

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration declared the recent deaths of ringed seals in [...] Alaska an unusual mortality event
Since mid-July, more than 60 dead and 75 diseased seals, most of them ringed seals, have been reported in Alaska
Reports continuing to come in
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also identified diseased and dead walruses
A decision by the Service on making an an unusual mortality declaration for Pacific walrus in Alaska is pending
Tests indicate a virus is not the cause
Walruses and ringed seals in Russia, and ringed seals in Canada, have reportedly suffered similar symptoms
While it is not clear if the disease events are related, the timing and location of the disease suggests the possibility of transmission between the populations, or shared exposure to an environmental cause

Symptoms

Seals and walruses suffering from this disease have skin sores usually on the hind flippers or face
Patchy hair loss
Some of the diseased animals have exhibited labored breathing
Appear lethargic
Do not flee from humans as they usually do
Necropsies have found abnormal growths in the brain
Some seals and walruses have undersized lymph nodes which may indicate compromised immune systems

Dr. Stephen Raverty, veterinary pathologist with the Provincial Veterinary Diagnostic Lab in British Columbia

“These appear to be ulcerated lesions with secondary infections”
“Opportunistic yeast and fungi and bacteria have invaded”
“Our analysis is not completed”
“It could be an environmental factor or more than one disease”
“We are screening for 18 recognized pathogens, but all the lab results have come back negative“
“We think defects in the skin are allowing pathogens to migrate into the animals”
“Bacteria are becoming blood borne and localizing to the liver“
“Causing white spots on the liver, hepatitis and fluid in the lungs“

See earlier report: Reuters: Radiation tests underway on dead and diseased seals in Alaska -- Suffering bleeding lesions, hair loss (PHOTO)

Large Bald Spot

"THE PACIFIC OCEAN: A RADIOACTIVE GARGAGE DUMP"

2011-05-14T17:30:00.000-07:00

"Not under any public discussion or commentary by any scientists: what is/will be the impact of on-going radiation traveling across the Pacific Ocean as it encounters miles and miles of toxic degrading plastic? How will hormone disrupting plastic and radioactivity impact this vast area’s ecology? What kind of real future will sea birds and all other sea life have with this gigantic contamination?"

http://aircrap.org/pacific-ocean-radioactive-garbage-dump/331431/

Dr. Ilya Sandra Perlingieri
May 14, 2011

“The ocean is now a plastic wasteland.” Capt. Charles Moore, 2010

Ocean Contamination

For the past two months, it has not been possible to separate the on-going radioactive poisons heading east on the Pacific Ocean currents from Japan to North America (and thence around the globe) with other serious oceanic environmental troubles. This is not simply just a one-issue crisis, even though Fukushima’s radioactive nightmare continues to poison the rest of our planet.

Firstly, of primary importance for our health and well being: it is not a safe choice to eat any fish or crustaceans caught there. This is due, of course, to the widespread radioactivity of the Pacific Ocean.

The tragedy of the now contaminated entire Pacific Ocean is as epic as the Gulf of Mexico’s mass dispersants poisoning. More than a year since the BP oil-rig catastrophe, the impact on both the human and wildlife populations continues to soar to disastrous heights. The death toll for all wildlife will never be accurately known, as unconscionably sea turtles (and unknown other kinds of sea life) were burned alive. For months, no tally was taken of dead mammals and birds washing ashore. It was more than ineptitude and poor management of this enormous crisis. It was, and continues to be, a criminal cover-up of vast proportions.

The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) released a new report estimating “that around 26,000 dolphins and whales, 82,000 birds, and 6,000 sea turtles were likely harmed [or killed] by the spill.”(1) There was far more than harm. There was much unaccounted wildlife death; and the now one-year-later continuing toll may be far higher. However, as with Fukushima’s nuclear reactors tragedy, nothing has been done to safeguard human lives, nor protect all of the ocean’s animals and birds (really, the entire vast and precious ecosystem!). All of this is under constant siege from human negligence, deliberate harm, and corporate greed.

It is quite clear, from both these enormous on-going disasters, that corporate-driven secret plans and responses do not include any real solutions. Harm is their watchword, as our planet’s web-of-life continues to unravel at an accelerated pace. This is due to human malfeasance. A new report published shows how all the hundreds of Fukushima workers, now putting their lives on the line for a devastating situation that cannot be fixed, are all expendable. See:

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24543

Dead fish and sharks are already arriving along the California coast. Although the cause is supposedly unknown, it is doubtful if we will ever be told that any dead sea life washing ashore is most likely radioactive. See:

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/ventura_county&id=8081041

and

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/04/22/dead-leopard-sharks-found-in-redwood-city-lagoons

The EPA has refused to test the Gulf of Alaska for radioactivity. In their latest negligence, EPA posted on May 3, their refusal to monitor daily radiation from Fukushima, “due to the consistent decrease in radiation levels related to the Japanese nuclear incident.”(2) This was no “incident.”

This is why I have repeatedly urged everyone to join together and get radiation monitoring in your area. Low levels of ionizing radiation, as Dr. Helen Caldicott has frequently said are extremely dangerous. Further, she has consistently noted that it is deliberately misleading to connect exterior radiation levels with internal ones. We will never get the truth from any government agency or official. In fact, their planned deceit and intentional extreme harm put us all in continued danger. It is vital that we get accurate information ourselves, and know how much we can really protect ourselves.

As I have learned personally from the cover-up during and after 2003, 1-million-acre California FIRESTORM, any government agency has already long been compromised and corrupted. As Jeff Rense wrote on April 21, it is the “latest example of blatant Federal negligence. …This is another egregious abandonment of their obligation to watch over the public health and welfare. …[and] the public’s right to know and be kept safe and informed be damned.” His article also has an excellent map, showing the ocean currents coming to the West Coast and up to Alaska. This continued refusal to test the waters also protects the now-toxic catches of Alaska’s fishing industry, while poisoning anyone who eats contaminated fish:

www.rense.com/general93/curr.htm

This is not the fishing industry’s fault, per se. [That is another separate article.] Rather, it is the result of this enormous radioactive contamination that puts everything in grave jeopardy. Does any of this really compute to a rational person who still can think critically and sees the bigger picture?

This article covers another oceanic nightmare that must be included in our awareness of what is happening throughout the entire Pacific Ocean. It does impact all of us. Our oceans have been in long-term and devastating decline for decades. The seas are no longer what we may think of: miles and miles of pristine and beautiful glistening waters, gentle sea breezes, with an occasional whale or dolphin leaping out of the water.

The Pacific Ocean has also been poisoned with colossal amounts of garbage floating in a vortex area called NORTH PACIFIC SUBTROPICAL GYRE. This is the Pacific Ocean’s floating toxic, petroleum-based plastics dump that has contaminated and killed countless millions of fish and mammals, including dolphins and seals. In 1997, these huge areas were discovered by Captain Charles Moore while he was returning to California from Hawaii on his vessel, the 50-foot “Algalita” (now the name of the foundation he set up). He took a detour through a region with little wind, due to the ocean currents. Normally, this area is usually avoided by sailors, because of these very calm seas.

Day after day, as Captain Moore sailed, he saw endless piles of plastic trash floating for miles and miles. Originally, this area was called the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. Far from some small “patch,” it is thought that this massive amount is actually twice the size of the continental US. This swirling soup of floating garbage is about 500-nautical miles off California’s coast, and stretches across the northern part of the Pacific Ocean, past Hawaii, and comes close to Japan. Unseen by satellite photos, this massive “sea of rubbish is translucent and [is on, and also] lies just below the water’s surface” and continues under water through the water column.(3)

Since Moore started doing this research, the size of this trash has grown enormously. Now the Great Garbage Patch is divided into the Western and Eastern Garbage Patch, on either side of the Hawaiian archipelago. According to Marcus Eriksen, Algalita’s research director, there is about 100-million tons of flotsam floating in this region.

In 1994, Captain Moore had originally founded Algalita Marine Research Foundation, to focus on the “restoration of disappearing giant kelp forests and the improvement of water quality through the preservation and re-construction of wetlands along California’s coast.”(4) He was so shocked by what he saw in the Pacific Ocean, that he became a dedicated environmental activist, and decided to raise global awareness and find much-needed answers. With his foundation, he now focuses on collaborative ocean research to find out the extent of this massive amount of floating garbage and the damage it continues to cause. The non-profit foundation, now in its sixteenth year, has brought worldwide attention to the fate of millions of tons of discarded plastics and how it has impacted all sea life and damaged human health.

Firstly, even the smallest particles of plastic, are broken down “by wave action or sunlight” (called photodegradation), and then they are eaten by fish. Once eaten, these plastics then travel up the ocean food chain (from small fish to larger ones), and they eventually wind up on your seafood dinner plate. “Every little piece of plastic manufactured in the past 50 years that made it into the ocean is still out there somewhere,” said chemist Tony Andrady, with the US-based Research Triangle Institute.(5) This goes for EVERY bit of plastic made: from shredded plastic to any large item. See:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnUjTHB1lvM

According to the UN Environment Program, “plastic debris causes the deaths of more than a million sea birds every year, as well as more than 100,000 marine mammals. Syringes, cigarette lighters, and toothbrushes have been found inside the stomachs of dead seabirds,” mistaking them for food.(6) “A Dutch study in the North Sea of fulmar seabirds concluded [that] 95 percent of the birds had plastics in their stomachs. More than 1600 pieces were found in the stomach of one bird in Belgium.”(7)

Dead bird killed by eating plastics

The ocean is now “an endless trail of trash floating in the middle of the Pacific: water bottles, plastic crates, disposable(sic) diapers, bath toys, cigarette lighters, tampon applicators [styrofoam, too]; a veritable buffet of convenience culture.”(8) This refuse is what is dumped in the ocean from landfills. Unbelievably, other trash includes: kayaks, carrier, refrigerators, furniture, Lego blocks, footballs, and fishing nets. All these items were thrown overboard either from oil-rig platforms or ships. As on land around the globe, our seas have become a vast stench of sewage.

Possibly millions (no one is counting) of the plastic 6-pak holders for soda and beer have been found strangling sea and other wildlife [e.g., fish, otters, and small seals]. The plastic diameter to hold these cans is just wide enough for some small animal’s head to get stuck in it. Once their head is caught, they cannot get out. In the oceans, plastics also break down into smaller and smaller pieces. These are mistaken for fish eggs or other kinds of food and ingested by fish. Last month, the Los Angeles Times reported that researchers have found “about 35 percent of fish they collected in the northern Pacific Ocean in 2008 had plastic in their stomachs. …Some lantern fish [had] as many as 83 plastic fragments in a single fish.”(9) Often tiny pieces of plastics are part of the plankton that whales eat. Plastic does kill. This is yet another reason not to use plastic. See:

www.surfrider.org

and

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yom6zlm5VqE

and

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftbmO4D4DK4

Captain Charles Moore, who has been documenting this “waste slick more insidious than an oil spill, due to the impossibility of cleanup,” has produced a documentary about this called “Synthetic Sea.”

www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEKohTXF4Xw

Captain Moore calls the ocean “the world’s largest toilet bowl that never flushes.” In 1999, as part of his research to carefully document this garbage, he discovered that “for every pound of naturally occurring plankton…[there was [a] yielded [of] 6 pounds of plastic.”(10) By 2008, in the same original region, they recorded a staggering increase of 45 to 1 times more plastic than plankton! There were less tan-colored pieces of plastic. Moore believes they have been eaten by birds and other plankton feeders, because they resemble krill. Color is an important factor as is shape, as it mimics food. “Over 70 species of birds have been found to ingest these pieces of plastic that resemble their natural food supply. Studies have shown that they then have higher PCBs content, and it is a way to transport pollutions.”(11) Plastic does not “break down” anywhere in our environment. It just get smaller and smaller to cause more harm throughout the entire web-of-life as it travels up the food chain. Thus, the “quality of life” for the entire marine ecosystem has been undermined and ruined.

As noted in the above-cited excellent “Synthetic Sea” 2010 documentary: “There’s no such a thing as biodegradation of petroleum-based plastic.”

The author of another article, Anna Cummins who traveled on the “Algalita” (Moore’s oceanic research vessel), wrote that: “though we’ve all come on this trip (in 2004) fully prepared to find constant evidence of plastic thousands of miles from land, it’s still shocking to see it in person. It simply does not belong here. …The highest level of pollution [is] in highly productive zones.”(12)

This essential research is done in “international waters,” so it has been barely touched by any agency in charge of environmental issues in any country. The garbage just continues to grow. As usual, much of the scientific research stays in journals. However, there are staggering pollution and reproductive issues that will not go away, and will contribute to the continued dramatic dwindling numbers of ocean creatures. The repercussions of this toxicity go far beyond the oceans. There are two main crises that are already impacting all of us.

Phthalates

(1) Plastic is a well-known chemical hormone disruptor. It changes and toxifies the body’s natural hormonal balance. It is one of the major reasons for hermaphroditic indications in frogs and other amphibians. This research goes back to the late 1970s. Plastics have been part of our daily life for almost a century. They have replaced many natural and safer products. Hard and soft plastics are chemical and petroleum-based. Ubiquitous in our environment, they have not been proven safe to use. Thousands of new chemicals and plastics are put on the market each year without the benefit of human safety testing. Chemical corporations continue to spend billions to advertise and market plastics as “necessary” to our daily lives. Yet, most people still do not realize the invisible and toxic risks to using plastics.

One category of industrial chemicals that are used as softeners and emulsifiers is called phthalates [pronounced “tha-lates”]. These plastics are found in products from baby bottles, thin fruit and vegetable produce bags, food wraps, children’s toys, food storage items, lubricants, medicals devices and IV bags, wood finishes, perfumes, and thousands of beauty products. They emit cumulative but invisible highly dangerous toxins. Since the 1970s, phthalates have been known to be global pollutants. Even so, more than 1-billion pounds of toxic phthalates are produced annually. No extensive long-term tests were done before they were marketed. Sometimes, phthalates may be listed as: Dibutyl phthalate (DBP); Diethyl phthalate (DEP); or Butylbenzyl phthalate (BBP). When you purchase most products containing phthalates, most often there is no warning label to advise you, as a consumer, of the dangers. Phthalates now show up frequently in human urine as a biomarker from daily exposure.

Phthalates are a class of extremely dangerous chemicals known as hormone or endocrine disruptors, popularly called “gender-benders.” This means that these chemicals are absorbed into the body (by breathing the off-gassing and by ingesting) and then cause damage by disrupting hormonal balances (both in humans and all animals). These poisons bio-accumulate in us and all other living creatures. They cause serious developmental harm from the very beginnings of life: in utero, in sperm DNA, in organ damage, early puberty, cancer (testicular, prostate, and breast –all of which have increased dramatically over the past four decades). Phthalates suppress the proper functioning of the immune system.

With the Fukushima reactors catastrophe, now out of control, there is no research on the synergistic relationship between these chemical hormone disruptors and radioactive Uranium (spewing from Fukushima’s reactors), also a hormone disruptor.

(2) Hormone disruption is a major factor in the increase of obesity in the US. The media portrays this as a dietary issue. Yes, it is. But far past this is the use of toxic plastics that surround our every move: from nuking it in microwave ovens and boiling food in pre-packaged “pouches” [loaded with chemical poisons] to drinking many different (already chemically poisoned) drinks bottled in it. There is no nutritional value in these kinds of packaged and prepared foods. These toxins are stored in body fat, and wreck the body’s ability to repair itself.

As it works its way up the food chain, where bigger fish eat the already contaminated fish (who’ve already eaten even smaller ones), these toxins bio-accumulate synergistically, until it reaches the human population –billions of whom have been eating/drinking food packaged in plastic. This goes for other proteins sources as well. Cows also eat a contaminated food supply: either grass loaded with other chemical hormone-disrupting pesticides, or water sources filled with chemicals and antibiotics. Some of the best research on hormone disruption and its long-term generational impact can be found in Dr. Theo Colburn’s et al. “Our Stolen Future.” This is essential reading.

Hormone-disrupting chemicals and radiation not only affect the genders of animals, they can also be linked to DNA damage and birth defects in humans. This is rarely reported, again because the gravity of these findings would shut down the chemical and nuclear companies, if people knew the extent of the genetic contamination with which we are already dealing (actually, since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki). In her article on the impact of radiation and nuclear power, geoscientist Leuren Moret notes:

“The daily ‘permitted’ radioactive emissions and discharges into the Irish Sea since the 1950’s, have turned the contaminated sediments, seawater, and biosphere into a radioactive sink or permanent point source of radiation, with serious local and global effects. Daily ‘permitted’ radioactive emissions and discharges from global sources have accumulated to higher radiation levels in the biosphere than any Chernobyls would release, and are the main cause of the large increase in ocean dead zones since the 1970’s. People are missing or overlooking the serious impact of chronic releases…a strategy guaranteed to continue to fail.”(13)

How much further will this daily contamination of the Irish Sea, and the vast additional nuclear and chemical synergistic contamination of the Pacific Ocean affect us all? Everything is inter-connected. Our planet’s entire web-of-life continues to be in an overwhelming state of siege. Most of this is invisible (unless it affects you or your family directly!). Nonetheless, it continues to impact all of us. This has been the elite’s decades-long, behind-the-scenes plan for utter destruction.

Almost 16 years ago, National Geographic’s cover story, “Diminishing Returns: Exploiting the Ocean’s Bounty,” highlighted in graphic detail the rapaciousness of huge trawling vessels that haul in massive amounts of sea life. In 1995, more than 37,000 ships with 1-million crew worldwide, created “a 50-year boom in fishing technology [that] created a powerful industrial fleet.”(14) Along with oceanic plastic garbage, globalization of the oceans has destroyed them. Small boat fishermen who rely on their catch to feed their local families are often left without resources to fish far from home. Poor fishermen, eeking out a minimal existence, cannot compete with fishing supertankers. A photo from this NG story shows a Senegalese fisherman cleaning small sardines he caught with toxic wastewater. “Fish stock are dwindling, and once independent fisherman now cater to the whims of European buyers. ‘This,’ says a Senegalese community worker, ‘is just the latest battleground between rich north and poor south.’”(15)

These poor fishermen cannot compete with mega-corporation globalized hauls. In addition, many fish and mammals caught in these huge nets are supposedly “unprofitable.” Their lives mean nothing. Euphemistically called “by-catch,” it is not known how many possibly billions of dead creatures have been tossed overboard as unprofitable. The dramatic cost to all sea life has been devastating. Between thousands of pollutants, dead by-catch, enormous over-fishing, sonar, and nuclear bombs exploded underwater by military, the entire web of sea life has suffered dramatically.

Our Oceans Are in a RED ALERT Crisis

Thus, this human rapaciousness creates built-in diminution and death. Each year, the size of mature fish and mammals become smaller, and there are less and less species. Japan, with the world’s largest appetite for fish (for sushi, etc.) and whales, will now have a totally radioactive ocean soon to be devoid of life. Tuna is loaded with mercury [long-term eating of it is a major contributing factor to dementia]. Over the past three decades, whales and dolphins, numbering in the thousands, have beached themselves. Oregon salmon are radioactive from decades of nuclear releases from the Hanford Nuclear Superfund site. Many species are in dramatic decline. Corporate-scientists have few “public” explanations. The few independent scientists left are silenced.

Radioactivity and Nuclear Consequences

Not under any public discussion or commentary by any scientists: what is/will be the impact of on-going radiation traveling across the Pacific Ocean as it encounters miles and miles of toxic degrading plastic? How will hormone disrupting plastic and radioactivity impact this vast area’s ecology? What kind of real future will sea birds and all other sea life have with this gigantic contamination? Hormone disrupting chemicals are known to bio-accumulate up the food chain in a synergistic manner that could equal far more than 1,600 times the original dose of poisons. No creature is safe from this horrendous nightmare! Nor are we.

Caretaking of our planet, Mother Earth our only home, is not a corporate concern. Last month, Michael Parenti wrote of “Profit Pathology and the Disposable Planet.”(16) In short order, with this ecological disaster right in front of us, nothing will be left; and we are already in grave and deliberately orchestrated financial ruin. Nor, are environmental organizations really doing their jobs to protect. The one thing rarely discussed in this degraded death-equation is the human poisoning of our oceans! It is eradicating our planet’s species. This is part of the current Sixth Extinction. The last one was the dinosaurs, 65-million years ago. What have humans wrought?

Rachel Carson (1907-1964) wrote a beautiful work, a best-seller, called The Sea Around Us. It was an ode to the magnificence of our great waters. When she received the National Book Award for it, she said: “the winds, the sea, and the moving tides are what they are. If there is wonder and beauty and majesty in them, science will discover these qualities. If they are not there, science cannot create them. If there is poetry in my book about the sea, it is not because I deliberately put it there, but because no one could write truthfully about the sea and leave out the poetry.”

This book is a hymn to the sea. It was the closing of a time before science unleashed nano-replicating particles into the Gulf of Mexico or the illegal aerosol crimes of Chemtrails loaded with a myriad of invisible but deadly chemicals to poison all of us and our planet’s lands and sea.(17)

By weight, we are 61-percent water. Salt-water oceans make up 71 percent of the earth. We cannot live without it, nor can all the wondrous assortment of sea life. They cannot survive in toxic seas, any more than we can survive breathing the toxic spew that no longer passes for “air.”

Almost forty years ago, Jacques Yves Cousteau brought these amazing sights to our home televisions. We sat enthralled by what he shared with us traveling on the Calypso. There was a sense of magic that filled his programs. They educated us, but there was more. They enchanted us. We listened to the songs of the whales, and these new underwater sounds enthralled us. The music from the ocean’s depths gave many of us a deep empathy for these far-away creatures. Truly, we cannot live without them. See:

www.couseau.org

and

www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CKiZERnpq8

Who could then have imagined the corporate rapaciousness that ensued and has been globalized at any and all costs? Who could think that whales would be hunted almost to extinction, while insane military plans to detonate bombs, take thousands of sea animals’ lives, and emitted sonar to harm these magnificent giants of our seas? The US Navy has a five-year plan to kill 11.7 million marine mammals in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico! There has hardly been any public discussion of this rapacious warfare “testing.”(18) For what sane reason?

The whales and dolphins, the turtles and tuna have lives, too. Not to be hunted or burned to death. Not to be poisoned with deadly chemicals, or phthalates, or radioactivity. Our ocean’s living planetary gifts are under siege. They are all part of the wonders of our world. We must care for them as a sacred trust!

Our countries are under criminal siege, as well. If humans destroy all of it, we destroy ourselves. We live in a topsy-turvy brutal and violent world without ethical or moral values. In our wrecked economies, where all social services are gutted, only the military and killing has a giant budget. Orwellian humans, with a complete lack of what used to make us truly human, have created a devastating scenario that is unraveling our very web of life. This threatens all of us right now. What have we permitted in our names?

We do have other choices. We can cut down drastically (or totally) on our use of plastic. As consumers, we do have choices of not buying or using dangerous items. We can make these choices before we go to the check-out counter. We can make safer consumer decisions and we must speak out. Go though your own house or apartment: see how many un-necessary plastic items can be recycled. Use safer items: glass or stainless steel. It is not difficult to do some Spring Cleaning, and safely get rid of these dangerous items: There are thousands of plastic recycle centers around. We have the potential of demanding and using safer alternatives. Just think what we could collectively do by not buying or boycotting all these dangerous and toxic items! We no longer can shop on automatic pilot and take things off the shelves without understanding the dangers of thousands of products we use. There are consequences to using products daily that are manufactured without any safety concerns. And they bio-accumulate up the food chain to us.

NOTES:

1. Lynn Hermann. “New report calls for end to all new offshore drilling.” Digital Journal. April 26, 2011:

www.digitaljournal.com/article/306018

2. Updated on May 3, 2011: EPA. Japanese Emergency: Radiation Monitoring. www.epa.gov/japan2011/data-updates.html

3. Kathy Marks and Daniel Howden. “The world’s rubbish dump: a tip that stretches from Hawaii to Japan.” London. The Independent. Feb. 5, 2008: www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/the-worlds-rubbish-dump-a-tip-that-stretches-from-hawaii-to-japan-778016.html

4. See: www.algalita.org/about-us/index.html

5. Kathy Marks and Daniel Howden, op. cit.

6. Kathy Marks and Daniel Howden, ibid.

7. The Plastic Killing Fields –Pacific Ocean Gyre Garbage Patch Grows to the Size of Texas.” Jan. 14, 2008:

http://patagonia-under-siege.blogspot.com/2008/01/plastic-killing-fields-pacific-ocean.html

8. Anna Cummins. “Sailing the Synthetic Sea.” WEND magazine. Vol. 3, Issue 4, November 2008: p. 20. Special thanks to CAP for sharing this reference with me.

9. Tony Barboza. “Ingestion of plastic found among small ocean fish.” Los Angeles Times. March 11, 2011:

www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-fish-plastic-20110311,0,6588047.story

10. Cummins, op. cit., p. 22.

11. See: Y. Mato et al. “Plastic Resin Pellets as a Transport Medium for Toxic Chemicals in the Marine Environment.” Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol. 35 (2001): 318-324; and Christian M. Boerger et al. “Plastic ingestion by plankivorous fishes in the North Pacific Central Gyre.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. Vol. 60 (2010): 2275-2278.

12. Cummins, op. cit., p. 24-25.

13. Leuren Moret. BE FOREWARNED: The accompanying photos with this article are shocking and gravely upsetting, but we NEED to see what nuclear radiation does! “Global Implications of Sellafield. ‘Irish Seas Coast Effect’ and Beyond.” April 15, 2009:

www.rense.com/general85/Pages33-37Final.pdf

14. Michael Parfit. “Diminishing Returns: Exploiting the Ocean’s Bounty.” National Geographic. Vol.188. No. 5, November 1995: p. 9.

