If ever there was a company that stands for everything Organic Lifestyle Magazine stands against, it’s Monsanto. To us they are the villain, a company that embodies virtually everything we at OLM believe to be wrong with big business today. We would be hard pressed to find a company whose products have done more to harm our planet.

• Click here to read part II
• Click here to read part III
• Click here to read part IV

Many argue that Monsanto’s potential to devastate life as we know it is second only to producers of atomic bombs. Ironically, Monsanto was also heavily involved in the Manhattan Project and the creation of the world’s first nuclear bomb.

Monsanto started in 1901 as a chemical company. Their first product was saccharine, a coal tar product, which has had a controversial history. You may know it as Sweet‘N Low, the artificial sweetener sold in little pink packages.

Though saccharin was their first, Monsanto is also well known for many other chemical and chemically based products including Agent Orange, Bovine Growth Hormone, Polychlorinated biphenyl (commonly known as PCBs), Dichloro-Diphenyl-Trichloroethane (DDT), and RoundUp.

Today, Monsanto is a leader in the bio-tech industry selling RoundUp ready GMO seeds. Its main crops are soy, cotton, sugar beets, and canola. Its controversial bovine growth hormone, rBST, was sold to the Eli Lilly Company earlier this year.

We asked Brad Mitchell, Director of Public Affairs for Monsanto if we were dealing with a new Monsanto since our take on Monsanto’s reputation is one of deception, corruption, bribery, and environmental degradation, a company that made significantly bad choices.

“I think more than anything, it’s a new age,” he said. “…I think you’re holding the Monsanto of the middle part of the 20th century against the standards of today. So, for instance, if you look at PCBs we all know today that what Monsanto did there was wrong. It shouldn’t have been done. Did we, Monsanto, or society as a whole know in the 60s or the 50s that that was wrong? I don’t think that we were as environmentally sophisticated as we are today.

“…I’m not saying that we’re not liable, that we shouldn’t have done it, and all that, but you know, when you make these kind[s] of statements about how Monsanto obviously disregarded human health and public safety and the environment for profit, I wasn’t there. I can’t tell you what was in people’s hearts and minds. I do believe, however, that to some extent we’re being held against today’s standards for actions that occurred half a century ago.”

Perhaps we could agree that these actions occurred half a century ago if Monsanto had voluntarily embarked on a clean-up of PCB contamination in Anniston, Alabama, in any decade following the 50s or 60s. If they had, perhaps we could believe the corporation has grown a conscience. According to The Washington Post, it was February 2002 when Monsanto was held liable by an Alabama jury for all six counts it considered: negligence, wantonness, suppression of the truth, nuisance, trespass and outrage. The Post quotes the legal definition of outrage under Alabama law as conduct, “so outrageous in character and extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency so as to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in civilized society.”

The Center for Food Safety maintains a website, www.monsantowatch.org. On this site they report, “In August, 2003, Monsanto and its former chemical subsidiary, Solutia, Inc. (now owned by Pharmacia Corp.), agreed to pay $600 million to settle claims brought by more than 20,000 residents of Anniston, AL, over the severe contamination of ground and water by tons of PCBs dumped in the area from the 1930s until the 1970s. Court documents revealed that Monsanto was aware of the contamination decades earlier.”

History tells us Monsanto was well aware of the damage their silence and lack of action brought Anniston as The Center for Food Safety also reports,

The world’s center of PCB manufacturing was Monsanto’s plant on the outskirts of East St. Louis, Illinois, which has the highest rate of fetal death and immature births in the state. By 1982, nearby Times Beach, Missouri, was found to be so thoroughly contaminated with dioxin, a by-product of PCB manufacturing, that the government ordered it evacuated.”

Monsanto can, however, claim the Monsanto of today is not the Monsanto of yesteryear. According to Wikipedia, the Monsanto of 1901-2000 and the current business are now two legally separate corporations, though they share the same name as well as many of the same executives and workers. The “new” Monsanto is an agricultural company (as opposed to a chemical company).

Are Monsanto’s misdeeds a thing of the past? In 2005, BBC News reported that Monsanto agreed to pay a $1.5 million dollar fine for bribing an Indonesian official “to avoid environmental impact studies being conducted on its [bio-tech] cotton.” Monsanto said it accepted full responsibility for its “improper activities” and agreed to three years of close monitoring of its business practices by American authorities.

