Monsanto’s Roundup May Be Linked To Fatal Kidney Disease, New Study Suggests RT February 27, 2014
A heretofore inexplicable fatal, chronic kidney disease that has affected poor farming regions around the globe may be linked to the use of biochemical giant Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide in areas with hard water, a new study has found. The new study was published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. Researchers suggest that Roundup, or glyphosate, becomes highly toxic to the kidney once mixed with “hard” water or metals like arsenic and cadmium that often exist naturally in the soil or are added via fertilizer. Hard water contains metals like calcium, magnesium, strontium, and iron, among others. On its own, glyphosate is toxic, but not detrimental enough to eradicate kidney tissue. The glyphosate molecule was patented as a herbicide by Monsanto in the early 1970s. The company soon brought glyphosate to market under the name “Roundup,” which is now the most commonly used herbicide in the world. The hypothesis helps explain a global rash of the mysterious, fatal Chronic Kidney Disease of Unknown etiology (CKDu) that has been found in rice paddy regions of northern Sri Lanka, for example, or in El Salvador, where CKDu is the second leading cause of death among males. Furthermore, the study’s findings explain many observations associated with the disease, including the linkage between the consumption of hard water and CKDu, as 96 percent of patients have been found to have consumed “hard or very hard water for at least five years, from wells that receive their supply from shallow regolith aquifers.” The CKDu was discovered in rice paddy farms in northern Sri Lanka around 20 years ago. The condition has spread quickly since then and now affects 15 percent of working age people in the region,
or a total of 400,000 patients, the study says. At least 20,000 have died from CKDu there. In 2009, the Sri Lankan Ministry of Health introduced criteria for CKDu. Basically, the Ministry found that CKDu did not share common risk factors as chronic kidney disease, such as diabetes, high blood pressure and glomerular nephritis, or inflammation of the kidney. Based on geographical and socioeconomical factors associated with CKDu, it was assumed that environmental and occupational variables would offer clues to the disease’s origins – or in this case, it came from chemicals. The new study noted that even the World Health Organization had found that CKDu is caused by exposure to arsenic, cadmium, and pesticides, in addition to hard water consumption, low water intake, and exposure to high temperatures. Yet why that certain area of Sri Lanka and why the disease didn’t show prior to the mid-1990s was left unanswered. Researchers point out that political changes in Sri Lanka in the late 1970s led to the introduction of agrochemicals, especially in rice farming. They believe that 12 to 15 years of exposure to “low concentration kidney-damaging compounds” along with their accumulation in the body led to the appearance of CKDu in the mid-90s. The incriminating agent, or Compound “X,” must have certain characteristics, researchers deduced. The compound, they hypothesized, must be: made of chemicals newly introduced in the last 20 to 30 years; capable of forming stable complexes with hard water; capable of retaining nephrotoxic metals and delivering them to the kidney; capable of multiple routes of exposure, such as ingestion, through skin or respiratory absorption, among other criteria. These factors pointed to glyphosate, used in abundance in Sri Lanka. In the study, researchers noted that earlier studies had shown that typical glyphosate half-life of around 47 days in soil can increase up to 22 years after forming hard to biodegrade “strong complexes with metal ions.” Scientists have derived three ways of exposure to glyphosate-metal complexes (GMCs): consumption of contaminated hard water, food, or the complex could be formed directly within circulation with glyphosate coming from dermal/respiratory route and metals from water and foods. Rice farmers, for example, are at high risk of exposure to GMCs through skin absorption, inhalation, or tainted drinking water. GMCs seem to evade the normal liver’s detoxification process, thus damaging kidneys, the study found. The study also suggests that glyphosate could be linked to similar epidemics of kidney disease of unknown origin in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and India. Recent investigations by the Center for Public Integrity found that, in the last five years, CKDu is responsible for more deaths in El Salvador and Nicaragua than diabetes, AIDS, and leukemia combined.
Food Industry Under Siege By Helena Bottemiller Evich And Tarini Parti politico.com February 27, 2014
First lady Michelle Obama’s move to limit junk food marketing in schools and revamp nutrition labels is just the latest salvo in an intensifying battle royale with the food industry. The Obama administration — arguably the most active on food policy in the past century — has issued a slew of new rules over the past few years to reform everything from the steps companies take to guarantee the safety of imported food to the banning of trans fat to completely overhauling what children eat in public schools. With regulation after regulation in the federal pipeline and calls for soda taxes and mandatory labeling for genetically modified foods in certain cities and states, the industry is bracing for an onslaught of changes that are expected to cost billions and involve both reformulating products and disclosing more information to consumers than ever before. “I can certainly see how the industry might feel like they are being targeted by the administration,” said Bruce Silverglade, a principal at Olsson Frank Weeda Terman Matz, which advises food companies in Washington. “I wish the administration would take a step back,” said Baylen Linnekin, executive director of Keep Food Legal, a food freedom advocacy group, and a professor at American University. “I would imagine [the food industry] has the same whiplash as someone like me or you who has just been trying to keep up with these changes.” Though highly engaged in all the policymaking, the food industry is more than a bit overwhelmed and has to be careful about how it is perceived if it fights back against policies that are pitched as a way of curbing obesity rates and giving consumers more information. Although industry groups are publicly saying they welcome the Nutrition Facts update unveiled this week and Obama’s efforts, many companies are expected to fight tooth and nail on the details.
