Disposable coffee cups, carryout containers filled with cancer-causing agents

(NaturalNews) Millions of people eat and drink from plastic and styrofoam cups and containers every single day, and the US government now admits that many of these consumer products contain known cancer-causing agents. The formaldehyde preservatives found in many disposable coffee cups and foam take-out containers, as well as styrene, another chemical additive used in such products, have both been added to the federal government’s list of known or suspected carcinogens. The addition of these two chemicals, as well as six others, to the carcinogen list this year was reportedly a reluctant decision made by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which has been pressured by the chemical industry for years to delay coming forward with this information. Nevertheless, both formaldehyde and a chemical known as aristolochic acid have now been categorized as “known human carcinogens,” while captafol, cobalt-tungsten carbide, certain glass wool fibers, o-nitrotoluene, riddelliine, and styrene have been dubbed “reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens.” “Reducing exposure to cancer-causing agents is something we all want, and the Report on Carcinogens provides important information on substances that pose a cancer risk,” said Dr. Linda Birnbaum, director of both the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the National Toxicology Program (NTP). “The NTP is pleased to be able to compile this report.” You can read the full report, entitled 12th Report on Carcinogens , here: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc12 The chemical industry was quick to denounce the findings, of course, claiming that there is no significant danger from exposure to these chemicals. And some federal officials seem to be kowtowing to this pressure by telling the public that the main concern is the industrial use of these chemicals, rather than consumer use. Even the American Cancer Society (ACS) has urged the public not to worry about continuing to use plastic cups or foam containers, despite the fact that many are loaded with some of the chemicals in question. Sources for this story include: http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/health/2011/06/12/2011-06-12_two_main_components_of_coffee_cups_and_carry_out_containers_identified_as_cancer.html?r=lifestyle/health http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robyn-griggs-lawrence/formaldehyde-carcinogen_b_876115.html

Psych drug doctors now pushing to add lithium to drinking water

(NaturalNews) Chlorine, fluoride, and the various other chemical poisons already added to the nation’s drinking water supplies are apparently not enough for the self-appointed experts whose insatiable lust to force-medicate the world is never satisfied. A recent report in The Daily offers credence to the insane notion that adding lithium, a drug currently used to treat mental disorders, to drinking water will be beneficial in helping to reduce suicide and violent crime rates. Much like fluoride, lithium alters the brain’s normal production of serotonin and norepinephrine, which in turn artificially alters the way an individual thinks and how he or she feels about a given situation. Lithium is literally a mind-altering, antidepressant chemical substance that those promoting it openly admit modifies brain function. And yet they purport that forcibly inducing these chemical changes on the unwitting populations of the world is a good and acceptable idea. “Lithium certainly dampens impulsivity, which would explain how it reduces suicide rates,” said Dr. Allan Young, a psychiatry professor at Imperial College London and big time promoter of lithium-laced water, to The Daily . “When you change these resilience factors in the brain, you see other changes too. People are less timid and shy, for example.” And in the same conversation with that reporter, Young humorously wonders with seemingly insidious arrogance why he has received slews of angry letters from the concerned public about his proposal to mass-medicate the world with this new type of drug. Could it be, Dr. Young, that people would rather think for themselves without having self-appointed “experts” like yourself superciliously play the role of God by deciding for others what they should and should not consume of their own free will? In his push to begin poisoning water supplies with lithium, Young also cites Americans having been easily swayed to accept genetically-modified (GM) foods as a reason why the US is a “likely candidate for early implementation” of lithium-laced water. He and others are openly pushing to get lithium in the water as soon as possible in order to, as The Daily puts it, “cultivate a more serene social order.” Sources for this story include: http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/05/22/052211-news-lithium-1-5/

