U.S. Pork Producers Keep Using Drug Banned or Restricted in 160 Countries

AllGov

Pig farmers in the United States have continued to feed a controversial drug to their livestock, choosing production needs over human and animal health concerns, according to critics.

The drug is ractopamine, which is given to 60% to 80% of all domestic pigs and cattle to make them grow leaner before slaughter. The Food and Drug Administration first approved it 15 years ago, claiming the drug was safe to use.

But food safety advocates disagree with this claim and the assertions of farmers who rely on the product made byElanco, a division of drug maker Eli Lilly. They point out that 160 countries have either outlawed the drug or limited its use, while also noting the existence of 160,000 reports of pigs becoming ill or dying after being fed ractopamine.

The nonprofit Center for Food Safety cited information from the European Food Safety Authority showing ractopamine can cause increased heart rates in humans.

This symptom is similar to the drug’s effect on pigs, which experience elevated heart rates and relaxed blood vessels. These changes result in leaner muscles in the animals, which don’t eat as much food while on the drug, saving farmers money on feed

The Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy has reported that studies show pigs fed ractopamine can have trouble walking, become more aggressive, and experience other abnormal behavior.

As concern in the U.S. grows over the safety of domestic pork—as well as that of other foods, including chicken, which is disinfected with chlorine by American food producers—an expanded trade deal between the U.S. and the European Union(EU) hangs in the balance. Given the EU’s ban of ractopamine and U.S. chickens, the new trade pact could be in trouble. The U.S. government has put pressure on Europe to allow such foods to be imported, but the EU has been firm.

“We want to have quality food,” Olga Kikou, European affairs manager for Compassion in World Farming, told McClatchy. “We don’t want to have food that is produced in ways that are not good for our health.”

“This is such a great example of how the U.S. is really putting the financial interest of companies ahead of public health,” Kari Hamerschlag, senior program manager of the food and technology program at Friends of the Earth, said to McClatchy. “We want to export our really crappy meat-production system to the rest of the world—and they don’t want it.”-Noel Brinkerhoff, Danny Biederma

Related:  Ractopamine Factsheet: Lean Meat = Mean Meat (Center for Food Safety)
Ractopamine: The Meat Additive on Your Plate That’s Banned Almost Everywhere But America
U.S. Pig Farmers Use Drug Banned in China as Unsafe

New Séralini study shows Roundup damages sperm

Activist Post

A new study in rats found that Roundup altered testicular function after only 8 days of exposure at a concentration of only 0.5%, similar to levels found in water after agricultural spraying, writes Claire Robinson, Managing Editor of GMO Seralini.

The study found no difference in sperm concentration, viability and mobility, but there was an increase in abnormal sperm formation measured 2, 3, and 4 months after this short exposure.

The study, the first to measure the delayed effects of exposure to Roundup on sperm in mammals from a short exposure, was conducted by a team including Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini at the University of Caen, France.

Roundup was found to change gene expression in sperm cells, which could alter the balance of the sex hormones androgen and estrogen. A negative impact on sperm quality was confirmed, raising questions about impairedsperm efficiency. The authors suggested that repeated exposures to Roundup at doses lower than those used in agriculture could damage mammalian reproduction over the long term.

The study’s findings should raise alarm in farm workers, as well as people who spray Roundup for municipal authorities and even home gardeners. People exposed to lower doses repeated over the long term, including consumers who eat food produced with Roundup and people who happen to be exposed to others’ spraying activities, should also be concerned.

Those who want to conceive a child should take special measures to minimise their exposure, including eating organic food and lobbying for a ban on Roundup spraying in their neighbourhoods.

Abstract

Roundup is the major pesticide used in agriculture worldwide; it is a glyphosate-based herbicide. Its molecular effects are studied following an acute exposure (0.5%) of fifteen 60-day-old male rats during an 8-day period. Endocrine (aromatase, estrogen and androgen receptors, Gper1 in testicular and sperm mRNAs) and testicular functions (organ weights, sperm parameters and expression of the blood–testis barrier markers) were monitored at days 68, 87, and 122 after treatment, spermiogenesis and spermatogenesis. The major disruption is an increase of aromatase mRNA levels at least by 50% in treated rats at all times, as well as the aromatase protein. We have also shown a similar increase of Gper1 expression at day 122 and a light modification of BTB markers. A rise of abnormal sperm morphology and a decrease of the expression of protamine 1 and histone 1 testicular in epididymal sperm are observed despite a normal sperm concentration and motility.

