"All the World's a Stage We Pass Through" R. Ayana

Showing posts with label poisoned food. Show all posts
Showing posts with label poisoned food. Show all posts

Friday, 3 June 2016

Poisoning YOU: The Last Roundup


Poisoning YOU: The Last Roundup

Results of Glyphosate Pee Test Are in ‘And It’s Not Good News’


 

http://www.permaculturenews.org/images/roundup_killing_machine.jpg




[In April], Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) volunteered to take a urine test to see if glyphosate—the cancer-linked weedkiller—is in their system. Forty-eight MEPs from 13 different European Union countries participated in the test, and now the results are in.

Greens take the #MEPee to highlight 'probably carcinogenic' effects of #glyphosate https://t.co/3GW9jZchk1 pic.twitter.com/RWpBUkrP2x
— Andrew Bell (@aw_bell) April 22, 2016

According to ELISA test results from the accredited Biocheck Laboratory in Germany: “All participants excreted glyphosate by urine.”

The experiment was spearheaded by the Green Party in the European Parliament, which wants a ban on the controversial herbicide in the European Union.

The group noted in a press release of their so-called “#MEPee” test:

On average, the MEPs had 1.7 micrograms/liter of glyphosate in their urine, 17 times higher than the European drinking water norm (0.1 microgram/litre). This means that everyone we tested was way above the limit for residues of pesticides in drinking water.

Of the 48 participants, EU-parliament members from Belgium, France and Germany made up more than 80 percent of the whole investigated participants. The test showed that EU-parliament members from Lithuania, Spain and Croatia had the highest concentrations of glyphosate. The lowest concentrations were in the urines of participants from Italy, Finland and Ireland.

“Nevertheless all investigated EU-parliament members were glyphosate contaminated. This will show glyphosate is also in the food chain of members of the EU-parliament,” the report states.

Glyphosate, which the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) declared a possible carcinogen last March, is the main ingredient in Monsanto’s widely used weedkiller, Roundup. It is also found in herbicides manufactured by Syngenta and Dow.

The Greens conducted the test ahead of European Parliament’s April 13 resolution that opposed the European Union’s relicensing of glyphosate.


http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mepeefi.jpg




The results of our #MEPee test on #glyphosate are in and it's not good news for the 48 MEPs https://t.co/wMUCNhfKBn pic.twitter.com/DyqDO4i6Gj
— Greens in the EP (@GreensEP) May 12, 2016

Despite fierce opposition from European Parliament, countries such as France, Sweden, Italy and the Netherlands, and the 1.4 million people who have signed a petition calling on an EU ban, the European Commission—the executive body of the European Union—reportedly plans to relicense glyphosate for nine years.

According to the Green Party, the European Commission’s latest proposal, which will be voted on May 19, will “plough ahead with a full-fledged approval of glyphosate’s license for nine years.”

“It considers only symbolically if at all the European Parliament’s resolution calling for a very limited scope of approval. Responsibility for the protection of operators and for multiple risks is discharged onto Member States in a non-legally binding manner,” the party said. “We are pissed off that our governments want to allow this poison for another nine years! No politician should have this in his or her body, and not a single citizen either!”

Glyphosate approval in the EU expires at the end of June. The chemical has been the subject of incredible controversy in Europe especially after the European Food Safety Authority famously rejected the IARC’s classification of glyphosate as a possible carcinogen in November.

Agri-business giant Monsanto has also vehemently denied glyphosate’s health and cancer risks and demanded a retraction of the IARC report.


EN Glyphosate


The Green Party’s MEPee test was inspired by a German study “Urinale 2015,” which sampled glyphosate concentrations in urine from more than 2,000 participants.

“The study found that the scale of the glyphosate problem is enormous, with detected concentrations in urine between five and 42 times over the maximum value of residues for drinking water in Europe,” the Green Party pointed out. “No less than 99.6 percent of all citizens who took part in this survey had higher residue levels. This means that virtually all citizens are contaminated with glyphosate.”

A number of other studies have detected glyphosate—the “most widely applied pesticide worldwide”—in feminine hygiene products, everyday food items and, yes, human bodies. A 2013 Friends of the Earth Europe study reported people in 18 European countries have traces of glyphosate in their urine.