Plastics chemical in packaged foods linked to asthma in babies

(NaturalNews) BPA, also known as bisphenol-A, is a chemical compound often used in the production of a large variety of plastics. The widespread use of BPA has come under public scrutiny due to known connection to a host of health problems, including heart complications, cancer, neurological issues, diabetes and fertility and sexual issues. http://www.naturalnews.com/027736_BPA_sexual_dysfunction.html The chemical can be found in water bottles, dental fillings, plastic containers, canned food linings http://www.naturalnews.com/025128_BPA_food_companies.html, paper receipts, CD/DVD packaging, and more. Numerous studies have found that BPA acts as an endocrine system disrupter, negatively affecting our bodies’ hormone production. Exposure is almost a certainty -a 2004 study by the CDC found BPA in 93% of the over 2000 urine samples tested. So, it shouldn’t surprise you that new information has surfaced linking BPA to breathing issues in babies. An article in Mail Online, discussed the results of a recent study by Penn State College of Medicine. The results found that pregnant mothers with high levels of BPA in their blood during the 16th week of pregnancy are “twice as likely to have infants with wheezing problems in the first six months of life.” What is really scary is that 99% of all the mothers in this study had various levels of bisphenol-A in their systems. There is no question that the use of bisphenol-A use in food and drinking containers should be banned. Even though no country has yet to go that far, Denmark http://www.wecf.eu/english/articles/2010/03/denmark-bisphenola.php was the first country in the EU to ban the chemical in containers that target children under 3; and the entire EU has banned it from use in the production of baby bottles. Northern America has been a bit slower on the uptake but Canada and some states in the United States have begun taking steps to control the use of bisphenol- A in consumer products. Six baby bottle manufacturers removed the chemical from their U.S. bottle production after widespread public outcry. Of course, the plastics industry prefers to spend money to procure studies http://acronymrequired.com/2008/10/fda-bpa-glp.html that cast doubt on the dangers of BPA, rather than implanting BPA safe alternatives. So again, consumers must take steps to protect themselves. Expectant mothers and women planning to conceive should be diligent in avoidance of bisphenol-A contaminated products- it is imperative for the well being of themselves and their infants. Resources: 1. http://www.naturalnews.com/031651_BPA_chemicals.html 2. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1382525/Chemicals-food-packaging-linked-breathing-problems-babies.html?ito=feeds-newsxml 3. http://www.naturalnews.com/025804_BPA_Baby_Bottles.html

Study: Pesticides, toxins can absorb directly into crops through soil

(NaturalNews) A recent study put forth by Nanjing Agricultural University and funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China provides further insight into the delicate relationship between plants and the soil in which they are grown. An experiment involving ryegrass shed light on how environmental toxins, chemical pesticides, and other pollutants are fully capable of absorbing directly into plants and distributing throughout plant cells. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) is the general name given to a variety of contaminant byproducts that result from activities like burning coal and oil, and barbecuing and blackening meats. Scientists also intentionally manufacture and use these chemicals to make artificial dyes, plastics, pharmaceutical drugs, and pesticides. Tests involving acenaphthene, a specific type of PAH that is a constituent of coal tar, revealed that the chemical binds fairly easily to soil solids. Since PAHs do not easily break down in the presence of water, they also tend to settle in waterways. And when normal soil pathogens found on the roots of ryegrass become contaminated with acenaphthene, the end result is the direct uptake and spread of the chemical throughout the cellular system of the plant. So not only are PAHs an external threat that pollute air and water, but now they are known to be an internal threat that invade and permeate the very structure of plants. The implications of this are clearly devastating, as the very integrity of plants and food crops is compromised by continual exposure to these and other toxic chemicals. The ryegrass test was just one of many that Yanzheng Gao and his colleagues plan to conduct on pollutants, soil, and plants, but it highlights the important reality of how soil composition plays a crucial role in plant health. If ryegrass so easily absorbs chemical toxins found in soil, then it is safe to assume that conventional food crops doused in chemical pesticides are most likely doing the exact same thing — and millions of people are consuming food made from these crops every single day! According to reports, prenatal exposure to PAHs can result in low birth weight, premature delivery, heart malformations, low IQ and childhood asthma. Long-term exposure as an adult can cause lung damage, kidney dysfunction, liver problems, and skin disorders. Sources for this story include: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-03/asoa-hpa032911.php

