More Scientists Against Vaccines

Stories of vaccine-injured children often start the same way. “I trusted my doctor. I didn’t know about vaccines then. I only wish I knew then what I know now.” Those with firsthand experience with vaccine side effects tend to learn a great deal about vaccines. Parents of vaccine injured children account for a large proportion of the anti-vaccine movement.

Many scientists are opposed to vaccines. Just like lay people, whether or not they are opposed to vaccines depends a great deal on how much they know about them and whether or not their livelihood depends on the vaccine industry.

Brian Hooker, PhD, PE

Brian Hooker is both a parent of a vaccine injured child and a vaccine researcher. As a scientist, he has devoted many years of his life to studying vaccines and corruption within the CDC.

Dr. Brian Hooker currently holds the position of Associate Professor and serves as the Math and Science Division Chair at Simpson University in California. He graduated from Washington State University in 1990 with a PhD in Chemical Engineering and is a licensed professional engineer in Washington. He is known for fighting against the CDC to reveal the data used in their studies on vaccines and helping to expose how the CDC has hidden data.

You know the CDC’s plan, not only their historic plan, but their ongoing plan, to absolve vaccines and vaccine components from anything related to the autism epidemic. You know, we don’t know what causes autism do we? But we know for darn sure tootin’ that it isn’t the vaccines and it can’t be the vaccines. Okay, which is completely illogical. There is no logic. If you don’t know what causes it, then it’s very, very, difficult to say that something doesn’t cause it.

Peter Fletcher, PhD

Dr. Peter Fletcher is a retired Chief Science Officer with the Department of Health in the United Kingdom. He also serves on the Committee on Safety of Medicine where he helped review drug safety trials and decide if new drugs, including new vaccines, were safe.

It appears that we are stuck with the term “autism” even though it is impossible to define with any precision. I suppose it does not matter as long as everyone understands that it is not a single abnormal condition but a cluster of different disorders having some signs and symptoms in common.

There is little doubt that what we might call “old fashioned” autism, as it was before 15 or so years ago, probably had predominantly genetic origins although even then other factors may have triggered the disorder.

There is absolutely no doubt that in the USA and the UK the number of cases of autism being diagnosed has reached epidemic proportions.

… The observed increase in autism in such a short period of time (15-20 years) therefore has to be real and to have external causality.

… It is of the utmost urgency that wide ranging research, with the aim of identifying possible external causal factors, be initiated without delay on an international basis.

… Instead of repeated denials of parents claims, could the skeptics of vaccination/toxic substances/immune challenge being causal discontinue their entirely negative attitude and give us something more positive? I could accept their disbelief if they supported it with convincing alternatives, but none have been forthcoming.

Shiv Chopra, PhD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL024246A37000FF12&v=X71F9UCdPN8#t=12

Dr. Shiv Chopra has been working in Canada for decades within the field of food safety. He holds a PhD in Microbiology from McGill University in Montreal. Dr. Chopra is known for his part in the successful fight to have bovine growth hormone banned in Canada. He continues to speak out on matters of public health including food safety and vaccines.

…the first vaccines that landed on my desk were rubella and later on, mumps, and some later versions of measles. I objected to it. I said, ‘I see problems in these because these are minor diseases and most people get immune by age 15. Why are we going to give these vaccines that have never been tested?’

I knew they were made in monkey kidney tissue and we have had problems with the polio vaccine…

… My suggestion was, why don’t we test women at the age of 15 and 16? Those who are not yet immune then may be given the vaccine?

Of course, the companies didn’t want that. They wanted 100 percent or at least 80 percent of the children vaccinated. That was the only way they were going to make money.

… We now know from history that those vaccines have been used for more than 40 years and the diseases, all of them, are still here. Meanwhile, autism, diabetes, and all kinds of autoimmune diseases have increased.

We don’t know what damage we’re doing — actually we know that in association with those vaccines, chronic diseases in children have increased. But nobody is paying attention. Everybody is denying that.

… Ironically, those vaccines have never been removed from the ledgers and DPT was never talked about. Again, medical people know, a lot of scientists know, the CDC, U.S., FDA, other departments, medical departments, medical professionals, they are all denying that all these infectious diseases had started to decrease in the early 1940s.