 

 

https://www.organicconsumers.org/sites/default/files/styles/400x300/public/l_glyphosate_2013.png?itok=zgzC6Lan

 

European Parliament votes to ban most uses of glyphosate


http://www.theecologist.org/siteimage/scale/800/600/400270.png


 

by Oliver Tickell


The EU Parliament has responded to the health concerns of millions by calling on the Commission to severely restrict permitted uses of the toxic herbicide glyphosate, including an effective ban on pre-harvest dessication of crops.

This resolution opposes approval of glyphosate for most uses, and takes aim at the excessive length of the approval proposed by the Commission, which must now address these concerns.

The European Parliament today [April] adopted a resolution strongly opposing the Commission's proposal to reapprove the controversial weedkiller glyphosate for use in Europe for 15 years.

The resolution flags significant concerns with the Commission's proposal, notably calling for significantly restricting the uses for which glyphosate - best known in Monsanto's 'Roundup' formulation - could be approved.

The Parliament's vote precedes a decision by EU government representatives on whether or not to support the Commission proposal to approve glyphosate for use in the EU. This may take place at the next EU pesticides committee meeting on 18-19 May.

While the 374 to 225 vote is non-binding on the Commission and EU governments, it will nonetheless carry strong moral weight since it comes from the EU's only elected body directly representing EU citizens and will force a discussion of the issues raised.

The resolution calls for no approval of glyphosate - recently determined to be "probably carcinogenic" by the WHO's cancer watchdog, the IARC - for many uses now considered acceptable, including:

  • non-professional uses;
  • in or close to public parks, playgrounds and gardens;
  • where integrated pest management systems are sufficient for necessary weed control.


It also calls for the renewal to be limited to just seven years instead of the 15 proposed by the Commission.



Pre-harvest 'desiccation' strictly limited


The resolution additionally demands strict limits on 'pre-harvest' applications on crops, with a strong recital calling such uses "unacceptable". This refers to the practice of spraying crops up to two weeks before harvest to 'desiccate' the plants and make harvesting easier.

Pre-harvest application of glyphosate is a clear route for human exposure to glyphosate via the harvested crop. Currently glyphosate formulations are licenced for a wide range of crops including wheat, barley, oats, oilseed rape (canola), linseed, field beans and peas.

This use of glyphosate is believed to be the main source of the herbicide and its residues in bread and NGOs including the UK's Soil Association are campaiging to stop this use.

The resolution further calls for:

  • An independent review of overall toxicity of glyphosate;

  • A call on the Commission and EFSA to immediately disclose all scientific evidence for the positive classification of glyphosate, given the overriding public interest in disclosure;

  • A call on the Commission to test and monitor glyphosate residues in foods and drinks produced in the Union as well as in imported produce;

  • Strong criticism of the Commission for accepting an incomplete dossier with regard to endocrine disruption;

  • strong criticism of the problem of resistances of weed created by glyphosate, and the toxic spiral by agro-biotech companies adding further resistances to plants.


'The Commission and EU governments must take note'


After the vote, Green food safety and public health spokesperson Bart Staes said: "The European Parliament has today highlighted serious concerns with the proposal to re-approve glyphosate for use in Europe and the Commission and EU governments must take note.

"We would have preferred if MEPs had followed the recommendation of the Parliament's environment committee in clearly calling for an outright rejection of the re-approval of glyphosate. However, this resolution opposes approval of glyphosate for most of its uses, and takes aim at the excessive length of the approval proposed by the Commission.

"This is a shot across the bow of the Commission and it must now work with EU governments to address these concerns, rather than pushing ahead with its proposed reapproval."

Although falling short of the full ban demanded by the Greens and campaigners, the passage of the resolution represents a huge victory for all those who have opposed the Commission's proposal to re-licence for all existing uses for 15 years and heavily lobbied their MEPs. Over 1.4 million people have signed an Avaaz petition opposing the relicencing of glyphosate.