15. Parfit., ibid., p. 22.

16. Michale Parenti. “Profit Pathology and the Disposable Planet.” Global Research. April 8, 2011:

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24232

17. May 11, 2011 update on the Gulf of Mexico “Blue Plague: http://worldvisionportal.org/wordpress; and

www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaJvqTFwPeE

18. Rosalind Peterson. www.agriculturedefensecoalition.org/?q=us-navy

WISE LABORATORY for ENVIRONMENTAL and GENETIC TOXICOLOGY

2011-05-08T21:59:00.000-07:00

http://usm.maine.edu/toxicology/research/uranium.php

URANIUM TOXICOLOGY STUDIES

Background

DU is becoming a wider international concern as a possible health hazard and carcinogen (1-3). Little is currently known about DU mechanisms of effect, but reported data have shown lung cancer (1-3), embryotoxicity and teratogenicity (4), reproductive and developmental damage (5), genomic instability (6) and single strand DNA damage in vitro (7). Given the widespread use of uranium for military applications and the present world-wide deployment of the United States military, it is imperative that we should be able to better define both the risks of DU exposure and the possible mechanisms of carcinogenicity and genotoxicity.

The lack of scientific data concerning the possible health and cancer risks associated with DU are becoming a major issue worldwide (1-3). Fifty-four of the sites on the EPA National Priority List contain unacceptably high levels of uranium contamination (8). Uranium is ubiquitous: occurring naturally, in water and building materials and as a contaminant in phosphate fertilizers, but its military uses are leading to further questions about additional uranium exposure (9-10). Little is also known about threshold doses for frank renal, reproductive or genetic effects, although the existence of such effects is well-documented in the scientific literature. Thus, in keeping with the increased usage of DU, increased knowledge of its mechanisms of action, and the possible environmental and health risks of its use must be more thoroughly investigated.

DU-induced lung cancers occur in human bronchial cells (11). However, despite these observations, the effects of DU in human bronchial cells are unknown. Only two studies have considered the interaction of DU and human bronchial cells (12-13). One study found that soluble DU induced neoplastic transformation of human bronchial cells (12) and the other reported that DU induced lipid peroxidation and micronuclei formation (13). To fully understand how DU causes cancer, it is essential that we study its effects in human bronchial cells, its target cells.

In fact, there are few other data concerning the genotoxic and carcinogenic effects of DU on human cells. Only one other study has considered human cells and that study reported genomic instability, cytotoxicity and micronuclei formation in human osteosarcoma cells (6). Published data demonstrated that DU exposure in vitro can transform immortalized human osteoblast cells (HOS) to the tumorigenic phenotype (14). Recently, it has been reported that this toxic metal can induce leukemia in mice (15).

The Wise Laboratory is investigating the carcinogenicity and genotoxicity of particulate and soluble DU and develops karyotypic and gene expression fingerprints of DU exposure. Our current knowledge of DU carcinogenicity and genotoxicity is clearly inadequate due to an absence of appropriate models of its target cells and very little data about how particulate DU compounds cause their harmful effects. Our research program is significant because it will address these critical shortcomings. When completed it will provide:

1) a better understanding of how DU damages DNA and causes cancer;

2) essential information to better assess the relative risk of exposure to particulate or soluble DU;

3) fingerprints of exposure to better detect soldiers who may have been exposed to harmful levels; and

4) A model of human bronchial cells for further study of DU, other metals, and lung cancer in general.

Experimental Studies

We first focused our experimental studies on the cytotoxic and clastogenic effects of particulate and soluble depleted uranium in human bronchial fibroblast cells (WTHBF-6) (1). We used uranium trioxide (UO3) and uranyl acetate (UA) as prototypical particulate and soluble DU salts, respectively. After a 24 h exposure, both UO3 and UA induced concentration-dependent cytotoxicity in WTHBF-6 cells. When treated with chronic exposure of up to 72 h, there was an increased degree of cytotoxicity in both UO3 and UA. We assessed the clastogenicity of these compounds at 24 h and found that at concentrations of 0, 0.5, 1, and 5 µg/cm2 UO3, 5, 6, 10, and 15% of metaphase cells exhibit some form of chromosome damage. UA did not induce chromosome damage above background levels. With chronic exposure of 48 and 72 h there were slight increases in chromosome damage induced with UO3 treatment, but no meaningful increase in chromosome damage was observed with UA.

In addition to bronchial fibroblasts, we have examined the cytotoxic and clastogenic effects of UO3 on human bronchial epithelial (BEP2D) cells. BEP2D cells also demonstrate a concentration-dependent cytotoxicity, but a significant increase in chromosome damage is not seen until a 48 h exposure, suggesting a mechanism of toxicity which requires longer exposures to break DNA.

We used immortalized human bronchial epithelial cell lines (BEP2D) to study the transforming potential of particulate DU. We observed focus formation in cells exposed to UO3 for 24 h. (Figure 1)

Normal BEP2D cells

DU-induced focus

(Figure 1)

Specifically, after 24 h UO3 treatment with 0, 0.25, 2.5, and 25 μg/cm2 UO3 we observed focus frequencies of 3, 23, 24, and 21 foci, respectively.

The DU transformants also acquired anchorage-independent growth. Figure 2 shows colonies in soft agar formed by DU-transformed cells.


DU-transformed cells formed colonies in soft agar medium.

(Figure 2)

After 24 h treatment with concentrations of 0, 0.25, 2.5, and 25 μg/cm2 UO3, the percentage of resultant foci that grew colonies in soft agar was 0, 67, 100, and 75, respectively.

In addition, 53% of DU-transformed cell lines tested showed a hypodiploid phenotype (chromosome number less than 44) with a significant increase in metaphases exhibiting a chromosome number ranging from 7 to 43.

We are now focusing on the roles of DNA damage and repair as key factors in uranium's carcinogenicity. We are currently investigating how depleted uranium (DU) causes DNA strand breaks and chromosome aberrations. Efforts are underway to understand how these types of damaging events are sensed, responded to and repaired, considering the roles of gene expression at the RNA and protein levels, and phenotypic changes. We also seek to understand how uranium induces genetic instability. Efforts are also underway to understand how uranium transforms a normal cell into a tumor cell and the chromosomal and gene expression changes that underlie the transformation we observe.

References

Royal Society Working Group on the Health hazards of Depleted Uranium Munitions, Memorandum: The health effects of depleted uranium munitions: a summary, The Royal Society, London England, 2002.
Bleise, A., Danesi, P.R., and Burkart, W. (2003), Properties, use and health effects of depleted uranium (DU): a general overview. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 64:93-112.
World Health Organization, 54th World Health Assembly (2001) Provisional agenda item 13.10: Health effects of depleted uranium, Report by the Secretariat.
Bosque, M.A., Domingo, J.L., Llobet, J.M., and Corbella, J., (1992) Embroyotoxicity and Teratogenicity of Uranium in Mice Following Subcutaneous Administration of Uranyl Acetate. Biological Trace Element Research 36:109-118.
Domingo, J.L. (2001) Reproductive and developmental toxicity of natural and depleted uranium: a review. Reproductive Toxicology 15:603-609.
Miller, A.C., Brooks, K., Stewart, M., Anderson, B., Lin, S., McClain, D., Page, N. (2003), Genomic instability in human osteoblast cells after exposure to depleted uranium: delayed lethality and micronuclei formation. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 64:247-259.
Yazzie, M. Gamble, S.L., Civitello, E.R., and Stearns, D.M. (2003) Uranyl Acetate Causes DNA Single Strand Breaks In Vitro in the Presence of Ascorbate (Vitamin C). Chem. Res. Toxicolo. 16:524-530.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Research (2003) Toxicological Profile for Uranium., U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
McClain, D.E., Benson K.A., Dalton, T.K., Ejnik, J, Emond, C.A., Hodge, S.J., Kalinich, J.F., Landauer, M.A., Miller, A.C., Pellmar, T.C., Steward, M.D., Villa, V., Xu, J. (2001) Biological effects of embedded depleted uranium (DU): summary of the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute research. Science of the Total Environment, 274:115-118.
Miller, A.C., Fuciarelli, A.F., Jackson, W.E., Ejnik, E.J., Emond, C., Strocko, S., Hogan, J., Pagew, N., and Pellmar, T. (1998) Urinary and serum mutagenicity studies with rats implanted with depleted uranium or tantalum pellets. Mutagenesis 13:643-648.
Vahakangas, K.H., Smaet, J.M., Metcalf, R.A., Welsh, J.A., Bennett, W.P., Lane, D.P., and Harris, C.C. (1992) Mutations of p53 and ras genes in radon-associated lung cancer from uranium miners. Lancet 339: 576-580.
Yang, Z.H., Fan, B.X., Lu, Y., Cao, Z.S., Yu, S., Fan F.Y., and Zhu, M.X. (2002) Malignant transformation of human bronchial epithelial cells (BEAS-2B) induced by depleted uranium. AiZheng 21:944-948.
Ohshima, S., Ying, Xu, and Takahama, M. (1998) Effects of uranium ore dust on cultured human lung cells. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology 5:267-271.
Miller, A.C., Blakely, W.F., Livengood, D., Whittaker, T., Xu, J., Ejnik, J.W., Hamilton, M.M., Parlette, E., John, T.S., Gerstenberg, H.M., and Hsu, H. (1998) Transformation of human osteoblast cells to the tumorigenic phenotype by depleted uranium-uranyl chloride. Environ. Health Perspect. 106, 465-471.
Miller, A.C., Bonait-Pellie, C., Merlot, R.F., Michel, J., Stewart, M., and Lison, P.D. (2005) Leukemic transformation of hematopoetic cells in mice internally exposed to depleted uranium. Mol. Cell Biochem., 279, 97-104.

Relevant Wise Laboratory Publications

LaCerte C., H. Xie, A. Aboueissa, J.P. Wise, Sr. 2010. Particulate Depleted Uranium is Cytotoxic and Clastogenic to Human Lung Epithelial Cells. Mut. Res. 697: 33–37.

Xie, H., C. LaCerte, D. Thompson, and J. P. Wise, Sr. 2010. Depleted Uranium Induces Neoplastic Transformation in Human Lung Epithelial Cells. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 23: 373–378.

Wise, S.S., D. Thompson, A. Aboueissa, M. Mason, and J.P. Wise, Sr. 2007. Particulate Depleted Uranium is Cytotoxic and Clastogenic to Human Lung Cells. Chemical Research in Toxicology. 20: 815-820.

Collaborators and Cooperators

The Wise Laboratory is assisted in this work by an important number of collaborators and cooperators. In particular, the following prominent scientists and their teams provide significant support and input:

Dr. AbouEl-Makarim Aboueissa is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics and Statistics at the University of Southern Maine (USM). He provides statistical expertise particularly in the area of handling samples with measurements at or below detection limits.

Dr. Douglas Thompson is a Professor of Epidemiology and Associate Director of the Maine Center for Toxicology and Environmental Health at the University of Southern Maine. He provides expert advice and guidance on statistical analysis and study design and also assists with the marine mammal studies.

Dr. Hongyu Zhao is Ira V. Hiscock Associate Professor of Public Health and Genetics, Yale School of Medicine. He provides expert advice in the design, conduct and analysis in genetic epidemiology and statistical genetics, particularly with respect to microarrays.

Funding

This work is generously supported by grant #W911NF-04-1-0240 from the Army Research Office, Department of the Army and by the Maine Center for Toxicology and Environmental Health.

"POPULATIONS EXPOSED TO ENVIRONMENTAL URANIUM"

2011-05-08T21:31:00.000-07:00

INCREASED RISK OF INFERTILITY AND
REPRODUCTIVE CANCERS

By Leuren Moret

PART 1 OF 2

http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk/Populations%20Exposed%20to%20Enviromental%20Uranium.htm

GUARDIANS AND CARETAKERS:
“The Navajos help guard the land for the Hopi. We don’t want them to leave. This is their sacred land, too. The White Man is the one who needs to leave before Nature intervenes. The Great Spirit made us caretakers of this land. We take care of it with our prayers and our ceremony. Now you poison it and rape it and destroy it with your strip mines and uranium tailings and power plants – all on sacred land! And you try to chase the last few Indians off so you can do your dirty work.” Thomas Banyacya, Hopi[1]

MARIN COUNTY: HIGHEST BREAST CANCER RATE IN THE US.
RIVERBANKS AND COASTLINES HAVE HIGHEST CANCER RATES

It is clear that dilution is not the solution to pollution. Dumping radioactive contaminated materials into bodies of water has a boomerang effect. It is not long before the ionizing radiation is washing back up on riverbanks and shorelines. In fact, in the first cancer mapping survey[2] in history (1850-60) in Cumbria, the Lake District of Britain, Alfred Haviland reported that out of 6000 cancer cases in a ten-year period, the highest cancer rates were along riverbanks and shorelines. This provided a strong environmental link to cancer, before manmade ionizing radiation was introduced into the environment after 1900. Today it is well known by geoscientists that most natural background radiation originates in minerals from rocks and in sediments which are rocks reduced to particles by sedimentary processes, and transported in water until they wash up on riverbanks and shorelines… where Haviland reported the highest pre-1900 cancer rates.

Pre-1900 cancer rates globally represent the true baseline for cancer studies. Here a comparison is made between pre-1900 cancer rates in Cumbria to 1963 Hawaii cancer rates at the peak of atmospheric testing. Because crustal or continental rocks are much higher in natural background ionizing radiation than oceanic volcanic rocks, pre-1900 Hawaii cancer rates should have been lower than pre-1900 Cumbria cancer rates. Unfortunately, Hawaii has some of the highest rainfall in the world, which very efficiently deposited atmospheric manmade radioactive pollution into the Hawaiian environment. According to a 1973 letter from the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) to the science journal Nature,[3] Hawaii is the most radioactive contaminated place in the world from atmospheric testing and burned up spacecraft.

In Haviland’s pre-1900 survey, lung cancer was 0.17% of all cancers, but increased to 17.6% (103.7-fold increase) of all cancers reported[4] in Hawaii by 1963. The pre-1900 pancreatic cancer rate was 0.15%, which increased to 5.8% (38.6-fold) in Hawaii by 1963,[5] and increased 12-fold in Japanese males between 1945-1965 [Fig. 4].[6] Pre-1900 thyroid cancer in Cumbria was the rarest at 0.05%, and has increased rapidly on a global scale since 1945. The majority of cancers in the pre-1900 Cumbria survey were breast (23.73%), and uterine (20.42%), which made up 43.15% of all cancers. The greatest majority of cancers in 1963 in Hawaii were digestive system (41.1%)[7] and respiratory (20.4%)[8] which together made up 61.5% of total cancers. Breast cancer was only 5.2% of the total, although it too greatly increased after 1945, but formerly rare cancers had much greater increases. The enormous increase in respiratory and digestive system cancers indicates an environmental link – with the introduction of atmospheric testing fallout – inhaled and ingested globally by all living things.

THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY

The chance discovery of an abstract in the Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, “Radiocesium in North San Francisco Bay and Baja California coastal surface waters,”[9] provided me with an answer to a puzzling question about breast cancer. Hundreds of millions of dollars of US government money have been spent by the University of California to identify the cause of what may be the highest breast cancer rates[10] in the United States in Marin County [Fig. 1], California, just north of San Francisco.

Even more surprising, the radiocesium reported in the paper had been measured by the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab (managed by the University of California), from the north end of San Francisco Bay to the coastal waters at the tip of Baja California, Mexico. By mapping the pattern of breast cancer in Marin County, I identified the San Francisco Bay shoreline of the Marin County peninsula as the environment where the highest rates of breast cancer occur in the county. The deepest part of San Francisco Bay is offshore from Marin, and the highest volume of radioactive contaminated sediment-laden water passes through this area each day with the tides. The sediment and water flow pattern in the north part of the bay is visible in the aerial photo in Fig.1.

Not only is San Francisco Bay contaminated with ionizing radiation from the Sierras, but it also is heavily contaminated with chemicals, ionizing radiation, and military waste from decommissioned military bases. Signs around the Bay shoreline warn pregnant women to eat nothing caught in the Bay, and “residents should eat no more than one fish a month” caught in the Bay. Little wonder the warning signs are posted since ionizing radiation and chemicals have a synergistic interaction, multiplying the effects of each other by many times.

The lowest breast cancer rates are along the Pacific coastline of Marin. The spatial distribution of breast cancer made it clear that there had to be an environmental cause. Large areas of mudflats and estuaries along the bay side shoreline of Marin, like the Cumbria and Welsh seacoasts, provide a low energy environment of quiet still water for radioactive contaminated fine sediments to settle out.

Fig.1. (above): San Francisco Bay Area, with Marin County in upper left corner, north of San Francisco.
Source: http://www.sfbayquakes.org/mapview/map_without_view.jpg

CONTAMINATION OF REGIONAL
WATER SUPPLIES

Most of the fresh water coming into San Francisco Bay is from the Sierra Nevada Mountains east of the California coastline, a very high mountain range running north and south along the border with Nevada [Fig. 2]. The soils of the Sierras are now contaminated with radioactive materials from nuclear bomb testing, Chernobyl, and the emissions from the Rancho Seco nuclear power plant, which operated east of Sacramento until it was shut down in 1989 by a citizens lawsuit after a history of accidents, radioactive leaks, startups and shutdowns. The citizens lawsuit was successful because they owned the Sacramento municipal Power Company, including the nuclear power plant.[11] Most of the drinking water for the San Francisco Bay area comes from the Sierras. Approximately 95% of the radioactive emissions from Rancho Seco were rained and snowed out into the Sierra Nevada Mountains, contaminating vegetation, soils, streams, rivers and lakes.

Fig.2 (above): Map of California showing San Francisco Bay, Marin County north of San Francisco, and the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east where radioactive contaminated water supplies orginate for northern California.
Source: Hornbeck, D., California Patterns: A Geographical and Historical Atlas. Mayfield Publ. Co, Palo Alto, CA (1983).p.11

Mortality from all diseases for all ages in San Francisco declined by about 10% within two years of the Rancho Seco shutdown,[12] just what the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) predicted in the new radiation risk model they wrote in 2003 as an independent report for the European Parliament.[13]

During the lawsuit, which eventually shut down Rancho Seco nuclear power plant in 1989, the citizens contracted with Lawrence Livermore nuclear weapons lab to measure fission product emissions in the Rancho Seco environment. I obtained the Livermore Lab radiation reports[14] and communications with lawyers, from Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass who had been an expert witness for the lawsuit. It was a surprise to discover that Livermore Nuclear weapons Lab has not only secretly conducted extensive global monitoring of ionizing radiation for decades, but local ionizing radiation monitoring as well. In fact, I saw fresh core samples from Hiroshima and Nagasaki lying on a table in a Livermore environmental laboratory in 1991. When I asked Dr. Kai Wong, a Livermore lab ionizing radiation expert, why they were still monitoring Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he said:

“Because Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still radioactive. And we are still studying the people because they are too.”

LIVERMORE NUKE LAB SECRETLY MEASURING
GLOBAL RADIATION LEVELS

In a recent study, Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab reported [15] measuring one Curie of radiocesium per year, passing through San Francisco Bay, attached to fine sediment. Cesium 137 and Strontium 90 are the two most abundant fission products, and are commonly measured as an indicator of more than 400 other fission products produced. Therefore far more than one Curie of ionizing radiation per year has been washing through the Bay. Clay particles are highly charged and act as scavenging agents for radioactive particles suspended in water. This has been a chronic and cumulative source of low-level ionizing radiation washing up daily on the San Francisco Bay side of the Marin shoreline for at least 60 years – since atmospheric testing started in 1945, and the likely cause of the high rates of breast cancer reported in Marin County.

Based on 550 epidemiological studies of exposed populations, an independent low-level ionizing radiation report for the European Parliament, the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) report, has stated that chronic exposure to low-level ionizing radiation is:
“…up to 1000 times more biologically damaging than the International Committee on Radiation Protection (ICRP) standards and risk model predict.”[16]

The ICRP standards and risk model are based on the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Atomic Bomb studies, which were deceptively conducted by the U.S. Government, in order to protect the future development of a nuclear weapons program.

Even worse than the fission products, the public health impact from global pollution by depleted uranium, was not officially measured or reported from bomb testing, but someone must have been monitoring it. All atomic and hydrogen bombs have large amounts (thousands of pounds) of depleted uranium packed as “tamping” around the small plutonium core weighing less than 20 lbs.[17] The major contribution made by depleted uranium to global radioactive pollution from atmospheric testing was very rarely mentioned or reported.

THE DIABETES LINK TO RADIATION

Prior to the introduction of manmade ionizing radiation into the environment, diabetes was very rare. Most children who developed diabetes died by the time they were 7 years old, since insulin was not discovered until the late 1920s. This greatly minimized inheritance of a genetic link to diabetes. By globally mapping diabetes,[18] it was very clear to me that the highest rates of diabetes in the world are in the same latitudes as the major atmospheric tests. Jet stream distribution carried the radiation from east to west in the northern latitudes where the US, Russia, and China conducted tests. And in the southern latitudes where British and French bomb tests were conducted, the jet stream carried the radiation around the world, contaminating the tips of S. America and Africa. By 1963 at the peak of atmospheric testing, Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass reported a 50% decline in the North Atlantic fishing catch, and a 65% decline in the northern Pacific fishing catch, due to global nuclear fallout pollution of the oceans.[19]

Fig. 3: Diabetes death rates in Japan 1950-2004. This represents the global cumulative radiation effects of atmospheric testing (1950-1963), nuclear power plants introduced in 1968, and depleted uranium introduced in 1991.
Source: Vital Statistics of Japan 2004 vol.1, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Health and Welfare Statistics Assoc., Table 5.15, p. 203.

A global diabetes epidemic [Fig. 3], beginning in 1945 with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, has had a major contribution from the effects of uranium pollution from atmospheric testing, nuclear power plants, and depleted uranium weaponry introduced to the battlefield in 1991. Uranium is particularly damaging to the pancreas, insulin production, information flow, and cell function. And diabetes in pregnant women has a serious effect on the foetus.[38]

Fig. 4: Trend of mortality rate from pancreatic cancer in Japan (Males) for the period 1940-1965 prior to, and following the release of fission products into the environment.”
Source: M. Segi, M. Kurihara, and T. Matsuyama, “Cancer Mortality in Japan (1899-1962)”, Department of Public Health, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan, 1965.

Pancreatic cancer mortality in Japanese males [Fig. 4] increased 12-fold between 1945 and 1965, during the peak of atmospheric testing.[20]

MARIN COUNTY: A NATURAL CONTROL STUDY

The Marin County study is the kind of natural experiment geoscientists find useful in their research, with the Pacific coastline as a natural control and San Francisco Bay mudflats in Marin County as the study area. It is also a good comparison of the public health effects of ionizing radionuclide concentrations in contaminated freshwater compared to seawater. It is already well known that because of the influence of saltwater on uptake of radionuclides saltwater fish have much lower radioactive contamination levels than freshwater fish living in contaminated environments where toxins may bio-concentrate by thousands of times.

When the results of mud samples from the Marin County bay side shoreline and the Pacific coastline are analyzed and reported, low-level ionizing radiation from the Sierras will be identified as the cause of what may be the highest breast cancer incidence in the United States. High rates of autism also occur in areas, between the Sierras and Marin County, in low energy slow water environments where swampy still water and mudflats occur, and are recharged with contaminated water washing down from the Sierras. The California Department of Developmental Services (DDS) found a 273 percent increase in autism cases between 1987 and 1998.[21] This is due not only to residual ionizing radiation washing out of the Sierras, but also to the nuclear power industry in California. Dr. Ernest Sternglass has provided powerful evidence[22] that in the state of California, autism has increased and is correlated with the increase of energy generated by nuclear power plants since the early 1970’s. An investigation of U.S. autism rates and nuclear power plant operating capacity confirmed the California findings. Ionizing radiation in the environment has a cumulative effect, where increased levels have been reported in dairy products and soils such as in New York City, causing an increase in biological problems in exposed populations.[23]

Fig. 5A (left): High-risk counties within 100 miles of nuclear reactors where 2/3 of breast cancer deaths occurred 1985-1989. Fig. 5B (right): Nuclear power plant locations in the U.S.
Source: 5(A) J. Gould, The Enemy Within: The High Cost of Living Near Nuclear Reactors, Four Walls Eight Windows, NY/London (1996), p.187.
5(B) Source: “The Madness of Nuclear Energy”, The Ecologist, Vol. 29 No. 7, November 1999, back cover.

I’M THE “MOUSE LADY”

The University of California, as the unchallenged manager for 61 years of the nuclear weapons program at Los Alamos National Lab, Lawrence Livermore Lab, and Lawrence Berkeley Lab, has received billions of dollars to make a global radioactive environmental mess, hundreds of millions of dollars more to “study” the breast cancer clusters in Marin County, and has still failed to identify the cause. The “platinum plated” labs have so much sophisticated equipment and personnel to study ionizing radiation that they are, as one Livermore scientist said, a “solution looking for a problem.” Yet, during a breast cancer conference on January 21, 2006, by the Bay Area Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Center (BABCERC), University of California scientist Dr. Mary Helen Barcellos-Hoff from the Lawrence Berkeley Lab, introduced herself as “the mouse lady”. She stated very clearly, during her presentation to 600 women, that “radiation is the only known cause of breast cancer in mice.”[24] She repeatedly mentioned in her talk that “Radiation is the only known cause of breast cancer in mice and that is why I use it to cause breast cancer in mice.” She concluded her talk, by saying that in their research they “never identified the cause of breast cancer in women”.