… Veterinarians are effectively toxicologists.

Unlike medical people, we learn comparative medicine. So therefore, this is a way to compare and see what species do. The law is that every drug, any product that directly or indirectly gets into the human body, must be tested in at least two species of animals, one of which must be non-rodent. It must also be tested in pregnant animals. Then it also must be tested to see whether it produces cancer by lifetime studies in rats and mice and so forth.

[Recently] the United States Supreme Court said that if people get damaged, if the children get damaged due to vaccine, they can’t sue either the government or the companies — by what right?

Who is to decide to shove vaccines into people who don’t want it?

Theresa Ann Deisher, PhD

Dr. Theresa Ann Deisher holds a PhD in Molecular and Cellular Physiology from Stanford University. She has worked as a research scientist for more than two decades and currently presides as the President of the Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute and as the CEO of AVM Biotechnology. Her research over the years has focused on human therapeutics.

Vaccines manufactured using human fetal cells contain residual DNA fragments (50-500 bp) (Table I). It is possible that these contaminating fragments could be incorporated into a child’s genome and disrupt normal gene function, leading to autistic phenotypes

…Not only damaged human cells, but also healthy human cells can take up foreign DNA spontaneously. Foreign human DNA taken up by human cells will be transported into nuclei and be integrated into host genome, which will cause phenotype change. Hence, residual human fetal DNA fragments in vaccines can be one of the causes of autism spectrum disorder in children through vaccination. Vaccines must be safe without any human DNA contaminations or reactivated viruses and must be produced in ethically approved manufacturing processes.

Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD

Dr. Obukhanych holds a PhD in Immunology from Rockefeller University and completed postdoctoral training at Harvard Medical School as well as Stanford University.

I hold a PhD in Immunology. I am writing this letter in the hope that it will correct several common misperceptions about vaccines in order to help you formulate a fair and balanced understanding that is supported by accepted vaccine theory and new scientific findings.

Do unvaccinated children pose a higher threat to the public than the vaccinated?

It is often stated that those who choose not to vaccinate their children for reasons of conscience endanger the rest of the public, and this is the rationale behind most of the legislation to end vaccine exemptions currently being considered by federal and state legislators country-wide. You should be aware that the nature of protection afforded by many modern vaccines – and that includes most of the vaccines recommended by the CDC for children – is not consistent with such a statement.

… IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #1). Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades.

… Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but rather acquired from deep puncture wounds contaminated with C. tetani spores.

… Vaccinating for diphtheria cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is likewise intended for personal protection only.

… In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is. No discrimination is warranted.

How often do serious vaccine adverse events happen?

It is often stated that vaccination rarely leads to serious adverse events. Unfortunately, this statement is not supported by science. A recent study done in Ontario, Canada, established that vaccination actually leads to an emergency room visit for 1 in 168 children following their 12-month vaccination appointment and for 1 in 730 children following their 18-month vaccination appointment (see appendix for a scientific study, Item #5).

When the risk of an adverse event requiring an ER visit after well-baby vaccinations is demonstrably so high, vaccination must remain a choice for parents, who may understandably be unwilling to assume this immediate risk in order to protect their children from diseases that are generally considered mild or that their children may never be exposed to.

… Studies of measles outbreaks in Quebec, Canada, and China attest that outbreaks of measles still happen, even when vaccination compliance is in the highest bracket (95-97% or even 99%, see appendix for scientific studies, Items #6&7). This is because even in high vaccine responders, vaccine-induced antibodies wane over time. Vaccine immunity does not equal life-long immunity acquired after natural exposure.

… elimination of vaccine exemptions, currently only utilized by a small percentage of families anyway, will neither solve the problem of disease resurgence nor prevent re-importation and outbreaks of previously eliminated diseases.