Fluoride spill at water facility literally burns holes in parking lot cement

(NaturalNews) A recent chemical spill at a water treatment facility in Rock Island, Ill., required the assistance of an emergency relief crew decked in the very same type of hazmat suits being worn by workers at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant in Japan. Except instead of radiation, the leaked chemical at the water plant was actually hydrofluorosilicic acid, a chemical fluoride component commonly added to drinking supplies for the stated purpose of preventing cavities. This fluoride chemical is so hazardous that it actually began to burn through parking lot cement in Rock Island before emergency crews arrived on the scene. According to reports from WQAD News 8 in Moline, a tanker truck delivering the fluoride began to overflow, leaking the chemical directly onto the parking lot where it spilled down towards the street. And before emergency crews arrived on the scene in full hazmat suits and gas masks, the fluoride had actually begun to burn a hole right through the concrete. “It’s a corrosive agent that the water treatment plant uses,” said Rock Island assistant fire chief Jeff Yerkey, concerning the spilled fluoride. He explained that the crews had to use earthen berms, dirt, sand, and commercial broom equipment to stop the leak. Yerkey also added that there was no “inhalation hazard” from the incident, and no evacuation of local residents was required. To see the full WQAD News 8 video report of the incident, which includes footage of hazmat workers being hosed off after the incident to ensure that no fluoride residues remained, visit: http://www.wqad.com/news/rock-island-hazmat-water-treatment-plant-03242011,0,4540527.story What is truly amazing about the incident is that this very same fluoride, which fire chief Yerkey specifically called a “corrosive agent,” is deliberately added to drinking water supplies across the nation. This highly-toxic chemical that, when spilled, requires similar protective equipment as does a radioactive fallout situation, is being added to millions of Americans drinking water supplies every single day in the name of promoting health. In reality, the events surrounding this fluoride spill are more than enough proof for any rationally-minded person that adding this poison to water supplies is a bad idea. Anything that requires the use of a protective suit and gas mask in order to handle — and that burns a hole directly through concrete — simply cannot be good for the body when ingested. To learn more about where the chemical fluoride additives pumped into water supplies actually come from, check out the NaturalNews.TV video The Fluoride Deception : http://www.naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=42652E035A1B1BAAAE1F340B54694975 Sources for this story include: http://www.wqad.com/news/rock-island-hazmat-water-treatment-plant-03242011,0,4540527.story

Monsanto, Dow to begin pushing dangerous 2,4-D herbicide as ‘solution’ to superweeds

(NaturalNews) It is something that many farmers of genetically-modified (GM) crops are already trying to do and failing to succeed in, but that the chemical companies responsible for the problem may soon be pushing as an alleged “solution.” The Dow Chemical Company has sponsored a study that aims to position the 2,4-D herbicide, a popular commercial herbicide, as the solution to Roundup-resistant “superweeds.” But 2,4-D-resistant “superweeds” have already begun emerging as well, which suggests that increased chemical interventions of any kind will only make the superweed problem worse, not better. Year after year, GM crop farmers have to battle mutant superweeds that continue to grow stronger and more resistant to the toxic pesticides and herbicides used in GM crop cultivation. But the practice is polluting the environment, contaminating the food supply, and spurring the rampant growth of harmful superweeds. Rather than admit they are responsible for the problem, agri-giants like Dow and Monsanto say that using different pesticides and herbicides will help solve the problem. But such a suggestion could not be further from the truth. Treating plants with increasingly higher levels and more potent concoctions of toxic chemicals is a recipe for disaster, and one that will only make the superweed problem worse. Dow, of course, found in its own study that using 2,4-D is a successful intervention to help prevent the growth of superweeds, But a review by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, which tends to be conservative in its estimation of the environmental harm caused by pesticides and herbicides, says 2,4-D leads to “risk quotients that exceed the level of concern.” In other words, Dow’s “solution” is highly problematic in terms of environmental and human health. The report found that if 2,4-D is used the way Dow suggests, humans will be exposed to dangerously high levels of the toxin, which in turn causes autoimmune disorders, cell destruction (apoptosis), nerve damage, metabolic dysfunction, and other serious problems. The only real way to stop the spread of superweeds, if it is even still possible, is to stop planting and cultivating GM crops. Organic, sustainable growing methods do not require toxic chemical applications, which in turn do not create superweeds. They also do not pollute the food supply and the environment with extremely toxic chemicals like GM crop cultivation methods do. Sources for this story include: http://www.gmwatch.eu/latest-listing/1-news-items/12888-re-gm-industry-solution-to-glyphosate-resistant-weeds-2-4-d-resistant-crops