The passing of the resolution also represents some skilful political footwork by the Greens in the EU Parliament. While they wanted a complete ban on glyphosate, they worked with other political groups to impose restrictions that would secure a majority of votes from other parties - even though the Greens opposed the final resolution as falling short of a complete ban.

"There is growing opposition among EU governments to reapproving glyphosate for use in the EU and we hope today's vote, combined with major public opposition, will convince more governments to change their minds on glyphosate", Staes continued.

"Given the serious health and environmental concerns and conflicting scientific advice regarding glyphosate, it is scandalous that the EU Commission proposed to continue to allow its use for 15 more years, without any restrictions on its use.

"With the WHO assessment having concluded the substance is probably carcinogenic, EU governments must heed these concerns and reject the Commission's proposal." 


Rural residents still left at risk


However pesticides campaigner Georgina Downs points out that even if the Parliament's position was adopted by EU Governments, millions of rural residents would still be at risk from agricultural use of glyphosate:

"The European Parliament vote has seemingly recognised the risk to the health of transient bystanders and non-professional users of pesticides but left at risk from exposure and adverse impacts the group with one of the highest levels of exposure which is rural residents living in the locality of sprayed crop fields ...

"There are many millions of rural residents across the EU (including babies, children, pregnant women, the elderly, people already ill and/or disabled) who have no protection at all from exposure to this (or indeed any other) pesticide that is often sprayed in the locality of their homes and gardens."

In a statement, Avaaz gave the vote a cautious welcome, pointing out that "with mounting public concern the vote in the European Parliament could be a major influencing factor for the decision of the Commission on a new license."

Pascal Vollenweider, Avaaz Campaign Director, added: "This vote shows European politicians are beginning to listen to the citizens they represent and independent science, but we will still be glyphosate lab rats for 7 more years. Two-thirds of Europeans want to suspend glyphosate until it is proven safe and it's now up to the Commission to put public health before corporate profits."





Group of Farmers Files Lawsuit Against Monsanto Claiming RoundUp Gave Them All Cancer

 

https://buelahman.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/dees-mon28_n.jpg

A group of Nebraska farmers diagnosed with cancer is suing Monsanto, maker of agricultural chemicals and GMO seed. The farmers allege that glyphosate, the popular Monsanto herbicide, caused them to develop cancer and that the company intentionally misled the public about the dangers of the world’s most widely used herbicide.

The lawsuit was filed last Wednesday in federal court in Lincoln, Nebraska. The farmers are seeking punitive damages, alleging defective design, failure to warn, negligence and breach of warranty.

Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup brand herbicide, which is advertised as being able to kill almost any weed. However, the company claims it is safe to use on food. Monsanto’s Roundup Ready GMO seeds are designed to resist the chemicals so the plants can still grow after being sprayed.

The lawsuit also claims that Monsanto “concealed or systematically sought to discredit” research showing links between glyphosate and cancer and continues to do so.

“Monsanto championed falsified data and has attacked legitimate studies that revealed Roundup’s dangers. Monsanto led a campaign of misinformation to convince government agencies, farmers and the general population that Roundup is safe. Its continuing denial extends to the date of this Complaint,” the lawsuit states.

Glyphosate was designated as a probable cause of cancer in March 2015 by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer. The report noted glyphosate is most frequently associated with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other hematopoietic cancers, including multiple myelomas, lymphocytic lymphoma, and B-cell lymphoma.

All of the farmers in the group have been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Later in 2015, California announced plans to label glyphosate as a carcinogen based on the IARC’s classification. Monsanto has fought back against the declaration with a lawsuit.

Several countries have banned or restricted glyphosate since its classification as a possible carcinogen by the IARC, including the Netherlands, France, Bermuda and Sri Lanka.

According to the farmers’ lawsuit, Roundup is used on more than 100 varieties of crops, and the volume of glyphosate applied to crops grown in the U.S. has increased from 85 million pounds in 2001 to 185 million pounds by 2007.

“Glyphosate is found in rivers, streams, and groundwater in agricultural areas where Roundup is used. It has been found in food, the urine of exposed persons, and in the urine of urban dwellers without direct contact with glyphosate,” according to the complaint.

