Air pollution leads to people losing the equivalent of one year of education, says a new study conducted in China. Developing countries are more likely to have poor air quality, and 95% of the world’s population is breathing unsafe air. This has resulted in an estimated 6.5 million premature deaths worldwide from air pollution in 2016. We’re aware of the toxic effects of air pollution on our health and environment, but this study looks at some of the more subtle side effects of unsafe air. A year’s worth of education is what people are losing on average. Xi Chen at Yale School of Public Health in the US, a member of the research team, said,

Polluted air can cause everyone to reduce their level of education by one year, which is huge…But we know the effect is worse for the elderly, especially those over 64, and for men, and for those with low education. If we calculate [the loss] for those, it may be a few years of education.”

The Susceptible

In addition to the elderly, at-risk populations include children, men, low-educated people, and individuals with mental disorders. This study also identified how air pollution impacts cognitive ability. Subjects were more likely to lose language ability, rather than math ability. Longer exposure also meant a greater decrease in these abilities and a greater likelihood of developing dementia and mental illness.

Recommended: Myth of Moderate Alcohol Benefits Debunked, and How Science Gets Corrupted

China

China is notorious for their poor air quality. More than half of the people that die from air pollution every year, more than three million people, live in China and India. The government has been focused on improving their air quality, closing down 500 factories, forcing 300,000 older cars off the roads, and reducing coal consumption by a whopping 30 percent. But that is likely not enough. Less than three years ago, the smog and air pollution in Beijing was at eight times the level considered healthy by the World Health Organization.

Can We Fix It?

Air pollution is a serious health hazard. Like many of the emerging causes of disease, it is a problem of our own making. Factories in all of their forms (industrial and farmed) have permanently altered our atmosphere and left billions worldwide at an increased risk of physical conditions like heart disease, emphysema, cancer, and asthma, among others. Studies have previously confirmed that air pollution can affect cognitive performance, but now the link between the loss of overall intelligence and air pollution has been drawn.

Recommended: Glyphosate Found in the Majority of Oat-Based Products

China has already put programs in place to combat air pollution. That will provide crucial intel into whether or not air pollution can be effectively dealt with for ourselves and the next generation.

Sources:

• Air pollution causes ‘huge’ reduction in intelligence, study reveals – Guardian
• Beijing creates anti-smog police to tackle air polluters – Guardian
• Pollution Linked to Nine Million Deaths A Year Worldwide – Organic Lifestyle Magazine
• Pollution linked to one in six deaths – BBC News

The Environmental Protection Agency under the direction of Scott Pruitt removed a 2012 ban of a harmful pesticide, chlorpyrifos, in 2017, a move that a federal appeals court ruled violated federal law. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has given the government agency 60 days to remove chlorpyrifos from the market. The pesticide is widely used on citrus fruit, apples, corn, wheat, and other crops. It’s been proven harmful to children even in small quantities. The government refused to ban the chemical earlier in March this year, but this split decision ruling demands that the EPA finalize that ban. Appeals Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff wrote in the majority’s opinion,

The panel held that there was no justification for the EPA’s decision in its 2017 order to maintain a tolerance for chlorpyrifos in the face of scientific evidence that its residue on food causes neurodevelopmental damage to children…”

Children at Risk

Chlorpyrifos is one of the leading pesticides listed in cases of pesticide poisonings. In adults, it impairs the nervous system functions and can lead to convulsions, respiratory paralysis, and, in extreme cases, death. Children are especially at risk, as prenatal exposure can lead to health consequences like low birth weight and delayed motor development. Even tiny amounts of the pesticide can lead to neurological conditions in small children from reduced IQ to loss of working memory and attention deficit disorders. It’s been banned from residential use since 2000, and the science supports banning this chemical.

Related: How to Avoid GMOs in 2018 – And Everything Else You Should Know About Genetic Engineering

The pesticide does have an important backer in its corner, though…the manufacturer of the product, Dow Chemical. In spite of the residential ban and the proven toxicity of the chemical, Dow sells roughly 5 million dollars of chlorpyrifos in the U.S. every year. The company maintains that the science identifying their product as a serious health hazard is flawed and inconclusive. This attitude was echoed by Scott Pruitt when he reversed the Obama administration’s ban of chlorpyrifos use for food crops in March 2017.