Highlights

• We investigated the effects of a glyphosate-based herbicide after an 8-day exposure of adult rats.
• We have shown a significant and differential expression of aromatase in testis.
• We have observed a diminution of mRNA expression of nuclear markers in spermatozoa.
• These results suggest changes in androgen/estrogen balance and in spermnuclear quality.
• The repetition of exposures of this herbicide could alter the mammalian reproduction.

An acute exposure to glyphosate-based herbicide alters aromatase levels in testis and sperm nuclear quality.

Estelle Cassault-Meyer, Steeve Gress, Gilles-Éric Séralini, Isabelle Galeraud-Denis
Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology Volume 38, Issue 1, July 2014, pp. 131–140
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1382668914001227

Forgotten vials of smallpox found in storage room

Yahoo News

ATLANTA (AP) — A government scientist cleaning out an old storage room at a research center near Washington made a startling discovery last week — decades-old vials of smallpox packed away and forgotten in a cardboard box.

The six glass vials were intact and sealed, and scientists have yet to establish whether the virus is dead or alive, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Tuesday.

Still, the find was disturbing because for decades after smallpox was declared eradicated in 1980, world health authorities said the only known samples left were safely stored in super-secure laboratories in Atlanta and in Russia.

Officials said this is the first time in the U.S. that unaccounted-for smallpox has been discovered. But at least one leading scientist raised the possibility that there are more such vials out there around the world.

The CDC and the FBI are investigating.

It was the second recent incident in which a U.S. government health agency appeared to have mishandled a highly dangerous germ.

Last month, scores of CDC employees in Atlanta were feared exposed to anthrax because of a laboratory safety lapse. The CDC began giving them antibiotics as a precaution.

The freeze-dried smallpox samples were found in a building at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, that has been used by the Food and Drug Administration since 1972, according to the CDC.

The scientist was cleaning out a cold room between two laboratories on July 1 when he made the discovery, FDA officials said.

Officials said labeling indicated the smallpox had been put in the vials in the 1950s. But they said it’s not clear how long the vials had been in the building, which did not open until the 1960s.

No one has been infected, and no smallpox contamination was found in the building.

Smallpox can be deadly even after it is freeze-dried, but the virus usually has to be kept cold to remain alive and dangerous.

In an interview Tuesday, a CDC official said he believed the vials were stored for many years at room temperature, which would suggest the samples are dead. But FDA officials said later in the day that the smallpox was in cold storage for decades.

“We don’t yet know if it’s live and infectious,” said Stephan Monroe, deputy director of the CDC center that handles highly dangerous infectious agents.

The samples were rushed under FBI protection to the CDC in Atlanta for testing, after which they will be destroyed.

Peter Marks, deputy director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Research and Evaluation, said the discovery was unexpected but not a total shock. He added, however, that “no one’s denying we should have done a better job cleaning out what was there.”

In at least one other such episode, vials of smallpox were found at the bottom of a freezer in an Eastern European country in the 1990s, according to Dr. David Heymann, a former World Health Organization official who is now a professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

Heymann said that when smallpox samples were gathered up for destruction decades ago, requests went out to ministers of health to collect all vials.

“As far as I know, there was never a confirmation they had checked in with all groups who could have had the virus,” he said.

Dr. Donald “D.A.” Henderson, who led the WHO smallpox-eradication effort and is now a professor at the Center for Health Security at the University of Pittsburgh, said it is highly unlikely more such stashes will be discovered. But he conceded “things were pretty casual” in the 1950s.

Decades ago, he recalled, “I came back from many a trip carrying specimens, and I just put them in the refrigerator until I could get them to a laboratory. My wife didn’t appreciate that.”

Smallpox was one of the most lethal diseases in history. For centuries, it killed about one-third of the people it infected, and left most survivors with deep scars on their faces from the pus-filled lesions.

The last known case was in Britain in 1978, when a university photographer who worked above a lab handling smallpox died after being accidentally exposed to it through the ventilation system.

Global vaccination campaigns finally brought smallpox under control. After it was declared eradicated, all known remaining samples of live virus were stored at a CDC lab in Atlanta and at a Russian lab in Novosibirsk, Siberia.

The labs take extreme precautions. Scientists must undergo fingerprint or retinal scans to get inside, they wear full-body suits including gloves and goggles, and they shower with strong disinfectant before leaving the labs.

There has long been debate over whether to destroy the stockpile.

Many scientists argue that any remaining samples pose a threat and that the deadly virus should be wiped off the planet altogether. Others contend the samples are needed for research on better treatments and vaccines.

At its recent annual meeting in May, WHO put off a decision again.