Monsanto has been the target of a series of new lawsuits including in India and Burkina Faso, both related to its BT Cotton. The company is also being sued by 7 major US cities including Portland, Seattle, and San Diego.

GMO policy is also in focus for the 2016 election season as Vermont’s labeling law is the first in the nation to require labels for GMO ingredients. Vermont’s law takes effect in July 2016. In March, the U.S. Senate voted 48-49 against SB 2609, a bill that would have blocked states from making their own GMO labeling laws. Senate Bill 2609, the Biotech Labeling Solutions Act has been called the DARK Act, an acronym for Deny Americans the Right to Know.

The new Vermont law has some companies planning to label all products with GMO ingredients including MARS, maker of M&M’s and SNICKERS, fruit company Del Monte, and other large food conglomerates like Kellogg’s, and General Mills.



For more information about Roundup see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/roundup
- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section


Do you LIKE this uniquely informative site?
Hours of effort by a genuinely incapacitated invalid are required every day to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate, moderate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest.
Now that most people view these posts on mobile devices, sites like this earn an ever diminishing pittance from advertising…
Like what you see? Please give anything you can -  
Contribute any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
(You can use a card securely if you don’t use Paypal)
Please click below -




Spare Bitcoin change?


Xtra Images – http://www.permaculturenews.org/images/roundup_killing_machine.jpg
 https://www.organicconsumers.org/sites/default/files/styles/400x300/public/l_glyphosate_2013.png?itok=zgzC6Lan
https://buelahman.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/dees-mon28_n.jpg


For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ the top left of http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see


 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel -  https://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/playlists

New Illuminati’s OWN Youtube Videos -  
New Illuminati on Google+ @ For New Illuminati posts - https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RamAyana0/posts

New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati


New Illuminations –Art(icles) by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com



DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further!

This site is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution!

If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…


From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Tuesday, 18 August 2015

Ruthless Power and Deleterious Politics: From DDT to Roundup


Ruthless Power and Deleterious Politics: From DDT to Roundup

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjE6WfThJQ_OYP2QA0aRDjXSMUpy-boHVNXNmTCLOd-M2AdQIIwdzsd7N6x88RfCi2xY0x4NUc9zqKoXaVqPRhQKm_ciQXh9y4vCyZmYTBeHvJRkcvVEEZvngucQNDPuy1JfYfWcAtPaFHZ/s1600/Monsanto-Roundup-Dees.jpg


By Evaggelos Vallianatos


Morton Biskind, a physician from Westport, Connecticut, was a courageous man. At the peak of the cold war, in 1953, he complained of maladies afflicting both domestic animals and people for the first time. He concluded that the popular insect poison DDT was the agent of their disease. DDT, he said, was “dangerous for all animal life from insects to mammals.”


The Reign of DDT


Yet, he was astonished at what little was done to restrict or ban DDT. On the contrary, officials and scientists defended it:

[V]irtually the entire apparatus of communication, lay and scientific alike, has been devoted to denying, concealing, suppressing, distorting… [the bad news about DDT]. Libel, slander and economic boycott have not been overlooked… And a new principle of toxicology has… become firmly entrenched…: no matter how lethal a poison may be for all other forms of animal life, if it doesn’t kill human beings instantly, it is safe. When… it unmistakably does kill a human, this was the victim’s own fault – either he was “allergic” to it… or he didn’t use it properly,” he wrote (Biskind 1953).



DDT, Time Magazine, 1947
DDT, Time Magazine, 1947


The warnings of Biskind went nowhere. The Pentagon was testing nuclear weapons above ground and agribusiness was expanding its conquest of rural America — and the world. The strategic interests of the Pentagon coincided with those of agribusiness.

Rachel Carson, the author of “Silent Spring,” listened to Biskind. She denounced the hegemony of chemical pesticides, “the sinister and little-recognized partners of radiation in changing the very nature of the world – the very nature of its life.” She said America’s single-crop farming clashes with how nature works.

Instead, “we allow the chemical death rain to fall…. The crusade to create a chemically sterile world seems to have engendered a fanatic zeal on the part of many specialists and most of the so-called control agencies… there is evidence that those engaged in spraying operations exercise a ruthless power.” (Rachel Carson, Silent Spring)

Meanwhile, federal agencies and official science pretended nothing was wrong. The US Environmental Protection Agency, born in 1970, had to start from the beginning with toxic chemicals some 17 years after Biskind’s complaint. The political and economic forces of agribusiness, the chemical industry, and politicians forged an unofficial alliance between the Pentagon and big agriculture, with agriculture borrowing the Pentagon’s chemical warfare strategy for American farmers. Furthermore, the missionaries of agricultural industrialization adopted and spread the profitable new approach to chemical danger — what Biskind aptly called “a new principle of toxicology” — that still reigns supreme among the practitioners of conventional science and politics in the early twenty-first century. Like a gigantic octopus, the chemical industry put its tentacle all over Congress, the White House and land grant universities.

No wonder most toxic chemicals have been entering the market without being tested for health and environmental effects. Only the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the food and drug part of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act require testing of chemicals. The Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the cosmetic provisions of the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act, as well as all other federal laws require no testing for the chemicals or other products entering the market. This does not prevent the industry men and women say the products of their companies “meet EPA standards.”

DDT came out of that careless chemical culture – and war. DDT was successful in fighting malaria during World War II. For that reason, in 1948, its inventor, the Swiss scientist Paul Miller, received the Nobel Prize for medicine. By then DDT was used widely in America. The US Department of Agriculture “registered” it in 1945.

The popularity of DDT had nothing to do with its presumed “safety.” DDT killed more than insects. DDT doomed birds by making it impossible to give birth to live chicks. Their brittle shell cracked under the weight of the adult bird during hatching. DDT was particularly deleterious to predatory birds, bringing peregrine falcons, osprey, brown pelicans, and bald eagles to the brink of extinction. DDT also killed many insects it had not been designed to target, and also small animals, which ate DDT-poisoned fish and wildlife.

The deathly legacy of DDT and DDT-like chemicals has been a long one. The reason is their chemical properties: DDT belongs to the organochlorines, a huge group of chlorine-based poisons that last for decades in nature while accumulating in the fat of the animal ingesting them.

It was the human effects of DDT that convinced EPA to ban it in 1972. EPA considered DDT “a potential human carcinogen.” By that time, the early 1970s, DDT had contaminated “staple human foods, especially meat and milk.” In 1973, a federal judge did not know what to do since DDT had contaminated nearly all foods.

He said, “Although the cancer aspects of DDT are frightening, the obvious solution to that problem, that is, a total ban on foods containing DDT, is not available. Virtually every food contains some DDT… DDT has presented, and apparently will continue to present a massive dilemma both for EPA and for society.” (USA vs Goodman, 1973)

The same happened to the global environment. In 1979, two Wildlife Society scientists, Steven G. Herman and John B. Bulger, reported that DDT was “the most widespread and pernicious of global pollutants.” (Herman and Bulger 1979).


The Hegemony of Glyphosate


The banning of DDT in America in 1972 did not bring about any rethinking of factory farming and its addiction to deleterious pesticides. In fact, large industrialized and pesticide-dependent farms are now crowding the planet. Their owners preach a war on hunger but in actual practice their war is directed against the natural world and small farmers and peasants. And despite their propaganda for feeding the world, they only produce about a third of the world food. Peasants, not industrialized farmers, feed most of the world’s people (Douwe van der Ploeg, 2014). But industrialized farmers are responsible for huge harm done to the natural world and people. That harm comes in the form of global warming and the poisoning of wildlife, rivers, drinking water, and food.

Other toxins replaced DDT. One that became extremely successful worldwide is glyphosate, the so-called active ingredient of Roundup weed killer. This herbicide is a product of the multinational giant seed and agribusiness company Monsanto.

Glyphosate received its EPA registration in 1974. This was a time of deep corruption in the chemical industry. For a few decades before and after 1974, laboratories widely fabricated “safety” studies of pesticides, other chemicals, and also drugs. The fraud enabled these to benefit from government registration. It opened the doors to sales. I don’t know if glyphosate entered the market through fraud. But I do know 1974, the year EPA registered glyphosate, was a year of corruption for most pesticides. The EPA scientist who uncovered the lab fraud, Adrian Gross, was my friend and colleague.