Harmful Patterns

Through all of the turmoil that is the Trump Administration, the EPA has developed some distressing patterns of behavior. The first of these is their desire to eliminate many environmentally friendly programs or regulations, particularly those from the Obama era. These withdrawals are often to the detriment of public health, like reversing this ban, withdrawing from the Clean Air Act, and allowing dangerous pesticide use to continue with little oversight.

Related: Holistic Guide to Healing the Endocrine System and Balancing Our Hormones

The agency also has a tendency to consider the needs of businesses before they consider the environment. The EPA has gone on the record in the last year saying that glyphosate is not carcinogenic. A statement hasn’t been released after the landmark judgment against Monsanto this August, but if business continues as usual, glyphosate will remain “not likely” to cause cancer.

And now the EPA is being called out by an Appeals Court for a chemical that at the very least deserves a closer, objective look. It’s sad to say, but even if this pesticide is removed from use, business will find another to replace it. The EPA will approve it, because business comes first.

 Sources:

• EPA violated law by keeping harmful pesticide on the market, court says – PBS
• Chlorpyrifos The toxic pesticide now harming our children and environment – Earth Justice
• Trump’s EPA Says Glyphosate Not Carcinogenic To People – Organic Lifestyle Magazine

The Trump administration continues its efforts to roll back Obama programs, announcing plans to eliminate the fuel economy mandate that requires automakers to reach a fleet average of 54.5 mpg by 2025. In light of the announcement, the fuel efficiency standards will be frozen at approximately 37 mpg, the standard for the year 2020. President Obama brokered the previous agreement with nearly all major auto manufacturers (Volkswagen being the notable exception), United Auto Workers (UAW), and the State of California. According to Andrew Wheeler, the acting head of the Environmental Protection Agency,

We are delivering on President Trump’s promise to the American public that his administration would address and fix the current fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards…Our proposal aims to strike the right regulatory balance based on the most recent information and create a 50-state solution that will enable more Americans to afford newer, safer vehicles that pollute less.”

A New Twist on States Rights

It’s interesting that Wheeler cites the need for a 50 state solution. The state of California has played an outsized role in determining nationwide emissions standards. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for setting California’s emission standards, a power the federal government approved as a part of the Clean Air Act in 1970. Other states are free to follow the California standards, and at least 12 states do.

The proposed rollback takes aim at California’s ability to set its own vehicle emissions standards. This is a stark change from the way the EPA previously handled this situation, with the agency frequently consulting with CARB before implementing rule changes.

California Fighting Back

The decision by the Trump administration to move forward with the rollback of emissions standards is bold, especially since they will have a fight on their hands. California, Washington D.C., and 16 other states filed a lawsuit in back May to prevent the rollback from occurring. The state of California, in particular, has been vocal in opposing many Trump policies and regulations and has sued the administration more than 30 times on a variety of topics. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is from CA and released a statement on the decision, calling the rollback a “dangerous assault on clean air and public health in California and across the nation.”

It’s also important to remember that California is not the only state requiring automakers to adhere to the more stringent vehicle emission standards. Those states account for nearly a third of all car purchases in the nation, giving them a quite a bit of buying power. State governments that realize the impact of greener, more environmentally-friendly initiatives will continue to side with CA. According to a New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection representative, Lawrence Hajna,

We’ve had the California CARB program in place for a while…I’ve not heard that we have any intent on changing it for any reason; our position has always been that it’s important for us to maintain the standard for overall air quality.”

Shortsighted 

Eliminating the higher standards for vehicle emissions is negligent. Why are car sales and prices more important addressing air pollution and climate issues? The EPA believes the rollback can prevent 1,000 highway fatalities a year. Meanwhile, pollution is linked to 9 million deaths a year worldwide, with 6.5 million of those attributed to air pollution. Then again, this administration isn’t known for thinking ahead.

Sources:

• Trump administration moves to revoke Obama-era fuel economy standards – NBC News
• CARB vs. the EPA: What the New Federal Emissions Standards Could Mean for the Country – DMV.org
• Pollution Linked to Nine Million Deaths A Year Worldwide – Organic Lifestyle Magazine
• California Sues Over Plan to Scrap Car Emission Standards – US News

Electromagnetic Radiation From Power Lines and Cell Towers Disorientates Birds, Insects, Affects Plant Health

EKLIPSE is a UK based organization that aims to, “…improve the integration of emerging issues into policy development related to or impacting on biodiversity and ecosystem services.” The Telegraph reports that the nonprofit research group analyzed 97 studies and came to the conclusion that radiation from power lines, wi-fi, broadcast transmitters, and cellular towers pose a “credible risk” to wildlife and also degrades plant health. They warn that the upcoming 5G rollout could cause greater harm.