GMO seeds were approved by the FDA under the GRAS designation—generally recognized as safe. As such, Monsanto’s bio-tech seeds were granted exemption from premarket approval by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Due to this ruling, the onus to ensure the safety of genetically altered food created by Monsanto rests with Monsanto, a company whose actions have revealed an unparalleled disregard for human life and environmental safety.

Opponents of GMOs often quote a cavalier statement made by Phil Angell, Monsanto’s former director of corporate communications to author Michael Pollan. In Pollan’s article, Playing God in the Garden, published in the New York Times Magazine in 1998, Angell is quoted as saying,

Monsanto should not have to vouch for the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”

We asked Brad Mitchell, Director of Public Affairs for Monsanto if we were dealing with a new Monsanto since our take on Monsanto’s reputation is one of deception, corruption, bribery, and environmental degradation, a company that made significantly bad choices.   “I think more than anything, it’s a new age,” he said. “…I think you’re holding the Monsanto of the middle part of the 20th century against the standards of today. So, for instance, if you look at PCBs we all know today that what Monsanto did there was wrong. It shouldn’t have been done. Did we, Monsanto, or society as a whole know in the 60s or the 50s that that was wrong? I don’t think that we were as environmentally sophisticated as we are today.

…I’m not saying that we’re not liable, that we shouldn’t have done it, and all that, but you know, when you make these kind[s] of statements about how Monsanto obviously disregarded human health and public safety and the environment for profit, I wasn’t there. I can’t tell you what was in people’s hearts and minds. I do believe, however, that to some extent we’re being held against today’s standards for actions that occurred half a century ago.”

Perhaps we could agree that these actions occurred half a century ago if Monsanto had voluntarily embarked on a clean-up of PCB contamination in Anniston, Alabama, in any decade following the 50s or 60s. If they had, perhaps we could believe the corporation has grown a conscience. According to The Washington Post, it was February 2002 when Monsanto was held liable by an Alabama jury for all six counts it considered: negligence, wantonness, suppression of the truth, nuisance, trespass and outrage. The Post quotes the legal definition of outrage under Alabama law as conduct, “so outrageous in character and extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency so as to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in civilized society.”

The Center for Food Safety maintains a website, www.monsantowatch.org. On this site they report, “In August, 2003, Monsanto and its former chemical subsidiary, Solutia, Inc. (now owned by Pharmacia Corp.), agreed to pay $600 million to settle claims brought by more than 20,000 residents of Anniston, AL, over the severe contamination of ground and water by tons of PCBs dumped in the area from the 1930s until the 1970s. Court documents revealed that Monsanto was aware of the contamination decades earlier.”

History tells us Monsanto was well aware of the damage their silence and lack of action brought Anniston as The Center for Food Safety also reports,

The world’s center of PCB manufacturing was Monsanto’s plant on the outskirts of East St. Louis, Illinois, which has the highest rate of fetal death and immature births in the state. By 1982, nearby Times Beach, Missouri, was found to be so thoroughly contaminated with dioxin, a by-product of PCB manufacturing, that the government ordered it evacuated.”

Monsanto can, however, claim the Monsanto of today is not the Monsanto of yesteryear. According to Wikipedia, the Monsanto of 1901-2000 and the current business are now two legally separate corporations, though they share the same name as well as many of the same executives and workers.  The “new” Monsanto is an agricultural company (as opposed to a chemical company).

Are Monsanto’s misdeeds a thing of the past? In 2005, BBC News reported that Monsanto agreed to pay a $1.5 million dollar fine for bribing an Indonesian official “to avoid environmental impact studies being conducted on its [bio-tech] cotton.”  Monsanto said it accepted full responsibility for its “improper activities” and agreed to three years of close monitoring of its business practices by American authorities.

GMO seeds were approved by the FDA under the GRAS designation—generally recognized as safe. As such, Monsanto’s bio-tech seeds were granted exemption from premarket approval by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Due to this ruling, the onus to ensure the safety of genetically altered food created by Monsanto rests with Monsanto, a company whose actions have revealed an unparalleled disregard for human life and environmental safety.

Opponents of GMOs often quote a cavalier statement made by Phil Angell, Monsanto’s former director of corporate communications to author Michael Pollan. In Pollan’s article, Playing God in the Garden, published in the New York Times Magazine in 1998, Angell is quoted as saying,

Monsanto should not have to vouch for the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”

When we asked Mr. Mitchell if he was familiar with this statement, he said he thought the statement had been made by a Monsanto foreman and that it was taken out of context. “I don’t know the gentleman, but I do know the general feeling here. There is nobody here at Monsanto that I know that says, ‘Screw safety, that’s not our problem, it’s FDA’s.’ I think what the gentleman quoted is referring to is that when it comes down to it, the law, by the law, it’s FDA’s responsibility. I don’t know a single person at Monsanto who does not believe that we have the responsibility. But if you want to look at the law, the final say on this, and the final arbiter, and the people legally charged with safely stating whether it’s safe or not is not Monsanto, it’s FDA.”

Mitchell tells us he and Monsanto’s scientific team have never seen a study that shows any significant risk associated with GMO foods.

I’ve worked with our scientific affairs team, so when studies come out to do analysis and that sort of thing, we have yet to see a study which we think shows us any significant risk with these things. So, those studies are best addressed on a one-on-one basis, and I would say that there are just as many studies, independent as well, that show (chuckles) that there are not risks with them [GMOs].”

He argues that the oft referenced study by Árpád Pusztai showing GMO potatoes was flawed. “My understanding is that there were only six animals in each control group, so statistical significance is pretty weak there.” In addition, he states that Pusztai did not go through the basic safety processes. “The premise of biotech safety in virtually every country that allows these things is something called substantial equivalence. You compare a genetically modified potato to a non-genetically modified potato against a whole bunch of parameters on stuff they contain. And essentially if it doesn’t cause any physiological or physiochemical differences in the potato, they’re deemed to be substantively equivalent, which means that they are pretty much the same with the exception of the protein that’s expressed in the genetically modified one. …Now the ironic part is that Pusztai, when he did his test, never analyzed the potatoes for substantial equivalence. And in fact there is very good evidence that snowdrop lectin [used in the study] will actually—the protein itself, will change the physiology of that potato where it would not meet the standards of substantial equivalence. So he’s testing a GM product that was never commercialized, that has never even been even through the most basic level of safety, with a poor study, that basically shows and basically came to the conclusion that all genetically modified crops have risks, when he hasn’t even done the basic tests that genetically modified crops go through before being approved.”

In 1997, Steve Wilson and Jane Akre were hired by Fox Television as the researchers and stars of a new investigative news show, called The Investigators. Akre says they were told, “Do any stories you want. Ask tough questions and get answers.”  One of the first stories they proposed was an expose on Monsanto’s bovine growth hormone, rBST, also known as Posilac. Their investigation revealed that Canada refused to approve Posilac, citing health concerns, that Posilac was linked to cancer, and that the FDA had rubberstamped the product without proper testing.

While Monsanto’s publicity stated, “Posilac is the single most tested new product in history,” Wilson and Akre’s investigation revealed that the longest test Monsanto had done for human toxicity was for 90 days on 30 rats.

Legal threats from Monsanto prompted Fox to kill the story and set in motion a chain of events that resulting in Fox firing Steve Wilson and Jane Akre for insubordination after several attempts failed to convince them to kill the story, re-write the story, or out and out lie about its contents.  Fox even attempted to bribe the pair, offering them the rest of a year’s salary in exchange for their silence about the story and Fox’s part in it.

Brad Mitchell stated, “We would still contend that Monsanto [rBST] is a safe product. The FDA would support us on that. It’s still being used, albeit by a different company.”

Mitchell also tells us recent Internet rumors that Monsanto was opposed to or tried to prevent the labeling of milk as rBST free were absolutely untrue.

What we were trying to prevent was misleading labeling of milk as being rBST free. And many of the milk companies out there who were labeling it were doing so in a way that was in violation of FDA guidelines and made it basically sound like our product wasn’t safe, and the scientific consensus, at least in this country, was that it is.

“You know, we obviously would prefer that it wasn’t labeled that way, but our gripe was not against people who were labeling milk as rBST free; our real concern was people who were labeling it in opposition to what FDA guidelines set. And the vast majority of the state legislation and the things you saw really were just forcing milk labelers to label in accordance to those guidelines.

“I’ll give you an example, where some milk labels said it’s hormone free. Well, no milk is hormone free. It’s just misleading to say so. Now, if you want to say it’s rBST free, that’s better. What the FDA suggested was that it says this milk comes from cows not treated with rBST. Obviously we would prefer that people didn’t put that in writing and that people didn’t see a problem with our products. But if they were labeling milk accurately, we would not have had an issue with them.”