Sick Brains in Teens – Is There A Root Cause?

(NaturalNews) It’s been nearly a month since the nation’s attention was focused on Tucson, where five were killed and 13 injured , including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, several other shootings missed the mainstream news. Violence seems to be erupting among youths everywhere, from Los Angeles(1) to Omaha(2) to Brooklyn(3) – indicating something is seriously going wrong in the minds of young persons in this country. Why Young Brains Are Sick The list of assailing particles on children is long, and starts with chemical exposure in the womb. In July, 2005, the Environmental Working Group released a hallmark study using cord blood to assess the chemical exposure of neonates in-utero. The placenta has long been thought to shield the developing baby from pollutants in the environment. The study’s alarming results dispelled this as a wishful myth. Of the 287 chemicals identified in the umbilical cord blood of 10 infants, 180 were known carcinogens, 217 were toxic to the brain and nervous system, and 208 have been associated with birth defects or abnormal development in animal tests. The study concluded that, “the dangers of pre- or post-natal exposure to this complex mixture of carcinogens, developmental toxins and neurotoxins have never been studied.”(4) Within hours of emerging from the womb, a newborn is given a dollop of antibiotics in the eyes, injected with the hepatitis b vaccine, with known neurotoxic properties,(5)and jabbed with a vitamin K shot, which contains 9 mg of benzyl alcohol. In 1992, Golding published concerns that vitamin K injections could be associated with a doubled risk of malignant disease in children, particularly leukemia. While there have been considerable doubts about whether the association is coincidental or causal, the controversy has never been completely resolved.(6) Starting around the 60th day of life, infants with still immature immune systems are subjected to a battery of vaccines: DTaP, HiB, polio, Prevnar, and a squirt of oral rotavirus vaccine, all generally given at the same time. The onslaught of these shots, including two additional injections of hepatitis b vaccine, repeats twice, every 60 days. This deposits approximately 66 different viral or bacterial antigens and measurable amounts of a dozen different chemicals into a six month old infant. By the time a child is five years old, a little 40 pound human will receive up to 35 injections, containing at least 110 different weakened pathogens (or pathogen particles), and an assortment of 59 different chemicals. If all approved shots are administered, the little tot will also be injected with stray viral DNA, four types of animal cells, cells from aborted fetal tissue and a bit of human albumin (a foreign protein.) By the way, all of these substances are listed on package inserts for each vaccine. Subjective Labels for Brain Pathology According to the U.S. Surgeon General, nearly 20 percent of American children and adolescents suffer from a mental disorder so significant, it interferes with their day-to-day life.(7) The plethora of diagnoses fall into a few fairly well defined categories: Conduct disorders , such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); learning disabilities , a spectrum of speech delay and comprehension issues; and mood disorders , which include depression, bipolar disorder and chronic anxiety. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) approximates that nearly 5.4 million children 4 to 17 years of age have been diagnosed with ADHD alone (2007 data). This represents nearly 1 in 10 of all children – and the number has been escalating. Between 2003 and 2007,(8) the number of parent-reported children diagnosed with ADHD increased by 22 percent. Disturbingly, in an attempt to quell their out-of-control behavior, more than two thirds of these children have been placed on at least one prescription medication. Since the underlying cause for the sick brain and hyperkinetic behavior has not been identified and addressed, the drugging is akin to tightening down the lid on a boiling pot of water. One of these behavioral