No, but hundreds of millions of dollars later, they sure did in mice… ionizing radiation.

THE MOUSE THAT ROARED

When it was time for questions, I held up an enlarged breast cancer map [Fig. 5A] using US Government data (1985-1989) from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The map identified that within a 100-mile radius of nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons labs, [Fig. 5B] two thirds of all breast cancer deaths occurred in the United States from 1985-89.

I asked the speaker, Dr. Mary Helen Barcellos-Hoff, if BABCERC was investigating ionizing radiation as a cause of breast cancer around these sites. She quickly replied, “Oh, I’m a microbiologist!” distancing herself from the “R” word.

Fig. 6 (above): Kokopelli is a fertility deity, an ancient humpbacked flute player from an Anasazi glyph. He presides over childbirth, agriculture, and reproduction of game animals, and is venerated by Southwestern Indians.
Source: Walker, D., Cuckoo for Kokopelli, Northland Pub. Flagstaff AZ (1998), p.3-Pottery by Melissa Antonio, Acoma Pueblo, New Mexico, p.1-Navajo basket by Eleanor Rock, Twin Rocks Trading Post, New Mexico.

KOKOPELLI SPEAKS

Living on the Navajo Reservation heavily contaminated from uranium mining, a young Navajo girl when she was nine, lost her grandmother, her ama’sa’ni, to breast cancer.[25] Her mother later had breast cancer twice. When Stefanie Raymond-Whish decided to become a molecular biologist at the University of Northern Arizona, she dedicated her research to finding the root causes of breast cancer.

LOOD DOO NADZIIHII –
“THE SORE THAT DOES NOT HEAL”

Raymond-Whish discovered that there was New Mexico State Tumor Registry data on the New Mexico portion of the Navajo Reservation, which showed a 17-fold increase in childhood reproductive cancers compared to the U.S. average.[26] Ms. Williams, the journalist who wrote “On Cancer’s Trail” about Raymond-Whish reported “These are extremely rare cancers related to hormone systems."[27] Another set of registry data from 1970-1982 showed a 2.5-fold increase in these cancers among all New Mexico Native Americans.[28] A 1981 paper identified a possible link between proximity to uranium mine tailings and incidents of birth defects in families. Breast cancer [Fig. 7] is the number two killer of Navajo women after heart disease.[29] Uterine and ovarian cancers doubled or tripled since 1970 in New Mexico Indians, with no change in whites and Hispanics.[30] This has prompted the U.S. Health and Human Services to fund a study on kidney disease to be done jointly by a Navajo health agency and a New Mexico state agency. They will be looking at 1300 Navajos and 160 drinking wells, compiling illness data and analyses of drinking water contaminants (uranium, arsenic, etc.). With less than ¼ of the wells tested, the study has already established that living within 0.8 kilometer from an abandoned mine is a significant predictor of kidney disease and diabetes.[31] This suggests that local uranium pollution point sources are contaminating the groundwater on the Navajo reservation where many family dwellings have their own well. Municipal drinking water supplies, utilized by whites and Hispanics in more populated urban areas, may explain the reduced uterine cancer rates in non-Indian populations.

Fig. 7 (above): A dividing breast cancer cell as seen through a colored scanning electron micrograph.
Source: Steve Gschmeissner/Science Photo Library. http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id=17708

Dr. Ernest Sternglass has recommended that reverse osmosis filtration systems, for a cost to the U.S Government of about $500 per household, will remove heavy metals including uranium and other contaminants from water. He suggests that the U.S Government cost of providing these systems to contaminated Native American populations would be far cheaper than the public health studies and high health care costs of chronic exposure to uranium contamination.

Another Mouse Study and a Different Outcome

When Raymond-Whish received her PhD in May 2008, she had already co-published a groundbreaking paper[32] identifying uranium as an estrogen disruptor and a serious cause of infertility as well as breast, ovarian, and uterine cancer. She and researchers exposed mice to depleted uranium contaminated drinking water below the U.S. EPA water standard of [30] picoCuries/Liter [33] (or about 1 Bequerrel),[34] in other words at levels the U.S. government considered to be a minimal health risk. Their results: “Mice that drank uranium-containing water exhibited estrogenic responses including selective reduction of primary follicies, increased uterine weight, greater uterine luminal epithelial cell height, accelerated vaginal opening, and persistent presence of cornified vaginal cells. Coincident treatment with the antiestrogen ICI 182,780 blocked these responses to uranium or the synthetic estrogen diethylstilbestrol. In addition, mouse dams that drank uranium-containing water delivered grossly normal pups, but they had significantly fewer primordial follicies than pups whose dams drank control tap water.”[35]

Their Conclusions Were:

“Because of the decades of uranium mining/milling in the Colorado plateau in the Four Corners region of the American Southwest, the uranium concentration and the route of exposure used in these studies are environmentally relevant. Our data support the conclusion that uranium is an endocrine-disrupting chemical and populations exposed to environmental uranium should be followed for increased risk of fertility problems and reproductive cancers.”[36]

Andrea Gore, a neuroendocrinologist at the University of Texas, Austin, and former advisor to the National Science Foundation considers this to be a groundbreaking study:
“This is a science of subtlety, (Dyer’s and Raymond-Whish’s) work is consistent with other good labs. People criticize the field of endocrine disruption because we don’t always understand the mechanisms, but the effects are real. This is why animal studies are so important. The responses we see in lab animals can happen in humans, because we share the exact same hormones. The estrogen receptor is similar.”[37]

Fig. 8 (above): The start of every human life: Human ovulation where emergence of the oocyte from the ovary occurs before fertilization in the uterus.
Source: Geddes, L., “Human egg makes accidental debut on camera,” New Scientist, June 11, 2008.

A Global Depopulation
Doomsday Machine

Since 1945, the University of California and the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Labs together with other nuclear states have blanketed Planet Earth and the global atmosphere with accumulating uranium and fission products with an unknown biological outcome. This is very significant because low level uranium contamination, even below EPA drinking water standards, is an estrogen or hormone disruptor at a minimum, which means it will have a global affect, and not just on females of many species. Raymond-Whist has identified some of the effects in one biological system (reproductive), which is a part of a larger cooperating set of systems in a human or animal super-system. Her research predicts that infertility will increase in each future generation because of chronic low-level ionizing radiation exposure, cancers of reproductive organs in females will increase, and the viability of future generations will decline.

The link between diabetes and uranium exposure is also significant to the reproductive system, since pregnant women who have diabetes and little or no health care produce unhealthy babies.[38] The impact of uranium on the pancreas and production and function of insulin, another hormone, is very significant damage to another system. Environmental uranium is already causing a global epidemic of diabetes with large increases in rates. The World Health Organisation has predicted that global diabetes rates are expected to increase 10 times by 2030.

Animals too are being affected by the impact of environmental uranium pollution, since we share the same hormones and similar estrogen receptors. This is accelerating the collapse of the environment and our web of life. The entire planet is experiencing the greatest mass extinction of all species since the dinosaur extinction 65 million years ago. Examples of indicators are everywhere, such as increases in uranium levels in drinking water reported in Los Angeles,[39] which doubled in 2007 alone, from depleted uranium bombing in Iraq and Afghanistan. In 2006 depleted uranium was reported in the British atmosphere 7-9 days after bombing in Iraq and Afghanistan.[40] High increases of diabetes have been reported in Tasmania, and 50% of the Tasmanian Devil population has been exterminated by aggressive mouth cancers since 1993, when uranium mining and milling both doubled in Australia. The radioactive dust is carried in southern hemisphere atmospheric circulation patterns to Tasmania in a matter of days.

Ionizing radiation is different. There is no way to turn it off and no way to clean it up. It is the weapon that keeps giving and keeps killing. Fertile females, the unborn, and children are the primary targets of this global depopulation Doomsday Machine. The University of California, home of the Manhattan Project - the atomic bomb project that never ended, will forever be known as “the University that poisoned the world”.

References

1 Wall, S., H. Arden, WISDOMKEEPERS: Meetings With Native American Spiritual Elders, Beyond Words Publishing Inc. (1990), p.96.

2 Haviland, A., The geographical distribution of heart disease and dropsy, cancer in females and phthisis in females in England and Wales, London: Swan Schonnenschein, 1875.

3 Hardy, E.P., P.W. Krey, H.L. Volchok, “Global Inventory and Distribution of Fallout Plutonium”, NATURE, vol. 241, Feb. 16, 1973, p. 444-5.

4 Dept. of Health Annual Report, State of Hawaii (1963), p.127.

5 Ibid.

6 Segi, M., M. Kurihara, and T. Matsuyama, “Cancer Mortality in Japan (1899-1962)”, Department of Public Health, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan, 1965.

7 Dept. of Health Annual Report, State of Hawaii (1963), p. 127: Digestive system cancers - Stomach (12.7%), Large Intestine (8.0%), Pancreas (5.8%), Rectum (4.9%), other Digestive (9.7%).

8 Dept. of Health Annual Report, State of Hawaii (1963), p. 127: Respiratory system - Lung (17.6%), other Respiratory (1.4%).

9 Volpe, A.M., B.B. Bandong, B.K. Esser, G.M. Bianchini, “Radiocesium in North San Francisco Bay and Baja California coastal surface waters”, Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 60 (2002) 365-380.
http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2002/Radiocesium-San-Francisco-Bay16mar02.htm

10 Laurie, J., “Alarming breast cancer rates in northern California county”, World Socialist Web, Oct. 31, 2002. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/oct2002/canc-o31.shtml

11 Smellof, E., P. Asmus, Reinventing Electric Utilities: competition, Citizen action, and Clean Power, Island Press, Wash. D.C., (1996), p.35-50.

12 “Improvements in Public Health in San Francisco after Rancho Seco Shutdown”, Hunter’s Point/San Francisco Press Conference Sept. 7, 2001, Radiation and Public Health Project.

13 Busby, C., Edit., with R.. Bertell, I. Schmitze-Feuerhake, M. Cato, A. Yablokov, ECRR: 2003 Recommendations of the European Committee on Radiation Risk, Regulator’s Edit.: Brussels, 2003, p.182.

14 Noshkin, V., K. Wong, R. Eagle, J. Dawson, J. Brunk, T. Jokela, “Environmental Radiological Studies Downstream from Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Generating Station”, LLNL Report UCID-20367 (one of a series).

15 Volpe, et al., 2002.

16 Busby, C. et al., 2003, p.182.

17 Glasstone, S., The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, Dept. of the Army Pamphlet No. 50-3, Headquarters Dept. of the Army, March 1977, p. 15 sec. 1.50.

18 Bronzan, J., “A Local, National and Worldwide Scourge”, New York Times, January 8, 2006.
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/01/08/nyregion/20060109_DIABETES_GRAPHIC.html

19 Sternglass, E.J., “Fallout and Reproduction of Ocean Fish Populations”, unpublished 1971.
http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/Fallout-Fish-Sternglass8oct71.htm

20 M. Segi (1965).

21 “M.I.N.D. Institute Study Confirms Autism Increase”, Press Release Oct. 17, 2002, Sacramento, California.
http://www.dds.ca.gov/Autism/MINDEpidemiologyStudy.htm

22 Dr. Sternglass was able to correlate State of California autism rates from pre-1945 to 2005, with NRC data on nuclear power generated electricity, personal communication June 2003.

23 Fowler, J.M., Fallout: A Study of Superbombs, Strontium 90, and Survival, Basic Books NY, 1960, p. 59 Fig. 11.

24 Nichols, B., “Breast cancer meeting fails people of Hunters Point, San Francisco, Marin County”, Indybay.org, January 26, 2006. http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/01/28/17987821.php

25 Williams, F., “On Cancer’s Trail”, High Country News, May 26, 2008. http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id=17708

26 Ibid., p.8.

27 Ibid., p.8.

28 Ibid.

29 Halliwell, B., Gutteridge, J., FREE RADICALS IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE 4th Edit., Oxford University Press (2007).

30 F. Williams, 2008, p.8

31 F. Williams, 2008, p.10

32 Raymond-Whish, S., L.P. Mayer, T. O’Neal, A. Martinez, M.A.Sellers, P.J. Christian et al, “Drinking Water with Uranium below the U.S. EPA Water Standard Causes Estrogen Receptor-Dependent Responses in Female Mice”, Environ. Health Perspect., Vol. 115:12, Dec. 2007, pp.1711-16. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2137136

33 US EPA Drinking Water Standard, Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 236/Dec. 7, 2000/ Rules and Regulations,
Table I-1: p. 76710.
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2000/December/Day-07/w30421.pdf

34 Former Livermore nuclear weapons program scientist, Marion Fulk, has calculated that 27.027 pCi equals 1 Bequerrel (1 radioactive disintegration/second).

35 S. Raymond-Whish, 2007, p.1.

36 Ibid.

37 F. Williams, 2008.

38 Halliwell, B., J. Gutteridge, Free Radicals in Biology and Medicine, 3rd Edit., Oxford Univ. Press (1999), p.526

39 Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power, Annual Water Quality Report 2007, Table I.
http://www.ladwp.com/ladwp/cms/ladwp010711.pdf

40 Moret, L., “The Queen’s Death Star: Depleted Uranium Measured in British Atmosphere from Battlefields in the Middle East”, Mindfully.org, Feb. 26, 2006.

http://www.rense.com/general69/deathstar.htm

Leuren Moret is an Environmental and Scientist Geoscientist. She is an expert on atmospheric dust, and how it moves and is transported around the world. She was an expert witness at the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan in Tokyo. She is an independent scientist and international expert on radiation and public health issues. She has worked internationally on radiation issues, educating citizens, the media, members of Parliaments and Congress and other officials. Leuren became a whistleblower in 1991 at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab after experiencing major science fraud on the Yucca Mountain Project. She is a former Environmental Commissioner for the City of Berkeley and President of Scientists of Indigenous People.
Tel: +(1) 510 845 3139

Email: leurenmoret@yahoo.com

See http://www.beyondtreason.org

CHEMTRAILS aka "STRATOSPHERIC AEROSOL GEOENGINEERING"

2011-05-06T21:18:00.000-07:00

http://geo-terrorism.blogspot.com/2011/05/chemtrails.html

The Consequences of Toxic Metals and Chemical Aerosols on Human Health

"Even with the increases in preventable illnesses, the issue that has not been linked or addressed –with what Clifford Carnicom rightly calls “aerosol crimes”– is the deterioration of cognitive function...it is obvious –to anyone who is paying attention– that many people are behaving oddly. While it may be considered “anecdotal” reporting, there are millions of people whose behavior is strange. There have been numerous times in just the past year when I have asked someone a question and received an answer that is totally unrelated. There have been more and more uncontrolled outbursts in public areas: someone “snaps” for no apparent reason. Violence levels are up."

Part I

By Dr. Ilya Sandra Perlingieri

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19047

Global Research, May 12, 2010

For decades, we have known that heavy metals and chemicals can cause grave physical harm. Going back to Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, we have known and been amply warned of the serious consequences of using or being exposed to these poisons in our daily activities. Thousands of these are well-documented carcinogens.

Building on Carson’s ground-breaking research, we also know that certain kinds of chemicals can and do disrupt human [and other animals’] entire immune system. Going back 30 years, researchers were investigating what became known as endocrine [hormone] disrupting chemicals and how they were affecting frogs [who sometimes had five legs or hermaphroditic characteristics], other aquatic animals, and mammals. These animals were the proverbial canaries in the coal mine. In another pioneering book, Our Stolen Future authors Dr. Theo Colburn, Dianne Dumanoski, and John Peterson Myers clearly demonstrate that 1 + 1 hormone-disrupting chemicals did not equal 2. Rather, in a nightmare of mathematical proportions, these poisons acted synergistically; and 1+1 could equal up to 1,600 times the original dose. We are also exposed to more than 100,000 chemicals regularly. Most of them have never been tested for human safety. So, almost nothing has been done to reduce human exposure to a myriad of hazardous chemicals. In fact, over the past decade, the Bush administration dismantled many environmental laws in existence for 30 years, to let corporations off the proverbial hook. [Just look at what’s unfolding in the Gulf with the BP oil spill.]

[SEE URL FOR ENTIRE ARTICLE]

ALSO POSTED AT

http://geo-terrorism.blogspot.com/2011/05/chemtrails.html

"MESSAGE FROM THE EARTH" MOUNT TITIROA NEW ZEALAND

2011-03-20T23:27:00.000-07:00

"We as human beings are only one species of life on a planet who is home to billions of life-forms, known and unknown. All life forms are unique; in the most fundamental ways we are no different or important than any other living being, except that our beliefs about ourselves have set us apart in our own minds, in thought and in action, and in the ability of our technological-industrial civilization to poison and exploit the planetary biosphere. Dominant belief paradigms like Darwinism and Judaeo-Christianity have laid the foundation for the widespread separation from and destruction of the natural world which we now experience and exacerbate. Indigenous peoples who live simply and in touch with nature are systematically decimated; their lands stolen, resources extracted, and the remnants become assimilated into the modern “way of life” centered on materialism, over-consumption, and the religion of capitalism. In the words of Joseph Wood Krutch,

“Man is one of those animals which is in danger from its too successul participation in the struggle for existence…from the standpoint of nature as a whole, he is both a threat to every other living thing, and therefore, a threat to himself also…he has become the tyrant of the Earth, the waster of its resources, the creator of the most prodigious imbalance in the natural order which has ever existed…”

We as human beings require the Earth for our existence; the Earth loves us as one of her children but does not require our existence. As we poison and destroy the Earth, we literally do this to ourselves. Our “artificial realities” imposed on the Earth and each other have supplanted our relationship with the natural world to such an extent that nature is no longer a primary element of consciousness.

One in two people globally now live in cities. No city of any size can possibly be a healthful place to live. Cities are high-density concentrations of all the most destructive things that people do, and are permeated with high levels of toxins, electromagnetic radiation, noise and socio-cultural malaise. People living in cities are far more vulnerable to natural and man-made disasters than people living in more natural and de-centralized conditions in the country or forest.

The Earth is a constantly changing and dynamic being, a living planet undergoing transformations just as her life-forms do; the Earth simultaneously provides an encompassing context for life as we know it, but is also itself embedded in larger cosmic contexts, most notably, the heliocosm, or local solar system, which is itself dynamic, transformative, and influenced by energies and movements at the galactic level.

Current science tells us that life itself has survived several “mass extinction events”; 99.9% of all life-forms that ever existed are now extinct. Life is not so much a specific life-form, for example, an individual organism or species, but more of a process.

Human life has been around long enough to have witnessed cosmic catastrophes that have left imprints in our collective psyche. The Earth experiences cyclical variations that result in changes in climate and magnetic fields, with resultant effects on life-forms.

Ancient/indigenous cultures have knowledge of some of these cycles and have long predicted the accelerated “Earth changes” now upon us. The influence of the existence of our global technological-industrial civilization is a significant factor as well in how these Earth changes affect us and the planet. The choices that we make, individually and collectively, on how we live and what we do with respect to the Earth also comprise a significant factor in the overall equation.

In addition to the direct manipulative and destructive effects of our technological civilization, including man’s warfare against himself, we may also be precipitating a higher degree of negative influence from the cosmic levels due to the disruption of natural systems at a planetary level. These negative influences could be termed “karmic” as well as “energetic” and “morphogenetic.”

At the human level, our overall desensitisation to the vibrations of nature puts us in a frequency domain out of harmony with the Earth and out of harmony with the incoming energetic shifts. Our decision-making is affected and in general we are not living in ways that are compatible with the long-term health or even existence of life as we know it, human or non-human. When we are out of touch with the subtle intelligence of nature, we are not able to respond to urgent warning signals, psychic “alarm bells” which may alert us to impending danger. When the local environment is saturated with electromagnetic radiation and chemical toxins, our personal auras are distorted, our resonance with the Earth’s magnetic field is blocked and we are out of synch with the real world in which life as we know it has always lived and evolved.

The Earth is not “punishing” us for doing what we are doing; we are punishing ourselves, and the Earth. The result is that we are making it vastly more difficult for ourselves to make it through this window of time successfully, for example, by continuing to live more and more extravagantly, consuming more and more resources, instead of pulling back on our damage to the Earth like indigenous elders and true “old school” environmental leaders have been telling us to for decades. In no way are we using our best or highest knowledge; the opposite is closer to the truth, as we plunge head-long into accelerating destructive habits and the refusal to renavigate our course to oblivion.

In the aftermath of the development of atomic weapons, Albert Einstein observed that “everything has changed except our ways of thinking.” This same insight can be applied to the effects of our entire military-industrial civilization: science-fiction level technologies are being deployed of on an undreamed-of scale, yet as individuals we cling to totally out-moded beliefs and values that make no sense in today’s world. We each are affected daily by the results of the scientific “revolution” yet most people could be classed as scientifically illiterate.

The unknowns with which we as humans are now confronted are enormous. The biggest unknowns lie within each of us, the mystery of why, for example, we steadfastly refuse to wake up out of the hypnotic trance called “normality” and to examine our “ways of life” that are literally paving the road to disaster.

It’s clear that political “leadership” and mass-media are only making matters worse by reinforcing the unquestioned status quo beliefs that increased materialism, capitalism and “technology” are the solutions to the problems we now face.

Nothing could be further from the truth. We each have the ability to take charge of our own lives if we allow ourselves to disengage from the “artificial realities” which have come to dominate our existence. We each have the ability to choose to simplify our lives, to live closer to nature, to live as if the Earth and our family of life, “mitakuye oyasin”, actually matter as fellow beings, not as “resources.”

If we each get a little closer to nature and lessen the damage we participate in through our daily routines and things we take for granted, a wellspring of healing and love is there just waiting for us to be aware of it, from the heart of the Earth herself, our true mother.

If we drink from the fountains of life we become more alive, and regain our sensitivity and responsiveness to the intelligence of nature and the Earth which is constantly guiding and informing us about what is happening in the local universe."

"“Environmental Effects of Pesticides On Public Health, Birds, and Other Organisms” David Pimentel

2011-02-13T18:50:00.000-08:00

NOTE FROM JEFF: This excellent article is from a small publication sent to us by the Fish and Wildlife Service in the USA which was created in honour of Rachel Carson, who used to work for them. Pimentel is a major and impartial global authority on pesticides and their affects on life and the biosphere.

“The major problem with the recommended use of pesticides is that so little actually reaches the target pests. The estimate is that less than 0.01% of the pesticides that are applied reaches the target pests…This, of course, means that 99.9% of the pesticide that is applied pollutes the environment… In the United States, as mentioned, more than 1 billion pounds of pesticides are applied and worldwide about 5 billion pounds are applied each year… Worldwide… 26 million people [are] poisoned and about 220,000 die each year…In addition, pesticides cause cancer and the estimate is that there are more than 10,000 cases of cancer that are the result of pesticide exposure…Pesticides also disrupt the endocrine, immune, and neurological responses in humans and other animals… Most pesticides applied to crops eventually end up in ground and/or surface water.”

“Environmental Effects of Pesticides On Public Health, Birds, and Other Organisms”

David Pimentel
Professor, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Cornell University

This is a tribute to Rachel Carson and her book, Silent Spring (1962). She had the foresight and knowledge to warn us against the ecological hazards of pesticides to public health and other organisms. Carson’s book was also instrumental in giving recognition to the growing field of science of ecology. For all of Carson’s many contributions, all of us are indebted.

From the time that the United States started using synthetic pesticides in 1945 to the time that Carson’s book was published, pesticide use increased about six fold (Pimentel, 1975). It took 10 years from the time that her book was published before DDT was banned in 1972. By the time that DDT was banned, pesticide use has increased ten-fold to about one billion pounds. The total quantity of pesticide in terms of pounds has not increased, however, the actual toxicity of pesticides has increased 10 to 20 times (Pimentel et al., 1993). The prime benefit with the new highly toxic pesticides that replaced DDT and similar chemicals is that the new toxicants to not persist for long periods of time in the environment. DDT persists in the soil for 30 to 50 years, whereas the newer insecticides persist only up to 3 months.

The major problem with the recommended use of pesticides is that so little actually reaches the target pests. The estimate is that less than 0.01% of the pesticides that are applied reaches the target pests (Pimentel and Levitan, 1986). This, of course, means that 99.9% of the pesticide that is applied pollutes the environment. The result is numerous birds, fish, and other species are killed or affected by the applied pesticides.

In this article, I will briefly review the environmental impacts of pesticides on public health, birds, and other organisms.

Human Pesticide Poisonings

In the United States, as mentioned, more than 1 billion pounds of pesticides are applied and worldwide about 5 billion pounds are applied each year (Pimentel and Hart, 2000). Some humans are directly exposed to the pesticide sprays, especially those people who apply pesticides. In addition, pesticides contaminate human food and water resources. For example, about 35% of the food that isi purchased has measurable amounts of pesticide residues, with 1% to 3% having residues that are above accepted tolerance level.

In the U.S., about 110,000 humans are poisoned with pesticides, with about 25 accidental deaths each year ( Benbrook, et al., 1996). Worldwide, the situation is far more serious with 26 million people poisoned and about 220,000 deaths each year (WHO, 1992). In addition, pesticides cause cancer and the estimate is that there are more than 10,000 cases of cancer that are the result of pesticide exposure (Pimentel & Hart, 2001). Pesticides also disrupt the endocrine, immune, and neurological responses in humans and other animals (Colborn et al., 1996). It is interesting that these disruptors tend to make male animals become female in structure. In addition, the production of sperm is greatly reduced or is zero.