This company Highlight is continued in our next issue. Click to read Monsanto Company Profile Part II, Monsanto’s Turn. We will discuss Monsanto’s stand on patent infringement lawsuits and high yield potentials of GM crops, Europe’s attitude toward GMOs, and more.

Recommended Reading:

• Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods
• Monsanto part II
• Monsanto part III
• Monsanto part IV

Consumption Awareness with Moms and their Kids

As a mom of three young children, I think mothers lead the pack when it comes to excessive consumption. Just look at what we buy! Moms, I promise you, your children will not shrivel up and dehydrate if they don’t have a drink every 15 minutes– enough with the juiceboxes! In fact, drop the juice addiction altogether. Water’s what they really need. And the prepackaged snacks? Even the organic kind? Not healthy! You know what’s healthy and sustainable? An apple. From a tree.

I brought a whole new consumption awareness with me to the grocery store. I now buy very little that comes in plastic packaging. Kids need snacks for lunch?  It’s raw fruits and veggies all the way… and I put the produce in my own canvas bags, not the plastic produce bags. We didn’t produce a lot of garbage before I went hardcore on my grocery habits, but now we use one small bag and it takes two weeks to fill it. So next time you go grocery shopping, ask yourself, “Do I really need this?  Does the nutritional content of this product warrant its packaging?”

What about the toys and the clothes slick marketing schemes try to brainwash us into believing we need? What does that new baby really need? I promise you, the latest Pack and Play Portable Playard or the Fisher-Price Power Plus Swing and all the other crap that sits in a landfill six months after we bought it can’t be considered a necessity.

What about the brand new baby clothes dipped in flame retardant? Do you really want that stuff on your baby? My last child was born in June. I went to the Salvation Army and bought a bunch of onesies. It was hot. That was all she needed. The only other thing I bought was an Ergo (a baby carrier). That’s it. You don’t NEED all the plastic junk and the brand new clothes that you’re led to believe you can’t do without. All our babies need is a boob and a means to be tied to us—nothing more, nothing less.

The next time you get the impulse to buy something for your child, stop and think. Is your need just to connect? Do something with your child instead. Give your child your time, not more stuff. You’ll both feel more fulfilled.

As a brand new farmer, I farmed conventionally for two years and broke even both years on one quarter section. Not so good. No profit. Farming has to make money or there is no point in doing it, right?

I decided I could make a little more money if I converted to organic, plus I didn’t like spraying all those chemicals. So I began the next year with a crop of oats, and I didn’t spray. Well, in the spring, what popped out of the ground was a beautiful field of wild mustard weed. Again not so good. The oats did grow, but they suffered under the canopy of the wild mustard.

From a distance, the field looked like a canola field. I hung my head in shame thinking that once again, I would not make a profit. Some farmers laughed. Some jokingly commented on how beautiful my canola crop looked. And some probably thought I was one bale short of a hay stack! In desperation I searched the web for a solution, but could find nothing. I resigned myself to just let it grow and harvest whatever I could in the fall instead of plowing it under.

That summer I spoke to many farmers and eventually met up with an old timer who used to farm organically. Over coffee at his place, I told him about my field and all the things that went wrong. To my surprise, in one hour he gave me more info on how to farm organically than I had learned in months of searching on the net.

With this new-found knowledge, I purchased a few more pieces of old farm equipment to help me out. Fall came, and the oats, wild mustard, wild buckwheat, and all the other weeds that offered me their seed were pouring into the combine. It was a mess that looked like a dog’s breakfast, but, thanks to my friend, the old timer, I used an old-fashioned screening system I had found for $400.00 at a local farm auction to separate the small weeds from the larger oats . It worked so well, I was able to remove 99% of all the junk from the oats.

With this new found hope, I felt confident I could farm organically. But what was I to do with all these weed seeds like wild mustard? Most farmers just dig a hole in the field and bury them four feet under. I did some brainstorming and research, and then it came to me. I could crush them like they crush canola seeds to make my own fuel.

Since then, I have designed and built my own bio-diesel reactor, purchased a grain burning stove, and purchased a small canola crusher. My tractors and trucks run on my homemade bio-diesel, a major reduction of my fuel farming costs. I also heat my home on weed seeds, saving even more money.

The second year I planted wheat and was able to keep the weeds to a minimum. During the summer, I noticed I had a wheat midge problem. (A midge is a little bug that eats the wheat.) It wasn’t an all out devastating infestation, but I asked around to a few farmers who all told me I should spray to get rid of the pest. However, I knew if I sprayed, I would no longer qualify to be organic. So I went back to the web in hopes of an answer. I found nothing but chemicals used to kill the bugs.