1)…due to the properties of modern vaccines, non-vaccinated individuals pose no greater risk of transmission of polio, diphtheria, pertussis, and numerous non-type b H. influenza strains than vaccinated individuals do. Non-vaccinated individuals pose virtually no danger of transmission of hepatitis B in a school setting, and tetanus is not transmissible at all; 2) there is a significantly elevated risk of emergency room visits after childhood vaccination appointments attesting that vaccination is not risk-free; 3) outbreaks of measles cannot be entirely prevented even if we had nearly perfect vaccination compliance; and 4) an effective method of preventing measles and other viral diseases in vaccine-ineligible infants and the immunocompromised, immunoglobulin, is available for those who may be exposed to these diseases.

Taken together, these four facts make it clear that discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted as the vaccine status of conscientious objectors poses no undue public health risk.

Stephanie Seneff, PhD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3P6wVUH0pc

Dr. Stephanie Seneff is employed by MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory as a Senior Research Scientist. She holds a PhD in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from MIT. Her research has largely focused on nutrition and health through computer analyses of large datasets.

I’m a computer scientist so I can go look at the number crunching, looking at the words, statistical distributions and whatnot. You can find a lot of things out, looking at VAERS.

…I confirmed in my studies on VAERS database that MMR is associated with autism. I wrote a paper on that and I proposed at the time that possibly, and it was something that somebody else had also proposed, which was that the acetaminophen, it was given just to control the fever, kids are often given that around the vaccine, and that can become toxic to certain kids who can’t metabolize it properly.

… the glutamate in the vaccine that’s causing the problem and that the glutamate is much more toxic now because of the glyphosate. So all this is connecting up. And the same thing is true for the aluminum in the vaccines as well and people have talked a lot about the mercury and the mercury certainly is an issue and its very toxic. I look at the aluminum because that’s the one that’s gone up quite a bit. We have a lot of aluminum containing vaccines now that we didn’t have before so that fits with what’s going up in step with the autism increase, lots more aluminum containing vaccines. For example the HPV, which has just been introduced, the Gardasil they’re giving that to these kids, teenagers. That’s loaded with aluminum. And that’s a very nasty vaccine. I’ve looked at that one too and it has much, much more severe reactions to that one than to other vaccines that these kids are getting. Its a very toxic vaccine and totally unnecessary in my opinion and they can’t even prove that its actually doing what its claiming to do because its like 60 years later when you’re going to get this cervical cancer that its supposedly protecting you from, you know. I don’t know why anyone would think it’s a good idea to get that vaccine. Young girls’ lives are being destroyed. People are dying or they’re getting some debilitating autoimmune disease, you know, from that vaccine. It’s very clear from the data.

Conclusion

When researching scientists’ recommendations for public health policies in regards to vaccines, it is surprising how few of them support vaccination unless they work for the pharmaceutical industry.

In order for vaccines to be truly safe and effective, adverse reactions would be rare and breakouts of vaccine-preventable diseases among vaccine compliant populations would be rare or non-existent. Clearly, neither outcome is reality. The science does not support the statement that vaccines are safe and effective. This is not a scientific finding. This is a marketing slogan taught to doctors in medical school. If vaccine damage is a concern of yours, check out How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children. 

Further Reading:
Sources:


Useful Tips for Growing Food in the Big City

Living in the big city does not have to cause your green thumb to wilt. In fact, urban gardening projects are becoming more popular in these modern times, whether the gardening is done indoors, on a small patio outdoors, or the roof of the building in which you live.

Whether your passion is exotic fruit trees, herbs, or growing your own vegetables, there is something for everyone who likes running their fingers through a fresh bag of potting soil. The following tips will breathe new life into your big city gardening project.

Save on Gardening Containers

If you think you need to go out and buy a ton of planting pots to start your urban garden, you’ll appreciate these cost-saving alternatives, many of which you probably have on hand:

  • Plastic bottles from drinking water, fruit juice, and other liquids. Rinse the bottles thoroughly with plain water, and cut off the tops where the bottles start to narrow.
  • Plastic containers from yogurt, spreads, nuts, and other food items. Wash the containers, put the tops in the recycle bin, and you’ve got pots.
  • Buckets that are cracked or have lost their handles.  A severe crack can be mended with tape while a minor crack will be useful for drainage.
  • A shallow wading pool. Have fun by planting your crops in concentric circles or a spiral from the inside out.
  • Hanging flower pots left over from seasons gone by. They’re ideal for vertical gardening and can be placed on the ground, too.
  • Plastic kitchen bowls and cups. Turn items you’re likely to discard due to appearance into containers where something green will grow.