But the industry is going to have to be careful in how it fights. “I don’t think anyone is going to be foolish enough to attack the first lady — that’s just stupid,” said one longtime food company consultant who asked to remain anonymous. “It’s sort of a laundry list of everything the industry didn’t want.” The administration, however, is proving it’s not afraid to make bold policy changes when it comes to food. “This administration has done more than any administration in history to make our food more affordable, nutritious and transparent. This is all part of an unbelievable record of achievement that is unmatched,” said Scott Faber, vice president of government affairs for Environmental Working Group and a former lobbyist for the food industry. The dramatic attack on food policy has been felt by the food and beverage industry, which has spent more on lobbying the federal government under the Obama administration than ever before. Between 2009 and 2013, food and beverage companies plunked down a staggering $185 million on federal lobbying, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Lobbying has been a winning strategy for the food sector, noted Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group. Back when President Barack Obama was running for reelection, allies of the food giants shot down an effort by an interagency working group led by the Federal Trade Commission that would have set voluntary guidelines for the healthfulness of foods marketed to children. Even though the effort has been long-dead, food lobbyists managed to get language in the last omnibus bill saying FTC could not revive the effort unless it first conducts a cost-benefit analysis. The next battle over food labels is going to be tough, Jacobson said. The food industry will most likely have a big bill to pay with the new labeling changes. The bold revamp of the nutrition facts panel announced Thursday is expected to cost the food companies roughly $2 billion, by the Food and Drug Administration’s own estimates. The agency also calculates that the changes would bring about $20 billion in economic benefit to the public. Several food manufacturers would not be pleased because, for the first time, they would be required to list added sugars, which industry officials say will be difficult to measure.
Florida County Says ‘No’ To Water Fluoridation Infowars.com February 27, 2014 County residents vote down adding toxic fluoride to municipal drinking water Following debate over adding the chemical fluoride to county drinking water, Hernando County, Fla. has decided not to force medicate its residents. On Tuesday, the Hernando County Commissioner’s board held a meeting where both pro and antifluoride activists were allowed to voice their opinions, after which the crowd voted against mandatory fluoridation. “The majority of those speakers were opposed to fluoridation,” Hernando Today reports. One dentist who spoke argued that people need to “step up and vote” to add fluoride to the county’s drinking water to help the “poorest of the poor” reduce cavities. “Fluoridation is safe, effective and provides huge cost-savings and reduces human pain and suffering,” the dentist reportedly stated. Jim Intzen, one of the residents opposed to fluoridation, countered the dentist’s claim, pointing out that “the county health department offers a dental program so it is a fallacy that low-income people don’t have access to affordable care.” Intzen also pointed to studies that have shown people exposed to fluoride developed thyroid problems and that the chemical has been linked to lowering a person’s IQ. County residents also called the industrial waste chemical out as being an “insidious poison,” and a retired doctor added that fluoride not only posed a health hazard when swallowed, but that it is also “absorbed into the skin and ultimately the bloodstream when showering.” Additionally, hydrofluorosilicic acid, the compound typically used to fluoridate drinking water, is a corrosive chemical whose own Material Safety Data Sheet says it can cause “nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal burning, and cramp-like pains,” in addition to
its vapors being able to cause “severe irritation to the lungs, nose and throat. If swallowed,” the MSDS says, “it can cause severe damage to throat and stomach.” According to Hernando Today, “Audience members said it was unconstitutional to force fluoridation on citizens. European countries have already outlawed its use in public drinking supplies, a few people said.” In fact, a whole host of cities in the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have moved to take fluoride out of their water. “It removes freedom of choice and becomes medication (by force),” another resident stated. In voting down fluoride, the county estimates it has saved taxpayers close to $800,000. Hernando County joins a legion of municipalities around the globe which have fought back and won against what many studies have shown to be a deadly neurotoxin that attacks the central nervous system, lowers IQ and leads to a multitude of serious health problems. Protect you and your family’s health by removing toxic fluoride from the body with Infowars’ Fluoride Shield, available at the Infowars Store. Learn more about “how hazardous waste ended up in our drinking water” with “The Case Against Fluoride,” also available at the Infowars Store.
‘Shoe Rubber’ Chemical Removed From Subway Bread Found In Nearly 500 Common Foods Joe Satran The Huffington Post February 27, 2014 Footlong fans breathed a sigh of relief at the beginning of February, when sandwich chain Subway announced that it was removing azodicarbonamide — a chemical used in shoe rubber and yoga mats — from its bread. Though the World Health Organization has said that the chemical is safe for human consumption, some studies have suggested it could be linked with asthma and skin and respiratory problems. And when the chemical is baked, it forms another chemical that has been linked to cancer in animal studies, CBS News pointed out. Read more
INFOWARS.COM BECAUSE THERE'S A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND