Is It Organic Fertilizer or Toxic Sewer Sludge>

Toxic sludge is good for you?

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, along with municipal governments across the US, want farmers, school, and backyard gardeners to grow their veggies using toxic sludge, spreading the outrageous lie that municipal wastewater sewage plants can somehow magically transform hazardous materials into "organic fertilizer."

Toxic sludge is poison.

Listen

John Mayer and John Stauber of Organic Consumers Association talk about toxic sludge and how San Francisco's "green" mayor has sludge on his hands. 

Listen on Raising Sand Radio.
Listen on the Peter Collins Show. 

Scientific evidence has confirmed that municipal sewage sludge contains hundreds of dangerous pathogens, toxic heavy metals, flame-retardants, endocrine disruptors, carcinogens, pharmaceutical drugs and other hazardous chemicals coming from residential drains, storm water runoff, hospitals, and industrial plants.

Sewage sludge contains everything the sewage treatment plant was able to remove from the sewage - plus every new chemical and pathogen formed in the mad synergy of this chemical soup, including virulent, antibiotic-resistant bacteria created through horizontal gene transfer.

San Francisco public officials have helped the toxic sludge industry score a major victory in the Bay Area, where they've been able to convince hundreds of regional (non-organic) farmers to spread the hazardous material on farm land and pasture, and have actually been able to get city residents to take hundreds of thousands of pounds of toxic sludge and spread it over their backyard and community gardens.

San Francisco is a strategic battleground to stop the sludge industry from poisoning more farms and communities. In 1998 the organic community rose up and banned the use of sewage sludge in organic farming. Now it's time to ban its use on farms, gardens, lawns, and land in general.

Sewage sludge is a form of hazardous waste and needs to be contained and isolated as such.

California proposition 65 (P65) requires the listing of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. Chemicals known to the SFPUC that are in San Francisco sewage sludge that are also found on the California P65 list include:

Mercury - Molybdenum - Cobalt - Antimony Chromium - Dibenzofurans - Naphthalene - 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane (Dbcp) - Di (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate (Dehp) - Tcdd Equivalents (Dioxins) Such As Octachlorodibenzo-P-Dioxins (Ocdd)

Stop Sludge!

Click here to download OCA's Sludge Leaflet (PDF)

Organizations that have signed onto the letter asking Mayor Newsom to stop spreading toxic sludge on the city include:

Organic Consumers Association - Consumers Union - Arc Ecology - California Communities Against Toxics - California Food & Justice Coalition - Center for Food Safety - Center for Health, Environment & Justice - Earth Share California - East Bay Green Tours - Food First (Institute for Food and Development Policy) - GAIA (Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives) - Green Cafe Network - Help for Sewage Victims - Lessing/Sears Community Garden - Local Harvest - MOMAS (Mothers of Marin Against the Spray) - North Berkeley Harvest - Our City - People's Grocery - Planting Justice - Raising Sand Radio/Motherspeak - Safe Food and Fertilizer - San Francisco Green Party - Teamsters Union - United Sludge -Free Alliance

EPA Approves HIGHER Levels Of Monsanto's Roundup Glyphosate

When does one plus one not equal two? When mounting evidence says glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup pesticide, does more damage to our health and environment than we thought. And the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) responds by approving higher, not lower, allowable limits of the pesticide residue.

Please sign the letter below. Tell the EPA you want lower, not higher, limits on Monsanto’s glyphosate and Roundup!

This month (May 2013) the EPA announced a final ruling to increase, yet again, the allowed residue limits in food and animal feed of glyphosate, the key active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. Under the ruling, the allowed glyphosate level in animal feed will rise to 100 parts per million (ppm) and 40 ppm in oilseed crops.

There is precedence for final rulings to be revisited, even reversed, if enough people voice their opposition. The EPA will take comments on the ruling until July 1, 2013.

The EPA ruling defies sound science and undermines public health. Peer reviewed studies show rats fed diets as low as 2ppm of glyphosate were 70 percent to 80 percent more likely to develop tumors. Infertility, affecting both the sperm and the egg, was documented in animals subjected to glyphosate residue levels as low as .05 ppm. Birth defects in frog and chicken embryos resulted after being subjected to glyphosate residues of just 2.03 ppm.

Yet the EPA claims glyphosate is only “minimally toxic” to humans, and 40 ppm is nothing to worry about?

The EPA’s decision is all the more unjustifiable in light of two recently published, peer reviewed studies revealing glyphosate to be a far greater threat to human health than previously determined.

According to a study published in the journal Entropy in April 2013, glyphosate is related to debilitating diseases like gastrointestinal disorders, diabetes, heart disease, obesity, autism, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. The study says the negative impact on the human body is “insidious and manifests slowly over time, as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body… it may in fact be the most biologically disruptive chemical in our environment.”

A 2012 study published in the journal Archives of Toxicology showed Roundup is toxic to human DNA even when diluted to concentrations 450-fold lower than used in agricultural applications. Industry regulators and long-term studies look at glyphosate in isolation, instead of looking at Roundup’s full formulation, which includes secret added ingredients. These “confidential” and unlabeled ingredients, when measured as a whole, affect all living cells, including human cells.

Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the world. According to the EPA, at least 208 million tons of Roundup were sprayed on GE crops, lawns and roadsides in the years 2006 and 2007. In 2007, as much as 185 million pounds of glyphosate was used by U.S. farmers, double the amount used just six years ago.

A 2009 study found that Americans use about 100 million pounds of glyphosate annually on their lawns and gardens. It’s safe to assume all these number are much higher now. Why? Because GE crops are now being invaded by new strains of herbicide-resistant “superweeds” requiring higher and higher doses of poison.

Beyond Pesticides has assembled extensive documentation of past research linking glyphosate to increased cancer risk, neurotoxicity and birth defects, as well as eye, skin, respiratory irritation, lung congestion, increased breathing rate, damage to the pancreas, kidney and testes.

Glyphosate also endangers the environment, destroys soil and plants, and is linked to a host of health hazards. The EPA’s decision to increase the allowed residue limits of glyphosate is out of date, dangerous to the health of people and the environment and scientifically unsupportable.

Please sign the letter below. Tell the EPA you want lower, not higher, limits on Monsanto’s glyphosate and Roundup! I am very concerned about the increase in glyphosate residue limits proposed for food and commodity crops. Mounting evidence points to the need to lower, not raise, the allowable limits of glyphosate residue.

Peer reviewed studies show rats fed diets as low as 2ppm of glyphosate were 70 percent to 80 percent more likely to develop tumors. Infertility, affecting both the sperm and the egg, was documented in animals subjected to glyphosate residue levels as low as .05 ppm. Birth defects in frog and chicken embryos resulted after being subjected to glyphosate residues of just 2.03 ppm.

One recent study, http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416 published in the journal Entropy in April 2013, revealed glyphosate to be a far greater threat to human health than previously determined. According to the study, glyphosate is related to debilitating diseases like gastrointestinal disorders, diabetes, heart disease, obesity, autism, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. The study says the negative impact on the human body is “insidious and manifests slowly over time, as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body… it may in fact be the most biologically disruptive chemical in our environment.”