It is important to drill holes through the bottoms of containers that don’t already have them to allow drainage of excess water which might otherwise cause roots to rot, destroying the plant.

These and many similar items are easily modified for gardening purposes. A large low-rimmed plastic tub or storage container will also work for potting multiple plants in the same container. One thing you need to take into account, other than the obvious factor of plant size, is that different plants need different amounts of mulch. Choose plants accordingly and make sure the pot has enough space to spread the mulch nice and even. Organic mulches provide extra benefits. They add valuable nutrients and promote soil micro-organism activity for overall plant health.

The Role of Light in Your Plant’s Development

One of the critical, dynamic factors involved in indoor and outdoor plant growth is lighting. It is important to remember that different plants have different lighting requirements. According to the University of Illinois, plants exhibit three types of responses to light.

The first of these responses is photosynthesis. This process is how plants convert light into storable chemical energy necessary for a plant’s survival.

The second of these responses is phototropism. In the process of phototropism, plant growth hormones build up on one side of a plant’s stem. This buildup causes it to tilt in the direction of available sunlight.

The third reaction is photoperiodism. This fascinating response is controlled by a pigment in the leaves called phytochrome. The pigment changes form to determine how a plant will developmentally respond to receiving red light during dark periods. In short, this means that a plant has a reproductive cycle that reacts to the changes in the lengths of day and night.

What does all of this mean for your success with urban gardening? Here are a few tips and takeaways.

Know the light needs of the plants you’re growing. Most plants require full sunlight, especially if they are bearing fruit. The best place for fruit and veggie plants is outside. If you’re committed to growing them indoors, a bay window facing the sun might suffice. Otherwise, you’ll need to install grow lights.

On the other hand, a wide range of plants such as climbing hydrangea, Japanese rose, and columbine prefer partial to full shade. These do very well indoors near a window or glass door or outside where they get limited direct sunlight during the day.

The stems of plants growing near a window or against an outdoor wall might start bending toward the light. To keep the plant growing straight with a stem that is robust all around, rotate its container 90 degrees each day.

Any fruit-bearing plant will produce more abundantly with grow lights. The best solution is LED grow lights that use far less energy and create much less heat than conventional grow lights.The better you understand the role light plays in a specific type of plant’s development, the easier it will be to customize the light intake for each one.

Organizing Your Gardening Tools

When your space is limited, it is best to keep all your big city gardening tools organized for easy access. Here are three tool organizers used by urban gardeners:

  1. A small wooden box or crate repurposed for your tools.
  2. A pegboard on the wall, inside or outdoors, that also has floor space.
  3. A small gardening cart with a handle that includes storage inside and a lid for sitting on as you prune, pull weeds or pick fruit.

With Limited Space, Think Vertical

Depending on your living arrangements, you may have lots or very limited space for your big city garden. Urban-based agricultural projects range from expansive green roofing designs to a single square foot outdoors or an indoor garden. Fortunately, the ongoing development of urban gardening techniques means that just about anyone living in the city can have the thrill of making something grow! One of the most popular trends is known as vertical gardening, and you’ve got interesting options:

  • Use trellises for tomatoes, beans and other vine plants to climb and produce.
  • Arrange rows of hooks on a privacy fence or the outside wall of your home. For example hang one row at one meter and a second row at two meters. Hang baskets from the hooks, and use the top row for plants requiring full sun. The lower row will be ideal for plants preferring partial shade.
  • In similar fashion, attach rows of planting boxes to a fence or wall, and select appropriate plants for each row.

Create your Own Compost

Today’s urban lifestyle is often a green one, and making the most of leftover food scraps is part of it. Your local gardening centre will have home composting bins, most of which come with complete instructions, and the few additional supplies you’ll need.

Ideal items for home composting include:

  • Fruit and vegetable scraps.
  • Bread and similar products.
  • Coffee grounds and tea bags.
  • Grains.
  • Leaves that drop or are pruned from your plants.