Bird Poisonings

Like humans, birds are also poisoned by pesticides. Birds, like the canary in the coal mine, make excellent “indicator species.” In fact, the suggestion in the title of Rachel Carson’s book was that if we continued to apply DDT and other pesticides we would have a Silent Spring – without birds singing. Birds are poisoned by the direct exposure to pesticides, poisoned by feeding on contaminated prey, and have reduced growth and reproduction because of the exposure to sub-lethal doses of pesticides. In the U.S., approximately 3 pounds of pesticide are applied per acre per year on about 400 million acres (Pimental et al., 1993). Incidentally, home-owners apply about 8 pounds per acre per year, or nearly 3 times the pesticide damage that farmers apply per acre. The full extent of bird kills by pesticides is difficult to determine, because birds are secretive, camouflaged, highly mobile, and live in dense grass, shrubs, and trees.

It is assumed that the pesticides inflicted on birds occur on the 400 million acres of cropland that receives most of the pesticide, and the bird population is estimated to be 1.8 birds per acre of cropland (Boutin et al., 1999), then about 720 million birds are directly exposed to pesticides. If it is conservatively estimated that only 10% of the bird population is killed, then the total number of birds killed is approximately 72 million.

Therefore the conservative estimate is that about 72 million birds are killed each year because of direct exposure to pesticides. This 72 million birds does not include the nestlings lost because one or more parents is killed and/or that pesticide-contaminated insects and earthworms are brought to the nest and fed to the nestlings. The actual number of birds killed might be twice the 72 million figure.

The American bald eagle and other predatory birds suffered high mortalities because of DDT and other chlorinated insecticides. The bald eagle population declined primarily because of pesticides and was placed on the Federal endangered species list. After DDT and the other chlorinated insecticides were banned in 1972, it took nearly 30 years for the bird populations to recover. The American bald eagle was recently removed from the endangered species list (Millar, 1995).

Beneficial Natural Enemies

In both natural and agricultural eco-systems, a large number of species of predators and parasites control and limit the feeding pressure of plant-feeding arthropod populations (Pimentel, 1988). The biological control organisms help the eco-system remain “green” with foliage on trees, shrubs, and other plants. The beneficial parasites and predators help control pest arthropods in agricultural crops (Pimental et al., 1993).

In the U.S., I estimate that while pesticides provide approximately 10% of pest control, natural control provides about twice this amount of control (Pimentel & Hart, 2001). Many cultural controls such as crop rotation, soil and water management, fertilizer management, planting time, crop-plant density, trap crops, mechanical cultivation, and poly-culture provide additional benefits for pest control. Together, these non-chemical controls could be used effectively to reduce U.S. pesticide use by more than 50% without any reduction in crop yields and/or cosmetic standards (Pimentel et al, 1993). Confirmation that pesticide use in the U.S. could be reduced by 50% comes from the fact that Sweden reduced pesticide use by 50% from 1992 to 1997 and is now on a program to reduce pesticide use another 50% (Pimentel, 1997). In Indonesia, most of the pesticide was applied to rice. Dr. I.N. Oka was able to reduce pesticide use by 65% and increase rice yields by 12%. This illustrates what can be done, if pesticides are used judiciously.

Pesticides frequently have adverse impacts on beneficial natural enemies. For example, the following pests have reached outbreak levels following the destruction of natural enemies by pesticides: bollworm, tobacco budworm, cotton aphid, spider mites, and cotton loopers (Pimentel et al., 1993). Significant pest outbreaks also have occurred in other crops.

When outbreaks of pests occur because their natural enemies have been destroyed by pesticides, additional and usually more expensive and toxic pesticide treatments are required to sustain crop yields. It is estimated that the destruction of natural enemies by pesticides, the subsequent crop losses, and additional pesticide application cost the U.S. more than $500 million per year (Pimentel et al., 1993).

Pesticide Resistance

The widespread use of pesticides has resulted in the development of pesticide resistance in insect pests, plant pathogens, and weeds. The estimate is that more than 1,000 species of pests are now resistant to pesticides. As pesticide use increases, the number of pesticide-resistant pests explodes.

Increased pesticide resistance in pest populations frequently requires several additional applications of pesticides. The additional pesticide applications tend to compound the problem by increasing selection in the target pests. Despite numerous attempts to deal with this problem, pesticide resistance continues to develop at a rapid rate (Pimentel et al., 1993). Assuming a 10% loss in major crops that also receive heavy pesticide treatments in the U.S. because of resistance, total losses due to pesticide resistance are estimated to be about $1.4 billion per year (Pimentel et al., 1993).

Honey Bee and Wild Bee Poisonings

Honey bees and wild bees are vital to the pollination of about one-third of the crops in the U.S., especially fruits and vegetables. The benefits of bees for pollination are estimated to be about $40 billion per year if forages and pastures are included in the assessment (Pimentel et al., 1997). Because most insecticides and some fungicides and herbicides are toxic to bees, these pesticides have a major impact on both honey bee and wild bee populations (MacKenzie & Winston, 1989; Pimental et al., 1993).

For most agricultural crops, both yield and quality are enhanced by effective pollination. For example, adequate pollination of fruits and vegetables provide major benefits. With effective pollination, melon yields were increased 10% and quality was raised 25%, as measured by the dollar value of the crops (Pimentel et al., 1993).

Approximately 20% of all honey bee colonies are adversely affected by insecticides, and the yearly estimated loss from partial bee kills, reduced honey production, and the cost of moving colonies total about $25 million per year. Also, as a result of heavy pesticide use on certain crops, bee-keepers are excluded from 10 to 15 million acres of otherwise suitable apiary locations, and the yearly loss in potential honey production in these regions is about $27 million each year (Pimentel et al., 1993).

Based on the analysis of honey bee and pollination losses caused by insecticides, pollination losses attributed to pesticides are about 10% of the pollinated crops, at a yearly cost of about $200 million per year. The combined annual costs of reduced pollination and direct loss of honey bees due to insecticides can be estimated to be at about $320 million each year (Pimentel et al., 1993).

Ground and Surface Water Contamination

Most pesticides applied to crops eventually end up in ground and/or surface water. Aircraft application of pesticides is the most effective means of contaminating the environment. For instance, under ideal weather conditions only 50% of the spray from an aircraft or helicopter reaches the target acre, the remaining 50% drifts off to contaminate the environment. The current growing technology is the use of ULV (ultra low volume) spray technology. Because concentrated pesticide spray is applied, little or no water is added to the spray. Of course, this means breaking the pesticide spray into very small particles to obtain good coverage of the crop plants. The very small and lightweight droplets are more prone to drift. Thus, under ideal weather conditions, only 25% of the pesticide lands in the target areas and 75% drifts off into the environment (Pimentel et al., 1993).

Pesticide contamination of ground and surface waters is a serious concern in the U.S. One study showed that pesticide residues were found in 92% of Midwestern reservoirs (Solomon et al., 1996). Also in the Midwest, in Iowa herbicide residues were found in 75% of the wells sampled (Koplin, et al., 1998a). Also in the Midwest, 54% of the shallow ground water sites were found to be contaminated with pesticides (Koplin, et al., 1998b). In the Northeast, in the Hudson River Basin of New York State, pesticides were found in 69% of the well networks (Phillips, et al., 2000).

Approximately 60% of all drinking water comes from groundwater. Detectable levels of pesticides are found in about 15% of U.S. wells. If an adequate job were done in monitoring pesticide levels in groundwater, the cost would be about $1.3 billion per year (Nielson & Lee, 1987). Remember this is only monitoring but does nothing to correct the water contamination problem.

Conclusion

We currently spend about $8 billion each year in the recommended use of pesticides and this use of pesticides returns about $32 billion each year. However, these benefits do not include the environmental and public health costs of using pesticides. These costs are estimated to total about $9 billion per year.

If as has been done in Sweden and several other countries, including Norway, Denmark, Netherlands and Indonesia, and in the province of Ontario, pesticide use in the U.S. could be reduced by more than 50% without any reduction in crop yields or cosmetic standards. Reducing the recommended use of pesticides would significantly reduce the environmental and public health impacts of pesticides. It is long overdue that we reduce the use of pesticides and use them in a judicious manner that will benefit farmers, the environment, and the public.

References

Benbrook, C.M., Groth, E., Hoaaloran, J.M., Hansen, M.K., & Marquardt, S. (1996). Pest Management at the Crossroads, Yonkers, N.Y: Consumers Union

Boutin, C., Freemark, K.E., & Kirdk, D.E. (1999). “Spatial and temporal patterns of bird use of farmland in southern Ontario”, Canadian Field Naturalist. 113 (3). 430-460.

Carson, R. (1962). Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Co.

Colborn, T., Dumanoski, D., & Myers, J.P. (1996). Our Stolen Future: Are WE Threatening Our Fertility, Intelligence and Survival? New York: Dutton

Koplin, D.W., Thurman, E.M., & Linhart, S.W. (1998a) “The environmental occurrence of herbicides: the importance of degradates in ground water.” Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 35(3), Oct. 1998. 385-390

Koplin, D.W., Barbash, J.E. & Gilliom, R.J. (1998b). Environmental Science & Technology. 32(5) March 1, 1998, 558-566.

MacKenzie, K.E. & Winston, M.L. (1989). “Effects of sub-lethal exposure to diazinon on longevity and temporal division of labor in the honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Journal of Economic Entomology. 82(1), 75-82

Millar, J.G. (1995) “Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposal to reclassify the bald eagle in most of the lower 48 states.” Journal of Raptor Research. 29(1): 71

Nielson, E.G. & Lee, L.K. (1987). The Magnitude and Costs of Groundwater Contamination from Agricultural Chemicals: A National Perspective, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, National Resources Economics Division, Washington, D.C. ERS Staff Report, AGES870318

Phillips, P.J., Wall, G.R., & Ryan, C.M. (2000) “Pesticides in wells in agricultural and urban areas iin the Hudson River Basin” Northeastern Geology and Environmental Sciences 22(1), 1-9

Pimentel, D. (1975) Insects, Science and Society. New York: Academic Press

Pimentel, D. (1988) “Herbivore population feeding pressure on plant host: feedback evolution and host conservation”, Oikos, 53, 289-302

Pimentel, D., McLaughlin, L., Zepp, A., Lakitan, B., Kraus, T., Kleinman, P., Vancini, F., Roach, W.J., Graap, E., Keeton, W.S., & Selig, G. (1991) Environmental and Economic Impacts of Reducing U.S. Agricultural Pesticide Use. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press

Pimentel, D., Acquay, H., Biltonen, M., Rice, P., Silva, M., Nelson, J., Lipner, V., Giordano, S., Horowitz, A. & D’Amore, M. (1993) “Assessment of environmental and economic costs of pesticide use” in The Pesticide Question: Environment, Economics and Ethics (D. Pimentel & H. Lehman, eds)(pp. 47-88) New York: Chapman and Hall

Pimentel, D. & Hart, K. (2001) “Pesticide use: ethical, environmental, and public health implications” in New Dimensions in Bioethics: Science, Ethics and the Formulation of Public Policy (W. Galston & E. Shurr, eds)(pp. 79-108) Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers

Pimentel, D. & Levitan, L. (1986) “Pesticides: Amounts Applied and Amounts Reaching Pests” Bioscience, 36, 86-91

Solomon, K.R., Baker, D.B., Richards, R.P., Dixon, K.R., Klain, S.J., La Point, T.W., Kendall, R.J., Weisskopf, C.P., Giddings, J.M., Giesy, J.F., Hall, L.W., & Williams, W.M. (1996) “Ecological risk assessment of atrazine in North American surface waters”, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 15(1), 31-76.

WHO. (1992) Our Planet, Our Health: Report of the WHO Commission on Health and Environment. Geneva: World Health Organization

"Mankind has gone very far into an artificial world of his own creation. He has sought to insulate himself, in his cities of steel and concrete, from the realities of earth and water and the growing seed. Intoxicated with a sense of his own power, he seems to be going farther and farther into more experiments for the destruction of himself and his world… We have looked first at man with his vanities and greed and his problems of a day or a year; and then only, and from this biased point of view, we have looked outward at the earth he has inhabited so briefly and at the universe in which our earth is so minute a part. Yet these are the great realities, and against them we see our human problems in a different perspective…Here and there awareness is growing that man, far from being the overlord of all creation, is himself part of nature, subject to the same cosmic forces that control all other life. Man's future welfare and probably even his survival depend upon his learning to live in harmony, rather than in combat, with these forces….the more clearly we can focus our attention on the wonders and realities of the universe about us the less taste we shall have for the destruction of our race.” Rachel Carson

AGRICULTURE DEFENSE COALITION/ROSALIND PETERSON

2010-08-14T00:27:00.000-07:00

http://www.agriculturedefensecoalition.org/

Agriculture Defense Coalition (ADC)

The Agriculture Defense Coalition is dedicated to protecting agriculture, our water supplies, trees, and pollinators from a wide variety of experimental weather modification and atmospheric testing programs and experiments.

These experimental programs will cause a decline in agriculture crop production, exacerbate declines in tree health, and add toxic chemicals to our water supplies and soils. Just the use of salt particles to make clouds brighter will salt up drinking water in watersheds and cause increases in salt in drinking and agriculture water supplies. The continued use of salt particles in clouds will make productive crop producing soils unusable for agriculture and change fresh water to salt water. The results will be long-lasting and will affect trees, birds, mammals, fish, watersheds, pollinators, crop production, rivers and streams.

Toxic chemicals used in experimental atmospheric testing programs by the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and NASA are already showing up in drinking water samples across the United States. The California State Department of Heath, Drinking Water Division in Sacramento, CA, is the repository for all public drinking water tests results required by the State of California and the EPA. These tests showing increasing (spikes), levels of toxic chemicals used in atmospheric tests. (For More Information on these Tests Check the Website by Chemical Name or Go to the NASA Section or the U.S. Navy Section which list some of these Experiments.)

In the United States anyone may modify or mitigate your weather or climate without your consent. Any government agency, the military, state, county, city, private corporation, weather modification company or individual can modify your weather at any time. No public notification is required other than to report these programs to the United States Interior Department, NOAA. However, it has been learned that many programs are not reported to NOAA (National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration).

U.S. Senate Bill S601 (initiated by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison), could be passed by the U.S. Senate at any time. This bill funds experimental weather mitigation and modification programs, does not require congressional oversight, sets up a board of directors who essentially may take bribes and be in office for years, does not have public oversight, public notification or public consent requirements. This bill expands experimental weather modification and mitigation programs in the United States. (For More Information on this Topic and a Listing of Curent and Ongoing Weather Modification Programs from NOAA Check the Weather Modification Section of this Website.)

Upper atmospheric testing contintues without public oversight or consent and with little, if any, public notification. Now Global Geoengineering Plans to reduce the amount of direct sunlight reach the Earth (Solar Radiation Management), are beginning to be planned for our future. The use of toxic chemicals and other upper atmospheric particle releases are planned. There have been three hearings by the U.S. House of Representatives Science & Technology Committee since November 5, 2009. Testimony has only been from those, for the most part, promoting Geoengineering. (For More Information about the Negative Consequences of these Experiment Check the Geoengineering Section of this Website.)

The ADC also works to educate the public about a variety experimental programs that will negatively impact agriculture and our pollinators. This site is dedicated to providing educational information about current legislation, experimental programs, atmospheric geoengineering experiments, and other issues that will affect all of us...our water supplie, tree health, and our crop production. We hope that you will find this site a useful educational tool, research site, and a place to more clearly understand how experimental programs, which may or may not be voted upon by our elected officials, change our lives without our consent, debate or prior notification.

Respectfully,

Rosalind Peterson, President

ROSALIND PETERSON ON ALEX JONES SHOW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShrwWWodBek

OIL IN LOOP CURRENT/"INVISIBLE" OIL THREAT TO MARINE LIFE

2010-08-05T18:52:00.000-07:00

"...figuring out how much oil lies beneath the water's surface—something satellites can't show..'It's not a matter of predicting if it's going to be there or not,' Roffer said. "It's there.".

"Researchers...have discovered what initial tests show to be a wide area with elevated levels of dissolved hydrocarbons throughout the water column..'Our concern regarding these contaminants is they have the potential to be incorporated in the food web,' said David Hollander, a chemical oceanographer who is a lead investigator in the research mission.""

http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/2010/05/100518-gulf-mexico-oil-spill-loop-current-science-environment/

Gulf Oil Is in the Loop Current, Experts Say

Satellite pictures show oil snared by an eddy.

Christine Dell'Amore

National Geographic News

Published May 18, 2010

Part of an ongoing series on the environmental impacts of the Gulf oil spill.

Some oil from the Gulf of Mexico spill is "increasingly likely" to be dragged into a strong current that hugs Florida's coasts, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) officials said today.

But other experts say that the oil is already there—satellite images show oil caught up in one of the eddies, or powerful whorls, attached to the Loop Current, a high-speed stream that pulses north into the Gulf of Mexico and travels in a clockwise pattern toward Florida.

Images from the past few days show a "big, wide tongue" of oil reaching south from the main area of the spill, off the coast of Louisiana, said Nan Walker, director of Louisiana State University's Earth Scan Laboratory, in the School of the Coast and Environment.

Meanwhile, a particular eddy has intensified and expanded north in recent days. The images reveal that the eddy has snagged oil and pulled it southeastward 100 miles (about 160 kilometers), which means the crude is now circulating inside the turbulent waters.

The oil has also reached the point where the eddy connects to the Loop Current, Walker said. That means the oil is traveling eastward alongside the main stream of the Loop Current, and it's likely that it will continue flowing with the current to Florida, Walker said.

Mitchell Roffer, president of Roffer's Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service in West Melbourne, Florida, has also been tracking the oil spill by satellite.

"Several scientists from different organizations have seen the oil in the Loop Current" via "clear and dramatic" satellite pictures, Roffer said.

"Nowhere to Go But On the Beach"

According to Roffer, the northeast portion of the Loop Current has been moving eastward, closer to Tampa, on Florida's western coast (map). That means if an eddy sweeps the oil into the main current, it has "nowhere to go but on the beach," Roffer said.

Once in the Loop Current, oil can travel south and enter the Gulf Stream, a powerful ocean conveyor belt that carries warm water up the eastern seaboard.

Oil brought to Florida's east coast could then get pulled into inlets and harbors, where it would settle into the mangrove forests that are nurseries for many species of sea life, Roffer pointed out in early May. (See pictures of ten oil-threatened animals.)

On Monday the Coast Guard reported the discovery of 20 tar balls at Key West's Fort Zachary Taylor State Park. The sticky balls of congealed oil are currently being analyzed to determine if they came from the Gulf spill. (See pictures of tar balls and dead dolphins that washed up on Alabama beaches.)

But Roffer said it's unlikely that oil-contaminated Loop Current waters could have reached Key West in that short amount of time.

The current travels about 50 to 100 miles (80 to 160 kilometers) a day, so it would take roughly 13 days or more for oil to get from the site of the damaged Deepwater Horizon rig to Key West, LSU's Walker said.

Oil Lies Beneath?

Researchers from the University of South Florida will venture into the Loop Current via boats later this week to collect water samples and verify the oil's presence, according to the Associated Press.

Such testing is "absolutely" necessary, Roffer said, as is figuring out how much oil lies beneath the water's surface—something satellites can't show.

What the satellite pictures definitely reveal, he said, is that the time for modeling whether oil might get into the Loop Current is over.

"It's not a matter of predicting if it's going to be there or not," Roffer said. "It's there."

Invisible Oil Detected in Gulf

http://usfweb3.usf.edu/absolutenm/templates/?a=2362&z=31

USF’s R/V Weatherbird II Detects Invisible Hydrocarbons in Gulf Waters

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuKZEPmULs0&feature=player_embedded

By Vickie Chachere

St. Petersburg, Fla. (May 28, 2010) – Researchers aboard the University of South Florida’s R/V Weatherbird II conducting experiments in a previously unexplored region of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill have discovered what initial tests show to be a wide area with elevated levels of dissolved hydrocarbons throughout the water column, possibly indicating that a limb of an undersea oil plume has spread northeast toward the continental shelf.

(A June 7, 2010 report by CNN.com covers the findings of USF scientists and researchers. Click here to view the report.)

The Weatherbird II deployed a variety of instruments to detect the signature of hydrocarbons, which will undergo further testing to verify if it Deepwater Horizon oil. The probable concentration of dissolved hydrocarbons was highest at 400 meters below the surface.

"The ramification is that what we see at the surface is not the entire story," said Ernst Peebles, a biological oceanographer who was aboard the Weatherbird II and is one of the lead researchers on the project.

"This is not a big glob of oil drifting," he said. "These are layers. They show up on sonar as layers with clear water in between."

The discovery is significant because it verifies the presence of dissolved hydrocarbons in the deep recesses of the Gulf of Mexico that cannot be seen with the human eye but could eventually become a threat to marine life and habitats.

Samples and data gathered during the voyage are now undergoing additional testing. Given the "insidious" nature of dissolved hydrocarbons on marine environments, the discovery has scientists concerned.

The R/V Weatherbird II made its discovery on Tuesday afternoon while performing tests along a series of stations east and northeast of the collapsed Deepwater Horizon rig. The researchers returned to the area on Wednesday and performed a precise repeat of their experiments which produced the same results.

The researchers’ preliminary findings came from water sampling using three separate technologies: a CDOM Fluorometer, the ship’s sonar and gliders which are able to assess water conditions as they move through the water column.

“Our concern regarding these contaminants is they have the potential to be incorporated in the food web,” said David Hollander, a chemical oceanographer who is a lead investigator in the research mission.

“The first ecological impact of this spill is the effect on coastal habitats, including marshes, beaches and estuaries. The second threat to nature would be the impact on the food webs. That is what’s at risk.”

The R/V Weatherbird II’s journey in the gulf did have some bright findings for the state of Florida. Several stations where water testing was completed between the Loop Current and the Florida coast showed currently clean water, no weathered oil on the surface and no record of dissolved hydrocarbons at depth.

The researchers were investigating the area northeast of the leaking well after models created by USF’s Ocean Circulation Group Director Robert H. Weisberg indicated that oil plume from the spill might have spread underwater in that direction.

The underwater discovery of dissolved hydrocarbons came in area that is 35 kilometers northeast of the ruptured wellhead and in an area roughly south of Mobile, Alabama.

Scientists will need to conduct further tests to determine whether the suspected dissolved hydrocarbons were caused by dispersants or the emulsification of the oil as it moved through the water away from the leaking well.

The R/V Weatherbird II departed May 22 for the spill zone on the six-day mission. Seven scientists from USF and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commisson's research institute and six crew members are on board.

Video by USF News Intern Amy Mariani.

Underwater Lakes Of Oil From BP Spill Will Continue To Cover Gulf Beaches With Toxic Layer Of Invisible Oil For Months

http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2010/07/28/underwater-lakes-of-oil-from-bp-spill-will-continue-to-cover-gulf-beaches-with-toxic-layer-of-invisible-oil-for-months/

As Washington’s Blog reports BP Gulf Oil Spill Clean Up Workers are having a heard time finding crude floating on the surface because BP has used dispersants to sink the oil beneath the surface.

News headlines state that cleanup workers are having a hard time finding oil.

Sounds good, right?

Actually, if BP had let things run their course:

* Oil-skimming vessels could have sucked up most of the oil

* Booms would have stopped most of the oil from hitting the shore

* And oil-eating bacteria would have broken down most of the remaining oil

Instead, BP has used millions of gallons of dispersants to hide the oil by breaking it up, so it sinks beneath the surface.

That means that oil-skimming vessels can’t find it or suck it up.

But as Washington points out that doesn’t mean the oil has magically disappeared as the media is widely reporting.

Experts: Gulf of Mexico Oil is Breaking Up

The light crude began to deteriorate the moment it escaped at high pressure, and then it was zapped with dispersants to speed the process along. The oil that did make it to the ocean’s surface was broken up by 88-degree water, baked by 100-degree sun, eaten by microbes, and whipped apart by wind and waves.

To the contrary has I have pointed out several times as little as 2% of the oil released in the BP Gulf Oil spill may make it to the surface.

The study called Project “Deep Spill” was first a black eye for BP and the Federal Government when they claimed it didn’t make sense that there where huge plumes oil floating in the ambient currents beneath the surface of the sea because as they put it “oil floats”.

Project “Deep Spill” is now hitting them with another black eye and debunks the lie that the methane gas being released from the well is floating to the surface and not being absorbed into the sea.

The study analyzed a wide range of controlled releases at different depths below the sea surface of different types of oil found all over world to help better understand the flow of hydrocarbons released from a deepwater blowout.

One of the studies, called DeepBlow, released 10,000 barrels of oil per day at a depth of 800 meters which is less than half of the depth of the Deepwater Horizon blowout.

The basic findings of that study has been recreated by scientists from the University of North Carolina.

In their research the scientists simulated of the formation of the underwater oil plumes that are created during deepwater blowouts.

Watch The University of North Caroline Simulation Showing How Oil Released Underwater Forms Plumes

In particular the final report of Project “Deep Spill” found:

Only 2% of the oil released in a deepwater blowout may actually make it to the surface. That’s as little as 2% naturally without the use of dispersants. Add dispersants into the equation and it could be less then one percent of oil that makes it to the surface.
None of the methane released from the deepwater blowout made it to the surface. The study found that released natural gas may dissolve completely within the water column if it is released from a deep enough depth relative to the gas flow rate.From the study of the 800 meter release:
Echo sounders provided efficient tracking of oil and gas releases in the field and showed that the gas was completely dissolved before it could surface.

DeepBlow does not include hydrate kinetics, and hence, under hydrate forming conditions, the model predicts solid hydrate particles. Not only is the mass transfer from such particles slower than from gas bubbles, but also hydrate density is closer to that of water than that of natural gas, substantially reducing plume buoyancy.