Holy Fukushima – Radiation From Japan Is Already Killing North Americans

WeAreChangeSF

by Jeromie Williams

If you live on the west coast of Canada or the United States, you’re pretty much already screwed at this point thanks to the Japanese earthquake and tsunami of 2011. Radiation levels are already increasing in the food and water, babies born with thyroid issues linked to radiation are rising quickly and governments in Canada and the United States are raising the “acceptable levels” of certain toxic substances in the food being shipped in from Japan.

This isn’t a conspiracy theory, this is happening and it’s happening right now.

The fancy little picture at the top of the article isn’t showing you the flow of happy fun time thoughts from Japan back in March of 2012, it’s showing you the flow of radiation from the Fukushima nuclear plant after the devastating earthquake and tsunami of 2011. Yes, that sharp pain you just felt in your chest is the sudden realization that the image shows the radiation reaching almost past Hawaii more than a year ago.

Do the math – If that radiation screamed across the Pacific Ocean that far in one year, just how far do you think it has gotten since then? Look at what World Truth TV is saying and then you decide.

Samples of milk taken across the United States have shown radiation at levels 2000 percent higher than EPA maximums. The reason that milk is so significant is that it is representative of the entire food supply. According to an article published on Natural News, “Cows consume grass and are exposed to the same elements as food crops and water supplies. In other words, when cows’ milk starts testing positive for high levels of radioactive elements, this is indicative of radioactive contamination of the entire food supply.”

The Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Deception Protection Agency, instead of refusing to prohibit the sale of tainted foods and mandatory testing of foods produced and harvested from the Pacific Coast, have simply raised the “acceptable levels” of radioactive material in foods.

If that doesn’t scare the ever-living crap out of you, then take a look at the list of foods you are now supposed to be wary of, you know, for only the next 30,000 years.

How can we protect ourselves? First, be aware of what items are likely to be highly tainted.


1.) SEAFOOD: Question the origin of ALL seafood. Fish and crustaceans from the Pacific Ocean should all be considered to be poisoned with radiation.


2.) WATER: The rainfall and snowfall are all radiated. Do not drink any water that has not been filtered. The tap water that flows from your faucet has NOT been treated to rid it of radioactive particles. A recent report from the NY Times stated, “A rooftop water monitoring program managed by UC Berkeley’s Department of Nuclear Engineering detected substantial spikes in rain-borne iodine-131 during torrential downpours …


3.) DAIRY PRODUCTS: Milk and milk products from the West Coast states currently have the highest levels of radiation in North America.


4.) PRODUCE: Leafy Vegetables, Wines, Tomatoes, Strawberries….all produce from California or any other West Coast State are also likely to be tainted.


5.) MEAT: If an animal eats any leafy vegetable all along the West Coast, that animal has consumed radiation, and is poisoned. This is any animal from cows, pigs, goats, sheep to wild deer and other game.


If you eat the above foods from areas with high radiation levels, you are eating radiation and feeding it to your children. Slowly the radiation levels within your body will build up. This is PERMANENT.


Infant mortality rates across the United States have increased by more than 35% since the nuclear disaster, according to a court statement by Dr. Sherman with independent scientist Leuren Moret, MA, PhD. A study published in The International Journal of Medicine indicates that more than 20,000 deaths right here in North America can be directly attributed to the release of radioactive material from Fukushima.


Radioactive isotopes of the type released from Fukushima have a half-life of 30,000 years. This means that we must permanently change the way we prepare our food.


Wash your food with soap and rinse it in filtered water.
Be aware of the origins of your vegetables, fish, game and seafood.
Keep abreast of radiation levels to help monitor where your food is acquired.  
Use only filtered water for drinking, cooking and ice. 


I don’t know about the rest of you, but that one way trip to colonize Mars is looking pretty damn attractive right now.

Related:
Fukushima radiation taints US milk supplies at levels 2000 percent higher than EPA maximums
Medical Journal Article: 14,000 U.S. Deaths Tied to Fukushima Reactor Disaster Fallout
Shocking Plane Radiation On Flight From Chile To US

Just One Can of Soda a Day Raises Aggressive Cancer Risk By 40 Percent

Waking Times
by April McCarthy

Men who drink one 300ml can of soda per day are much more likely to require treatment for a serious form of cancer than those who never consumed the drink.

A 15-year study found those who drank 300ml of a fizzy drink a day — slightly less than a standard can — were 40 percent more likely to develop prostate cancer than men who avoid the drinks.

Worryingly, the risk applied not to early-stage disease that was spotted via blood tests but to cancers that had progressed enough to cause symptoms.

This is significant as faster-growing forms of prostate cancer are more likely to be fatal.

It is thought that sugar triggers the release of the hormone insulin, which feeds tumours.