Items you should not compost include:

  • Meat and meat products including bones, fat, skin. Fish or fish waste.
  • Dairy products.

Those who want to take home composting to the next level might consider using a composting toilet. That’s right, humanure, as many call it, is ideal for use in an urban garden! Composting toilets mean that waste isn’t really a waste after all.

Besides saving space, there are additional benefits of vertical gardening. Because the plants are elevated, weeding them and picking fruit and flowers is done without stooping. Inspecting for insects, pruning and weeding are less of a chore, too. There is little waste of fruit, since it won’t sit on the ground where it can rot, be eaten by pests, or be overlooked under foliage.

Conclusion

With the price of food constantly increasing, many residents of big cities are turning to gardens to reduce their grocery bills. Others simply appreciate the benefit of unadulterated, fresh, organic produce as a key component to a nutrient-dense diet. Whatever your reason for starting your big city garden project, knowing how to grow your own food is always a good skill to develop. You never know when it might come in handy.

Recommended Reading:
Sources & Further Reading:


Web MD’s Ties with Monsanto and Big Pharma

When we look for medical information, whether or not we embrace alternative medicine, there are a few primary sources we tend to check out for the conventional treatment and the low down on any given illness. WebMD is at, or near, the top of that list, and it is clearly one of the most popular sites on the Internet.

We expect the information given on this WebMD to be clear, correct (within the limits of conventional medicine), and unbiased. Anyone with any knowledge about the way things really work will expect Big Pharma to have undue influence over the information presented because they have undue influence over doctors and every aspect of conventional medical treatment. We don’t expect to find Monsanto and the FDA also hiding behind the curtain.

But first, more about Big Pharma. In 2010, Dr. Mercola wrote about a self-test for depression that was presented on WebMD by Eli Lilly. The problem was, even if you marked no to every indicator, the test came up with the same result – “You may be at risk for major depression.” The test was completely bogus, unethical, and irresponsible. WebMD presents itself as the unbiased 3rd party, but it isn’t.

When an article is written by a sponsor, such as Monsanto, it is labeled as such. It says, “This content is from our sponsor. The sponsor has sole editorial control.” Does the typical reader realize they are reading an article that is clearly company propaganda and not content that WebMD necessarily supports? What site that was created to give its readers information publishes content they do not agree with? We don’t!

In addition, the site is used and abused by companies like Monsanto as shown by series of emails exchanged between Monsanto and Dr. Kevin Folta of the University of Florida. Monsanto approached Folta, asking him to publish their biotech propaganda as if it were his own on WebMD. Of course, he agreed – Monsanto gives his programs money.

The final surprise is the relationship between WebMD and the FDA. According to Dr. Mercola, the FDA’s first public-private partnership was with WebMD. The FDA states on their website:

  • FDA’s Public-Private Partnerships allow the FDA to partner with any number of a wide range of other organizations including, but not limited to, patient advocacy groups, professional societies, charitable foundations, industry members, trade organizations, academic institutions and other government and state entities.
  • FDA’s Public-Private Partnerships are science-driven, aim to improve the public health, and are structured to uphold the principles of transparency, fairness, inclusiveness, scientific rigor, and compliance with Federal laws and FDA policy.

The FDA does not, however, offer a list of their partners. But that’s a bit creepy, isn’t it? That a government agency created to provide oversight actually partners with private industry? Who’s watching who?

It’s always a good idea to follow the money connected to any source. WebMD makes lots and lots of money. Averaging 210 million unique users a month with 4.25 billion page views, WebMD reported a profit of $10 million from a revenue of $143.3 million for the first quarter of 2015. So if you choose to use the site in the future, keep these facts in mind, especially if you are seeking information on any controversial subject in which the pharmaceutical companies, the biotech companies, or the FDA may share an interest.

Sources:


Danger – Poisonous House Plants to Be Aware Of

Houseplants vary in shape, size, colour, and looks and can be added to your home to enhance any interior theme. They also purify the air, providing a great health benefit. But there is one thing every homeowner should be cautious about when it comes to selecting plants. Some of them are poisonous.