The EPA’s science on glyphosate is outdated. I urge you to do a complete review of the toxicity of glyphosate and adjust the tolerance levels allowed in the U.S. feed and food supply downward, not upward. Thank you.

US Breaks 12,793 Snow & Cold Records In Less Than 2 Months

“From March 12 to April 22 (6 weeks) there were 9,664 snow and cold records broken,” says reader Ralph Fato.


“From April 22 to May 5^th there were 3,129 snow and cold records broken.”
“That’s 12,793 Snow and Cold records broken in less than 2 months.”

Uruguay: Birth of a Movement Against Mining and Extractivism

On March 7 one of Uruguay’s strongest myths was broken: trust in state enterprises. That day those who turned on their faucets were met with a foul smell and those who were drinking coffee or maté found a strange taste. The company in charge of the water supply, the State Sanitary Works (OSE), had to confess that there was “an episode” of algae contamination in the Santa Lucia River Basin, which supplies six out of ten Uruguayans.
Despite this, the state company said that the water was potable. 

A statement released days later said: “In relation to the event of the taste and odor perceived several days ago by the population of the metropolitan area, OSE informs that it was entirely due to a substance released by a type of microscopic algae in the Santa Lucia River. This substance, called Geosmin, has no bearing on the health of the population “[1].

The authorities closed ranks and denied emphatically the contamination of water sources, which had always been of high quality. However, much of the population did not believe the State’s arguments, buying bottled water and depleting stocks.


This event wouldn’t have had much significance if it were not for a movement that has grown in recent years against the installation of an Indian owned, open pit, iron mine called Aratirí. The movement has also been protesting the extensive use of pesticides and fertilizers that have polluted the soy crop and recently re-forested areas. In fact, environmental consciousness has grown widely due to a debate following the installation of a massive pulp mill on the Uruguay River.


At that time (approximately 2003 – 2008), amid the euphoria of to the rise to power of the Fente Amplio (2004) and an atmosphere of nationalism exacerbated by disputes between environmentalists and the Argentine government, the majority of the population supported the Uruguayan government. Now things have changed. The rural population (only 5% of the total) began to feel the harmful effects of agricultural development and small-scale traditional farmers (including livestock herders) began to mobilize.


A Contaminated Country


It’s difficult to accept that Uruguay’s rivers are polluted. The country was always a natural paradise, with few cars and light industry, with extensive ranches and grain farming. But in the last decade, with agricultural and mineral speculation, things have changed drastically.

The main changes that have been occurring over the last ten years have been concentrated in rural production. 

The price of land has increased six fold ($500 to $3,000 per hectare on average). Thirty-eight percent of agricultural land has been sold, and 41% has been leased [2]. Between 2000 and 2008 Uruguayan owners lost 1.8 million hectares that went to corporations that acquired a similar surface quantity.


There is a strong concentration of land owned by multinational corporations with one million hectares belonging to just 14 groups. Montes del Plata (Chilean-Swedish-Finnish) has 234,000 hectares followed by Forestal Oriental (Finnish) with 200,000 hectares. The U.S. company, Weyerheuser has 140,000 hectares and the Argentine owned El Tejar and Agronegocios de Plata (ADP) have 140,000 and 100,000 hectares respectively, completing the list of the largest foreign investments.


In the 2001-2002 season there were only 29,000 hectares of soybeans planted. In 2012 it exceeded 1 million hectares. Another million hectares of land was forested. This represents an exponential increase in the use of pesticides and fertilizers that have been washed by rain into rivers. This has initiated a drama that the people are beginning to feel.


A study of the Santa Lucia River (which provides 60% of the drinking water) conducted by the National Direction of the Environment (DINAMA) resulted in scandal. Internationally accepted phosphorus levels in water are 25 micrograms per liter, but the count detected in the river ranged between 70 and 12,900 micrograms per liter. [3] Scientists and environmentalists have been ringing alarm bells about the pollution, but the state has done little.


Biologist Luis Aubriot of the Sciences Department told reporters that “if there is no reduction of nitrogen and phosphorus” then the water problems will not be solved [4]. Another biologist, Mario Calcagno, recalled that in addition to the pesticides and fertilizers used for soybeans, the Santa Lucia River is polluted by refrigerator effluents, food industries and urban centers, and that native forest on its banks have been disappearing. “It’s a disaster,” he said [5].


Diego Martino, who represented Uruguay at the United Nations Program for the Environment, presented one of the strongest arguments: “In 2010, levels of atrazine were detected in the water. It is one of the components of glyphosate. There is no nationwide study that says what the consequences of very low levels of atrazine could be when consumed over ten years “[6].


In his opinion the main problem is the inability of the State to make and regulate decisions. He gave an example: How long did it take for the DINAMA to change the distance of 50 meters to 500 meters for spraying [pesticides] around a rural school? Years”. It’s not known how many children were made ill by this delay.


One of the main problems are [agricultural] reservoirs, which are used mostly for irrigation and rice cultivation. In a small country like Uruguay there are over a thousand dams that with the summer heat become incubators for algae growth because of the concentration of agrochemicals. Rain the water in the reservoirs overflows into rivers. All the rivers of Uruguay, including the extremely wide Río de la Plata, are green with pollution.


Livestock is also being affected. A rancher from the central part of the country, whose sheep drink in the large Rincón del Bonete dam, suffered the loss of 56 sheep in one year, all intoxicated [7]. The Director of Renewable Resources of the Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries acknowledged, “Uruguay does not have a diagnosis of the state of its water”. The same official affirms that soy is grown only four meters from lakes, rivers and streams, even though there is legislation that establishes a distance of [at least] eight meters, which is also insufficient. [8]


The director of the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Sciences at the Sciences department, Daniel Panario, received in 2012 the National Award for Citizen Excellence. He is the country’s most distinguished and combative scientist that has been denouncing pollution for over 20 years. In his opinion, the best example [of pollution] linked to water is lead.


“In the 1940s in England it was concluded that the poor performance of children in schools was due to lead and immediately all the water pipes were changed. In Uruguay this conclusion was made in the 1970s. We are now in 2013 and they have still yet to finish changing out the lead pipes in Montevideo. They say they have other priorities and that it’s expensive”[9].


In addition to the State, the university is an obstacle in allowing the population in knowing the truth. “One does not have complete freedom to investigate issues of national interest. When one goes to talk they risk having to deal with the authorities. A few days ago the [university] president said that I did not speak representing the university and that I was damaging the [image] of the department”[10].


Here appear two problems: academics prioritize research that can be published in journals, usually in English, to which ordinary people do not have access. On the other hand, universities depend on conventions and funds from various international organizations and private companies that have no interest in making public criticisms of the products they sell.


Universities themselves often boycott researchers like Panario, despite their national and international recognition. He applied twice for the national research fund and was rejected both times. He had to appeal to higher authorities for admission. He now seems happy with the growth of the movement against open-pit mining.