I once again resigned myself to just letting the crop grow and harvesting in the fall if the bugs left anything to harvest.

I once read a quote by Ambrose Bierce, “Patience: A minor form of despair disguised as a virtue.” That sort of summed it up for me. But this story gets better. Much better! I have to tell you! Are you sitting down in your chair?

A miracle happened. About a week later, I noticed a new critter in the field. Lady bugs. Lady bugs and more lady bugs. What seemed like millions of them. Everywhere I looked and everywhere I walked, lady bugs would land on my arms, hands, and hair. I wondered what in the world they were doing in the field because I had not seen them there before. To my amazement, they were eating the pesky wheat midge. Just when I thought all hope was lost, the small seemingly insignificant lady bug came to my rescue.

Every day I would walk through the field and marvel at the tiny creatures that were now living in my field creating balance the way it was designed to work. You know the best thing I ever did was choose not to follow the conventional wisdom. Had I sprayed the first year for weeds, I wouldn’t have all this free bio-diesel. Had I sprayed the second year for the bugs, I would have killed the wheat midge, but I also would have indiscriminately killed many other critters like the amazing lady bug. I wouldn’t have let the natural cycle of the field follow its course. I would have missed out on a major blessing.

Organic agriculture is sustainable. I can’t help but wonder what we as a people could accomplish if we were just a little more patient.

The problem of bioaccumulated toxins is reaching crisis proportions. Residues of more than 400 toxic chemicals have been found in human blood and tissues, many of them at levels that cause disease in animals. Recent medical and scientific studies show disturbing correlations between chronic low-level exposure to synthetic chemicals and allergies, asthma, autoimmune diseases, birth defects, developmental delays, cancer, and a host of other problems. Thousands of chemicals permeate our everyday life.

Fortunately, we can minimize these toxins through education and common sense. We must learn how to stop bringing toxins into our homes, to rid ourselves of toxins we have already introduced, and to help our bodies detoxify.

We accumulate toxins from air, water, and food. Surprisingly, most of our toxic load comes from sources in our own homes. Indoor air pollution poses a serious threat to the health and safety of families—especially to children. Indoor air is usually five times more polluted than outdoor air. The EPA has measured many indoor air samples to be 70 times more polluted.

Common household products contribute some of the most dangerous chemicals. One class of products is aerosols. A new study in the Archives of Environmental Health looked at the effects of aerosol air fresheners on the health of more than 10,000 young mothers and their infants. Formaldehyde and phenol are components of air fresheners that interfere with the ability to smell by coating nasal passages with an oil film or by releasing a deadening nerve agent.

Aerosol products, from air fresheners to cleaning products and shaving cream, contain volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which can include known carcinogens such as benzene and known neurotoxins such as xylene. Studies have shown that within 26 seconds of exposure to such products, traces of these chemicals can be found in every organ in the body and daily use of such aerosols causes a gradual increase in the amount of VOCs in the home air.

Daily use of air fresheners has been shown to cause adults to experience a 10 percent increase in headaches and a 25 percent increase in depression. Infants living in these homes suffered significantly more earaches and were 32 percent more likely to suffer from diarrhea. Keep in mind that these symptoms were the result of toxins seriously harming normal cell chemistry. The solution is simple: don’t use aerosols! (If you feel you must, use them sparingly with very good ventilation.)

Furniture and carpets made of synthetic materials are significant sources of indoor pollution and VOCs; they will off-gas toxic chemicals for decades. New carpets are especially toxic. Chemicals outgas from the fibers as well as the adhesives, backing, and padding. Researchers at Anderson Labs measured the effects of carpet toxicity on 110 families and found that within three months of installation, 82 percent of those people developed diverse health problems including irregular heartbeat, fatigue, rashes, memory loss, muscle pain, blurred vision, and tremors.

The problems with carpets first gained attention in 1988 when the new headquarters of the Environmental Protection Agency caused “sick building syndrome.” The problem was eventually traced to chemicals outgassing from the backing of their new carpets. Synthetic-fiber carpets can contain as many as 200 different chemicals, many of which outgas into a home’s living space.

Mice exposed to fumes from new carpets died in a matter of hours, while carpets up to 12 years old caused severe neurological problems. If carpet fumes can kill mice, what are carpets doing to you, your children, and your pets? And if all this isn’t bad enough, it gets worse when carpets are cleaned.