Animals including birds, mammals, insects and many others use the earth’s geomagnetic field as a magnetic compass. The EKLIPSE report showed that the magnetic orientation of birds, insects, spiders, and other animals including mammals can be disrupted by electromagnetic radiation. The report also established that these radiations also have an adverse effect on plant metabolism.

The report stated that “…serious impacts on the environment could not be ruled out.” They are asking for 5G transmitters to be placed away from areas where placement is likely to harm wildlife. The UK charity Buglife, after reviewing the report, is suggesting that 5g transmitters not be placed near LED street lamps, due to the fact that these lights attract insects and would thereby increase their exposure to the radiation.

The authors of the review concluded that there is

…an urgent need to strengthen the scientific basis of the knowledge on EMR and their potential impacts on wildlife.

… In particular, there is a need to base future research on sound, high-quality, replicable experiments so that credible, transparent and easily accessible evidence can inform society and policy-makers to make decisions and frame their policies.”

Matt Shardlow, CEO of Buglife, brought up a very good point:

We apply limits to all types of pollution to protect the habitability of our environment, but as yet, even in Europe, the safe limits of electromagnetic radiation have not been determined, let alone applied.”

This isn’t the first report on potential dangers with Electromagnetic Radiation.

A study from 2010 suggested that this electromagnetic radiation may be accelerating or causing a decline of certain animal and insect populations.

In the mid-1990s the cell phone industry commissioned a comprehensive research group called Wireless Technology Research to study cell phone health concerns. Dr. George Carlo oversaw the research. The commission started to reveal that there were serious health concerns with cell phone usage and then the industry decided to bury the results.

Researchers have been sounding the alarm for years.

The main health concern with electromagnetic radiation emitted by smart meters and other wireless technologies is that EMF and RF cause a breakdown in the communication between cells in the body, interrupting DNA repair and weakening tissue and organ function. These are the findings of Dr. George Carlo, who oversaw a comprehensive research group commissioned by the cell phone industry in the mid-1990s.” – James F. Tracy

In his continued effort to make America great again, Donald Trump is bringing back asbestos.

Asbestos is a mineral fiber with a lot of qualities desirable for manufacturing. It’s an excellent heat insulator, it dampens sound, and it is fire-resistant, strong, and inexpensive. It also causes cancer. Many studies have confirmed it.

It also causes cancer. Asbestos exposure is the only known cause of mesothelioma, a deadly form of lung cancer that is known to be extremely painful. Asbestos exposure is also linked to other lung diseases. Many studies have confirmed this. Thousands of lawsuits have been won against asbestos companies. In the last thirty years, seventy billion dollars has been spent on asbestos litigation, and more than seventy companies have been driven into bankruptcy because of said litigation. The Environmental Working Group estimates that 12,000 to 15,000 people die yearly in the U.S. from asbestos exposure, but other studies indicate that asbestos could be responsible for 40,000 deaths per year in the U.S. If you find asbestos in your home the EPA strongly recommends that you hire a professional to remove the asbestos. They come in with hazmat suits and respirators.  More than 60 countries have banned the use of asbestos. In the U.S. Here, the EPA only banned some uses of the material but all uses.

Despite all of this, Trump likes asbestos.

There is no new research disputing the health effects of asbestos, but regardless, Trump’s EPA wants to expand the legal uses for Asbestos. Can you guess why? One hint. Russia.

Uralasbest, a Russian mining firm, placed a seal with Trump’s face on their asbestos products. On their Facebook page, they posted their appreciation:

https://www.facebook.com/Uralasbest/posts/531137150617873

The translation reads:

Donald is on our side!

The combine “Uralasbest” produced an unusual batch of chrysotile: on the packaging of pallets with a mineral there is a stamp

“Approved by Donald Trump, 45th President of the United States”. In this unusual way, the workers of the combine’s asbestos-processing plant thanked US President Donald Trump for his words in defense of chrysotile-asbestos.

He supported the head of the US Environmental Protection Agency Scott Pruitt, who stated that his agency would no longer deal with the negative effects that could potentially result from products containing asbestos. Donald Trump supported the specialist and called asbestos “100 percent safe after use.”

“We came out with the initiative to support our chrysotile industry in this way and remind that our” mountain flax “is an important mineral for the whole world. The management has approved! “, They told in the factory.