A Different Movement


Iron ore prices were stable for twenty years. In 1985 a dry metric ton was worth $26. In 2004 it had reached $38 and climbed to $140 in 2008. In 2009 the price dropped to $101 per ton, but now it’s rising once again. Iron ore is not just any other metal, as it represents 95 percent of all metals used in the industry.


Aratirí Mining belongs to Zamin Ferrous, an Indian company based in London. It has seven projects in South America, five in Brazil, one in Peru and one in Uruguay, and expects to produce about 50 million tons of iron ore across the continent in 2013. But the company’s potential in the region amounts to 10 billion tons.

In Uruguay they were licensed to mine about 110 thousand hectares in areas devoted to cattle ranching and forestry, where exploratory drilling had been performed to detect areas of greater density of iron ore. The mining project has three parts: the area where the mining will be conducted, about 220 kilometers of pipeline to the Rocha coast and finally a freight terminal. The total investment is estimated to be $2 billion.


In late 2010, when Parliament passed the Mining Code, small-scale rural producers of Valentines and Cerro Chato (180 and 3,000 inhabitants each), the areas where Aratirí installed [it’s project], began to mobilize. In January 2011 neighborhood commissions from the coast, where a port will be installed to export the iron, started a petition against the project.


From there [opposition] activity intensified. First they attended a session of parliament to explain the reasons for opposing the project. Small-scale livestock ranchers would see disruptions in their production because they will either face land expropriations and thus be forced to emigrate or they will be forced to migrate because of air and water pollution. The coastal villagers would suffer a loss to their fisheries and tourism will become scarce.


Later they held dozens of informational events in different places, such as small towns of 50 to 100 people. Finally in May 2011 they convened the first national march in Montevideo with the slogan “No to mining, yes to natural resources”. 

The [mining] company held its own march in Cerro Chato mobilizing merchants and workers. The next day the [small-scale, opposition] producers doubled the number of people mobilized, challenging the multinational [company] that had also began conducting its own informational events that were boycotted by those opposed to mining.


In July 2011 the Confederation of Coastal villages was created with representatives from seven communities of the Rocha Department: La Paloma (pop. 3,500), Aguas Dulces (400), Punta del Diablo (800), Valizas (330), La Pedrera (200), La Esmeralda (57) and Cabo Polonio. These communities oppose the construction of a port in La Paloma designated for the export of wood to be sent to paper factories, and another port designated to export iron.


On October 12 the second national march was held with a confluence of collectives from the north, central region, south and coastal zone, made up of small-scale producers and rural workers. Several celebrities participated in a video against mega-mine projects. Since then each region now focuses on local activities and the Permanent National Assembly in Defense of the Land and Natural Assets was created with about 36 grassroots collectives [11].
In mid-2012 the government confirmed the construction of a deepwater port for the export of iron, wood and other products near La Paloma. In August the movement against mining held its first national assembly in Tacuarembó (North) attended by 300 people from 35 collectives.


In attendance were three unions, indigenous groups, community radios, small-scale producers and rural workers. Members of the coastal towns opted for direct action to prevent the construction of the port near La Paloma. On October 12 the third national march was held in Montevideo with 10 thousand people participating, dozens of gauchos on horseback, tractors, flags of indigenous peoples, environmentalists and unions.


The movement against mining in Uruguay has three unprecedented features.

 The first is that it was born in the rural central region, in villages of about 50 to 3,000 people, and then it appeared in the departmental capitals and later in Montevideo, where the first groups are still being organized. This is a reversal of what has happened throughout the country’s history of social struggles, where almost all have been born in the capital.


Secondly, it’s a grassroots, assembly based, horizontal movement, linked to land and territory. It finds its inspiration from rural populist identities rather than unions and labor of the traditional left. Although these sectors are integrated and participate they do not assume a hegemonic role. The speech and language invoke the independence struggle of 200 years ago led by Jose Artigas, also emphasizing that everything relates to the land.


The third is that the movement has thus far rejected being institutionalized. NGOs have their hands bound. Political parties are kept silent. But was is most interesting is that the movement hasn’t chosen the path of a national referendum, the modality that has been adopted by all the great Uruguayan movements since the restoration of democracy, beginning with human rights.


There are local collectives that gather signatures for departmental referendums, and after extensive discussions the choice to move to a national referendum has been avoided. The experience of over 20 years indicates that this path leads to the dismantling of the movement since it infringes upon the popular will.


This is the first social movement that was born under a progressive government. It directly questions the extractive model and the pollution of water only supports the movement’s arguments especially for gaining public support. As Panario said reflecting on the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy in New York and the overall climate change debate: “You must have a catastrophe for the people to become aware.”

Would You Believe A Convention Center With 6 Acres Of Living Roof?

Vancouver, British Columbia’s convention center has a roof that’s not just green, it’s alive. It is a living roof topped by it’s own ecosystem of nearly six acres of native plants and grasses.
In addition to the living roof which houses thousands of indigenous plants and recovers rainwater for irrigation. The covention center also uses seawater for heating and cooling and on-site water treatment. And it has a fish habitat built into the building foundations.


<iframe width="440" height="260" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/OX0JHdVd27o?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Dead sea lions washing on shore in California appear to have died from radiation poisoning

 

An unusual surge of stranded dying and dead sea lions (seals) have littered Southern California beaches from Santa Barbara to San Diego since earlier this year. Most of the area newspapers and media outlets have been alarmingly reporting this unusual phenomenon.

It's unusual because this is the season when sea lion pups flourish. Instead they're struggling ashore in starved, emaciated conditions, if they've managed to stay alive. Scientists say almost half the sea lions born this past winter have died.

When they get too thin, they're forced to go ashore for sun because they can't stay warm in cool waters. All the concerned marine biology scientists are scratching their heads. Some have commented on how this sort of mortality rate is usually predictable according to atmospheric or oceanic conditions.

But there are none of the obvious tell-tale signs that could have predicted this high occurrence of seal pup mortality.

"They're clearly not getting enough food," said Victoria Harris, Interim Executive Director with the California Wildlife Center. Yet another scientist claims there are sufficient squid and sardine populations for them off the coast of California.

Scientists seem to be determined to get to the bottom of this marine life tragedy. "Marine mammals are sentinels of the eco system," stated Victoria Harris, of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA).

The NOAA publicly announced that they considered radiation unlikely as the cause, but it wasn't ruled out.

How radiation could be the primary causal event

Japanese marine scientists have announced extremely high radiation reading in sea water collected off Japan.

The New York Times article, "Fukushima's Contamination Produces Some Surprises at Sea" published September 28, 2011 contained information from scientists about extremely high amounts of radioactive cesium 137.

The extremely high readings recorded at different times indicated that cesium 137 was rising, and at that time in 2011, more radioactive material was continuing to leak into the ocean.

That article registered concern over the high amounts of radioactive material, but claimed at that time the ocean was diluting the radiation levels low enough to prevent humans from being harmed directly.

Of course, California sea lions are a long way off from the Japan coast, but different currents and eddies could spread a continuing accumulation of radioactive contamination farther out into the ocean from Japan.

Even tuna caught off the California coast have been found with higher than normal traces of cesium 137 from the Fukushima disaster in May of 2012.

An unpublicized cause of death for seal pups is domoic acid, produced by toxic algae bloom. It causes seizure and death in California sea lions. Domoic acid is a neurotoxin produced by a few specific types of harmful algae blooms among the phytoplankton on the ocean's surface.

Often this results in what's been termed "Red Tide" that kills off lots of marine life.

Here's where I'm going with this. Phytoplankton is easily corrupted. Although it's involved with providing well over half the earth's oxygen through the process of photosynthesis, excessive UV rays coming through ozone layer openings do damage them.

So now we have a 2011 report from researchers at the Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology which stated that Fukushima's radioactive cessium 137 has contaminated ocean plankton. Plankton is the first food within the marine life food chain.

Professor Takashi Ishimaru, said the plankton were heavily contaminated because sea currents continuously carried contaminated water southward from the nuclear plant. There you have it. Radioactively contaminated plankton.

If it doesn't produce a form of domoic acid from that damage, it goes up the food chain to larger fish and sea mammals. Remember that quote from earlier in this article: "Marine mammals are sentinels of the eco system."

If not directly from radioactive contamination, which has not been ruled out since some Fukushima radioactive debris has washed ashore on the west coast, then the indirect consequences of radioactive plankton could be at the bottom of this seal pup tragedy.

Dept Of Interior Endorses Removal 4 Dams Klamath River

 

• 

0
inShare

The four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River that block salmon migration and cause toxic algae blooms in stagnant lake water should be removed, concludes the most comprehensive environmental study ever done on the river system that flows from Oregon through California to the Pacific.

If the dams go - still no sure bet - 420 miles of historic habitat would open for the first time in more than a century.

The final environmental impact statement on what would be the biggest dam-removal project in California history was released Thursday by the U.S. Department of the Interior. It supports removal of the dams: Iron Gate, Copco 1 and Copco 2 in California north of Yreka (Siskiyou County), and J.C. Boyle in Oregon.

The study predicts dam removal would employ 4,600 people during 15 years of work, and result in an 81 percent increase in chinook and similar increases in steelhead trout and coho salmon.

The project, which would cost about $1 billion, including habitat restoration and sediment removal, would nevertheless cost less over time than maintaining the reservoirs and building federally mandated fish ladders, according to Interior Department scientists.
The report "represents the most comprehensive scientific, engineering and environmental evaluation of facilities removal ever undertaken in the Klamath Basin," said Ken Salazar, secretary of the interior, in a statement.

The secretary, who will have to sign off on the plan, said removing the dams would resolve a lot of water-related problems among Indian tribes, farmers and utilities in the Klamath Basin while restoring historic fish runs.

Wild and scenic river

The mighty Klamath, a federally protected wild and scenic river, flows 255 miles from Oregon through California to the Pacific Ocean, draining 12,600 square miles of mountains, forests and marshlands that some have called the Everglades of the West.

The dams have blocked salmon migration along the California-Oregon border since the first one was built in 1909. The Klamath is the third-largest salmon run in the lower 48 states, behind the Columbia and Sacramento rivers.

Destructive parasites and blooms of toxic blue-green algae also contaminate the water behind the dams during the summer. Water diversions to cities and for agriculture exacerbate the problem, according to fishery biologists.

Serious talk of removing the dams began in 2002 after a federally ordered change in water flow led to the death of 33,000 salmon in the river.

About 40 parties, including American Indian tribes, farmers and fishermen, signed the 2010 Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, which laid out the process of removing the dams operated by the PacifiCorp utility beginning in 2020. The groups also approved the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, which would appropriate $800 million over 15 years to divide up water and restore the habitat.

"The scientific and common sense conclusion is clear," said Rep. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael. "We should tear down these dams."

Congress' approval needed

The problem is that both agreements need the approval of Congress, which appears reluctant to approve large expenditures for restoration and other costs. Supporters are now calling on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to call hearings on the matter.

"Dozens of groups came together and, despite their very different perspectives, were able to hammer out these agreements," said Curtis Knight, the conservation director for California Trout, a conservation organization. "Congress must do its part to turn this proposed local solution into reality."

There are opponents

Still, opposition remains, particularly among the 100 or so owners of lakefront property created by the dams. The value of 668 parcels is expected to go down as the reservoirs are drained.
In addition, customers of PacifiCorp in Oregon and California would pay an extra 2 percent on their monthly electric bills to cover the cost of dam removal. PacifiCorp has agreed to pay the first $200 million, and California will cover any costs above that, according to the removal agreement.

Read the report

The final Environmental Impact Statement is available at
www.klamathrestoration.gov.

What Is Government?

The Elite's Elixir Of Death

Water is amazing, a cleanser, a life giver, an object of beauty and we, as human beings, consist of around 80% water. Some scientists are now beginning to take a closer look into the qualities of water and finding some quite remarkable attributes that exist in our life giving elixir.

As reported on the Natural News website, Dr. Jacques Benveniste discovered certain scientific properties of water that cannot be explained by conventional physics. He found that water has a memory that we can digitally record. Also of interest here is that Dr. Masaru Emoto has proven that water is affected by thought. So what is this life sustaining liquid on our planet? I am sure there are many more exciting discoveries for us to uncover. So why in the name of goodness was Sodium Fluoride added to our drinking water en masse.

The story of Edward Bernays propaganda campaign to get Sodium Fluoride into our drinking water is well documented. This action should be understood and researched, as it really does start to uncover the mass mind control we are under from the TV and main stream media outlets.

This is all to protect the ‘self termed ‘Elite’ class of people, to maintain their control on the common man, and to carry on living in a manner of great privilege, at our expense. Once you understand this position, then you can see why Sodium Fluoride was introduced into the water. It truly is ‘The Elites Elixir of Death’. It is also found in many other substances such as toothpaste and insecticides for example. We are ingesting this toxin without even knowing about it

I am pleased to report that Walter Graham has agreed to be an adviser to the Committee of 100 Ministry of Health department on Sodium Fluoride and Electro Magnetic Frequencies. I asked him ‘What are the detrimental effects of consuming Sodium Fluoride?’

To understand fluoride and fluoridation, let me start with a summery of the issues it raises, followed by an outline of the main issues:

Firstly, it is a breach of Human Rights to drug a population against its’ will. Secondly, fluoride is not what the government is dumping in British drinking water. They use hydrofluosilicic acid, the toxic waste of the fertilizer and aluminum industries, which is contaminated with lead, mercury, arsenic, uranium, strontium, chromium, aluminum and 22 other cumulative substances including fluoride.

 The government pretends this chemical cocktail is fluoride and that it has no side effects other than Dental fluorosis, which is characterized by pitting, white flecks and brown staining of developing teeth. Typically 50% of any fluoridated area gets this damage to their teeth.

There are in fact thousands of published studies proving harm and none proving fluoride safe. The side effects range from thyroid dysfunction, irritable bowel syndrome, bone damage, cancer, neurological damage and lower IQ. This is the reason why 98% of Europe has rejected fluoridation.

 Since 99% of the water is lost in underground leaks, used by industry and farming, as well as flushing toilets, it is economically senseless as well. This is legalized dumping on a massive scale, without any environmental impact study or proof of safety.

Lastly the dose can not be controlled as it is in all food and drinks using the water supply, as well as toothpaste, mouth wash, drops, tablets, chewing gum, used as a killing agent in pesticides, herbicides and rat poison, coal burning, unleaded petrol fumes, prozac, rohipnol, etc., thereby accumulating in bones, the pineal gland and other tissue. Fluoride is more toxic than lead and its forced addition to water is an affront to humanity.

DENTAL FLUOROSIS

The one side-effect the government do admit to is Dental Fluorosis, which 50% of the population get, in any fluoridated area. The following dental fluorosis photo shows how much structural damage fluoride causes. Amazingly the government claim that fluoride MIGHT reduce dental caries in a few children, while giving 50% of the entire population a new oral disease that is a sign of skeletal poisoning!

As the teeth are the only visible part of the skeleton, if it is doing damage to the teeth isn`t it possible that it is also doing damage to the bones? There are a growing number of published studies that show increased hip fractures in fluoridated areas compared to non-fluoridated. The government put in 1 part per million fluoride, which is like a pin dot in a swimming pool.

According to the BMAs Guide to New Drugs and Medicines, fluoride causes dental fluorosis at 2ppm! And at “very high levels (over 8ppm) may also lead to bone disorders and degenerative changes in the kidneys, liver, adrenal glands, heart, central nervous system and reproductive organs.”

FLUORIDE BRAIN DAMAGE
 

What do pesticides, herbicides, rat poison, anesthetics, Saran the nerve gas, Rohypnol (the date rape drug), and Prozac have in common? They all work on the central nervous system and they contain FLUORIDE!

A recent Harvard University study has shown that fluoride can lower children’s IQ. It is the 33rd study to find a link to lowered IQs in fluoridated areas. Here is the opening line from a Chinese IQ study: “It has been reported that fluoride can penetrate the blood -brain barrier and accumulate in cerebral tissue before birth, thereby apparently affecting children`s intelligence.”

Do we really want to allow the unaccountable government to dump fluoride acid into our drinking water with proven side-effects like this! Or should we get active and bring this issue to our politicians, churches, unions, schools and any other group that will help before this madness goes ahead.

POISON WARNING

All US toothpaste tubes have a poison warning on them by Federal law. Our tube says; keep out of the reach of children… supervise brushing… don’t swallow… use no more than a pea sized amount. The US tube continues on with; IF YOU ACCIDENTALLY SWALLOW MORE THAN THE PEA SIZED AMOUNT, CONTACT A POISON CONTROL CENTER IMMEDIATELY! <br><br>

The reason this warning appears is because there is enough fluoride in a tube of toothpaste to kill a child! The amount in the tube is 1/5th of a level teaspoon. Amazingly fluoride is a cumulative poison and is more toxic than lead. However, you have a choice whether you use it or not. Once it gets dumped in your drinking water all choice goes out the window.

What they are proposing to dump in is not fluoride… it is hydrofluorosilicic acid

 Which is the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer and aluminium and nuclear industries. It has uranium, strontium, lead, arsenic, mercury, aluminum, and 25 other contaminants, as well as toxic fluoride. It is a toxic cocktail being promoted as FLUORIDE. They get away with this because the government and industry are keeping you in the dark and getting you to pay for their toxic waste, which would cost them money to safely bury it.

EU & FLUORIDE

98% of Europe has banned or rejected water fluoridation. Why, don`t they want good teeth?

 A lot of European countries have better teeth than the Republic of Ireland, who have been fluoridated for 45 years! What is worse, Spain and Holland have a fluoride toxic dumping problem caused by their industries and their solution is to ship it to Britain and Ireland and get you to eat it!

 Holland stopped adding fluoride after a group of doctors carried out a double blind study proving that fluoride caused osteoporosis and arthritic pains, IBS, thyroid dysfunction, Skin rashes and dental damage called Dental Fluorosis.. After these doctors ended fluoridation, they fought on and got the Constitution rewritten to prevent fluoride from ever being added again!

TOXIC WASTE OF MONEY

Economically, fluoridation makes no sense. The water department admit to loosing 40% of its water in underground leaks – that is 40% of our tax money wasted! Out of the 60% that`s left, industry and farming use 7/8ths of the water – more tax money wasted! Out of the 1/8th that comes into your house, you drink 1%. The rest is flushed down the toilet, washing clothes, dishes, etc

The small target audience of children with the really bad teeth make up 3% of the population. So the massive dumping of fluoride acid into our water is a total waste of our taxes.
Most importantly, Fluoridation is a breach of FREEDOM of CHOICE. Why should you drink someone else’s drug for the rest of your life just because a small group of kids don`t brush their teeth? This is a breach of European Human Rights, but your government don`t care because they haven`t signed up to them.

FLUORIDE FACTS

• Fluoride acid added to water is mass-medication.
• Fluoride acid has never been tested for safety or effectiveness.
• Fluoride acid is contaminated with uranium, lead, mercury, arsenic, and 25 other chemicals.
• Fluoridation is environmental pollution on a grand scale.
• There is enough fluoride in a tube of toothpaste to kill a child.
• 98% of Europe has rejected water fluoridation.
• Fluoride has been shown to cause an increase in cancer.

I`m writing this article to help the Committee of 100 warn as many people as possible of this impending disaster. We need another form of government that doesn`t give in to pressure from rich industries and put our health at risk. Join groups fighting fluoride and help stop this before it gets going!

Walter Graham gives a very comprehensive and easy to understand argument on why we shouldn’t have fluoride in our water. I also asked Dounne Alexander, another advisor to the Ministry of Health, about her knowledge on the use of fluoride and she answered with this.

FLUORIDE IN WATER:

The best way to remove fluoride and 99% of all impurities from our drinking water is by ‘reverse osmosis filtration’. Our water supply is so heavily polluted, plus as it’s essential to drink ‘PURE Water’, I always recommend reverse osmosis filter. Fresh Water Filter manufacturers we use, gives 15% discount to our customers. Therefore, if your readers quote GRAM033377, they will also receive the discount (www.freshwaterfilter.com : TEL 0208 558 7495). Additionally ‘activated Charcoal Powder’ will also remove fluoride from our body. I’ve included a short extract on fluoride below. It’s not only in our drinking water but also toothpaste and mouthwash.<br><br>

1. FLUORIDE POISONING

• FLUORIDE was first introduced and given to the Jews during ‘world war ll and was put in their drinking water to make them complacent, docile and easy to control. It is also used in today’s prisons to dumb-down prisoners; keep them docile and under control.

• FLUORIDE is the main ingredient in rat poison (as sodium fluoride) and is also in the anti-depressant drug ‘Prozac’.