disorders, called Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD),(9)is said to manifest around 8 years of age. Mannerisms include: easily losing one’s temper; aggressively arguing with adults and defying requests; refusing to follow rules; deliberately annoying other people; blaming others for one’s own mistakes or misbehavior; and being touchy, easily annoyed or angered, resentful, spiteful, or vindictive. In 2008, ODD was the most common reason children were referred to mental health professionals for an assessment, accounting for at least half of all out patient visits to psychiatrists and psychiatric practitioners. These children, mostly boys, are commonly diagnosed and treated for several coexisting mental disorders.(10) The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) is about to be released, replacing the older DSM-IV. The DSM (11) is a catalog of hundreds of psychiatric conditions, including a long list of anxiety, personality and adjustment disorders. Diagnoses are available to give children who struggle with math and writing skills a diagnosis (Mathematics Disorder 315.1 and Disorder of Written Expression 315.2, respectively), labeling a child who has a missing skill with a mental deficiency. New disorders are on the horizon too, such as Temper Dysregulation Disorder with Dysphoria (TDD),(12)a tweak to the current diagnosis of bipolar disorders for children under the age of ten. Treatments offered for malfunctioning, unhealthy brains include an extensive list of prescription medications, divided by class, based on the effect they are thought to have on brain chemistry. Antidepressants, mood stabilizers, anti-psychotics and sedatives are prescribed to ostensibly correct imbalances in brain chemicals. If one drug doesn’t work, more are added, perhaps with unintended consequences on behavior. A recent 69-month study identified 484 drugs that accounted for 780,169 serious adverse events, including violence and aggressive behavior. The drugs were associated with 387 reports of homicide, 404 physical assaults, 27 cases indicating physical abuse, 896 homicidal ideation reports, and 223 cases described as violence-related symptoms. Medications most strongly associated with violence(13) were 11 different antidepressants, particularly the serotonin reuptake inhibitors (ex: Lexapro, Paxil, and Zoloft); 6 different sedative/ hypnotics (ex: Xanax and Clonipin) and 3 drugs given for ADHD, including Ritalin and Concerta. Additionally, the anti-psychotics drugs, Seroquel, Zyprexa and Respirdol, commonly used to treat ODD,(14)are among drugs that can lead to violence. Combined Effects Significant populations of children in the U.S. have been exposed to a combination of chemicals, vaccines and multiple prescription medications – from infancy through early adulthood. No studies have examined the effect these components have individually on brain function, let alone in combination. Mental health experts try to convince us that the chemical exposures are so small they cannot have negative effects. Same with vaccines. “Experts” espouse that vaccinations are safe, effective, protective and harmless. No thought — or research — has been done to examine the potential problems that can arise from the combined effect of four or more simultaneous medications, vaccines and chemicals. There has been little effort by the government (FDA/CDC), the pharmaceutical industry or doctors — all of whom profit handsomely from massive drug and vaccine use — to evaluate the combined negative effects of these exposures. Brain inflammation has been the hallmark of severe reactions since the first vaccine — smallpox. The pertussis vaccination can have profound effects on the developing brain of a child, leading to permanent changes in behavior, personality, intelligence, emotional stability, and physical ability. Virtually every year–from 1933 to the mid-1980s– a paper was published discussing the adverse effects of the whole cell pertussis vaccine.