The buoyant parts of the oil released in a deepwater blowout split from the main plume within the first 200 meters of release. Those buoyant parts, which represent only a small portion of the total amount of oil, turn into small droplets that float to the surface.Here is a graph from the study showing this process.

Deepwater oil release – Buoyancy particle separation graph

Here is an image that captures the separation process

Deepwater oil release – Buoyancy particle separation simulation

Within the first 100 to 200 meters from the source of the release the the majority of the oil loses its buoyancy and stops rising. This majority of the oil remains submerged in an underwater plume that is then carried away by subsurface currents.

Deepwater oil plumes lose buoyancy within the first few couple hundred meters from release

Oil plumes released from deepwater plumes can travel for long distances. It is uncertain if or where they will surface unless they are tracked.

Deepwater oil plumes travel for long distances

A snippet from the study:
Based on the models, the experimental studies described in Section 2 and, to a limited extent, the DeepSpill experiment described in Section 3, an accidental release of oil and/or natural gas obeys the following staged pattern. Near the release, oil, gas and entrained seawater rise as a coherent buoyant plume. A few meters above a point-source release, ambient conditions begin to affect the plume: crossflows cause the plume to deflect in the downstream direction and stratification retards the upward plume motion by entrainment of ambient seawater. For cases similar to the DeepSpill experiment, at a height of order 100 m, these ambient effects arrest the plume, and cause the entrained seawater and the dispersed phases to separate. The arrest takes the form of a completely bent over plume in the case of a strong crossflow, or a trap height and intrusion in the case of a stratification dominated plume. At this terminal level, there is rapid spreading, either by advection from the crossflow or gravitational collapse of the intrusion layer, and the oil is distributed over a wide area. Above this trapping zone, the oil rises as individual droplets.

Recently a NOAA expedition by the Gordon Hunter has confirmed that there are massive underwater lakes of oil floating beneath the surface of the Gulf of Mexico because as a top level whistle blower at the EPA points out the Federal Government has allowed BP to use toxic dispersants to save BP billions in fines.

7. Volume visualization

This report summarizes sensor data from AUV surveys conducted on June 2 – 3, when optical and chemical measurements indicated hydrocarbon detection in a plume-like feature below 1000 meters depth. Physical samples were acquired from this feature by ship and AUV sampling systems, and NOAA is managing shore-based laboratory analyses of these samples. When results from these analyses are available, more complete interpretation of the deep feature mapped by the AUV will be possible, including identification of chemical composition, concentration ranges, and source (wellhead or natural seafloor seep).

NOAA Confirms Huge Underwater Lakes Of Oil 1100 Meters Beneath Surface Of Gulf

The illustration above shows the deep plume-like feature mapped by the MBARI AUV Dorado on June 3, 2010. The data and methods used to describe this feature are summarized in this report. The brown hues of the feature represent the tea-like colors of Colored Dissolved Organic Matter (CDOM) because CDOM fluorometry was the basis for feature detection, data analysis and visualization.

As NOAA pointed out in the Brooks McCall report the oil trapped in these underwater lakes of oil will take months to surface.

Review of R/V Brooks McCall Data to Examine Subsurface Oil

Background

This report presents a preliminary analyses of data collected by the R/V Brooks McCall near the site of the Deepwater Horizon MC252 (DWH-MC252) wellhead between May 8 and May 25, 2010. During this timeframe the DWH-MC252 wellhead was releasing gas and oil in a turbulent mixture from the broken riser pipe attached to the well. Throughout the data collection period, a plume of oil and gas continually rose from the wellhead with some oil reaching the surface in about three hours. During the trip to the surface, it is expected that some of the oil dissolved in the water column and some formed droplets. The pressure that propelled the oil out of the wellhead was strong enough to cause some of the oil to form water-in-oil emulsion, or mousse.

Dispersing oil at depth, either naturally or chemically, has the effect of breaking up the oil into small droplets within the water column. Because dispersed oil droplets vary in both size and buoyancy, droplets of different sizes take different lengths of time to rise to the water’s surface. Very small droplets, less than about 100 μm in diameter, rise to the surface so slowly that ocean turbulence is likely strong enough to keep them mixed within the water column for at least several months.

So that means that even though there is no oil visible on the surface of the Gulf layers of toxic oil invisible to the naked eye will continue to wash up on Gulf beaches for months.

In fact an ABC 3 Wear TV Report confirms that while there is no longer visible oil washing up on Pensacola beach an invisible layer of toxic oil from the BP Gulf Oil Spill continues to cover Pensacola Beach.

PENSACOLA BEACH – There appears to be a lot less oil washing up on Pensacola Beach lately. But what about the oil you can’t see?

Dan Thomas joins us now with a Channel Three news investigation.

Retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Rip Kirby has spent the last few years studying Northwest Florida beaches.

He’s a Coastal Geologist with the University of South Florida.

When we first met him a few weeks ago, he showed us this… Sheets of oil under the sand, covered by the outgoing tide.

“Buried Tar and it’s constant.”
But lately, less oil has been washing up, and chances are if you dig today, you won’t see it.

Dan Thomas/dthomas@weartv.com: “The Escambia Health Department says if you can see oil, you should avoid contact with it and take a look out here on the Gulf Islands National Seashore there’s really no oil to be seen, that is until you use the UV light. When you shine it on the sand, just like a sheen on the water, it’s there.”

Through the filter of our camera, the sugar white sand becomes blue and what Kirby says is oil, becomes white.

Rip Kirby/USF Coastal Geologist: “So if you just literally, see the oil under neath it.”

Rip Kirby/USF Coastal Geologist: “This is from somebody’s tire track, it just fell off.”

Rip Kirby/USF Coastal Geologist: “The particular oil product that’s in here, was blown there.”

Rip Kirby/USF Coastal Geologist: “This is where people scrape their feet. See all the oil right there?”

The stuff was everywhere, a few inches into the sand, a light dusting on top and still more washing in.

Rip Kirby/USF Coastal Geologist: “There’s no contamination with the white light, only with the UV light. So during the day if some one came out here and sat in the sand, they’re going to get oil product on them just from sitting in the sand. The question becomes how long can they sit in the sand and have it touch their skin and have them lay on the sand with simply a cotton towel between them and this, breathing it before it becomes a toxic problem for them to deal with 20 years from now when they have some kind of cancer? The answer to that is, I don’t know.”

Rip Kirby/USF Coastal Geologist: “We haven’t seen and I’ve been looking for it for six weeks now and I have not seen a report that tells me the chemical constituents of the oil product that’s in the beach sand.”

We put a call in to BP… They say they’re working on getting us that report.
So far we haven’t seen it either.

WISE MARINE TOXICOLOGY LAB/GULF MISSION

2010-08-02T19:51:00.000-07:00

http://www.usm. maine.edu/ toxicology/ gulf/index. php

Click here for Voyage Logs

On April 20 of this year, the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded resulting in an uncontrolled release of oil into the ocean. Estimates now indicate that 1.5 million to 4.2 million gallons continue to flood into the Gulf on a daily basis totaling between 85.5 million and 239 million gallons with no end in sight. Superimposed on the threat of the oil, is the already more than one million gallons of toxic chemical dispersants that British Petroleum (BP) dumped into the Gulf to try and breakup the oil. These chemicals are being used in unprecedented amounts and in untested ways.

One major concern is the impact of this crisis on wildlife in the Gulf of Mexico. Marine mammals are a particular concern because they serve as sentinels for human health and because they are key species for both the ocean ecosystem and coastal economies. Marine mammals are at risk in this crisis. For example, there is a resident population of about 1,600 sperm whales in the Gulf of Mexico. This population is endangered, as all sperm whales are, but this population is considered to be at particular risk because the size of the group is so small. Losing even a few whales will have dramatic population effects because individual whales take a long time to reach sexual maturity and then only produce a few calves over their lifetimes. The Gulf Oil spill is a specific threat to these sperm whales, because they occupy deeper waters and thus are much closer to the greatest amount of oil. Moreover, studies show that prior to the explosion, many sperm whales spent a lot of time near the Deepwater Horizon oil rig. In fact, a dead sperm whale has recently been discovered near the oil spill though the cause of death has not yet been reported.

Oil can have immediate and long term impacts on whales and other marine mammals. Marine mammals breathe air and, thus, if they surface to breathe in an oil slick, they can inhale the oil resulting in respiratory issues. Even if they do not surface within the slick itself, they may inhale sufficient amounts of the strong fumes emanating from the slick that can render them unconscious and cause them to drown. Oil can contaminate their food, and if they eat it, they can experience digestive disorders and immune system effects. Oil can also have long term effects such as damaging their DNA. If this occurs, it can impair the whales’ ability to reproduce, thus, reducing the number of calves born. The impacts of oil on whale populations were seen after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. That oil decimated the killer whale population, reducing it by 40%. Experts predict that this population will ultimately go extinct.

The effects of dispersants on whales are unknown and have not been studied. They have also never been released into the environment in such massive quantities.

Toxicology is the study of how chemicals (like oil and chemical dispersants) poison people, plants and animals. Currently, there are no focused toxicology efforts to assess the impact of the oil crisis in the Gulf on whales and no efforts to conduct a similar study in Atlantic whales now before the oil arrives. Moreover, no government rapid response funds for university researchers have been allocated for toxicology studies. In fact, remarkably, many of the programs specifically exclude using these funds for toxicology studies. It is essential that we conduct whale toxicology studies in both the Atlantic Ocean (before the oil arrives and then again after it does) and in the Gulf of Mexico in both oiled and non-oiled areas. It will be up to us, the people, to fund these studies.

[CLICK ON LINK TO READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE]

OCEAN ALLIANCE/ODYSSEY REPORT

2010-08-02T19:45:00.000-07:00

www.oceanalliance.org/

SEE ALSO the Facebook group "A Race To Save Our Oceans" for up to the minute postings from the crew of the Odyssey...

Ocean Alliance Releases Voyage of the Odyssey Report

6/24/2010

The Voyage of the Odyssey Report is the scientific end-product of Ocean Alliance’s 5-year, round the world research expedition during which scientists and crew collected biopsy samples and other data from almost 1,000 sperm whales globally.

Conducted aboard Ocean Alliance’s research vessel Odyssey, a 93-foot ketch motor-sailor, the expedition collected research data from sperm whales while providing formal and informal education and conservation programs in the 118 ports in 22 countries that the Odyssey and crew visited.

Departing from San Diego and traveling 87,000 nautical miles before its return to Boston, the Voyage of the Odyssey was a remarkably successful expedition to collect the first-ever baseline data set on toxic contaminants throughout the world’s oceans by studying the sperm whale, a cosmopolitan whale species that sits atop the oceanic food chain.

To access the Executive Summary, click below:

http://www.oceanalliance.org/documents/OAVoyageoftheOdyssey-ExecutiveSummary.pdf

"TOXINS FOUND IN WHALES BODE ILL FOR HUMANS"

2010-08-02T19:38:00.000-07:00

http://tutunui-wananga.blogspot.com/2010/08/toxins-found-in-whales-bode-ill-for.html

Report: Toxins found in whales bode ill for humans

June 24, 2010 By ARTHUR MAX , Associated Press Writer

Enlarge

This undated file photo provided by by Michael Moore of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts shows a sperm whale. Levels of cadmium, aluminum, chromium, lead, silver, mercury and titanium together are the highest ever found in marine mammals, scientists who spent five years shooting nearly 1,000 sperm whales with tissue-sampling darts say, warning that the health of both ocean life and the people who consume seafood could be at risk. (AP Photo/PA, Michael Moore, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution)

(AP) -- Sperm whales feeding even in the most remote reaches of Earth's oceans have built up stunningly high levels of toxic and heavy metals, according to American scientists who say the findings spell danger not only for marine life but for the millions of humans who depend on seafood.

[SEE LINK FOR ENTIRE ARTICLE]

"CHEMICAL SOUP: BURDEN OF PROOF" Keri Molloy/Robert Mann

2010-04-13T03:05:00.000-07:00

Download the entire pdf's of this excellent article by Bay Chronicle editor Keri Molloy, with special contributions by Auckland biochemist Dr. Robert Mann...excerpts below.

http://www.mediafire.com/?tzdy2ygyhwe

http://www.mediafire.com/?0noinx22tjy

“ ‘Many unanswered scientific questions remain about health hazards from such chemicals, as they got registered after only perfunctory testing. Also, the routine copout ‘if used according to label’ should not be relied upon, as it is well known that use is often not in accord with instructions…

The burden of proof should not be forced onto the public to prove harm, but instead the precautionary principle should be applied to protect them from exposure to chemicals which are reasonably expected to cause serious types of damage, e.g., cancer or birth defects,’ he says.”

" ‘The Health Department has for decades acted as a protective front for the chemical industry, refusing to gather detailed statistics that could possibly reveal damage from xenochemicals spread around our environment.’ “ “

‘Some farming districts in New Zealand had higher densities of dioxin-containing 2, 4, 5-T aerial-sprayed upon them than the total attributable to Agent Orange (50:50 2, 4, 5-T/2, 4-D) in Viet Nam. This was done mainly in springtime. Aerial drift onto human dwellings in these sparsely populated areas, as well as into local towns, was unavoidable, given the lax methods of spraying. Drinking water collected on roofs could, as we pointed out in 1971, contain dangerous doses of dioxin.’ “

DR. THEO COLBORN on ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS

2010-04-13T03:00:00.000-07:00

Dr. Theo Colborn is the author of Our Stolen Future. The video below explains what endocrine disrupting substances are, how they work, and what the implications are for life as we now know it.

VIDEO “The Male Predicament”

http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/endocrine.videoplayer.php

“A Case for Revisiting the Safety of Pesticides: A Closer Look at Neurodevelopment” Dr. Theo Colborn

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2005/7940/7940.html

http://motherjones.com/politics/1998/03/theo-colborn

THEO COLBORN

A controversial scientist speaks on plastics, IQ, and the womb

— By Marilyn Berlin Snell

For her groundbreaking work on the effect everyday chemicals have on children, Theodora "Theo" Colborn has been called "the Rachel Carson of the '90s." Just as Carson was pilloried for her 1962 book Silent Spring, which warned of the dangers of the pesticide DDT, Colborn has been in the hot seat for her 1996 book Our Stolen Future (co-authored with Dianne Dumanoski and John Peterson Myers). Colborn's controversial message is that even low-dose exposures to many of the man-made chemicals found in common plastics, cleaning compounds, and cosmetics can affect newborn babies and developing fetuses, and can cause a range of problems, including low IQs, genital malformations, low sperm counts, and infertility.

Though scientists have voiced concerns for more than 25 years about the chemicals that disrupt the endocrine (or hormone-secreting) glands, researchers like Colborn are using a multidisciplinary approach—merging toxicology, endocrinology, embryology, and psychology—which has resulted in recent breakthroughs. Some critics have dismissed Colborn's work as fear-mongering pseudoscience. However, in a December 1997 report published by the National Institutes of Health, a researcher set out to review the studies cited in Our Stolen Future on lowered sperm counts and was surprised to find that sperm counts in Europe and the U.S. are even lower than Colborn had initially reported.

Now 70, Colborn raised four children and worked as both a pharmacist and a sheep rancher before her environmental concerns inspired her to go back to school. She received her doctorate in zoology at age 58 and is now a senior scientist at the World Wildlife Fund, where she directs its Wildlife and Contaminants Program.

Q: A recent NIH report showed that a number of organic pollutants and industrial chemicals act like hormones, such as estrogens that can either bring out feminine characteristics or work to counteract male hormones.

A: That's right.

Q: What are the implications of this?

A: What I have always said is that we are neutering the population—we are making females more masculine and we are making males more feminine. Up until day 56 from the day of conception you can't tell the sex of the fetus. The tissue that's there is going to eventually produce testicles or ovaries. Now, it takes just a slight tweak of a hormone to make it grow into a male tissue and become a testicle; a tweak in the other direction and it will become female tissue. What we're finding in fish and birds and even mammals now are ovotestes, or testes that have ovarian tissue in them.

We've uncovered a new series of subtle effects, which probably take place during embryonic and fetal development and which have long-term effects that keep an individual from reaching his or her full development.

Q: What kind of effects?

A: We're seeing an increase in hypospadias in boys. Hypospadias is a condition where the urethra doesn't come out the end of the penis. This particular developmental process starts on day 56 in the womb and ends on day 84.

Q: And it has nothing to do with genetic predisposition?

A: Absolutely not. But what can cause this condition is dioxin and DDT. And it's not just this type of hypospadias that is increasing but also the more severe form, where the end of the urethra actually comes out of the scrotum. It is almost impossible to repair surgically. Hypospadias and undescended testicles—another condition that results from males not fully developing in the womb—put young men at greater risk of developing testicular cancer, which is one of the fastest-growing cancers in the world, and is occurring in younger and younger men. Finally, males with hypospadias and undescended testicles always produce less sperm, which means they are more likely to have reproductive problems.

All of this should be taken into consideration when discussing pregnancy, but we often forget about the embryo. Even the federal government's new Children's Health Initiative talks about the child from the day it's born through to puberty. They don't talk about prenatal exposure. For some reason, there is this fear that if we talk about the embryo, people will mix it up with the abortion issue.

Q: You've determined that early exposure to toxins such as lead, PCBs, and dioxins is much more harmful than exposure later in life. Why?

A: During embryonic and fetal development, the brain isn't developed yet, so you've got an individual that has no feedback mechanism to protect itself. The fetus is still growing new tissue, constructing its nervous system, constructing elements of its immune system and the reproductive tract. When all your organs are formed and fully functioning, it takes a lot more to blow them away.

Q: The transfer of these endocrine-disrupting chemicals occurs not only during pregnancy but also during breast-feeding. According to Environmental Protection Agency estimates, an infant who is breast-fed for one year will receive between 4 and 12 percent of its total lifetime exposure to dioxins. Is breast-feeding doing more harm than good at this point?

A: We don't have enough evidence yet. But I'll tell you quite frankly that I would not want to have to make the decision myself today. It appears that breast-feeding strengthens a baby's immune system, but we also wonder how these chemicals might be interfering with immune competency in these children. So far, the benefits seem to outweigh the risks, but we just don't know.

Q: Is there a way to prove a causal relationship between endocrine-disrupting chemicals and developmental problems, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children?

A: We're never going to be able to prove a causal relationship of anything in a human being because we can't feed chemicals to human beings and wait for them to grow up. With ADHD it's very difficult because the syndrome is probably precipitated prenatally or in early infancy through something that interfered with the development of the brain. And the presence of that chemical in that individual later on in life may or may not indicate that it was the cause. Despite the fact that there are a lot of misdiagnosed kids, I still think ADHD is on the increase. And the evidence is almost overwhelming that these chemicals are involved.

Q: Yet in response to the data in your book, one conservative journal stated flatly that there was absolutely no conclusive evidence linking developmental problems and environmental chemicals.

A: That's not true. I'll just mention one new report by the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry that says a sizable proportion of our child population is being exposed to PCBs and their co-contaminants and that these chemicals are affecting our children's neurological and neuromuscular development.

Q: According to United Nations statistics, from 1950 to 1955 the global fertility rate was 5 children per woman; today it's estimated at 2.8. Many hail this decline and cite education, family planning, urbanization, and later marriage as the cause. Not much attention is paid to possible environmental factors.

A: Isn't that amazing? We first began to see a decline in 1970. That is about the time that the first set of individuals exposed in the womb were reaching reproductive age. I've said there's a connection all along, but no one wants to take chemicals into consideration.

Q: But surely we have to acknowledge social factors.

A: Of course. But environmental factors have been a lot more important than people realize. Even Paul Ehrlich [a Stanford University population biologist], who has focused on demographic shifts caused by women getting an education, which impacts fertility rates, is backing down. He has admitted now that we also have to include toxic chemicals in that demographic shift.

Q: How have corporations responded to your research?

A: Let's put it this way: Last night on television I saw a new advertisement on the wonders of plastic and how safe it makes the world for children. I know this is in direct response to our work. This is how they are spending their money: to create the image of motherhood and apple pie where they know they are going to be blasted as the science comes forward.

Q: Are any working with you?

A: The major chemical manufacturers—the petroleum processors, the plastics producers, and the pesticide manufacturers—are not. But the people they supply are. The people who actually produce and package the products that come into your home are very concerned, because they know in the end they are going to be held liable.

Q: But if endocrine-disrupting chemicals and their byproducts are so widely used in paper, solvents, and plastics, how do we avoid them?

A: We may have to do triage. We may need to decide that there are certain places where we are going to use some of these chemicals, like in airplanes, in bridges, or in construction materials that we're not directly exposed to in buildings. The fact is, some plastics are far more durable than steel. But we've got to get rid of the endocrine-disrupting chemicals used in children's toys, cosmetics, and cleaning compounds.

Q: Is the government doing more than just calling for more studies?

A: The EPA is moving very rapidly. But it can't do anything until we come up with recommendations for screening and testing methods.

However, every industry has already started testing its products. They're not waiting. I am convinced, and I have said it publicly, that industry is going to make a tremendous amount of change before the government ever even gets around to writing the first regulation. They are modifying products already.

Q: Which products?

A: Well, for example, you used to see "microwavable plastic wrap" in the supermarket. Now, most manufacturers just put "plastic wrap" on the box and give clear instructions for microwave use. [Studies have shown that chemicals leach out of some plastics when heated.]

Q: To a layperson, your warnings about the dangers of endocrine disrupters are compelling. But when the research is so heatedly contested, one can't help but question whether this isn't just another "technology is bad" campaign.

A: People should look to the scientific journals, but they should also look very carefully at where the scientists who research and write about this issue get their funding.

The issue is very confusing, in part, because there are a lot of industries involved—petroleum, chemical, pesticide, pharmaceutical. But then look at the scientists who are trying to demonstrate that endocrine disruption is real. Where do they get their money? Follow the money. That's what the public is going to have to do.

Q: But that means independent scientists are going to have to lead the way, even though they don't have funding resources.

A: The responsibility lies with the industries that have made the money on these products. They could easily afford to put up a collective $100 million per year to support the kind of research agenda we need. Industry has a moral responsibility to put that money into the pot. And, let's face it: They want a healthy population to which they can sell their products.

Q: Can we be realistic for a moment? Do you actually think industry is going to be willing to act in the public interest when there are so few examples of this ever happening?

A: That's exactly why I'm making this point. I am praying that we can find one or two really conscionable corporate executives who are willing to dedicate the rest of their lives to future generations. This is our only hope. This is why I'm doing this work. I pray I live long enough so that I can needle enough people to do it.

FLUORIDE DECEPTION/CANCER/CNS/HORMONE DISRUPTION

2010-04-13T02:54:00.000-07:00

VIDEO "The Fluoride Deception" Interview with Christopher Bryson

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7319752042352089988#

VIDEO "The Hidden Agenda: The Fluoride Deception" Interview with Dr. Monteith

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7984669833566646476#

http://www.naturalnews.com/027693_fluoride_cancer.html

Fluoride Causes Premature Births, Brain Degradation, Bone Loss, Cancer and Hormone Disruption

(NaturalNews) A recent study conducted by researchers from the State University of New York (SUNY) found that fluoride ingestion may be responsible for causing premature births. Presented to the American Public Health Association at its annual meeting, these findings ratchet up yet another detrimental consequence of ingesting this toxic poison that is added to most American municipal water supplies.

Sodium fluoride, a waste byproduct of the aluminum industry, is touted by most mainstream health bureaucracies as one of the greatest public health achievements ever discovered. The American Dental Association praises the medication of the public through fluoridated municipal water supplies, claiming that it has done wonders to prevent tooth decay. A simple investigation beyond the glaringly false rhetoric, however, reveals the dirty reality behind fluoride and the incredible harm it inflicts upon those who ingest it.

Contrary to popular belief, fluoride is not a natural substance; it is the byproduct of the aluminum and nuclear industries' use of fluorine gas. The Merck Index lists fluoride's primary use as rat and cockroach poison and it is a known carcinogen. It wasn't until the 1950s that the FDA was somehow convinced that the poison allegedly helped protect teeth.

Fluoride used in Nazi death camps
The first known instances of deliberate water fluoridation were in Nazi Germany ghettos and prison camps. Sodium fluoride was added to the human inmates' water to sterilize them and to cause them to become docile, subservient subjects willing to comply with orders.

Charles Perkins, a research chemist, wrote a letter to the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research in 1954 about fluoride. In it, he stated that repeated ingestion of low doses of fluoride over a long period of time will destroy the areas of the human brain that trigger resistance to tyranny and unlawful coercion and control.

Conditions caused by fluoride ingestion
Fluoride ingestion is responsible for causing thyroid dysfunction. The National Research Council (NRC) warns that ingestion of .01 - .03 mg/kg/day of fluoride, which is easily achieved by drinking fluoridated water, can severely inhibit proper thyroid function.

Other problems caused by fluoride include dental fluorosis, a disease of the teeth, weakening of bones and bone loss, bone cancer, kidney problems, and hormone disruption.

Many communities have succeeded in removing fluoride from their water supplies through local campaigns and ballot measures. Since medical professionals and organizations are increasingly becoming opposed to fluoride use, the momentum is stronger than ever to rid the nation's water supplies of toxic fluoride.

Sources:

Study Links Fluoride to Premature Births - The Batavian

About 'Fluoride' - Truth Every Mother Should Know - Greater Things

Fluoride Action Network

"The Unintended Consequences of Convenience: Why Organic Matters"

2010-04-13T02:46:00.000-07:00

An excellent and shockingly informative slide-show on pesticides.