In America in 1850, about 13 ounces of soda were consumed per person per year. In the late 1980s, more than 500 twelve-ounce cans of sodas were consumed per person per year. The 1994 annual report of the beverage industry shows that per-capita consumption of sodas is 49.1 gallons per year. Of this amount, 28.2 percent of consumption is diet soda. Current estimates per-capita is approximately 60 gallons per year. The United States are the largest consumers of soft drink consumption and at least double the consumption of almost every country in the world.

Carbonated soda pop provides more added sugar in a typical 2-year-old toddler’s diet than cookies, candies and ice cream combined.

Fifty-six percent of 8-year-olds down soft drinks daily, and a third of teenage boys drink at least three cans of soda pop per day.

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men, affecting more than one billion worldwide annually.

The study, published in the respected American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, is far from the first to link the sugary soft drinks which lead to poor health. Previous research has flagged up heart attacks, diabetes,weight gain, brittle bones, pancreatic cancer, muscle weakness and paralysis as potential risks.

In the spring of 2005, research showed a strong correlation between esophageal cancer and the drinking of carbonated beverages.

For the study, they tracked the health of more than 8,000 men aged 45 to 73 for an average of 15 years. The men, who were in good health at the start of the study, were also quizzed about what they liked to eat and drink.

At the end of the study, they compared the dietary habits of the men who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer with those who remained healthy and found a clear link between sugary drinks and the disease.

Lund University researcher Isabel Drake said: ‘Among the men who drank a lot of soft drinks we saw an increased risk of prostate cancer of around 40 percent.’ The analysis also linked large amounts of cakes and biscuits, and sugary breakfast cereals with a less serious form of the disease.

Diet drinks, and tea and coffee with sugar, were not included in the study.

Dr Oz Defends Monsanto: Eat GMO Foods, They’re the Same as Non-GMO Organic

Natural Society
by Anthony Gucciardi

Dr. Mehmet Oz, the celebrity host of the Dr. Oz program which appeals to individuals who are actually into alternative health in varying degrees, has recently declared that GMO foods are actually the same as organic — a move that reveals just how serious about helping you and your family Dr. Oz is. Writing in Time magazine, Dr. Oz even goes on to call those who shop for foods free of GMOs, pesticides, artificial sweeteners, and other contaminants ‘snobs‘.

In the article, Dr. Oz states that those who buy organic are both ‘snooty’ and ‘elitists’. Furthermore, he goes on to state that GMO conventional foods are the food of the ‘people’. It makes you wonder if Dr. Oz even wrote this piece, as NaturalNews’ Mike Adams points out in his piece on the subject. Dr. Oz’s article even comes just after the largest healthcare group in the United States declared that everyone should avoid tumor-linked GMOs to avoid the serious health consequences that go along with their consumption.

Kaiser Permanente, the major healthcare group, had this to say:

“Despite what the biotech industry might say, there is little research on the long-term effects of GMOs on human health. Independent research has found several varieties of GMO corn caused organ damage in rats. Other studies have found that GMOs may lead to an inability in animals to reproduce.”

Dr. Oz Article Follows Barrage of Attacks on Organics, Pro-Monsanto Lies

But what’s going on here? Recently there have been numerous attacks on organic food, even leading the New York Times to issue a public apology over the ridiculous nature of the Times’ hit piece on organic food and buyers (using similar language as Oz in calling them snobs and elitists). Plus, the previous studies attempting to tackle the benefits of organic actually showed why organic is better — even after attempting to use statistical lies to make it appear to be the opposite.

It seems that Dr. Oz is the latest to join the barrage of attacks against Non-GMO, organic consumers across the nation. Was he paid by agribusiness a sum he could not refuse? There is currently no way of knowing, though he will surely have to respond to his ridiculous claims that GMO foods are literally the same health-wise as organic.

In an effort to reminder Dr. Oz of the research that defies his claims, I would recommend he look at the peer-reviewed research that links Monsanto’s Roundup (used in larger and larger doses on Monsanto’s GMO crops as they are ravaged by resistant insects) to over 29 conditions including:

DNA damage
Infertility
Liver damage
Lymphoma
Hormonal disorders in children

Roundup that organic food items do not use. But it seems Dr. Oz thinks that Roundup is perfectly safe, the same Roundup that researchers found at ‘normal’ levels contributed to tumor development and organ damage. And these are just a few examples.

This information will undoubtedly be brought to Dr. Oz by activists and health conscious citizens from around the globe who will demand answers from the celebrity doctor attempting to align himself with the alternative health crowd while simultaneously pushing vaccinations, many Big Pharma creations, and now GMO-laden foods. But will he issue a public apology, or continue to push Monsanto’s agenda throughout the mainstream media?