* FLUORIDE is actually an industrial toxic waste product manufactured by fertilizer industries (producing millions of tons annually) and contains aluminum, phosphoric acid and phosphates. In the 1930′s the manufacturers used to discharge it in the air and waterways, which caused serious health damage (such as destroy the immune, digestive & respiratory systems, cancer, blood circulation, liver, kidneys, thyroid, brain function and premature aging); resulting in expensive lawsuits.

Therefore, instead of paying out millions for disposal, the manufacturers cleverly convinced the Government, Medical Institutions to brain wash the general population that FLUORIDE is safe and beneficial for oral hygiene. It is now used throughout the world.

• FLUORIDE also causes hyperactivity and lowers IQ in children. Fluoride also affects unborn babies when ingested by the mother. The babies blood brain barrier is not fully developed and this allows fluoride, a neurotoxin, to penetrate and damage the brain more easily.

So why is it being including in our drinking water, toothpaste & mouthwash?

Exactly, why is fluoride being added to our drinking water. Here at the Ministry of Health are looking for activists who want to start up a campaign to bring fluoride awareness to the masses. You can contact us through the website.

NOTE:  One of the most effective ways I've seen corporations and government agencies sit up take notice, and change legislation is through change.org  

This is where anyone can start a petition and good causes typically gather supporters, and groups of supporters in the 5 and 6 figures!

Americans Chained By Illusion Called Brain Washing

California Is Failing And They Do NOT Want To Be Bailed Out

Warning to anyone outside of California……

This is what is happening in our state.

You MUST not let this happen in yours:

There is a parallel system of govt that has been stealthfully formed around us to overtake our federal/state and local system. This parallel system or shadow goverment consists of mostly state and regional boards, commission and agencies that are unelected and unaccountable to the people.
These boards/commissions and bodies have tremendous power and are now dictating policy


to local counties and cities.  Many of these agencies cannot be audited and are incorporating outside of California to avoid the open meetings act.

Federal and state funding are being given to these bodies bypassing the local municipalities giving them great power to coerce local cities and counties into implementing Agenda21 land use, transportation, climate and other policies.

In addition Public/private partnerships are being formed daily to further dilute the accountability and control within our state. These partnerships allow this shadow govt to hide behind and protect private businesses from lawsuits, environment regulations giving unfair advantage to these corporations thereby killing their true private competitors.

In a few weeks California will have a carbon credit trading scheme foisted upon us that will further kill our economy. This regulation was enacted supposedly to stop the evil corporations from polluting our air and water. However, all of those corporation who are favored by the shadow system, known as Benefit Corporations, will get waivers so the real damage by these regulations will be to the middle class.

In a few short months I predict that California will lose thousands more jobs, our businesses will not be able to compete and our economy will fail.

Please DO NOT come bail this state out!

I believe the rest of the country will be asked to save California because “We are too big to fail!” Do not fall for this. California was meant to fail by design. All the Marxist policies that have been implemented in this state were designed to overrun the system so it would fail and then the govt could come in and take over.

Please do not bail us out.

Use this as a cautionary message to save your own state.
God help us…….. We really need it.

Undiluted Coke Or Pepsi Much Cheaper Pesticide Solution

See, these products are not worthless, great to spray as pesticides, but would you really want to drink them?

Daryl Hannah Arrested Protesting Filthy Tar Sands

Soy's Cycle Of Destruction In The Amazon

By Dr. Mercola

Soybeans are touted by the food industry as the answer to world hunger. But very few pieces of propaganda could be more misleading. Not only does soy consumption lead to a number of health problems, but its production is leaving a trail of ecological devastation beyond belief.
While most people know the Amazon is under threat, few know that one of the principal perpetrators is soy.
One of the regions hardest hit by soy monoculture is Brazil, home of the largest expanse of precious Amazon rainforest. For several years, Greenpeace has been involved in an intense investigation of Amazon soy production using satellite images, aerial surveillance, previously unreleased government documents and on-the-ground monitoring, to expose the links in the soy chain.
Many of their findings are presented in the documentary "Soy: In the Name of Progress," which you can watch in its entirety in the link above. For more information, you can also read their final report, Eating up the Amazon¹.
Agricultural multinational bullies are rushing into Brazil to flatten forests into massive soy farms, expelling native peoples from their land by any means possible, legal or otherwise.
Peaceful community protests are met with violent beatings from large soy producers and their hired thugs, and individuals speaking out the loudest have been assassinated. The Brazilian government is sadly absent, uninvolved, and ineffective on this issue.
Not only is the soy takeover harming the Brazilian people and their native culture, but it's having a devastating ecological impact that could potentially affect the rest of the world.

Soy Monoculture Could Alter Global Climate Patterns

The Amazon is the largest expanse of tropical rainforest on the planet, but deforestation is occurring at an alarming rate. An area the size of France has been destroyed thus far. Not only does the Amazon contain some of the richest biodiversity in the world, but it's being destroyed before it can even be studied — so we don't even know what treasures have been lost.
The rainforest is tied into climatic patterns worldwide and provides a major source of the water vapor that ends up falling on your garden as rain. Some estimate that, if trends continue, the entire Amazon rainforest could be gone in 30 to 40 years. Consequences would be far reaching to the world's climate, including the U.S. and Europe — a climate that is already undergoing significant stress.

Soy's Cycle of Destruction in the Amazon

Between 2007 and 2008, almost three million acres of Brazilian rainforest were lost to illegal logging, soy plantations, and cattle ranching². Soy traders encourage farmers to cut down forest vegetation and plant massive soy monocultures. The traders then take the soy and ship it to Europe where it's fed to animals like chickens and pigs. The animals are then turned into fast food products.
Before soy can be planted, soy farmers have to remove the most valuable timber from areas they illegally occupy. According to Greenpeace² :

"As one of the first steps in the cycle of destruction, land grabbers build logging roads into pristine rainforest. Once accessible, these roads open the door to further devastation of the forest ecosystem through clearing for agricultural operations, fuel wood gathering, and mining."

The illegal timber trade supports the cheap sale of once-valuable tree timber. Then deforested lands are set on fire to clear any remaining debris. So not only is the rainforest destroyed, but tons of greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere by these burnings. Profits from this illegal logging are then used to seed soy plantations and line the pockets of a few select multinationals.
Three major companies account for 60 percent of the total financing of soy production in Brazil: ADM, Bunge and Cargill³. These enormous corporations build soy silos and terminals at the rainforest edge and buy soy from illegally cleared and operated farms, including those implementing slave labor.
As if this cycle of destruction is not bad enough, most of the soy crops are genetically engineered, which introduces an entire new set of dangers to you and the food chain. Genetically engineered crops come with serious risks, including resistant super weeds and super pests, uncontrollable cross contamination and serious health hazards, including allergies, infertility, birth defects, bizarre mutations and cancer, just to name a few.

Brazil Sees Fastest Climb in GE Soybean Share

The United States is the world's top soybean producer (33 percent), with Brazil running a close second (27 percent), followed by Argentina (21 percent)⁴. As of 2007, more than half of the world's soybean crops (58.6 percent) were genetically engineered (GE).

GE soybeans contain a gene that confers herbicide resistance, engineered by Monsanto. "Roundup ready soy" is being cultivated on a massive scale across the globe, having devastating effects in many countries, such as Argentina, where people are being sickened daily by massive herbicide spraying. According to GMO Compass⁵, at one time, GE soybeans were not permitted in Brazil, but that isn't the case today. GE seed was smuggled in from neighboring countries and planted illegally.

Unfortunately, the GE soybean share has risen faster in Brazil over the past decade than in any other major soy-producing country, as you can see in the following graphic illustrating GE soybean share trends over time.

GE Soybean Share: From GMO-Compass

Strategies for Avoiding GE Foods

There are some measures you can take to make sure the foods you select are not genetically engineered. Soy is one of only nine common GE food crops, but their derivatives are in over 70 percent of supermarket foods, particularly processed foods. So, the more fresh, organic and local foods you eat, the less likely you'll be consuming GE ingredients. Also, look for the USDA Certified 100% Organic seal: This green or black seal assures the product is certified organic by the USDA, which means it contains at least 95 percent organic ingredients that are free of genetically engineered ingredients. 

URGENT ACTION NEEDED: Support California's Ballot Initiative to Label GMO's!

One of the best strategies for reducing or eliminating GE foods is to force food manufacturers to list them on the label. You have a right to know if the foods you're eating contain GE ingredients. As it stands now, there is no labeling law.

This November, we have a great opportunity to change that with California Ballot Initiative Prop 37, which would require labeling of all genetically engineered foods and food ingredients, and ban the routine industry practice of labeling and marketing such foods as "natural." Voting day is fast approaching — if you're going to act, the time is now!

They need funds and volunteers. Remember, since California is the 8th largest economy in the world, a win for Prop 37 would be a huge step forward, likely affecting ingredients and labeling nationwide. As the campaign says,

"As goes California, so goes the nation."
I urge you to support this bill in any way you can. Here are a few suggestions as to how you can help pass this important initiative:

• Whether you live in California or not, please donate money to this historic effort, through the Organic Consumers Fund. If you live outside of the United States, you can still donate!  For International Donations, please call (218) 353-7651!
• If you live in California and want to get involved, please contact CARightToKnow.org. They will go through all volunteer requests to put you into a position that is suitable for you, based on your stated interests and location.
• No matter where you live, please help spread the word in your personal networks, on Facebook, and Twitter. For help with the messaging, please see CARightToKnow.org.
• Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the California Ballot. It may be the only chance we have to label genetically engineered foods.

Soy Is Destroying The World's Environment

Bolivia's Mother Earth Law Much Needed To Protect Nature

This month Bolivia passed the world's first ruling that grants all nature equal rights to humans. The “Law of Mother Earth,” agreed by politicians and grassroots social groups, redefines the South American nation's mineral deposits as "blessings" and is supposed to lead to radical new conservation and social measures to reduce pollution and control industry.

One of the sectors to be largely affected is mining, which not only is Bolivia’s second biggest industry, but it injects $500 million a year into the economy. This represents nearly one third of the country's foreign currency.

The new law —passed on Oct. 15—protects the right of nature "to not be affected by mega-infrastructure and development projects that affect the balance of ecosystems and the local inhabitant communities".

So what will all these mean for mining companies operating or with projects in the Andean nation?

According to Matatea Changuy and Sophie Beier, from Pulsamérica.co.uk, the first obvious implication is that Evo Morales’ government is now legally bound to prioritize the wellbeing of its citizens and the environment. Thus, measures compromising mining activities in the country may be take in any moment alleging compliance with the new regulations outlined in the Mother Earth’s law.

While Changuy and Beir consider the law ground-breaking, as “offers some provocative, revolutionary re-conceptualization of the interdependence between Humans and Nature, and the role of the State herein,” they also warn it lacks of clear indications on how all the concepts will actually be put in place:

In other words, such a complex and novel legal persona needs more than its inscription into the law: it needs a plan, a concept of how to reform the law from an ecological perspective. And how to do so, without creating more conflict.

Bolivia, often ridiculed by the USA and Britain in the United Nations climate talks for demanding steep carbon emission cuts, has established 11 new rights for nature. They include: the right to life and to exist; the right to continue vital cycles and processes free from human alteration; the right to pure water and clean air; the right to balance; the right not to be polluted; and the right to not have cellular structure modified or genetically altered.

It draws on the Andean philosophy that views the Pachamama (meaning Mother Earth in native language) as a living being and sacred home.

Evo Morales, Latin America's first indigenous President, has become an outspoken critic in the UN of industrialized countries. He has also become notorious for raising mining taxes and nationalizing the country’s key natural gas industry as well as the telecommunications and electricity sectors, since taking power in 2006.

Earlier this year, Bolivia took over assets from Spain’s Red Eléctrica Corp. (REE) and Pan American Energy LLC.

And in July, Morales seized and nationalized the assets of Vancouver-based South American Silver Corp. (TSX:SAC), accusing the miner of causing a conflict that saw violence erupt among communities around the silver-indium-gallium project it was developing there.
Though rich in mineral and energy resources, data from the Unicef shows that Bolivia is one of the poorest countries in Latin America and the weakest economy in all of South America.

Are You Willing To Bet Your Life On Monsanto?

Surprising Ways To Tell If You Might Develop Alzheimers

The statistics on Alzheimer’s disease are overwhelming. More than 5 million Americans are living with Alzheimer’s disease. One in eight older Americans has the condition, and Alzheimer’s is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States.



But there is another little-known stat that is equally, if not more, startling. Among cognitively normal people over the age of 75, about one-third has sufficient amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles to meet the criteria for Alzheimer’s disease.

These plaques and tangles are especially prominent in those who have Alzheimer’s and contribute to the degradation of neurons in the brain. But they also develop in many elderly people, even those who do not have Alzheimer’s.

It’s these cases — referred to as asymptomatic Alzheimer’s disease (ASYMAD) — that researchers find particularly fascinating. People with ASYMAD have all the physical characteristics that could lead to the progression of Alzheimer’s disease, but have managed to avoid it. If researchers figure out how, then that could lead the way to better, more effective prevention and treatment measures for Alzheimer’s, which are both sorely lacking right now.

Negativity Hurts the Brain

A team of researchers recently hypothesized that certain personality traits contribute to the cognitive resilience of ASYMAD. They compared the personality traits of those who subsequently developed clinical dementia with those who subsequently died cognitively normal, but with plaques and tangles indicative of Alzheimer’s discovered at autopsy.

And the results of this study may just want to make you turn that frown upside down, especially if you want to protect your brain.

The subjects in this study were also participants in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging, a study of physical and psychological aging. All agreed to have an autopsy of the brain following their death.

Researchers analyzed data obtained from 111 of the participants who completed personality tests at least once before the onset of cognitive decline, and who underwent autopsies after
death.

Personality traits were measured using a 240-item questionnaire that looked at 30 facets of personality, six for each of the five major dimensions of personality: neuroticism, extraversion, openness, conscientiousness and agreeableness.

As for neuropathology, participants were divided into three groups based on their cognitive health in their last year of life and their autopsy results:

1. Normal: Patients had no history of cognitive decline and autopsies showed no amyloid beta plaques or other signs of Alzheimer’s.

2. ASYMAD: Patients had no history of cognitive decline, but the autopsies showed amyloid beta plaques in the brain.

3. AD: Patients received clinical diagnosis of dementia and/or Alzheimer’s disease while alive, and autopsies revealed amyloid beta plaques and other signs indicative of Alzheimer’s.
Looking at the results of the autopsies and the personality questionnaires, researchers discovered that those who had greater emotional resilience and conscientiousness had lower risk of developing dementia, even if their autopsies revealed plaques or other signs of Alzheimer’s.

More specifically, ASYMAD patients scored lower on their personality questionnaires on negative traits like neuroticism, vulnerability to stress, anxiety and depression, compared with controls and to those who actually developed Alzheimer’s disease.
In addition, low scores on conscientiousness were strongly associated with the development of clinical dementia.

Researchers believe those who are more emotionally stable and conscientious may have greater resilience because they are generally healthier and engage in behaviors that reduce the risk of dementia — like exercising and abstaining from tobacco use. In addition, emotionally stable people tend to have better metabolic and inflammatory risk profiles and are less likely to have depression — all of which have been linked to dementia.

Also, they found that personality might be related to the severity of disease. Specifically, high neuroticism and low agreeableness were linked to more advanced spread of tangles. And skepticism, cynicism and being manipulative/deceptive were the characteristics associated with the most severe amyloid plaques and tangles.

This new knowledge of how personality traits affect the development of dementia allows us to see just how much of a role attitude plays in our overall health.

The more negative your overall demeanor, the more it will affect your health, possibly leading to cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease. Conversely, even if you are at physically high risk of Alzheimer’s, having a positive attitude toward life could delay or stop the progression of the disease. All the more reason to spend as much time as you can smiling, laughing and appreciating all the little things in your life.

Sources:
Terracciano A et al. Personality and resilience to Alzheimer’s disease neuropathology: a prospective autopsy study. Neurobiol Aging. 2012 Oct 2. pii: S0197-4580(12)00430-7. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2012.08.008. [Epub ahead of print.]
Saczynski JS et al. Depressive symptoms and the risk of dementia: the Framingham Heart Study. Neurology. 2010 Jul 6;75(1):35-4

7 Nasty Things Pesticides Are Doing To Your Body

Agrochemicals, home bug sprays, and lawn treatments could be causing chronic illness in your family.

Pesticides are designed to kill, although the mode of action they use to put the stranglehold on pests varies. Whether it’s nerve gas–like neurological disruption, the unbalancing of key hormones, or the stunting of a plant’s ability to absorb life-sustaining trace minerals from the soil, none of the chemical interventions seems all that appetizing, especially considering that chemical residues routinely wind up on and even inside of the food we eat everyday. Pesticides are also blamed for diminishing mineral levels in foods.

Agrochemical supporters tend to fall back on a “the dose makes the poison” theory, meaning tiny exposures aren’t really that harmful. Increasingly, though, independent scientists are debunking that belief, even proving that incredibly tiny doses could set a person up for health problems that might not crop up until decades down the line. Luckily, eating organic, less processed foods can cut back on your pesticide exposure.

Here are 7 health problems associated with pesticide-based agrochemicals.
Diabetes

Scientists have been noticing a link between pesticides and diabetes for years. The latest evidence comes out of the Endocrine Society’s 94th Annual Meeting, where Robert Sargis, MD, PhD, released the results of a study that suggest tolyfluanid, a fungicide used on farm crops, creates insulin resistance in fat cells. A 2011 study published in Diabetes Care found that overweight people with higher levels of organochlorine pesticides in their bodies also faced a higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes. 

Prevent it: To save money on organic fare raised without pesticides, cook with organic dried beans. In the home, avoid using chemical air fresheners and artificially scented products—these things are also blamed for inducing type 2 diabetes.

Cancer

More than 260 studies link pesticides to various cancers, including lymphoma, leukemia, soft tissue sarcoma, and brain, breast, prostate, bone, bladder, thyroid, colon, liver, and lung cancers, among others.

Prevent it: The President’s Cancer Panel suggests eating organic and avoiding plastic to lower your risk of environmentally triggered cancers.

Autism & Other Developmental Diseases

How do you get autism? The world’s leading autism researchers believe the condition develops from a mix of genes and the pollutants encountered in the mother’s womb and early in life. Many insecticides effectively kill bugs by throwing off normal neurological functioning. That same thing appears to be happening in some children. A 2010 Harvard study found that children with organophosphate pesticide breakdown materials in their urine were far more likely to live with ADHD than kids without the trace pesticide residues.

Prevent it: Switching to an organic diet rapidly eliminates pesticide residues in the body.

Obesity

Some agrochemical pesticides act as hormone disruptors, meaning they act like a fake version of a naturally occurring hormone in your body, they block important hormone communication pathways in the body, or they interfere with your body’s ability to regulate the healthy release of hormones. More than 50 pesticides are classified as hormone disruptors, and some of them promote metabolic syndrome and obesity as they accumulate in your cells, according to 2012 study appearing in Environmental Health Perspectives.

Parkinson’s Disease

More than 60 studies show a connection between pesticides and the neurological disease Parkinson’s, a condition characterized by uncontrolled trembling. The association is strongest for weed- and bug-killing chemical exposures over a long period of time, meaning it’s important to keep these toxic compounds out of your household routine.

Prevent it: Don’t turn to chemical interventions to kill bugs in your home or garden. Instead, use natural pest control measures.

Infertility

Pesticides spell trouble in the baby-making department, thanks to their bad habit of not staying put. For instance, atrazine, a common chemical weed killer used heavily in the Midwest, on Southern sugar cane farms, and on golf courses, has been detected in tap water. Doctors and scientists point to published evidence tying atrazine to increased miscarriage and infertility rates. Other pesticides cause a plunge in male testosterone levels. A 2006 study found chlorpyrifos, a chemical used in nonorganic apple and sweet pepper farming, and carbaryl, a go-to pesticide in strawberry fields and peach orchards, caused abnormally low testosterone levels.

Prevent it: Avoid the worst summer fruit, the kinds most likely to be laced with toxic pesticides. Instead, choose organic grapes, strawberries, and imported plums.

Birth Defects

Babies conceived during the spring and summer months—a time of year when pesticide use is in full swing—face the highest risk of birth defects. During these months, higher pesticide levels turn up in surface waters, increasing a mother’s risk of exposure. Spina bifida, cleft lip, clubfoot, and Down syndrome rates are higher when moms become pregnant during high season for pesticides.

Prevent it: To protect yourself, use a water filter that is certified by NSF International to meet American National Standards Institute Standard 53 for VOC (volatile organic compound) reduction. This will significantly reduce levels of atrazine and other pesticides in your tap water.

Alaska Radiation Concerns ~Lack Of Sea Life