If you have pets or children, poisonous plants could present a real threat if their parts are ingested. Some plants may even cause skin irritation and other problems if you touch them. Be careful around the following plants:

Dieffenbachia

DieffenbachiaThis is definitely one of the most popular house plants. The fact that it requires low-light conditions and little maintenance means that it can easily thrive in every home. However, the nickname of the plant – Dumb Cane – comes from the symptoms it causes when eaten. The plant sap usually leads to tongue swelling, which in turn presents a danger to both pets and humans if ingested.

Oleander

OleanderCertainly beautiful to the sight, but equally dangerous in that all of its parts are quite poisonous. You need to be careful when it comes to pruning and other garden care tasks. Always wear gloves and thoroughly wash your hands after tending to this plant.

Philodendron

Philodendron XanaduThis selection is probably among the most widely used indoor plants, featured in both homes and offices. However, the plants of this type are poisonous to both pets and humans if ingested.

Easter lily

Easter lilyThis plant is mostly dangerous to pets, cats in particular. Serious issues have been reported by veterinarians, who state that even small parts of the plant may cause cat death. The main damage occurs in the form of kidney failure, which is lethal if not treated promptly.

English ivy

English IvyWhile it is true that severe problems will occur only after ingesting large quantity of plant parts, there have been reports of skin irritation and rash in some cases. That is why you have to be careful around blooming ivies, especially during your gardening rounds, when it is easy to come into contact with the plant.

Most plants are safe to grow around children and pets. It is the aforementioned types you need to be careful about. It is better to look for alternatives, than be sorry later.

Further reading:
Sources:


Inside Child Protective Services – Why You Need to Know Your Rights and Be Careful

We are led to believe government agencies designed to serve and protect the public do just that, but evidence to the contrary suggests corruption and ineptitude play an ever-growing role in American government institutions.

In my last year of college I worked with my local CPS office in three capacities: I completed an internship in the CPS office, I ran a therapy group for a domestic violence center for women with active CPS cases, and I worked as a parent aide with women with open CPS cases. I was also married to a CPS worker. Believe me, I got the inside scoop.

The first startling discovery was that my husband (later my ex) was the only parent in his unit. Yes, most of the workers who were investigating child abuse had never been a parent. On first thought this doesn’t seem important, but I will never forget the day my husband called me to confirm the fact that our children had in fact suffered from severe diaper rashes a few times even though I changed their diapers religiously. Everyone in the office was sure the mother in question was neglecting her child based solely on the fact that he had a bad diaper rash. Another case that year, though not in our office, was about a child placed in protective custody because his mother confided in her social worker. The nursing mother revealed her concern that she found nursing to be a little sexually stimulating and wondered if her reaction was normal.

Throughout that year, I struggled with many concerns about CPS. One of clients was mercilessly criticized for being an exceptional housekeeper. She was “abnormally” clean and tidy. She wasn’t obsessive-compulsive, she was just clean! Her caseworker also misreported the case in every meeting, stating there were three incidents involving the child when there had been two. Although I corrected him each time, he continued to misrepresent the case – in meetings and in court.

In another case, children were sexually molested and emotionally scarred by the father, but he had friends in the criminal justice system and he never faced time. The mother who caught him in the act was not believed and the daughter who was abused, who did not want to see her father, was forced to endure supervised visits for years.

My final year in school was followed by ten years with the local county mental health center. In my last years, I served as the lead intake worker, the first person to interview an applicant for services. It was sad and disheartening to interview one after another and learn how many had suffered sexual abuse as a child.

I learned that many suffered more from the system than their parents’ homes. Many were molested by older foster children and foster parents, in addition to suffering from the loss of their families.

The ineptitude I witnessed along with the subtle, but ever present, abuse of power led me to believe the entire system needed to be overhauled. This was years before the system in another state failed my family, accusing my son of molesting his daughter and putting us through an unending nightmare. Our case was one of pure ineptitude from start to finish.

We live in a day and age where we have to think twice before touching a child, an age where teachers are told never to give a pat on the back for a job well done. There is a good reason for this. It is an age where an unsubstantiated claim of abuse, with no proof and no substance, can result in prison time for the alleged abuser. It is an age where any anonymous claim of abuse can tear a life apart. It is also a dangerous time for any family that chooses a path outside the accepted norm. These suspect choices include homeschooling, co-sleeping, vegan diets, and medical decisions, including refusal to vaccinate.