Just like DDT, glyphosate quickly became a global celebrity. Scientists on the payroll of the industry, including scientists of our land grant universities, declared it “safe.” Farmers, gardeners and lawn keepers adopted it widely.

However, not everybody was happy seeing another weed killer making the rounds all over the world. Glyphosate caught the attention of Don Huber, a retired Colonel from the army’s biological warfare corps and a retired academic scientist from Purdue University where he taught for 35 years. Of all the things he knows about biological weapons and diseases and crops, he is the most concerned about the effects of pesticides on the biological systems making up agriculture. He illustrates his anxiety with the effects of glyphosate on crops.

Glyphosate is more than a best-selling weed killer. It is also a powerhouse of genetic engineering. Its masters have bioengineered crops, called Roundup Ready soybeans, Roundup Ready corn, etc., to resist its killing power. This is music to the ears of farmers who can clear their fields of weeds just by spraying their crops with glyphosate.

Monsanto would like one day to control the world’s food supply. With that imperial purpose in mind, Monsanto has been using seeds, crops, pesticides, and genetic engineering to spread its know-how throughout the planet.

But like other agribusiness giants, hubris keeps it blind to the harm its products may often cause to humans and the natural world. Studies published in 2010 show glyphosate is causing birth defects in frogs and chicken embryos at amounts smaller than those farmers and gardeners leave in food (Paganelli et al. 2010). Older studies document: cancer, endocrine disruption, damage to DNA, and deleterious malformations of the reproductive, neurological and developmental systems of animals, including human beings (Richard et al. 2005; Benachour et al. 2007). Some researchers also link glyphosate to miscarriages afflicting people and livestock. Both the industry, including Monsanto, and government authorities have known about the toxic effects of glyphosate since the 1980s. Yet both industry and regulators have kept the public in the dark.

According to Huber, “glyphosate promotes soil pathogens and is already implicated with the increase of more than 40 plant diseases.” Furthermore, Huber reported that glyphosate “dismantles plant defenses” against disease by immobilizing vital nutrients, which means the growing crop is starved of the nutrients it must have to defend itself against disease and to be nutritious. Such impoverished crops, says Huber, are causing “animal disorders.”

On November 1, 2011, Huber visited England where he made a presentation to the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Agroecology of the House of Commons (Huber, 2011). His main argument was that glyphosate “predisposes plants to disease” and “stimulates pathogens” in the soil. In other words, glyphosate acts by compromising the defense of crops against disease; glyphosate kills the targeted plants (weeds) by becoming a biological war agent, in a sense, boosting disease organisms in the soil while killing disease resistance organisms. For the last 30 years glyphosate has been sterilizing the land of organisms that are essential for the health of crops. Such microorganisms are the highways through which plants absorb essential micronutrients. They are also responsible for fixing up to 75 percent of the nitrogen legumes like soybeans, alfalfa and peas need for protein. By killing microorganisms, glyphosate reduces the ability of crops to take up micronutrients from the earth. These micronutrients, like calcium, nickel, copper, iron, manganese and zinc are essential for the health and nutritional quality of crops and, therefore, the health of animals and people eating these crops. Huber connected the micronutrient deficiencies in crops to evidence of stillborn calves and animal disease.


https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbsm4Dl8lWeSKYL8sx3sqc-NeZTdf1Ms4myzttCjz75H2KgbGFxw8kNrVeZDJZ9jHGaUUFZq3mRSp5sizC6egXfM2d1AtjjJPMChWhXRFj5zzvtjdUYMgPHzqt41Xzj2BRUPk1jhsU6Zbb/s1600/monsanto-green-carnations.jpg 

Civilization Under Threat


Like Morton Biskind in 1953, Huber in 2011 spoke of the danger of a new super weed killer, glyphosate. In both cases, separated by 58 years, we have the sick feeling little, maybe nothing, has changed. The same irresponsible agribusiness activities threaten the possible devastation of American agriculture.