(15) Instead of spending more money to create new drugs and vaccines, we should demand that industry and governments study the complications and injuries caused by the combined use of the products we already have. Violence In America I have received many emails and messages over the years from persons or parents who are planning to go to other countries for a vacation, on a mission trip or to participate in a lifestyle immersion event. While many of the questions are about travel vaccines (few of which are required anywhere in the world; they are only recommended), I also get asked, “Do you think it is safe to go there?” That question always makes me pause. I’ve had the good fortune to have traveled throughout 57 countries over my life. Only on rare occasions- and mostly when I was in an ill-advised part of town or was unaccompanied in a rural area with wild animals I was unfamiliar with – did I ever feel unsafe. In fact, as a general rule, I have felt safer off the beaten path in a foreign country than in the downtown of an unknown, mid-sized city after dark anywhere in the U.S. An epidemic of chronic physical illness, mental disability, depression and violent behavior have escalated over the last 20 years and in one way or another, is touching us all. Although economic and social factors, biological variables and individual dietary practices certainly play a role in overall health and behavior, the detrimental, combined effect of chemicals, drugs and vaccines heaped into the brain from birth is a real concern and is undoubtedly a huge contributor to the violence rising among America’s youths. Based on survey data(16) from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. This includes almost 16,300 murders of which, 76 percent, or nearly 11,000 incidents, were committed with firearms. Since the Tucson shootings, calls for stricter licensing and gun registration, more vigorous background checks prior to purchasing a gun, and a ban on assault weapons are again on the table. The pros and cons of this debate reach far beyond the scope of this discussion. But truly, guns don’t shoot people. And something obviously makes people shoot people. Perhaps stopping the chain of events that result in medically unhealthy and physically sick young brains is the place to start. We owe it to future generations to clearly identify the effect these combined toxic compounds are having on brains of all ages. Even more importantly, we need to heal these damaged brains and restore them back to health before the epidemic of violence gets any worse. REFERENCES (1) Los Angeles shooting: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20029109-504083.html (2) Omaha shooting: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/us/06brfs-SCHOOLSHOOTI_BRF.html?_r=2&ref=schoolshootings (3) Brooklyn shooting: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/nyregion/16shooting.html?ref=schoolshootings (4) EWG study on chemicals: http://www.ewg.org/reports/bodyburden2/execsumm.php (5) Hepatitis B hazards: http://legaljustice4john.com/hepBhazzardsCites.htm (6) Vitamin K controversy: http://www.bmj.com/content/308/6933/867.full (7) Mental illness in children: http://www.webmd.com/anxiety-panic/mental-health-illness-in-children (8) CDC, Parent-reported ADHD: http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/data.html (9) eMedicine, Oppositional Defiant Disorder: http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/918095-overview (10) Facts for Families, ODD: http://aacap.org/page.ww?name=Children%20with%20Oppositional%20Defiant%20DisorderAAAAAAAAAA§ion=Facts%20for%20Families (11) Complete list of Mental Disorders: http://counsellingresource.com/distress/dsm-codes/dsm-disorder.html (12) The new Temper Disorder: http://www.wellsphere.com/autism-autism-spectrum-article/childhood-bipolar-disorder-is-not-bipolar-dsm-v-and-the-new-temper-dysregulation-disorder-with-dysphoria/986737 (13) Medications associated with violence: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002271/?tool=pubmed (14) Medications to treat ODD, ADHD, etc: http://www.myoutofcontrolteen.com/mr-meds.html (15) The true story of pertussis: http://jhmas.oxfordjournals.org/content/57/3/249.full.pdf+html (16) JustFacts.com re: crime and self defense: http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#crime