“The Unintended Consequences of Convenience: Why Organic Matters”

www.rachelcarsonhomestead.org/Portals/0/Why%20Organic%20Matters.pdf

FOOD ADDITIVES/PERSERVATIVES

2010-04-13T02:44:00.000-07:00

Two links to scary information concerning what those 3-digit food additives really are...

ACIDS, ANTIOXIDANTS, MINERAL SALTS

http://mbm.net.au/health/296-385.htm

MISCELLANEOUS

http://mbm.net.au/health/900-1520.htm

WHO 'DR. FLU' UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR GROSS CONFLICT OF INTEREST

2009-12-11T18:54:00.000-08:00

NOTE FROM JEFF: thanks to William Engdahl for sending this recent expose. WHO ‘Dr Flu’ under investigation for gross conflict of interest

By F. William Engdahl author of Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order

8 December 2009

The man with the nickname “Dr Flu”, Professor Albert Osterhaus, of the Erasmus University in Rotterdam Holland has been named by Dutch media researchers as the person at the center of the worldwide Swine Flu H1N1 Influenza A 2009 pandemic hysteria. Not only is Osterhaus the connecting person in an international network that has been described as the Pharma Mafia, he is THE key advisor to WHO on influenza and is intimately positioned to personally profit from the billions of euros in vaccines allegedly aimed at H1N1.

Earlier this year the Second Chamber of the Netherlands Parliament undertook an investigation into alleged conflicts of interest and financial improprieties of the well-known Dr. Osterhaus. Outside of Holland and the Dutch media, the only note of the sensational investigation into Osterhaus’ business affairs came in a tiny note in the respected British magazine, Science.

Osterhaus's credentials and expertise in his field were not in question. What is in question, according to a short report published by the journal Science, are his links to corporate interests that stand to potentially profit from the swine flu pandemic. Science carried the following brief note in its October 16 2009 issue about Osterhaus:

"For the past 6 months, one could barely switch on the television in the Netherlands without seeing the face of famed virus hunter Albert Osterhaus talking about the swine flu pandemic. Or so it has seemed. Osterhaus, who runs an internationally renowned virus lab at Erasmus Medical Center, has been Mr. Flu. But last week, his reputation took a nosedive after it was alleged that he has been stoking pandemic fears to promote his own business interests in vaccine development.Last week, his reputation took a nosedive after it was alleged that he has been stoking pandemic fears to promote his own business interests in vaccine development. As Science went to press, the Dutch House of Representatives had even slated an emergency debate about the matter."

On November 3, 2009 it appeared that Osterhaus emerged with at least the damage somewhat under control. An updated Science blog noted, “The House of Representatives of the Netherlands today rejected a motion asking the government to sever all ties with virologist Albert Osterhaus of Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, who had been accused of conflicts of interest in his role as a government adviser. But Dutch health minister Ab Klink, meanwhile, announced a "Sunshine Act" compelling scientists to disclose their financial ties to companies.”

The Minister, Ab Klink, reportedly a personal friend of Osterhaus, subsequently issued a statement on the ministry’s website, claiming that Osterhaus was but one of many scientific advisers to the ministry on vaccines for H1N1, and that the Ministry “knew” about the financial interests of Osterhaus. Nothing out of the ordinary, merely pursuit of science and public health, so it seemed.

More careful investigation into the Osterhaus Affair suggests that the world-renowned Dutch Virologist may be at the very center of a multi-billion Euro pandemic fraud which has used human beings in effect as human guinea pigs with untested vaccines and in cases now emerging, resulting in deaths or severe bodily paralysis or injury.

The ‘Bird Shit Hoax’

Albert Osterhaus is no small fish. He stands at the global nexus of every major virus panic of the past decade from the mysterious SARS deaths in HongKong, where current WHO Director Margaret Chan got her start in her career as a local health official. According to his official bio at the European Commission, Osterhaus was engaged in April 2003, at the height of the panic over SARS (Severe Acquired Respiratory Syndrome) in investigation of the Hong Kong outbreak of respiratory illnesses. The EU report states, “he again showed his skill at moving fast to tackle a serious problem. Within three weeks he had proved that the disease was caused by a newly discovered coronavirus that resides in civet cats, other carnivorous animals or bats.”

Then Osterhaus moved on as SARS cases vanished from view, this time publicizing dangers of what he claimed was H5N1 Avian Flu. In 1997 he had already began sounding the alarm following the death in Hong Kong of a three-year-old who Osterhaus learned had had direct contact with birds. Osterhaus went into high gear lobbying across Holland and Europe claiming that a deadly new mutation of avian flu had jumped to humans and that drastic measures were required. He claimed to be the first scientist in the world to show that H5N1 could be transferred into humans.

In a BBC interview in October 2005 on the danger of Avian Flu, Osterhaus declared, “…if the virus manages indeed to, to mutate itself in such a way that it can transmit from human to human, then we have a completely different situation, we might be at the start of the pandemic.” He added, “there is a real chance that this virus could be trafficked by the birds all the way to Europe. There is a real risk, but nobody can estimate the risk at this moment, because we haven't done the experiments.” It never did manage to mutate, but he was ready to “do the experiments,” presumably for a hefty fee.

To bolster his frightening pandemic scenario, Osterhaus and his lab assistants in Rotterdam began assiduously assembling and freezing samples of, well, bird shit, in an attempt to build a more scientific argument. He claimed that at certain times of the year up to 30% of all European birds acted as carriers of the deadly avian virus, H5N1. He also claimed that farmers working with hens and chickens were then exposed. Osterhaus briefed journalists who dutifully noted his alarm. Politicians were alerted. He wrote papers proposing that the far away deaths in Asia from what he termed H5N1 were coming to Europe, presumably on the wongs or in the innards of deadly sick infected birds. He claimed that migratory birds were carrying the deadly new disease as far west as Rügen and Ukraine. He conveniently ignored the fact that birds do not migrate east to west but rather north to south.

Osterhaus’ Avian Flu alarm campaign really took off in 2003 when a Dutch veterinary doctor became ill and died. Osterhaus claimed the death was from H5N1. He convinced the Dutch government to order slaughter of millions of chickens. Yet no other infected persons died from the alleged H5N1. Osterhaus claimed that that was simply proof of the effectiveness of the preemptive slaughter campaign.

Osterhaus claimed that bird feces were the source, via air bombardment or droppings, onto populations and birds below. That was the vehicle for the spread of the deadly new Asian strain of H5N1 he insisted.

There was only one problem with the now voluminous frozen samples of diverse bird excrement he and his associated had collected and frozen at his institute. There was not one single confirmed example of H5N1 virus found in any of his samples. At a May 2006 Congress of the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), Osterhaus and his Erasmus colleagues were forced to admit that in testing 100,000 samples of their assiduously saved bird feces, they had discovered not one single case of H5N1 virus.

At a WHO conference in Verona in 2008 titled “Avian influenza at the Human-Animal Interface,” in a presentation to scientific colleagues undoubtedly less impressed by appeals to pandemic emotion than the non-scientific public, Osterhaus admitted that “A proper risk assessment of H5N1 as the cause of a new pandemic cannot be made with the currently available information.” By then, however, his sights were already firmly on other possible pandemic triggers to focus his vaccination activities.

Swine Flu and WHO corruption

When no mass wave of human deaths from Avian Flu materialized and after Roche, maker of Tamiflu and GlaxoSmithKline had banked billions of dollars in profits from worldwide government stockpiling of their dangerous and reportedly ineffective antiviral drugs, Tamiflu by Roche, and Relenza by GlaxoSmithKline, Osterhaus and other WHO advisers turned to other greener pastures.

By April 2009 their search seemed rewarded as La Gloria, a small Mexican village in Veracruz, reported a case of a small child ill with what had been diagnosed as “Swine Flu” or H1N1. With indecent haste the propaganda apparatus of the World Health Organization in Geneva went into gear with statements from the director-general Dr Margaret Chan, about a possible danger of a global pandemic.

Chan made such irresponsible statements as declaring “a public health emergency of international concern.” The further cases of outbreak at La Gloria Mexico were reported on one medical website as, “a ‘strange’ outbreak of acute respiratory infection, which led to bronchial pneumonia in some pediatric cases. According to a local resident, symptoms included fever, severe cough, and large amounts of phlegm.”

Notably those were symptoms which would make sense in terms of the proximity of one of the world’s largest pig industrial feeding concentrations at La Gloria owned by Smithfield Farms of the USA. Residents had picketed the Smithfield Farms site in Mexico for months complaining of severe respiratory problems from the fecal waste lagoons. That possible cause of the diseases in La Gloria apparently did not interest Osterhaus and his colleagues advising the WHO. The long-awaited “pandemic” that Osterhaus had predicted ever since his involvement with SARS in the Guandgong Province of China in 2003, was now finally at hand.

On June 11, 2009 Margaret Chan of WHO made the declaration of a Phase 6 “Pandemic Emergency” regarding the spread of H1N1 Influenza. Curiously in announcing it, she noted, “On present evidence, the overwhelming majority of patients experience mild symptoms and make a rapid and full recovery, often in the absence of any form of medical treatment.” She then added, ”Worldwide, the number of deaths is small…we do not expect to see a sudden and dramatic jump in the number of severe or fatal infections.”

It later was learned that Chan acted, following heated debates inside WHO, on the advice of the scientific advisory group of WHO, or SAGE, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts. One of the members of SAGE at the time and today was Dr. Albert “Mr Flu” Osterhaus.

Not only was Osterhaus in a key position to advocate the panic-inducing WHO “Pandemic emergency” declaration. He was also chairman of the leading private European Scientific Working group on Influenza (ESWI), which describes itself as a “multidisciplinary group of key opinion leaders in influenza [that] aims to combat the impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza.” Osterhaus’ ESWI is the vital link as they themselves describe it, “between the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva, the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin and the University of Connecticut, USA.”

What is more significant about the ESWI is that its work is entirely financed by the same pharma mafia companies that make billions on the pandemic emergency as governments around the world are compelled to buy and stockpile vaccines on declaration of a WHO Pandemic. The funders of ESWI include H1N1 vaccine maker Novartis, Tamiflu distributor, Hofmann-La Roche, Baxter Vaccines, MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur and others.

Not to lose the point, the world-leading virologist, official adviser on H1N1 to the governments of the UK and Holland, Dr Albert Osterhaus, head of the Department of Virology at the Erasmus Medical College of Rotterdam, also sat on the WHO’s elite SAGE and served as chairman at the same time of the pharma industry-sponsored ESWI, which in turn urged dramatic steps to vaccinate the world against the grave danger of a new Pandemic they insisted could rival the feared 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic.

The Wall Street bank, JP Morgan, estimated that in large part as a result of the WHO pandemic decision, the giant pharma firms that also finance Osterhaus’ ESWI work, stand to reap some €7.5 to €10 billion in profits.

A fellow member of WHO’s SAGE is Dr Frederick Hayden, of Britain’s Wellcome Trust and reportedly a close friend of Osterhaus. Hayden also receives money for “advisory” services from Roche and GlaxoSmithKline among other pharma giants involved in producing products related to the H1N1 panic.

Chairman of WHO’s SAGE is another British scientist, Prof. David Salisbury of the UK Department of Health. He also heads the WHO H1N1 Advisory Group. Salisbury is a robust defender of the pharma industry. He has been accused by UK health citizen health group One Click of covering up the proven links between vaccines and an explosive rise in infant autism as well as links between the vaccine Gardasil and palsy and even death.

Then on September 28, 2009 the same Salisbury stated, “There is a very clear view in the scientific community that there is no risk from the inclusion of Thiomersal.” The vaccine being used for H1N1 in Britain is primarily produced by GlaxoSmithKlilne. It contains the mercury preservative Thiomersol. Because of growing evidence that Thiomersol in vaccines might be related to autism in children in the United States, in 1999 the American Academy of Pediatrics and the US Public Health Service called for it to be removed from vaccines.

Yet another SAGE member at WHO with intimate financial ties to the vaccine makers that benefit from SAGE’s recommendations to WHO is Dr. Arnold Monto, a paid consultant to vaccine maker MedImmune, Glaxo and ViroPharma.

Even more, the meetings of the “independent” scientists of SAGE are attended by “observers” who include, yes, the very vaccine producers GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Baxter and company. One might ask if the SAGE are supposed to be the world’s leading experts on flu and vaccines, why they would ask the vaccine makers to sit in.

In the past decade the WHO, in order to boost funds at its disposal entered into what it calls “public private partnerships.” Instead of receiving its funds solely from member United Nations governments as its original purpose had been, WHO today receives almost double its normal UN budget in the form of grants and financial support from private industry. The industry? The very drug and vaccine makers who benefit from decisions like the June 2009 H1N1 Pandemic emergency declaration. As the main financiers of the WHO bureaucracy, naturally the Pharma Mafia and their friends receive what has been called “open door red carpet treatment” in Geneva.

In an interview with Der Spiegel magazine in Germany, epidemiologist Dr. Tom Jefferson of the Cochrane Collaboration, an organization of independent scientists evaluating all flu related studies, noted the implications of the privatization of WHO and the commercialization of health:

“…one of the extraordinary features of this influenza -- and the whole influenza saga -- is that there are some people who make predictions year after year, and they get worse and worse. None of them so far have come about, and these people are still there making these predictions. For example, what happened with the bird flu, which was supposed to kill us all? Nothing. But that doesn't stop these people from always making their predictions. Sometimes you get the feeling that there is a whole industry almost waiting for a pandemic to occur.

SPIEGEL: Who do you mean? The World Health Organization (WHO)?

Jefferson: The WHO and public health officials, virologists and the pharmaceutical companies. They've built this machine around the impending pandemic. And there's a lot of money involved, and influence, and careers, and entire institutions! And all it took was one of these influenza viruses to mutate to start the machine grinding...

When asked if the WHO had deliberately declared the Pandemic Emergency in order to create a huge market for H1N1 vaccines and drugs, Jefferson replied,

“Don't you think there's something noteworthy about the fact that the WHO has changed its definition of pandemic? The old definition was a new virus, which went around quickly, for which you didn't have immunity, and which created a high morbidity and mortality rate. Now the last two have been dropped, and that's how swine flu has been categorized as a pandemic.”

Conveniently enough, the WHO published the new Pandemic definition in April 2009 just in time to allow WHO, on advice of SAGE and others like Albert “Dr Flu” Osterhaus and David Salisbury, to declare the mild cases of flu dubbed H1N1 Influenza A to be declared Pandemic Emergency.

In a relevant footnote, the Washington Post on December 8 in an article on the severity, or lack of same, of the world H1N1 „pandemic“ reported that, “with the second wave of H1N1 infections having crested in the United States, leading epidemiologists are predicting that the pandemic could end up ranking as the mildest since modern medicine began documenting influenza outbreaks.”

Russian Parliamentarian and chairman of the Duma Health Committee, Igor Barinow has called on the Russian Representative to WHO in Geneva to order an official investigation into the growing evidence of massive corruption of the WHO by the pharmaceutical industry. “There are grave accusations of corruption within the WHO,” said Barinow. “An international commission of inquiry is urgently required.”

Endnotes:

Martin Enserink, "In Holland, the Public Face of Flu Takes a Hit", Science, 16 October 2009: Vol. 326. no. 5951, pp. 350 – 351; DOI: 10.1126/science.326_350b. Science, November 3, 2009, Roundup 11/3 The Brink Edition, accessed on http://blogs.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2009/ Article from Dutch, De Farma maffia Deel 1 Osterhaus BV, 28 november 2009, accessed in http://hetonderzoek.blogspot.com/2009/11/de-farma-maffia-deel1-osterhaus-bv.html
Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport, Financiële belangen Osterhaus waren bekend Nieuwsbericht, 30 september 2009, accessed in http://www.minvws.nl/nieuwsberichten/pg/2009/osterhaus.asp European Commission, „Research“, Dr Albert Osterhaus, accessed in http://ec.europa.eu/research/profiles/index_en.cfm?p=1_osterhaus Ibid. Jane Corbin, Interview with Dr Albert Osterhaus, BBC Panorama, 4 October, 2005. Karin Steinberger, "Vogelgrippe: Der Mann mit der Vogelperspektive, Seuddeutsche Zeitung", 20 October, 2005, accessed in www.seuddeutsche.de panorama/8/373818/text/ Ibid. Schweinegrippe—Geldgieriger Psychopath Auslöser der Pandemie?, accessed in http://polskaweb.eu/vater-der-neuen-grippen-wahrscheinlich-wahnsinnig-673756422645.html
Ab Osterhaus, External factors influencing H5N1 mutation/reassortment events with pandemic potential, OIE, 7-9 October 2008, Verona, Italy, accessed in http://www.oie.int/eng/info_ev/en_verone.htm WHO Health Advisory, April 2009, accessed in http://www.swine-flu-vaccine.info/ Biosurveillance, Swine Flu in Mexico- Timeline of Events, April 24, 2009, accessed in http://biosurveillance.typepad.com/biosurveillance/2009/04/swine-flu-in-mexico-timeline-of-events.html
Cited in Louise Voller, Kristian Villesen, Stærk lobbyisme bag WHO-beslutning om massevaccination , Information, Copenhagen, 15 November 2009 accessed in . http://www.information.dk/215355 Jane Bryant, et al, The One Click Group Response: Prof. David Salisbury Threatens Legal Action, 4 March, 2009, accessed in http://www.theoneclickgroup.co.uk/documents/vaccines/David%20Salisbury%20Threatens%20One%20Click.pdf
Prof. David Salisbury cited in, Swine flu vaccine to contain axed additive, London Evening Standard, 28 September 2009, accessed in . http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/printArticle.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=316888&version=1&template_id=38&parent_id=20 Louise Voller et al, op. Cit. Bert Ehgartner, Schwindel mit der Schweinegrippe Ist die Aufregung ein Coup der Pharmaindustrie? Accessed in http://www.profil.at/articles/0944/560/254615/schwindel-schweinegrippe-ist-aufregung-coup-pharmaindustrie
Tom Jefferson, Interview with Epidemiologist Tom Jefferson: 'A Whole Industry Is Waiting For A Pandemic' Der Spiegel, 21 July 2009, accessed in http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,637119,00.html Ibid. Louise Voller, Kristian Villesen, Mystisk ændring af WHO's definition af en pandemi,Copenhagen Information, 15 November 2009, accessed in http://www.information.dk/215341 Rob Stein, Flu Pandemic Could Be Mild, Washington Post, December 8, 2009. Polskanet, Russland fordert internationale Untersuchung, 5 December 2009, accessed in http://polskaweb.eu/vater-der-neuen-grippen-wahrscheinlich-wahnsinnig-673756422645.html

"THE EDGE OF THE SEA" (excerpts)

2009-11-22T12:55:00.000-08:00

"Contemplating the teeming life of the shore, we have an uneasy sense of the communication of some universal truth that lies just beyond our grasp. What is the message signalled by the hordes of diatoms, flashing their microscopic lights in the night sea?"

THE EDGE OF THE SEA (1955)

PREFACE

“When we go down to the low-tide line, we enter a world that is as old as the Earth itself – the primeval meeting place of the elements of earth and water, a place of compromise and conflict and eternal change. For us as living creatures it has special meaning as an area in or near which some entity that could be distinguished as life first drifted in shallow waters – reproducing, evolving, yielding that endless varied stream of living things that has surged through time and space to occupy the Earth.”

INTRODUCTION

“To understand the shore, it is not enough to catalog its life. Understanding comes only when, standing on a beach, we can sense the long rhythms of earth and sea that sculptured its land-forms and produced the rock and sand of which it is composed; when we can sense with the eye and ear of the mind the surge of life beating always at its shores – blindly, inexorably pressing for a foothold. True understanding demands intuitive comprehension of the whole…”

THE MARGINAL WORLD

“The edge of the sea is a strange and beautiful place. All through the long history of Earth it has been an area of unrest where waves have broken heavily against the land, where the tides have pressed forward over the continents, receded, and then returned… The shore has a dual nature, changing with the swing of the tides, belonging now to the land, now to the sea…

Only the most hardy and adaptable can survive in a region so mutable, yet the area between the tide lines is crowded with plants and animals. In this difficult world of the shore, life displays its enormous toughness and vitality by occupying almost every conceivable niche.

The shore is an ancient world, for as long as there has been an earth and sea there has been this place of the meeting of land and water. Yet it is a world that keeps alive the sense of continuing creation and of the relentless drive of life. Each time that I enter it, I gain some new awareness of its beauty and its deeper meanings, sensing that intricate fabric of life by which each creature is linked with another, and each with its surroundings…

There is a common thread that links these scenes and memories – the spectacle of life in all its varied manifestations as it has appeared, evolved, and sometimes died out. Underlying the beauty of the spectacle there is meaning and significance. It is the elusiveness of that meaning that haunts us, that sends us again and again into the natural world where the key to the riddle is hidden. It sends us back to the edge of the sea, where the drama of life played its first scene on Earth and perhaps even its prelude; where the forces of evolution are at work today, as they have been since the appearance of what we know as life; and where the spectacle of living creatures faced by the cosmic realities of their world is crystal clear.”

“Then in my thoughts these shores, so different in their nature and in the inhabitants they support, are made one by the unifying touch of the sea. For the differences I sense in this particular instant of time that is mine are but the differences of a moment, determined by our place in the stream of time and in the long rhythms of the sea. Once this rocky coast beneath me was a plain of sand; then the sea rose and found a new shore line. And again in some shadowy future the surf will have ground these rocks to sand and will have returned the coast to its earlier state. And so in my mind’s eye these coastal forms merge and blend in shifting, kaleidoscopic pattern in which there is no finality, no ultimate and fixed reality – earth becoming fluid as the sea itself.

On all these shores there are echoes of past and future: of the flow of time, obliterating yet containing all that has gone before; of the sea’s eternal rhythms – the tides, the beat of surf, the pressing rivers of the currents – shaping, changing, dominating; of the stream of life, flowing as inexorably as any ocean current, from past to unknown future. For as the shore configuration changes in the flow of time, the pattern of life changes, never static, never quite the same from year to year. Whenever the sea builds a new coast, waves of living creatures surge against it, seeking a foothold, establishing their colonies. And some come to perceive life as a force tangible as any of the physical realities of the sea, a force strong and purposeful, as incapable of being crushed or diverted from its ends as the rising tide.

Contemplating the teeming life of the shore, we have an uneasy sense of the communication of some universal truth that lies just beyond our grasp. What is the message signalled by the hordes of diatoms, flashing their microscopic lights in the night sea? What truth is expressed by the legions of barnacles, whitening the rocks with their habitations, each small creature within finding the necessities of its existence in the sweep of the surf? And what is the meaning of so tiny a being as the transparent wisp of protoplasm that is a sea lace, existing for some reason inscrutable to us – a reason that demands its presence by the trillion amid the rocks and weeds of the shore? The meaning haunts and ever eludes us, and in its very pursuit we approach the ultimate mystery of life itself.”

"APPLIED INFOTOXICOLOGY: POISON, 'PR' & DEPOPULATION" JEFF PHILLIPS

2009-11-13T17:25:00.000-08:00

NOTE FROM JEFF: Clyde Graf, a NZ film-maker recently sent me "Poisoning Paradise", a fantastic doco about the continuing widespread use of 1080, a 'super-toxin' pesticide banned in almost every country in the world except Australia and tiny New Zealand, who deploys 85% of the global supply annually. I've known about this for years, and I've heard about how it's far more dangerous than the government agencies acknowledge; it always seemed paradoxical at best that a country so committed to broadcasting its "clean and green" image around the world, particularly in the wake of Lord of the Rings, would engage in something so anti-life.

Their film shows the reality behind the facade of the propaganda: countless dead animals whose carcasses lie to decompose in streams, 1080 being dropped into major water-catchment areas for cities, pets dying in extended agony, sham "public hearings" being conducted, outright fraud in presenting 'scientific' information. But even all this is just the tip of the ice-berg.

I started looking into it myself and the results have been profound. I don't have the whole story, but in this four-part series I share with you plenty of raw material from which to draw your own conclusions. A lot of it is going to be quite unpleasant but PLEASE MAKE AN EFFORT TO EXPLORE THIS INFORMATION. It's literally a matter of life and death.

Some of the details may not be exact, but the reality of this scenario cannot be denied. The basic idea is that what we are experiencing with this paradoxical chemical bombardment around the world is not 'accidental', not just 'side-effects' from the negligence of industry and government.

In New Zealand it looks like it's not even the 1080 per se that's the main problem, but the bio-accumulation of highly toxic and mutagenic fluorine compounds; fluorine is the central active ingredient not only in 1080, but is also added to 61% of New Zealand's public water supplies, not to mention its presence in many toothpastes and approximately 20% of all prescription drugs.

It's also possible that the agencies so irresponsibly deploying these 'super-toxins' are being manipulated by higher centralized control mechanisms at work behind the scenes, from the level of the UN, for example, and that the reasons for its continued use have nothing to do with "possum control." And have you had a look at New Zealand cancer statistics lately?

The evidence is that a very dangerous hidden agenda is at work with all this, an agenda whose origins lie in pre-war Germany with the development of chemical warfare agents for the purpose of killing people, the financial power-elite funding this research, and their under-lying ideological goals of global totalitarianism and depopulation that are being implemented at this very moment in history. But check it out and form your own picture. For the latest on 1080 in New Zealand go to

www.enufisenuf.co.nz

“Applied Infotoxicology: Poison, “PR” and Depopulation”

“The basic story is that all through the 20th century extremely wealthy individuals and families have taken upon themselves the responsibility of ‘managing humanity’…to run a decades-long program of ‘eugenics,’ involving on-going research and development of a host of technologies designed to kill off people they don’t like, create a ‘master race’ of new genetically-engineered high-tech versions of themselves, and to convert the surviving human remnant into a class of robota, or slaves.”