Huber denounces the betrayal of public trust by government, industry and academia. In fact, he cites a letter from 26 university entomologists to EPA in which these scientists complain they are prohibited from doing research because their universities receive money from genetic engineering companies to advance their mission, not the public good. And Huber laments the inexplicable reality of “how willing we’ve been to sacrifice our children and future generations and to jeopardize the sustainability of our entire agricultural infrastructure that is the very basis of our existence as a society.”

In spite of the warnings of Huber and other scientists, the USDA “regulators” of genetically engineered crops continue with business as usual. The EPA “regulators” of pesticides also continue with business as usual. The USDA recently approved 2,4-D for a new genetically modified corn. Apparently, they forgot the “weed killer” 2,4-D was a chemical weapon in the Vietnam War. Like its Agent Orange sibling, 2,4,5-T, the herbicide 2,4-D was contaminated by the lethal 2378-dioxin. Adding 2,4-D to the arsenal of GM crops doesn’t bode well for America and the world.


No More Death Rain


Fortunately, there’s resistance to business as usual. I cited Biskind and Carson but in the late 1960s, biologist Paul Shepard attacked the insanity of industrialization. He said ecology was more than a science. It was a resistance movement. He said ecologists are subversive because they challenge our “right” to pollute the environment, destroy predatory animals, spread pesticides everywhere, contaminate water and food, and appropriate the land for military and industrial purposes. Furthermore, ecology subverts our delusions of unlimited human population, the domestication of all wild places, large-scale manipulation of the atmosphere and the seas, and the extinction of species.

Resistance is now taking a new form: the removal of global toxins, unfortunately, one at a time. In early 2015, the usually timid and agribusiness-friendly, World Health Organization, declared both glyphosate and 2,4-D probable human carcinogens. Following on this modest step, in May 14, 2015, the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, based in Basel, Switzerland, issued an appeal to the European governments: “To immediately and permanently ban, with no exceptions, the production, trade and use in all the EU territory of glyphosate-based herbicides.” The UK journalist, Georgina Downs, echoes that sentiment to include all pesticides.

Humans need a pesticides-free future. We need to appeal to all politicians all over the world to ban permanently and without exception all pesticides. Glyphosate represents all pesticides. Our message and policies should be telling agribusiness companies enough is enough: no more death rain. Monsanto, on the other hand, is building additional facilities to manufacture another weed killer by the name of dicamba in order to mix it up with glyphosate. That way the joint product will be more effective against the super weeds resisting glyphosate.

Pesticides are chemical weapons. They were brought to market under the cover of questionable and often fraudulent science and regulation. They are maintained in farming under the false pretense of feeding the world. They are danger itself; they are biocides. They are simply the money lubricants of giant agriculture. They serve no public purpose. We don’t need them.


Benachour et al. (2007) Time-and dose-dependent effects of roundup on human embryonic and placental cells. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 53, 126–133.
Biskind, MS (1953) “Public Health Aspects of the New Insecticides,” American Journal of Digestive Diseases 20: 331-341.
Douwe van der Ploeg, J “Peasant-driven agricultural growth and food sovereignty,” The Journal of Peasant Studies 41: 999-1030.
Herman SG and Bulger JB (1979), “Effects of a Forest Application of DDT on Nontarget Organisms,” Wildlife Monographs, No 69: 49.
Hobbelink, H “Hungry for Land” Grain, May 2014.
Huber, DM “The effects of glyphosate (Roundup) on soils, crops and consumers” (Presentation to the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Agroecology, House of Commons, UK, 1 November 2011).
Paganelli A. et al. (2010) Glyphosate-Based Herbicides Produce Teratogenic Effects on Vertebrates by Impairing Retinoic Acid Signaling. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 23: 1586-1595.
Richard S, Moslemi S, Sipahutar H, Benachour N and Seralini G-E (2005) Differential Effects of Glyphosate and Roundup on Human Placental Cells and Aromatase. Environmental Health Perspectives 113: 716-720.
Shepard, P “Ecology and Man – a Viewpoint” in The Subversive Science, ed. Paul Shepard and Daniel McKinley (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1969) 9.
United States v. Goodman 486 F. 2d at 855 (7th Cir. 1973).