Warning for future generations – Pre-natal BPA exposure may cause female infertility

(NaturalNews) The U.S. government is so concerned with health safety and hell-bent on supposedly protecting people from consuming certain natural foods (like raw milk), you can rest assured that Americans are not being exposed to well-documented chemical dangers in the food supply, right? Wrong. The chemical known as bisphenol-A (BPA), which is found in plastic food containers and many baby and water bottles and also lines the inside of many food cans, leaches into food. And it has been linked time and time again to extremely serious health consequences — including birth defects, brain dysfunction, and an increased risk of diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular disease (http://www.naturalnews.com/028748_FDA_Bisphenol-A.html). It’s even suspected to cause erectile dysfunction, the politically correct term for impotence (http://www.naturalnews.com/027581_erectile_dysfunction_Bisphenol-A.html). However, the FDA has dragged its collective feet for years on banning the chemical. Now comes new evidence that ignoring the widespread use of BPA could impact future generations. The reason? BPA exposure before birth may cause female infertility during adulthood. A study just published online in the December 2nd issue of the journal Environmental Health Perspectives found that fertility plummeted over time in female mice that had been exposed during fetal and neonatal development. These animals were not subjected to mega amounts of the chemical, either. The doses used in the experiment were lower than or equal to human environmental exposure levels of BPA. “Mice exposed to BPA in the womb and during nursing subsequently had fewer successful pregnancies and delivered fewer pups over the course of the study,” one of the study’s co-senior authors, Ana M. Soto, MD, professor of anatomy and cellular biology at Tufts University School of Medicine (TUSM) and member of the cell, molecular and developmental biology program faculty at the Sackler School of Graduate Biomedical Sciences, reported in a media statement. At the highest dosage of three BPA amounts tested, only 60% of the BPA-exposed mice had four or more deliveries over a 32 week period, compared with 95% of animals not exposed to the chemical. Although the reproductive problems in the female mice in this study weren’t apparent during their first pregnancy, later in the rodents’ lives there was a significant decline in the number of offspring the animals could have. “This finding is important because standard tests of reproductive toxicology currently consist of assessing the success of a first pregnancy in young animals. If subsequent pregnancies are not examined, relevant effects may be missed,” co-senior author Beverly S. Rubin, PhD, associate professor of anatomy and cellular biology at TUSM and member of the cell, molecular and developmental biology and neuroscience program faculties at the Sackler School, said in a media release. “In addition, the infertility effect of BPA was dose-specific in our study. The lowest and highest doses we tested both impaired fertility, while the intermediate dose did not. This phenomenon, called non-monotonicity, is a common characteristic of hormone action. In other words, chemicals have to be tested at a variety of doses in order to avoid false ‘no effect’ results,” added co-senior author Carlos Sonnenschein, MD, professor of anatomy and cellular biology at TUSM and member of the cell, molecular and developmental biology program faculty at the Sackler School. “Our findings are potentially of great relevance to humans because BPA is used in the production of materials people are exposed to every day, such as polycarbonate plastics and the resins used to coat the inside of food and beverage cans,” said co-first author Nicolas J. Cabaton, PhD, formerly a post-doctoral fellow in the Soto/Sonnenschein laboratory at TUSM and now at the French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA). The research team also pointed out that BPA has effects that mimic those of the hormone estrogen and the chemical has been shown in previous studies to increase the risk of breast and prostate cancers, abnormal behavior, and obesity. Of most concern is the fact BPA is already contaminating the human population — it has been found in the urine of over 92% of Americans tested, with the highest levels in children and teens. The three doses of BPA used in the new study are well within the range of human exposure and far lower than the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reference dose (i.e., the maximal acceptable daily dose) for the chemical. “Our results suggest that a more sensitive test, like the one used in this report should be adopted by regulatory agencies in order to uncover the true risk and possible epigenetic effects of suspected endocrine disruptors,” Dr. Soto emphasized. Editor’s note: NaturalNews is opposed to the use of animals in medical experiments that expose them to harm. We present these findings in protest of the way in which they were acquired. For more information: http://ehponline.org/article/info:doi/10.1289/ehp.1002559 http://www.naturalnews.com/Bisphenol-A.html