The more we allow our government to chip away at our rights, on any and every front, the more likely we are to lose our parental rights. The time to stand up is now, before it is too late. Your vote counts. Choose wisely.

Recommended Articles:


Corruption and Pork – Agricultural Boards Behaving Badly

Pork. The other white meat. The incredible, edible egg. Beef. It’s what’s for dinner.

The majority of Americans are probably familiar with these slogans. But have you ever heard, “Pork: Be Inspired?” Probably not, despite the three million dollar licensing fee that the slogan has incurred each year from 2011 on.

What is the point of the slogan, and who has that kind of money to burn? The United States Department of Agriculture Research and Promotion (R and P) programs.

What Are They and Should I Care?

The pork industry is not the only agricultural industry to have its own board formed as part of the R and P. There are more than 20 agricultural products that have been classified by the USDA as research and promotion programs under the Agricultural Marketing Services department, from expected products like soybeans, dairy, beef, and eggs to potential head scratchers like sorghum and mangos. These R and P programs are set up and funded by the farmers in the industries they represent through set charges on specific amounts of units sold. An initial look at the programs shows their benefit in creating a demand and building a brand for a specific commodity, but there have been increasing concerns about a growing lack of transparency and the potential promotion of the interests of large producers at the expense of smaller farmers. There is also a concern about how close these organizations are to the taxpayer-funded USDA. Are our taxes promoting industries that are causing many of our health and environmental problems?

Questionable Decisions

If you’ve paid attention to the world of mayonnaise lately (and let’s face it, who hasn’t), you might have heard of a small startup called Hampton Creek being sued for misleading the public by Unilever, the maker of Hellmann’s mayonaise. While Unilever dropped the lawsuit, the FDA pursued the matter, claiming they were following up a complaint and that Hampton Creek’s product, Just Mayo, cannot be labeled as mayonnaise because the product doesn’t contain eggs.  A little investigation revealed emails from the National Egg Board executives that were targeting the company in ways both benign and malicious, from jokes about having “old buddies from Brooklyn” paying the Hampton Creek CEO a visit to a program promoting real eggs and contacting Whole Foods in an attempt to have the product removed from shelves. There is also the fact that Unilever reached out to the Egg Board for support during their lawsuit, leading to speculation that the Egg Board used its influence to convince the FDA to focus on Hampton Creek and Just Mayo.

While much of this seems to be within the guidelines of the R and P programs stated promotion goals, specifically calling retailers to get a competing product off the shelves has raised some eyebrows. It is troubling when an association linked to the USDA feels comfortable blocking the free market, proving that America capitalist preachings come hand in hand with rampant corruption. When the agency managed by the USDA spurs the FDA into action at the behest of an international corporation determined to eliminate a small startup, what chance does anyone else have when government is for the few?

A Mismanagement of Funds

The majority of people want to get their money’s worth when they pay for goods or services. The National Pork Board is not in this majority. Originally, they were licensing their previous popular slogan, “Pork. The other white meat.” from the National Pork Producers Council for a dollar a year. That cost increased to 818,000 in 2004 and then jumped to an incredible 20 year, 60 million dollar contract despite the lack of competition for the slogan and an actual market value of under 400,000 dollars. Though the Pork Board has retired the slogan, they continue to pay a yearly 3 million dollar fee to the NPPC. For farmers required to pay 40 cents for every 100 dollars they make to the Pork Board, that particular expense must sting quite a bit.

But even more interesting is who the money is going to and how it’s pushing out small farmers. The National Pork Producers Council is responsible for licensing the slogan and receives the yearly fees from the National Pork Board. The NPPC is a lobby group dedicated to lobbying political candidates on behalf of large-scale pig operations with environmentally detrimental policies. Despite trying to eliminate the program in the early 2000s, small farmers are still stuck with a government system that ignores their needs and lacks the necessary oversight to correct itself.

Can You Actually Do Anything?