“What we are faced with is not an occasional dose of poison which has accidentally got into some article of food, but a persistent and continuous poisoning of the whole human environment…”

Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, 1962

Don’t be afraid from what you are about to read. Allow this information to forge a new level of awareness and to inspire you to dig deeper, draw your own conclusions, create your own ‘big picture’ of what’s happening around and within us, wake up to the gravity of the situation. The chapter is as yet unfinished, the outcome is uncertain. We don’t even know it but WE are the authors of this unfolding drama…

What follows concerns what has to be the darkest dimension of modern history, a deeply disguised agenda of deliberate and premeditated, even scientifically designed and institutionally-enshrined genocide, aimed not at a “foreign enemy” but in reality at humanity as a whole. The breadth and depth of these programs stagger the imagination…for example, this is the true purpose behind the Pentagon (supposedly oriented due-south for purposes of black magic!)…and this is just from what we know; secrecy and deception are essential when depopulating the planet is the goal.

This agenda has been able to unfold pervasively because extreme care has been taken every step of the way to fool the public, to conceal the true nature of the modi operandi; because of the public’s lack of awareness coupled with a broad scientific illiteracy, generations of people have, for example, happily ingested toxic industrial waste in tooth-paste and drinking water, taken drugs actually designed to create disease, dropped “humane” pesticides into forests and eaten food sprayed with mutagenic chemicals…all the while thinking it was “safe”…because “experts” said so.

Our true human nature of being trusting beings has been grotesquely and repeatedly violated by the tiny “power elite” who want to “rule the world.” If we don’t soon wake up, however, the game will be over. Moreso today than ever before, things are not what they seem to be. Almost every high-level leader or official, every public event, every artifact of ‘news’ is in reality a fictitious creation, a methodically fabricated toxon, or ‘poison arrow’ delivered by the hugest and most pervasive weapons-system ever devised, mass-communication.

The target is YOU. Consider what I now share with you as a sort of cognitive antigen to the barrage of ‘social engineering’ or ‘infotoxin’ that constantly bombards us. What I am sharing with you now, as terrifying as it is, helps to explain a lot of what is happening in today’s world…the world in which we all live. The only world we know that has life. Planet Earth.

The picture that is emerging involves multiple layers that have been unfolding together for over one hundred years. On one hand we see the growth of industrial civilization and the development of science and technology, and are concerned about unintended “side-effects” on the health of our planet and ourselves. On the other hand, however, we can now see that most of these “side-effects” which are doing so much damage to our health, are NOT “side-effects” at all but deliberately implemented weapons of disease and depopulation.

The basic story is that all through the 20th century extremely wealthy individuals and families have taken upon themselves the responsibility of “managing humanity” as they see fit. Hiding their wealth in private “foundations” and using it to create organizations and to fund research in many inter-locking areas, these “power elites” have worked hand-in-hand with each other not only to create world wars, subvert the educational system, and rewrite history as they’d like it to be, but, most importantly, to run a decades-long program of “eugenics,” involving on-going research and development of a host of technologies designed to kill off people they don’t like, create a “master race” of new genetically engineered high-tech versions of themselves, and to turn the surviving human remnant into a class of robota, or slaves.

My goal here is to let the information speak for itself, so that you can form your own exact picture of what’s going on; some of this material might seem shocking or even completely incredible in the literal sense…but the sources are solid.

When Rachel Carson says that “What we are faced with is not an occasional dose of poison which has accidentally got into some article of food, but a persistent and continuous poisoning of the whole human environment…” and “…most pesticides meet the criterion of the perfect carcinogen too well for comfort” I think we can be fairly sure that what she’s telling us is that it hasn’t happened by accident.

In 1963 she was invited to meet with president John F. Kennedy after he read Silent Spring, her 1962 book, now credited with sparking the global environmental movement. Below are excerpts from his 1961 address:

"The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and secret proceedings…there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment…For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed."

It sounds as if JFK were describing an “invisible government,” one of whose primary goals was global depopulation?

Indeed, William Engdahl reveals that depopulation has been one of the primary underlying purposes of U.S. foreign policy for decades. In these excerpts from “The Brotherhood of Death” (chapter 6 of Seeds of Destruction which William has authorized me to post) you will find shocking revelations concerning the origin of “eugenics” research, what their goals all along have been, the diabolically “intelligent” nature of their instruments of disease and mass-murder, and how these programs have constantly mutated to conceal their true purpose...coming to fruition as I write this now.

The host of “fear memes” foisted on the unwary public in recent years, including “Islamic terrorists”, “swine flu”, “global warming” and “over-population” all of which have been clearly demonstrated to be fabrications or instances of “reality engineering” done by “public relations” apparati, share a common purpose: to convince the public that a “one world government” is the “solution” to all these “problems.” It IS…a “final solution.”

The “global warming” thing in particular in recent weeks has been solidly proven to be a hoax designed to justify control over “life activity” in the form of “carbon emissions.” Rough translation: depopulation.

This story is breaking around the world as I write these words now.

Here are three links that explain clearly what’s going on:

Apocalypse? No! - Why there is no global warming crisis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W-BePJOLbw&feature=related

Glenn Beck interviews Lord Moncton on Soviet Style take-over of America
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NIN-PqcsN0

Lord Moncton on Global Warming
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFJKBgDu1LY

2GB Radio: Alan Jones interview with Lord Mockton on the Copenhagen Summit
http://2gb.com.au/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=4998

The upcoming Kyoto II meeting in Copenhagen is apparently a huge effort by the “invisible government” to get the nations of the world to sign its “treaty” which will dissolve all national sovereignty and create a true “one world government” whose first goal, once empowered, will be the fulfilment of its global depopulation agenda. It’s my belief that many if not all ‘world leaders’ today have been put where they are in order to guarantee a smooth “signing away” of their respective country’s identity and freedom.

Not coincidentally, the Codex Alimentarius, an Orwellian “food safety” program whose directives resemble a Nazi eugenics wish-list, is scheduled to come into effect on 31 December of 2009. And THAT’S no coincidence, either!

I’ve been following the “depopulation agenda” for a while now after realizing the true nature of “depleted uranium.” That Rachel Carson knew the underlying reality is apparent, and William Engdahl has filled in the “who’s who” blanks.

For many years I’ve been aware of the “ecoxymoronic” use of 1080, sodium monofluoroacetate…a mutagenic ‘super-toxin’ banned in almost every country…here in “clean and green” New Zealand.

Film-maker and activist Clyde Graf sent me his recent film “Poisoning Paradise” last week and a lot of things came into focus. The active ingredient in 1080 is fluorine…the “grandfather” of toxic chemicals and industrial waste products, and the twin brother of uranium in lethality.

The main question raised in this film is, why is a substance known to be deadly to all vertebrate life, even to be an endocrine disruptor in human beings, being used in ever-increasing quantities and in such a small country? Why is something so carcinogenic that it’s banned in almost every country being deployed and endangering the health of all larger life-forms, supposedly “just” to kill possums?

FOR MORE INFO ON THE NZ SITUATION:
www.thegrafboys.org

WATCH THE FILM HERE:
http://ziln.co.nz/

AND TO SEE THEIR PREVIOUS FILM “SHADOW OF DOUBT”:
http://www.kaka1080.co.nz/links.html

When you step back and take a long hard look at all this, and consider that it’s actually impossible for valid research on the health effects of mutagens and carcinogens ever to have been done because it would take several generations of human life to do it, it becomes quite clear that WE, all the people of the Earth, ARE the experiment. We ARE the guinea pigs. We ARE the target, the “enemy.”

Ultimately, this is all stuff being done TO people BY people. People are doing it, people can stop doing it. But before it can be stopped, we must become aware that it is happening. We have to penetrate the walls of public relations deception and ‘perception management’ and inform ourselves about the reality of the situation. We must stop uncritically assimilating the “infotoxins” being sold to us as truth! We must “regain our brains.”

THE ONLY SAFE POISON IS NO POISON!

Industrial civilization is really a euphemism for “war on nature.” We are just one species of life who for reasons that remain unclear has run amuck. My belief is that this isn’t our “nature” but the result of a “season” of time we are going through embedded within a much larger cosmic context of constantly changing energies and influences. As a land-based species, we could be subject to a pattern of permanent psychic mutation.

Regardless of why it’s happening, the net result is that it looks like that for the time being, Mother Nature is using us to take ourselves out.

The Hopi, a peaceful native American tribe in southern Arizona, have prophecies going back thousands of years describing what they call koyaanisqatsi, “life out of balance.” According to them, the Earth periodically cleanses herself of all that is out of balance with the fabric of life. The Hopis call it the “day of purification.”

“A gourd of ash will be thrown from the sky which will burn the land and boil the oceans.” This prophecy was seen to be fulfilled by the advent of atomic weapons.

“If we dig precious things from the land, we will invite disaster.” This seems to be where the problems really started with our self-destruction…coal was the first substance to be systematically extracted on a large scale, and it was from coal tar that the science of organic chemistry was born; petroleum has fuelled the mega-machine since it was discovered, and given birth to legion toxic chemicals, drugs, wastes and by-products. Little is known or even can be known about the ultimate effects of the anthropogenic toxo-cosm in which we now find ourselves; but it’s pretty certain that the people of the distant future, if they exist, won’t look anything like us!

Interestingly, when uranium was mined for the first atomic bombs, much of it was dug from Black Mesa, a sacred area on the Hopi reservation.

“If we do not do the impossible, we may be faced with the unthinkable.”

JEFF PHILLIPS NEW ZEALAND NOVEMBER 2009

FOR FURTHER READING:

Cross-currents: The Perils of Electro-pollution, Robert Becker Controlling the Human Mind, Dr. Nick Begich
The Fluoride Deception, Christopher Bryson
Silent Spring, Rachel Carson
Our Stolen Future, Theo Colborn
Seeds of Destruction, William Engdahl
The Hundred-Year Lie, Randall Fitzgerald
The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight, Thom Hartmann
Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television, Jerry Mander
The Science of Coercion, Christopher Simpson

film Koyaanisqatsi (Ron Fricke, 1985)

P.S. Some people have questioned the reality of the global depopulation agenda by asking, in reference to reports of DU, or “depleted uranium” blowing in the wind to the four corners of the Earth…”But why would these people poison THEMSELVES, too?” Good question? David Icke would reply, “They aren’t people.” But I think there are several more logical reasons, for example, that they, the elite, have access to special anti-radiation/anti-cancer drugs (which they believe will work!); they eat only specially-grown foods; they are involved in the development of genetic nano-technologies which they believe will render the current biological human obsolete, and will consciously mutate into machines. If you think I’m making this up, just check out Ray Kurzweil’s work. Plus, they all have ready-and-waiting berths in doomsday bunkers and underground complexes around the world. Finally, I think they’re all just stark raving mad from generations of inbreeding. We’re just been taken in by their widely disseminated hallucinations. It’s high time we come up with some REAL ideas of our own, that relate to loving life rather than destroying it!

"I AM AWARE" is a piece of experimental music I recorded in 2002. It has Jimi Hendrix from Woodstock and Burt Lancaster from the film Judgment at Nuremberg and is a creative statement on the spirit of eugenics, depopulation and ecocide. Check it out at

http://www.regainyourbrain.org/

and click on Jimi...

This site is a prime resource for the newly-born discipline of infotoxicology, or the study of the poisoning of our mental environment.

THIS WORK IS DEDICATED TO THE SPIRITS OF RACHEL CARSON AND LIFE ON EARTH

SILENT SPRING, RACHEL CARSON (1962) [excerpts]

2009-11-13T17:07:00.000-08:00

“These sprays, dusts, and aerosols are now applied almost universally to farms, gardens, forests, and homes—nonselective chemicals that have the power to kill every insect, the "good" and the "bad," to still the song of birds and the leaping of fish in the streams, to coat the leaves with a deadly film, and to linger on in the soil—all this though the intended target may be only a few weeds or insects. Can anyone believe it is possible to lay down such a barrage of poisons on the surface of the earth without making it unfit for all life? They should not be called ‘insecticides,’ but ‘biocides. “

SILENT SPRING, Rachel Carson, 1962 (excerpts)

THE OBLIGATION TO ENDURE (chapter 3)

The history of life on earth has been a history of interaction between living things and their surroundings. To a large extent, the physical form and the habits of the earth's vegetation and its animal life have been molded by the environment. Considering the whole span of earthly time, the opposite effect, in which life actually modifies its surroundings, has been relatively slight. Only within the moment of time represented by the present century has one species—man—acquired significant power to alter the nature of his world.

During the past quarter century this power has not only increased to one of disturbing magnitude but it has changed in character. The most alarming of all man's assaults upon the environment is the contamination of air, earth, rivers, and sea with dangerous and even lethal materials. This pollution is for the most part irrecoverable; the chain of evil it initiates not only in the world that must support life but in living tissues is for the most part irreversible. In this now universal contamination of the environment, chemicals are the sinister and little-recognized partners of radiation in changing the very nature of the world—the very nature of its life. Strontium 90, released through nuclear explosions into the air, comes to the earth in rain or drifts down as fallout, lodges in soil, enters into the grass or corn or wheat grown there, and in time takes up its abode in the bones of a human being, there to remain until his death. Similarly, chemicals sprayed on croplands or forests or gardens lie long in the soil, entering into living organisms, passing from one to another in a chain of poisoning and death. Or they pass mysteriously by underground streams until they emerge and, through the alchemy of air and sunlight, combine into new forms that kill vegetation, sicken cattle, and work unknown harm on those who drink from once pure wells. As Albert Schweitzer has said, "Man can hardly even recognize the devils of his own creation."

It took hundreds of millions of years to produce the life that now inhabits the earth—eons of time in which that developing and evolving and diversifying life reached a state of adjustment and balance with its surroundings. The environment, rigorously shaping and directing the life it supported, contained elements that were hostile as well as supporting. Certain rocks gave out dangerous radiation, even within the light of the sun, from which all life draws its energy, there were short-wave radiations with power to injure. Given time—time not in years but in millennia—life adjusts, and a balance has been reached. For time is the essential ingredient; but in the modern world there is no time.

The rapidity of change and the speed with which new situations are created follow the impetuous and heedless pace of man rather than the deliberate pace of nature. Radiation is no longer merely the background radiation of rocks, the bombardment of cosmic rays, the ultraviolet of the sun that have existed before there was any life on earth; radiation is now the unnatural creation of man's tampering with the atom. The chemicals to which life is asked to make its adjustment are no longer merely the calcium and silica and copper and all the rest of the minerals washed out of the rocks and carried in rivers to the sea; they are the synthetic creations of man's inventive mind, brewed in his laboratories, and having no counterparts in nature.

To adjust to these chemicals would require time on the scale that is nature's; it would require not merely the years of a man's life but the life of generations. And even this, were it by some miracle possible, would be futile, for the new chemicals come from our laboratories in an endless stream; almost five hundred annually find their way into actual use in the United States alone. The figure is staggering and its implications are not easily grasped—500 new chemicals to which the bodies of men and animals are required somehow to adapt each year, chemicals totally outside the limits of biologic experience.

Among them are many that are used in man's war against nature. Since the mid-1940's over 200 basic chemicals have been created for use in killing insects, weeds, rodents, and other organisms described in the modern vernacular as "pests"; and they are sold under several thousand different brand names.

These sprays, dusts, and aerosols are now applied almost universally to farms, gardens, forests, and homes—nonselective chemicals that have the power to kill every insect, the "good" and the "bad," to still the song of birds and the leaping of fish in the streams, to coat the leaves with a deadly film, and to linger on in the soil—all this though the intended target may be only a few weeds or insects. Can anyone believe it is possible to lay down such a barrage of poisons on the surface of the earth without making it unfit for all life? They should not be called "insecticides," but "biocides."

The whole process of spraying seems caught up in an endless spiral. Since DDT was released for civilian use, a process of escalation has been going on in which ever more toxic materials must be found. This has happened because insects, in a triumphant vindication of Darwin's principle of the survival of the fittest, have evolved super races immune to the particular insecticide used, hence a deadlier one has always to be developed—and then a deadlier one than that....Thus the chemical war is never won, and all life is caught in its violent crossfire.

Some would-be architects of our future look towards a time when it will be possible to alter the human germ plasm by design. But we may easily be doing the same now by inadvertence, for many chemicals, like radiation, bring about gene mutations. It it ironic to think that man might determine his own future by something so seemingly trivial as the choice of an insect spray.

All this has been risked – for what? Future historians may well be amazed by our distorted sense of proportion. How could intelligent beings seek to control a few unwanted species by a method that contaminated the whole environment and brought the threat of disease and death even to their own kind? Yet this is precisely what we have done…

ELIXIRS OF DEATH (chapter four)

For the first time in the history of of the world, every human being is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the moment of conception until death. In the less than two decades of their use, the synthetic pesticides have been so thoroughly distributed throughout the animate and inanimate world that they occur virtually everywhere. They have been recovered from most of the major river systems and even from streams of ground-water flowing unseen through the earth. Residues of these chemicals linger in soil to which they have been applied a dozen years before. They have entered and lodged in the bodies of fish, birds, reptiles and domestic and wild animals so universally that scientists carrying on animal experiments find it almost impossible to locate subjects free from such contamination. They have been found in fish in remote mountain lakes, in earthworms burrowing in soil, in the eggs of birds – and in man himself. For these chemicals are now stored in the bodies of the vast majority of human beings, regardless of age. They occur in the mother’s milk, and probably in the tissues of the unborn child.

All this has come about because of the sudden rise and prodigious growth of an industry for the production of man-made or synthetic chemicals with insecticidal properties. This industry is a child of the Second World War. In the course of developing agents of chemical warfare, some of the chemicals created in the laboratory were found to be lethal to insects. The discovery did not come by chance: insects were widely used to test chemicals as agents of death for man.

The result has been a seemingly endless stream of synthetic insecticides. In being man-made – by ingenious laboratory manipulation of the molecules, substituting atoms, altering their arrangement – they differ sharply from the simpler inorganic insecticides of pre-war days. These were derived from naturally occurring minerals and plant products – compounds of arsenic, copper, lead, manganese, zinc and other minerals, pyrethrum form the dried flowers of chrysanthemums, nicotine sulphate from some of the relatives of tobacco, and rotenone from leguminous plants of the East Indies.

What sets the new synthetic insecticides apart is their enormous biological potency. They have immense power not merely to poison but to enter into the most vital processes of the body and change them in sinister and often deadly ways. Thus, as we shall see, they destroy the very enzymes whose function is to protect the body from harm, they block the oxidation processes from which the body receives its energy, they prevent the normal functioning of the various organs, and they may initiate in certain cells the slow and irreversible change that leads to malignancy.

THROUGH A NARROW WINDOW (chapter thirteen)

For mankind as a whole, a possession infinitely more valuable than individual life is our genetic heritage, our link with past and future. Shaped through long aeons of evolution, oru genes not only make us what we are, but hold in their minute beings the future – be it one of promise or threat. Yet generic deterioration through man-made agents is the menace of our time, ‘the last and greatest danger to our civilization.’

Again, the parallel between chemicals and radiation is exact and inescapable.

The living cell assaulted by radiation suffers a variety of injuries: its ability to divide normally may be destroyed, it may suffer changes in chromosomal structure, or the genes, carriers of hereditary material, may undergo those sudden changes known as mutations, which cause them to produce new characteristics in succeeding generations. If especially susceptible the cell may be killed outright, or finally, after the passage of time measured in years, it may become malignant.

All these consequences of radiation have been duplicated in laboratory studies by a large group of chemicals known as radio-mimetic or mutation-imitating. Many chemicals used in pesticides – herbicides as well as insecticides – belong to this group of substances that have the ability to damage the chromosomes, interfere with normal cell division, or cause mutations. These injuries ot the genetic material are of a kind that may lead to disease in the individual exposed or they may make their effects felt in future generations.

Only a few decades ago, no one knew these effects of either radiation or chemicals. In those days the atom had not been split and few of the chemicals that were to duplicate radiation has as yet been conceived in the test tubes of chemists. Then in 1927, a professor of zoology in a Texas university, Dr. H. J. Muller, found that by exposing an organism to x-radiation, he could produce mutations in succeeding generations. With Muller’s discovery a vast new field of scientific and medical knowledge was opened up. Muller later received the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his achievement, and in a world that soon gained familiarity with the grey rains of fall-out, even the non-scientist now knows the potential results of radiation.

Although far less noticed, a companion discovery was made by Charlotte Auerbach and William Robson at the University of Edinburgh in the early 1940’s. Working with mustard gas, they found that this chemical produced permanent chromosome abnormalities that cannot be distinguished from those induced by radiation. Tested on the fruit fly, the same organism that Muller had used in his original work with X-rays, mustard gas also produced mutations. Thus the first chemical mutagen was discovered.

Mustard gas as a mutagen has now been joined by a long list of other chemicals known to alter genetic material in plants and animals…

Dr. Peter Alexander, an outstanding British authority, has said that the radio-mimetic chemicals ‘may well represent a greater danger’ than radiation. Dr. Muller, with the perspective gained by decades of distinguished work in genetics, warns that various chemicals (including groups represented by pesticides)

…can raise the mutation frequency as much as radiation…As yet far too little known of the extent to which our genes, under modern conditions of exposure s to unusual chemicals, are being subjected to such mutagenic influences.

ONE IN EVERY FOUR (chapter fourteen)

The battle of living things against cancer began so long ago that its origin is lost in time. But it must have begun, in a natural environment, in which whatever life inhabited the earth, was subjected, for good or ill, to influences that had their origin in sun and storm and the ancient nature of the earth. Some of the elements of this environment created hazards to which life had to adjust or perish. The ultraviolet radiation in sunlight could cause malignancy. So could radiations from certain rocks, or arsenic washed out of soil or rocks to contaminate food or water supplies.

The environment contained these hostile elements even before there was life; yet life arose, and over the millions of years it came to exist in infinite numbers and endless variety…These natural cancer-causing agents are still a factor in producing malignancy; however, they are few in number and they belong to that ancient array of forces to which life has been accustomed, from the beginning.

With the advent of man the situation began to change, for man, alone of all forms of life, can create cancer-producing substances, which in medical terminology are called carcinogens. A few man-made carcinogens have been part of the environment for centuries. An example is soot, containing aromatic hydrocarbons. With the dawn of the industrial era, the world became a place of continuous, ever-accelerating change. Instead of the natural environments there was rapidly substituted an artificial one composed of new chemical and physical agents, many of them possessing powerful capacities for inducing biological change. Against these carcinogens which his own activities had created man had no protection, for even as his biological heritage had evolved slowly, so it adapts slowly to new conditions. As a result these powerful substances could easily penetrate the inadequate defenses of the body.

The history of cancer is long, but our recognition of the agents that produce it has been slow to mature…

One of the most impressive theories of the origin of cancer cells was developed by a German biochemist, Prof. Otto Warburg of the Max Planck Institute of Cell Physiology. Warburg has devoted a lifetime of study to the complex processes of oxidation within the cell. Out of this broad background of understanding came a fascinating and lucid explanation of the way a normal cell can become malignant.

Warburg believes that either radiation or a chemical carcinogen acts by destroying the respiration of normal cells, thus depriving them of energy. This action may result form minute doses often repeated. The effect, once achieved, is irreversible. The cells not killed outright by the impact of such a respiratory poison struggle to compensate for the loss of energy. They can no longer carry on that extraordinary and efficient cycle in which vast amounts of ATP are produced, bgut are thrown back on a primitive and far less efficient method, that of fermentation. The struggle to survive by fermentation continues for a long period of time. It continues through ensuing cell divisions, so that all the descendant cells have this abnormal method of respiration…At last they reach the point where fermentation is able to produce as much energy as respiration. At this point cancer cells may be said to have been created from normal body cells…

The Warburg theory also explains why repeated small doses of a carcinogen are more dangerous under some circumstances than a single large dose. The latter may kill the cells outright, whereas the small doses allow some to survive, though in a damaged condition. These survivors may then develop into cancer cells. This is why there is no ‘safe’ dose of a carcinogen.

In Warburg’s theory we also find explanation of an otherwise incomprehensible fact – that one and the same agent can be useful in treating cancer and can also cause it. This, as everyone knows, is true of radiation, which kills cancer cells but may also cause cancer. It is also true of many of the chemicals now used against cancer. Why? Both types of agents damage respiration. Cancer cells already have a defective respiration, so with additional damage they die. The normal cells, suffering respiratory damage for the first time, are not killed but are set on the path that may eventually lead to malignancy.

Measured by the standards established by Warburg, most pesticides meet the criterion of the perfect carcinogen too well for comfort…they may be creating sleeping cancer cells, cells in which an irreversible malignancy will slumber long and undetected – its cause long forgotten and even unsuspected – it flares into the open as recognizable cancer.

"THE BROTHERHOOD OF DEATH" WILLIAM ENGDAHL (excerpts)

2009-11-13T16:04:00.000-08:00

William Engdahl has authorized me to post these excerpts from his book. This information describes a scenario in which the most insidious research and diabolical experiments ever known to have been conducted by human beings was not the improbable outcome of crazed mad-scientists or lunatics, but the studious result of highly organized and well-financed efforts by some of the most brilliant minds of the 20th century, supported by the wealthiest people of the 20th century. The really scary part is that this is not something from the past; au contraire, much of what is happening in the world at this very minute makes a lot of sense when seen through Engdahl's lens of examination. The monsters aren't dead, but if they have their way, we all soon will be! "Promoting the well-being of mankind?" You betcha!

http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/

William's home page

"How could intelligent beings seek to control a few unwanted species by a method that contaminated the whole environment and brought the threat of disease and death even to their own kind? Yet this is precisely what we have done…" Rachel Carson, Silent Spring

Read this to understand why this is happening.