The EPA declined to ban uses of asbestos that have already been abandoned by industry. They also put forth a “significant new use rule,” or SNUR, that requires manufacturers to notify and seek approval from the EPA before resuming asbestos production and uses.

According to environmental advocates, this new rule gives chemical companies the upper hand in creating new uses for such harmful products in the United States. In May, the EPA released a report detailing its new framework for evaluating the risk of its top prioritized substances. The report states that the agency will no longer consider the effect or presence of substances in the air, ground, or water in its risk assessments.” – The Architects Newspaper

The EPA is ignoring specific exposures to asbestos in the safety assessments, which is reportedly in violation of law, and they are disregarding the safety risks from asbestos that still lingers in old schools, homes, and building materials just about everywhere in the U.S.

The EPA has also eliminated many kinds of asbestos from the FDA’s definition of asbestos.

Recommended:

• Best Supplements To Kill Candida and Everything Else You Ever Wanted To Know About Fungal Infections
• Holistic Guide to Healing the Endocrine System and Balancing Our Hormones
• Best Supplements To Kill Lyme and Everything Else You Ever Wanted To Know About Lyme Disease

Within the next few decades, Big Meat and Big Dairy will surpass Big Oil for climate pollution, according to a new study by the non-profits GRAIN and the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. The jointly published study quantified emissions from 35 of the world’s largest meat and dairy companies.

The non-profit researches analyzed 35 of the meat and dairy industry’s biggest companies. The researchers warned that meat and dairy companies will overtake oil firms as the world’s biggest polluters. The authors of the study say that factory meat and dairy farms are ‘majorly overlooked climate culprits.

Related: How to Avoid GMOs in 2018 – And Everything Else You Should Know About Genetic Engineering

According to the report, the five largest meat and dairy corporations—JBS, Tyson, Cargill, Dairy Farmers of America, and Fonterra—are already responsible for more annual greenhouse gas emissions than ExxonMobil, Shell, or BP.

They also found that businesses did a poor job reporting their emissions and targets, and many failed to report emissions entirely or excluded supply chain figures, which amount to 80 to 90 percent of total emissions.

Watch the video below to see how the meat industry could actually help reduce climate change.

Related: Stop Eating Like That and Start Eating Like This – Your Guide to Homeostasis Through Diet

Related:

• FDA Loophole That Allows Farmers To Administer Antibiotics Indefinitely
• The US Has a 2.5 Billion-pound Surplus of Meat and A 1.39 Billion-pound Surplus of Cheese

Antibiotics benefit farmers by speeding up the time it takes livestock to be ready for slaughter. Cows and chickens and other livestock grow faster with antibiotic use than they would otherwise. For cattle, the time from birth to slaughter can be cut in half. But antibiotic resistance is a growing public health concern.  Antibiotic-resistant bacteria like e.coli can be pathogenic to humans and even deadly. Farm water runoff and animal waste are damaging our ecosystems in a myriad of ways. Consequently, in 2017 the FDA was compelled to act.

The C.D.C. states that 23,000 Americans die each year due to antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections and they estimate that more than 400,000 United States residents become ill with infections caused by antibiotic-resistant food-borne bacteria every year. They believe that one in five of these antibiotic-resistant infections may be caused by pathogens from food and animals.

Recommended: Best Supplements To Kill Candida and Everything Else You Ever Wanted To Know About Fungal Infections

In 2017, the Food and Drug Administration enacted rules that prohibited antibiotics from being used for growth promotion in livestock. Previously these antibiotics could be purchased over the counter but the new rules require a prescription from a veterinarian.

Despite the ban, it’s widely believed that ranchers still use antibiotics to speed growth. The F.D.A. rules have a glaring loophole: farmers can use antibiotics for disease prevention.

You don’t even need a sick animal in the herd to use antibiotics in the feed and water as long as the justification is ‘disease prevention’ not ‘growth promotion,’ ” Avinash Kar, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council

More in-depth reading: Antibiotics in Meat Could Be Damaging Our Guts & New Report Tracks Rise of Antibiotic Resistance in Humans and Livestock

Our health depends on our gut’s ecosystem. Antibiotics, vaccinations, glyphosate, and GMOs are known to disrupt the bacteria in our gut. If you eat meat, we recommend careful consideration regarding who your buy meat from.

Related Reading:

• We Consume Livestock Vaccines When We Ingest Meat
• Majority Of Meat Contain Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria
• How to Avoid GMOs in 2018 – And Everything Else You Should Know About Genetic Engineering