Help reverse last-minute decision to use highly toxic pesticide on strawberries

(NaturalNews) In a shocking, last-minute decision by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), the agency approved the use of methyl iodide, a highly-toxic carcinogen, as a pesticide for conventional strawberries. Ignoring the recommendations of both its scientific advisory panel as well as the comments of tens of thousands of citizens opposed to its use, the DPR instead sided with the interests of the chemical industry and granted approval. Currently, most conventional strawberries are doused in methyl bromide, another toxic pesticide linked to respiratory, nervous system, and neurological disorders. The chemical is banned in many countries throughout the world because of the significant health threats it poses. But methyl iodide is even worse, as it causes DNA damage, neurological problems, thyroid disorders, and cancer (http://www.naturalnews.com/029051_strawberries_pesticides.html). Fifty-five scientists from the National Academy of Sciences, five of which are Nobel Laureates, expressed opposition to the methyl iodide back in 2007 when it was first registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). And a scientific review panel assigned to review the safety of the chemical for the DPR recently concluded that the chemical is a huge threat to public health. “Based on the data available, we know that methyl iodide is a highly toxic chemical and we expect that any anticipated scenario for the agricultural or structural fumigation use of this agent would result in exposures to a large number of the public and thus would have a significant adverse impact on the public health,” told the group to the DPR. “We have concluded there is little doubt that the compound possesses significant toxicity.” But the DPR, during the final days of leadership under Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, ignored this information and instead pandered to the interests of Arysta LifeScience, a Japanese chemical company that produces methyl iodide. And the group approved the chemical’s at levels 100 times higher than those considered “safe”. The Pesticide Action Network (PAN), an organization devoted to reducing pesticide use around the world, believes that with enough public pressure, Governor-Elect Jerry Brown will issue an immediate moratorium on the chemical once he takes office in January. And you can help make this happen by signing a PAN petition that will be sent directly to him. To read and sign the petition, visit: http://action.panna.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=5300

Nicotine feeds growth of breast cancer tumors

(NaturalNews) Nicotine is not just addictive, but may actually promote the development of breast cancer, according to a study conducted by researchers from Taipei Medical University and published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute . Tobacco products are known to contain at least 60 chemicals that cause cancer, but up until now nicotine had not been classified as one of them. Nicotine, the chemical that makes tobacco products addictive, is produced by plants as a natural insecticide. “Every time a person smokes, he or she inhales more than 4,000 different chemicals, including nicotine,” writes Phyllis A. Balch in the book Prescription for Nutritional Healing, 4th Edition . “Nicotine, which is extremely addictive, increases levels of the pleasure-inducing brain chemicals serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine. … Nicotine acts as a stimulant on the central nervous system. When nicotine is ingested, adrenaline production increases, raising the blood pressure and heart rate.” The new study “suggests … that nicotine could directly contribute to the molecular mechanism of carcinogenesis in addition to indirectly contributing by promoting addiction to smoking,” wrote Ilona Linnoila of the Center for Cancer Research at the National Cancer Institute in an accompanying editorial. The researchers exposed both healthy and cancerous breast tissue to nicotine. They found that cancerous cells had more receptors for the chemical than healthy cells did, and that nicotine exposure increased the risk that normal cells would turn cancerous. The study raises concerns over the safety of nicotine-based smoking cessation aids such as nicotine gum, patches and inhalers. Smoking is considered the foremost avoidable cause of disability, disease and death in the United States. In addition to causing 90 percent of lung cancer cases, cigarette smoke increases the risk of birth defects, miscarriage, lung disorders and cardiovascular disease. Secondhand smoke alone kills 38,000 people per year. To learn more about ways to prevent breast cancer, read the free NaturalNews report “Breast Cancer Deception,” at http://www.naturalnews.com/Report_Breast_Cancer_Deception_0.html. Sources for this story include: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7960133/Nicotine-in-cigarettes-linked-to-breast-cancer.html; http://www.healthcare-digital.com/news/breast-cancer/nicotine-could-lead-breast-cancer.

« Previous Page — Next Page »