“The Brotherhood of Death”

Chapter 6, Seeds of Destruction, F. William Engdahl (excerpts)

HUMAN GUINEA PIGS

Years before Henry Kissinger [1] and Brent Scowcroft made population reduction the official foreign policy of the United States Government, the Rockefeller brothers, in particular John D. Rockefeller III, or JDR III as we was affectionately known, were busy experimenting on human guinea pigs… JDR III made Puerto Rico into a huge laboratory to test his ideas on mass population control beginning in the 1950’s. By 1965, an estimated 35% of Puerto Rico’s women of child-bearing age had been permanently sterilized, according to a study made that year by the island’s Public Health Department. The Rockefeller’s Population Council, and the U.S. Government Department of Health Education and Welfare – where brother Nelson Rockefeller was Under-Secretary – packaged the sterilization campaign. They used the spurious argument that it would protect women’s health and stabilize incomes if there were fewer mouths to feed…

“SECOND ONLY TO CONTROL OF ATOMIC WEAPONS…”

John D. III’s forced sterilization was no radical departure for the family. The Rockefeller’s had long regarded Puerto Rico as a convenient human laboratory. In 1931, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, later renamed the Rockefeller University, financed the cancer experiments of Dr. Cornelius Rhoads [2] in Puerto Rico. Rhoads was no ordinary scientist. It later came out that Rhoads had deliberately infected his subjects with cancer cells to see what would happen. Eight of his subjects died. According to pathologist Cornelius Rhoads, “Purto Ricans are beyond doubt the dirtiest, laziest, most degenerate and thievish race of men ever inhabiting this sphere. What the island needs is not public health work but a tidal wave or something to totally exterminate the population. I have done my best to further the process of extermination by killing off 8…” Initially written in a confidential letter to a fellow researcher, Rhoad’s boast of killing Puerto Ricans appeared in Time magazine in February 1932 after Pedro Albizu Campos, leader of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party, gained possession of the letter and published its contents.

Rather than being tried for murder, the Rockefeller Institute scientist was asked to establish the U.S. Army Biological Warfare facilities in Maryland, Utah, and also Panama, and was later named to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, where radiation experiments were secretly conducted on prisoners, hospital patients and U.S. soldiers.

In 1961, more than a dozen decades before his policies were to become enshrined in NSSM 200, JDR III gave the second McDougall Lecture to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. Rockefeller told the listeners, “To my mind, population growth is second only to control of atomic weapons as the paramount problem of the day.” He spoke of a “cold inevitability, a certainty that is mathematical, that gives the problems posed by too-rapid population growth a somber and chilling caste indeed.” The “grim fact” of population growth, he warned, “cuts across all the basic needs of mankind and…frustrates man’s achievement of his higher needs.”

ROCKEFELLER SUPPORTS EUGENICS JDR III

grew up surrounded by eugenicists, race theorists and Malthusians at the Rockefeller Foundation such as Frederick Osborn, Henry Fairchild and Alan Gregg. For John D. III, it seemed only natural that he and others of his “class” should decide which elements of the human species survived, in order that they could have “life as we want it to be.” They saw it as being a bit like culling herds of sheep for the best of the breed. The logic of human life for the family was simple: supply and demand. As Jameson Taylor expressed it, "For Rockefeller the proper care of sheep…requires nothing more than an equalization of supply with demand. If supply - i.e., food, water and space – cannot meet demand, supply must be increased and demand must be decreased. The Rockefeller Foundation has used this two pronged approach to great effect. The supply shortage has been addressed by…advanced medical practices and increased crop yields. The demand problem has been solved by culling the herd via birth control and abortion." For most Americans and for most of the world, the idea that the leading policy circles of the United States Government, acting on the behest of some of its wealthiest families and most influential universities, would deliberately promote the mass covert sterilization of entire population groups was too far fetched to accept.

Few realized that individuals with names such as Rockefeller, Harriman, banker J.P. Morgan Jr., Mary Duke Biddle of the tobacco family, Cleveland Dodge, John Harvey Kellogg from the breakfast cereal fortune, Clarence Gamble of Proctor & Gamble [3] were quietly funding eugenics as members of the American Eugenics Society. They had also been financing experiments involving forced sterilization of “inferior people” and various forms of population control as early as World War 1. Their counterparts in the English Eugenics Society at the time included the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Winston Churchill, economist John Maynard Keynes, Aurthur Lord Balfour and Julian Huxley, who went on to be the first head of UNESCO after the war [4].

COMBATING THE ‘HUMAN CANCER’ …

One man served as head of the Medical Division of the Rockefeller Foundation for more than 34 years. His name was Alan Gregg [5]. An all but unknown person to the outside world…Gregg wielded tremendous influence. He was Vice President of the Foundation on his retirement in 1956, and his ideology pervaded the institute decades after. It was an ideology of Malthusian brutality and rascist finality. Gregg once wrote in an article for a scientific journal on population, “There is an alarming parallel between the growth of a cancer in the body of an organism and the growth of human population in the earth ecological economy.” He then asserted that “cancerous growths demand food, but so far as I know, they have never been cured by getting it. The analogies can be found in our plundered planet.” This was a formulation which translated as, “people pollute, so eliminate pollution by eliminating people…”

Gregg then went on, in a paper commissioned by Science, one of the most eminent scientific journals in the U.S., to observe, “how nearly the slums of our great cities resemble the necrosis of tumours.” And this “raised the whimsical query: Which is the more offensive to decency and beauty, slums or the fetid detritus of a growing tumour?”

THE ROCKEFELLERS’ DARKER SECRETS

The role of the Rockefeller Foundation in U.S. and global population policy was not accidental, nor was it a minor aspect of the institution’s mission. It was at the very heart of it. Tis population policy role was the key to understanding the later engagement of the Foundation in the revolution in biotechnology and plant genetics [6].

In 1913, the founder of the Standard Oil trust, John D. Rockefeller Sr., was advised to hide his wealth behind a tax-exempt foundation. That year Congress had passed the first federal income tax, and the Rockefeller family and other wealthy Americans such as the steel magnate, Andrew Carnegie, were enraged at what they deemed illegal theft of justly-earned gains. As Carnegie put it at the time, wealth passing through the hands of the few can be made a much more potent force for the elevation of our race [sic] than if distributed in small sums to the people themselves.” In so many words, money should only belong to the very wealthy, who know best how to use it. The newly-established Rockefeller Foundation’s stated mission was “to promote the wellbeing of mankind throughout the world.” It went without saying that the foundation alone, and the Rockefeller family, would decide just what “promoting the wellbeing of mankind” entailed.

From its inception, the Rockefeller Foundation was focussed on culling the herd, or systematically reducing populations of “inferior” breeds…

THE ‘BEST OF BREED’ – EUGENICS AND THE ‘MASTER RACE’

One of the first philanthropic projects undertaken by the Rockefeller Foundation in the 1920’s was to fund the American Eugenics Society, and the Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor, New York where by 1917, John D. Rockefeller had become the world’s second largest supporter of the Harriman family. Eugenics was a pseudo-science. The word was coined in England in 1883 by Charles Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton, and it was founded on Darwin’s 1859 work, the Origin of Species [by Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life] Darwin had imposed what he termed, “the application of the theories of Malthus to the entire vegetable and animal kingdom.” Malthus, who shortly before his death had repudiated his own theory of population, asserted in his 1798 tract, Essay on the Principles of Population, that populations tend to expand geometrically while food supply grew only arithmetically, leading to periodic famine and death to eliminate the “surplus” population… As it was defined by its sponsors, eugenics was the study of improving the “quality” of the human species, while reducing the quality of “inferior beings,” or, as Sanger put it, the “qualitative factor over the quantitative factor…in dealing with the great masses of humanity.” The title page of Eugenics Review, the journal of the Eugenics Education Society, carried the original definition of British eugenics founder, Francis Galton, Darwin’s cousin, who defined eugenics as “the science of improvement of the human race germ plasm through better breeding. Eugenics is the study of agencies under social control that may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations, whether physically or socially.”

Contrary to popular belief, the idea of a Nordic master race was not solely a Nazi Germany fantasy. It had its very early roots in the United States of America going back to the early years of the 20th century.

The president of the prestigious Stanford University in California, David Starr Jordan [7] promoted the idea of “race and blood” in his 1902 book, Blood of a Nation. He claimed that poverty was an inherited genetic trait, as was talent. Education had no influence; you either “had it” or you didn’t. Two years later, in 1904 Andrew Carnegie’s Carnegie Institute had founded the major laboratory at Cold Spring Harbor, the Eugenics Record Office on wealthy Long Island, outside New York City, where millions of index cards on the bloodlines of ordinary Americans were gathered, to plan the possible removal of entire bloodlines deemed inferior. The land for the Institute was donated by railroad magnate E. H. Harriman [8] a form supporter of eugenics. This was eugenics, American elite style. Naturally, if the ideal was tall, blond, blue-eyed Nordic types, that meant dark-skinned Asians, Indians, Blacks, Hispanics, and others, including the sick and retarded, were deemed inferior to the eugenics goal of “best of breed.” The aim of the index card project was to map the inferior bloodlines and subject them to lifelong segregation and sterilization to “kill their bloodlines.” The sponsors were out to eliminate those they deemed “unfit.” As early as 1911, Carnegie was funding an American Breeder’s Association study on the “Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population.”

One of the largest and most significant financial contributors for various eugenics projects soon became the Rockefeller Foundation. It poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into various eugenics and population projects, from the American Eugenics Society to Cold Spring Harbor, to the American Breeder’s Association.

One of the more prominent members of the American Eugenics Society in the early 1920’s was Dr. Paul Bowman Popenoe [9] a U.S. Army venereal disease specialist from World War 1, who wrote a textbook called Applied Eugenics. In sum, Popenoe said, “The first method which presents itself is execution…Its value in keeping up the standard of the race should not be underestimated.” He went on to eloquently advocate the “destruction of the individual by some adverse feature of the environment, such as excessive cold, or bacteria or by bodily deficiency.” In his book, Popenoe spoke of estimated five million Americans who would, at one point of another, end up in mental hospitals and of “five million more who are so deficient intellectually with less than 70% average intelligence, as to be in many cases, liabilities rather than assets to the race.” The book was aimed at a select, elite leadership. It was an example of what the eugenics movement termed “negative eugenics” – the systematic elimination of “inferior” beings, whether mentally inferior, physically handicapped or racially non-white.

Popenoe’s radical approach was a bit too controversial for some, but by 1927, in Buck vs. Bell, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a decision by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes [10] ruled that the forced sterilization program of the State of Virginia was constitutional. In his written decision, Holmes wrote, “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind…Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” Holmes, one of the Supreme Court’s most influential justices, was also one of its most outspoken racists. In 1922, the aging Holmes wrote to British economist and Labour Party leading figure, Harold J. Laski, “As I have said, no doubt often, it seems to me that all society rests on the death of men. If you don’t kill ‘em one way, you kill ‘em another – or prevent them from being born. Is not the present time an illustration of Malthus?” The statement could have served as the guiding slogan of the Rockefeller Foundation eugenics efforts.

This 1927 Supreme Court decision opened the floodgates for thousands of American citizens to b e coercively sterilized or otherwise persecuted as subhuman. One Illinois mental hospital in Lincoln fed new patients milk from known tubercular cows, in the conviction that a genetically strong human specimen would be immune…

Years later, the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials quoted Holme’s words in their own defense. In the postwar world, not surprisingly, it was to no avail. The Rockefeller propaganda machine buried the reference; the victors defined the terms of peace and the truth of war.

“Calling a Spade a Spade…”

The Rockefeller enthusiasm for eugenics during the 1920’s did not stop at America’s own shores. Rockefeller Foundation money played an instrumental role in financing German eugenics during the 1920’s…In 1826 it awarded an impressive $250,000 for the creation of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry [11]….

As American researcher Edwin Black and others later documented, the leading psychiatrist at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute at that time was Ernst Rudin [12] a man who went on to a stellar career as the architect of Adolf Hitler’s systematic program of medical eugenics. The Rockefeller-financed Rudin was named President of the World Eugenics Federation in 1932. Their platform was openly advocating the killing or sterilization of people whose heredity made them a “public burden.” The multi-talented Rudin was also head of brain research at that institute, where Hermann J. Muller [13] an American eugenicist also funded with Rockefeller money, was employed. Later it was revealed that the institute received “brains in batches of 150-250” from victims of the Nazi euthanasia program at the Brandenburg State Hospital in the late 1930’s. The brain research was directed towards the Nazi experiments on Jews, gypsies, the mentally handicapped and other “defectives.” Rudin also led the Nazi program of forced eugenic sterilization, and was a prime architect of the 1933 Nazi Sterilization Law. Rudin and his staff, as part of the Task Force of Hereditary Experts, chaired by SS chief Heinrich Himmler [14] drew up the sterilization law. Described as an “American Model” law, it was adopted iin July 1933…Declaring racial hygiene a “spiritual movement,” Rudin and his associates found a willing collaborator in Adolf Hitler. “Only through [the Fuhrer] did our dream of over thirty years, that of applying racial hygiene to society, become a reality,” Rudin said.

By 1940, thousands of Germans from old age homes and mental institutions had been systematically gassed, as had been advocated twenty years earlier in the United States by Popenoe, if with limited success. In 1940, just back from a tour of the German eugenics institutes, Leon Whitney, Executive Secretary of the Rockefeller-funded American Eugenics Society, declared of the Nazi experiments, “While we were pussy-footing around…the Germans were calling a spade a spade.”

The head of the German eugenics institute in Berlin was Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer [15]…[who]…advocated a “total solution to the Jewish problem.” Von Verschuer’s long-time assistant was Dr. Josef Mengele [16] who headed human experiments at the Auschwitz concentration camp after May 1943. Von Verschuer was delighted when Mengele, who won the name “The Angel of Death” for his deadly experiments on human prisoners, was assigned to Auschwitz. Never one to place principle before pragmatism, the Rockefeller Foundation ceased its funding of most Nazi eugenics, when the Nazis invaded Poland in 1939. By that time, what had been established with their money over a period of more than fifteen years was consolidated. Alan Gregg, the Foundation’s Director of the Medical Division, was the man who was most intimately involved in the Nazi funding of eugenics at every step of the way. His division was responsible for funding the various Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes…

Leaving Mengele holding the proverbial bag, Verschuer fled Berlin before the end of the war, and avoided a Nuremberg trial. By 1946 he was writing to his old friend, the U.S. Army eugenicist Paul Popenoe, in California…Old Nazi friends managed to whitewash Verschuer’s Auschwitz past, for which all records had been conveniently destroyed.

In 1949, the Auschwitz doctor Otmar Frieiherr von Verschuer was named Corresponding Member of the American Society of Human Genetics, a new organization founded in 1948 by by leading eugenicists hiding under the banner of the less-disgraced name, genetics. The first president of the American Society of Human Genetics was Hermann Josef Muller, a Rockefeller University Fellow who had worked at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research in 1932.

JDR III’s Population Council and “Crypto-eugenics”

Eugenics was the foundation of John D. Rockefeller’s obsession with overpopulation. Given his enormous influence and the huge financial muscle of the Rockefeller Foundation to fund scientific research, it was an obsession which would have untold consequences for generations after his death… In 1931, JDR III joined the board of the Rockefeller Foundation itself. There, eugenicists like Raymond Fosdick and Frederick Osborn [17] founding members of thes American Eugenics Society in 1946, and was also president of the racist Pioneer Fund. With John D. Rockefeller III he would co-found the Rockefeller Population Council. During the Third Reich, Osborn had expressed his early support for sterilization effort…Osborn…personally praised the Nazi eugenic program as the “most important experiment which has ever been tried.” …

With population control, Rockefeller and others in the establishment believed they had finally found the answer to mass, efficient and effective negative eugenics. The founding meeting of the Population Council…was attended by Detlev W. Bronk, then president of both the Rockefeller Institute and the National Academy of Sciences. JDR III arranged for the conference to be sponsored under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences to give it a quasi-scientific aura…Dr. Bronk was sympathetic to the agenda of population control. Being promoted was the same unvarnished eugenics racial ideology, veiled under the guise of world hunger and population problems.

Over the following 25 years, the Rockefeller Population Council would spend a staggering $173 million on population reduction globally, establishing itself as by far the most influential organization promoting the eugenics agenda in the world…

…At the time of the founding of Rockefeller’s Population Council, the American Eugenics Society made a little-publicized move of its headquarters from Yale University directly into the offices of the Population Council in the Rockefeller Center in New York City. Rockefeller shrewdly repackaged his discredited eugenics race and class ideology as “population control.” Instead of focusing on domestic issues…he turned his sights on the entire developing world, a vast sea of humanity which stood between the Rockefeller family and the realization of their ambitious post-war designs for a new American Century.

The strategists around the Rockefeller eugenics organizations explicitly set out to pursue the same agenda as essentially von Verschuer and the Nazi eugenics crowd had, but under the deliberate strategy of what they termed “crypto-eugenics.” The key American proponent of hiding the eugenics nature of their work under the name “genetics” and “population control” was Rockefeller’s head of the Population Council, Frederick Osborn…He stressed that the reason for making birth control “equally available” should be disguised: “Measures for improving the hereditary basis of intelligence and character are most likely to be attained under a name other than eugenics…”

The architect of the American reshaping of the elitist eugenics agenda into the new garment of population control was Rockefeller’s friend and employee, Frederick Osborn… A significant problem after the Second World War was that the very name eugenics had been thoroughly associated in the public mind with Nazi racist extermination programs, the definition of a Master Race and other human atrocities…

Osborn had a ready answer: people for some reason refused to accept that they were “second rate” compared to Osborn, Rockefeller, Sanger and their “superior class.” As Osborn put it, “We have failed to take into account a trait which is almost universal and is very deep in human nature. People are simply not willing to accept the idea that the genetic base on which their character was formed is inferior and should not be repeated in the next generation…” Osborn proposed a change in packaging. Eugenics was to be mass-marketed under a new guise…

Publicly, Osborn appeared to purge eugenics in his postwar-era of earlier rascism. In reality he applied racism far more efficiently to hundreds of millions of darker-skinned citizens of the Third World. Osborn also secretly held the office of the president of the infamous white-supremacist Pioneer Fund from 1947 to 1956. Among other projects the Pioneer Fund “supported highly controversial research by a dozen scientists who believed that Blacks are genetically less intelligent than Whites…” As late as 1946, after the war and the ghastly revelations of the human experimentation in Auschwitz and other concentration camps, Osborn, then President of the American Eugenics Society, published, in his Eugenics News magazine, the so-called Geneticist’s Manifesto, entitled “Genetically Improving the World Population.” …Genetics was the new name for eugenics…

Osborn doled out strong praise for Hermann J. Muller, Ernst Rudin’s colleague in Germany, who had received Rockefeller funds during the 1930’s for eugenics research. Quoting Muller, Osborn wrote “It would in the end be far easier and more sensible to manufacture a complete new man de novo, out of appropriately chosen raw materials, than to try to refashion into human form those those pitiful relics which remained.” Osborn also praised Muller’s proposal to develop sperm banks to “make available the sperm of highly qualified donors.” The idea for a gene revolution was being debated back then. Rockefeller’s Population Council gave grants to leading universities including Princeton’s Office of Population headed by Rockefeller eugenicist Frank Notestein, a long-time friend of Osborn, who in 1959 became President of the Rockefeller Population Council in order to promote a science called demography. Its task was to project horrifying statistics of a world over-run with darker-skinned peoples, to prepare the ground for acceptance of international birth control programs…

In 1952…Margaret Sanger [18] created, thanks to Rockefeller Foundation money…the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF)…

Following the initial Rockefeller financing, her IPPF soon was backed by a corporate board which included DuPont, U.S. Sugar, David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhatten bank, Newmont Mining Co., International Nickel, RCA, Gulf Oil, and other prominent corporate members. The cream of America’s corporate and banking elite were quietly lining up behind Rockefeller’s vision of population control on a global scale. Less than a decade after the revelations of eugenics and Auschwitz population control was again becoming fashionable in certain American elite circles of the 1950’s. It was a testimony to the power of the U.S. establishment to mould public opinion and encourage fears of exploding populations of poor, hungry peasants around the world. The population control lobby which would later shape Kissinger’s NSSM 200 was consolidating around Rockefeller Foundation grants and individuals, preparing a global assault on “inferior peoples,” under the name of choice, of family planning and of averting the danger of “over-population” – a myth their think-tanks and publicity machines produced to convince the ordinary citizens of the urgency of their goals.

From Eugenics to Genetics

A colleague of Ernst Rudin, Dr. Franz J. Kallmann [19], was a German scientist who left Germany in 1936 when it was discovered that he was part Jewish. After the war he helped rehabilitate German eugenicist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer and win him respectability and acceptance in the American scientific community. Kallmann’s enthusiasm for eugenics was in no way dampened by his own experience of Nazi persecution of the Jews…Kallmann was founding president of a new eugenics front organization, the American Society of Human Genetics.

At the New York Psychiatric Institute, Kallmann continued the same research in genetic psychiatry he had done with Rudin in Germany. Kallmann’s American Society of Human Genetics later became a sponsor of the Human Genome Project [20]. The multibillion dollar project was, appropriately enough, housed at the same Cold Spring Harbor center that Rockefeller, Harriman and Carnegie had used for their notorious Eugenics Research Office in the 1920’s. Genetics, as defined by the Rockefeller Foundation, would constitute the new face of eugenics.

While brother John D. III was mapping plans for global depopulation, brothers Nelson and David were busy with the business side of securing the American Century for the decades following the crisis of the 1960’s and 1970’s. American agribusiness was to play a decisive role in this project, and the development of genetic biotechnology would bring the different efforts of the family into a coherent plan for global food control in ways simply unimaginable to most.

[end chapter]

NOTE: the numbers are not Engdahl’s but my own…see below:

1) HENRY KISSINGER A major “architect of genocide” and Operation Paperclip
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Kissinger/CaseAgainst1_Hitchens.html/

NSSM 200 full text http://wlym.com/text/NSSM200.htm

Operation Paperclip
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/Operation_Paperclip_file.html

2) DR. CORNELIUS RHOADS Took the “cancer as weapon” idea into U.S. Army, Atomic Energy Commission, then Sloan-Kettering Cancer Institute
http://www.counterpunch.org/germwar.html

http://journals.lww.com/oncology-times/Fulltext/2003/09100/The_Rhoads_ Not_Given__The_Tainting_of_the.7.aspx

“…Dr. Rhoads was a researcher in the 1930s who worked at Rockefeller University and also in Puerto Rico. Over the years people have expressed concern over a letter he wrote while working in Puerto Rico expressing derogatory racist ideas about the local population…The letter was intended as a confidential note to a colleague in Boston. Dr. Rhoads left the document on his desk, and it was discovered the next day by a lab assistant who gave copies to colleagues as well as to Pedro Albizu Campos, head of the Puerto Rico Nationalist Party. Campos, in turn, circulated the letter to newspapers, embassies, the League of Nations, Pan American Union, American Civil Liberties Union, and the Vatican… the 1932 Time story and an earlier New York Times article were heavily influenced by none other than one of the founders of modern-day public relations spin-doctoring, Ivy Lee, who had been handling public relations for the Rockefeller family ever since the 1914 Ludlow Massacre when 24 men, women and children were killed during a labor riot at mine owned by the Rockefellers…Lee had pre-publication access to both the Time and New York Times articles, Dr. Lederer noted, and in both cases, Lee was able to influence sufficient editing and rewriting that the published accounts presented Rhoads' letter as a joke that was never intended to be mailed.

3) CLARENCE GAMBLE Of Proctor & Gamble whose toothpastes contain sodium fluoride
http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/breaking-down-understanding-our-enemies/ 23796-proctor-gamble-genocide.html

4) UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organization)
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9477

5) ALAN GREGG
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27a/247.html

6) "revolution in biotechnology"
http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/Rockefeller-Foundation- Social-Control-Eugenics.html

7) DAVID STARR JORDAN (excerpt, Blood of a Nation)
http://www.indiana.edu/~engs/ebook/samples.html

8) E.H. HARRIMAN
http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay6text.html

9) Dr. PAUL BOWMAN POPENOE (on-line book Sterilization for Human Betterment)
http://books.google.com/books?id=-3reUu-YbicC&dq=dr.+paul+bowman+popenoe&
printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=EtT8Sr2yJo6QsgOqw4mICw&sa=X&oi=
book_result&ct=result&resnum=12&ved=0CCYQ6AEwCw#v=onepage&q=&f=false

10) OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES
http://hnn.us/articles/1796.html

11) KAISER WILHELM INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHIATRY
http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/deadlymedicine/profiles/

12) ERNST RUDIN http://jonjayray.tripod.com/sanger.html

13) HERMANN J. MULLER
http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/resources/timeline/1927_Muller.php

14) HENIRICH HIMMLER
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007057

15) OTTMAR FREIHERR von VERSCHUER
http://www.whale.to/b/verschuer_h.html

16) Dr. JOSEF MENGELE
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/history/mengele/3b.html

17) FREDERICK OSBORN
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=107594.0;wap2

18) MARGARET SANGER http://www.blackgenocide.org/negro.html

19) Dr. FRANZ J. KALLMANN
http://www.eugenics-watch.com/roots/chap10.html

20) HUMAN GENOME PROJECT
http://www.waragainsttheweak.com/reviews.php