Government shouldn’t actively work against the people who pay for it. The idea behind the USDA’s Research and Promotion Programs is sound, but the lack of actual transparency and oversight make it an easy target for corporate corruption. The transparency issue also makes it difficult for consumers to understand what’s going on and to sort through myriad information, studies, and advertisements that serve to forward the agendas of Big Agriculture. Knowing about the dirty business taking place immediately beyond the public’s eye makes it even more important to support small farmers and to know where your food is coming from. You can make a difference by choosing products from small farms committed to animal welfare, the environment, and health.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


New Study Shows Children Should Eat Organic to Reduce Pesticide Levels

For a long time, we have known that organophosphorus (OP) pesticides, like chlorpyrifos and diazinon, are bad for humans, as well as pests. Almost two decades ago, they began to be phased out for residential use due to the risks. Unfortunately, they’re still heavily utilized in agriculture, and researchers in California decided to identify how much of these, and other, harmful pesticides, children are actually ingesting.

The Study Focused on Low-Income Children in Urban and Agricultural Areas

If it feels like you’ve already heard this information, you probably have, but not quite in this way. Previous studies have focused on pesticide levels of children in non-agricultural and suburban areas. As most of us know, these studies have shown that children have lower levels of pesticides when they go organic. The difference with this new study is that children in urban and agricultural areas are exposed to more pesticides in the environment, especially those in low-income families. Therefore, the question was not whether organic diets reduce pesticide levels- we know that they do, but whether children who are exposed to environmental pesticides have reduced levels when they go organic as well. For this reason, the study included participants from the Fruitvale area of Oakland, California, an urban area, and also from Salinas, California, a largely agricultural region.

Children Between the Ages of Three and Six were Analyzed

The study lasted only 16 days, but the results were incredibly apparent. For the first four days, 40 kids between the ages of three and six ate their normal diet, were monitored by an in-home personal trainer before or after extracurricular activities. They then ate an organic diet for seven days and switched back to their regular diet for the remainder of the study. Urine samples were collected every day of the study, and scientists analyzed the samples for pesticide residue and markers.

The Amount of Two Pesticides Reduced By 50% on an Organic Diet

The study revealed that reside for two specific pesticides was cut in half when children went on an organic diet. Levels of a common herbicide also dropped by about one-fourth. Asa Bradman, an author of the study and Associate Director of the Center for Environmental Research and Children’s Health at the University of California, Berkeley, acknowledges, “There’s evidence that diet is one route of exposure to pesticides, and you can reduce your exposure by choosing organic food.” However, she cautions people not to cut regular fruits and vegetables out of their diet, because they both provide health benefits.

Sadly, Levels of Three of the Most-Common Pesticides Did Not Decline

The study showed that pesticides commonly used in residential applications did not decline. So although there is benefit in going organic, it’s only part of the solution to an overall problem. However, the study did uncover another remarkable find. Because food diaries were also kept, researchers noted that kids ate more healthy grains and produce when they were on the organic diet. In other words, choosing to stick with an organic diet can have other unexpected health benefits.

Pesticides are Linked to Childhood Cancer and Low IQ, Among Other Issues

There is a laundry list of issues that scientists have linked to pesticides. Recently, a study published in the October issue of Pediatrics linked pesticides with a higher risk of developing leukemia and lymphoma. Though that particular study focused on children who were exposed to insecticides indoors, a 47% and 43% increase in cancer rates were noted, respectively. Chensheng Lu, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who headed up the study, said that instances of other cancers, like bladder and prostate, may also increase with exposure to insecticides. Additional studies link pesticides to low IQ and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, as well as minor conditions like nausea, skin irritation, and headaches. The same issue of Pediatrics that features this study also covers the story of a seven-month-old victim of SIDS. Analysis of her brain tissue revealed high levels of a pesticide known as DBNP, which she may have been exposed to two weeks prior to her death when her father sprayed the house for flies.

These cases are not rare. Pesticide use can cause acute health issues, and the compounds can build up over time undetected, resulting in long-term health consequences. Keeping children on an organic diet is an essential part of limiting exposure to dangerous and deadly chemicals. However, it’s also clear that parents should take steps to limit environmental exposure as well.