Evaggelos Vallianatos, Ph.D., is a former EPA analyst. He is the author of hundreds of articles and several books, including “Poison Spring: The Secret History of Pollution and the EPA” (with McKay Jenkins, Bloomsbury Press, 2014).





Seeds of Death - Full Movie
(1:19:37)


Sick: ‘Intolerable Levels’ of Monsanto’s Glyphosate Found in Breast Milk


Sadly, past research found similar results
baby-breast-milk-735-350

Christina Sarich


After testing 16 women from different regions all over Germany, the Green Party has found that traces of the chemical glyphosate, the primary ingredient in Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Round Up, are appearing in breast milk at ‘intolerable levels’ that could harm a developing baby and the mother.

The weed killer traces in breast milk were found to be between 0.210 and 0.432 nanograms per millilitre (PPB). Drinking water is allowed to have no more than 0.100 nanograms of glyphosate.

Irene Witte, professor of toxicology at the University of Oldenburg, described the findings as “intolerable.”

Witte stated:
“I would never have guessed that the quantities are so high.”

Though the sample size in these initial tests was small, and Witte believed it should be expanded, it is still indicative of a major problem. These 16 women indicate that larger sections of the population are being poisoned with glyphosate – a substance which the WHO has called carcinogenic. If Monsanto is allowed to keep selling these chemicals, it amounts to mass-murder.


Witte explained that if the chemical has been proven to cause cancer, then no amount should be tolerated in our food supply. As a reminder, the World Health Organization recently delivered a huge blow to Monsanto, pronouncing that glyphosate – and subsequently Monsanto’s Round Up – is ‘probably carcinogenic.’ The organization also recent declared 2 other pesticides – Lindane and DDT – as being cancer-causing to humans.

Further commenting on the glyphosate residues found in breast milk, Witte said:
“There is not upper limit you can then put on the quantity. Every molecule could cause cancer.”

The chair of the Environmental Committee in the Bundestag (German parliament) Bärbel Höhn of the Green Party said:
“The government needs to take glyphosate out of circulation until the question of its links to cancer has been cleared up.”

Sadly, past studies have found similar results to this. The herbicide has been found in breast milk, urine, and even blood:


  • A piece of research found that the toxic ingredient is actually found in the breast milk of women, leading to damage to underdeveloped human beings.
  • In addition to being found in urine and breast milk, glyphosate has also been found in people’s blood in 18 different countries.


The link is clear. It’s time to stop these biotech companies, now.


Learn how to test for Glyphosate Residues, here.



 

For more information about Roundup see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/roundup
- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section


Hope you like this not for profit site -
It takes hours of work every day by a genuinely incapacitated invalid to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest
Like what we do? Please give anything you can -  
Contribute any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
(You can use a card securely if you don’t use Paypal)
Please click below -



Spare Bitcoin change?


Xtra Images – https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjE6WfThJQ_OYP2QA0aRDjXSMUpy-boHVNXNmTCLOd-M2AdQIIwdzsd7N6x88RfCi2xY0x4NUc9zqKoXaVqPRhQKm_ciQXh9y4vCyZmYTBeHvJRkcvVEEZvngucQNDPuy1JfYfWcAtPaFHZ/s1600/Monsanto-Roundup-Dees.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbsm4Dl8lWeSKYL8sx3sqc-NeZTdf1Ms4myzttCjz75H2KgbGFxw8kNrVeZDJZ9jHGaUUFZq3mRSp5sizC6egXfM2d1AtjjJPMChWhXRFj5zzvtjdUYMgPHzqt41Xzj2BRUPk1jhsU6Zbb/s1600/monsanto-green-carnations.jpg




For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ the top left of http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see


 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel -  https://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/playlists

New Illuminati’s OWN Youtube Videos -  
New Illuminati on Google+ @ For New Illuminati posts - https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RamAyana0/posts

New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati


New Illuminations –Art(icles) by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com



DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further!

This site is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution!

If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…


From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com