Carpet cleaning products usually contain a multitude of toxic ingredients, including high risk hazardous chemicals such as 2-butoxy ethanol, formaldehyde, and perchlorethylene. During application and while drying, these chemicals evaporate and pollute the air. Carpet shampoos also leave a residue on carpet fibers. Such residues can disperse into the air or be picked up by pets and children who are close to the carpet. Children play on the floor and they tend to put everything in their mouths. They are more susceptible to toxins because their detox systems are still developing.

Carpet cleaning also leaves carpets wet for too long, encouraging the growth of mold. Once mold begins to grow in a carpet or its pad, it is impossible to adequately remove it. Even when mold is not actively growing, mold particles and spores can cause health problems such as fatigue, headaches, allergy symptoms, and asthma attacks. Chemicals from molds can cause cancer and mimic hormones.

Dangerous gasses and particles are also generated by household appliances. Gas stoves, water heaters, furnaces, space heaters, and fireplaces all release toxins such as nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, methane, and other gasses along with fine particles into the air. Furnaces and gas water heaters should be kept outside the living space, in a shed or an unattached garage. If that is not possible, consider switching to an electric water heater. This is what I had to do. Gas stoves should be used only with good ventilation. Electric stoves are preferable. Use fireplaces sparingly and never use artificial logs as they put a heavy VOC load into the living space and the neighborhood.

The list continues. Paradichlorobenzene, found in mothballs and deodorizers, is another common indoor pollutant and carcinogen. Pesticides are very toxic. Never use them in or around the home. Tobacco smoke, perfume, cosmetics, cleaning products, aerosol products, and all manner of scented products are toxic and should be avoided. Biological contaminants include mold, animal dander, dust mites, and cockroaches.

Attached garages pose another problem. Exhaust fumes and hydrocarbon vapors coming from the engine can enter the living space. The interiors of vehicles, especially new vehicles, are exceedingly toxic. Even tap water is dangerous. Most tap water is contaminated with aluminum, arsenic, pesticides, chlorinated hydrocarbons, chlorine, and fluoride. In addition to damaging the brain and lowering IQ, fluoride also causes cancer, weak bones, poor teeth, and soft tissue calcification.

Exposure by breathing these chemicals in your bath can rival or exceed exposure from drinking the water. Breathing the fumes from dishwashers, clothes washers, bathtubs, and showers is particularly bad, and bleaches and detergents used in washing add to the toxic load.

Americans spend 90 percent of their time indoors. Indoor air pollution is creating an epidemic of undiagnosed chronic disease that is mystifying medical doctors. Too often the medical response is to prescribe medications that only add to the toxic load.

Even if we could stop putting all these toxins into our bodies today, we would still be in toxic overload. Since toxins are now unavoidable, we must reduce our toxic exposures and help our bodies detoxify.

There are three major approaches to detoxifying: eating a nutrient-rich diet, consuming high-quality supplements, and taking regular saunas.

Most of us are malnourished. The body’s detoxification system requires a variety of nutrients to operate efficiently. Lack of these nutrients allows toxins to build up and do harm. Nutrients critical to detoxification include vitamins C and E, magnesium, zinc, molybdenum, selenium, carotenes, quercitin, CoQ10, glutamine, choline, and glutathione. It is important to supplement with detoxification-supporting nutrients and herbs.

There is another very effective way to get rid of toxins—saunas. According to detox expert Dr. Sherry Rogers, “Saunas have become a household necessity.” Sweating is a critical detoxification pathway, and saunas are the only proven way we know of to effectively rid the body of the hundreds of manmade chemicals we bioaccumulate. Through regular saunas, people with undiagnosable and untreatable problems have been restored to health. Unfortunately, saunas themselves can be toxic.

It took me two years to find and approve a sauna that met my exacting standards for safety and effectiveness. I finally found a far infrared (FIR) sauna made of nontoxic wood with special patented heating elements. I have one in my home. Twice a week, I sauna for an hour-and-twenty-minutes.

FIR saunas which operate at lower temperatures, take out more toxins and are far safer and more easily tolerated than regular saunas. If you are unable to have a sauna in your home, you can sauna at a health or fitness club. The important thing is to sauna regularly, at least once a week.

Other household aids include water filters, shower filters, and air filters. Each of these helps to reduce our toxic exposure. Finally, eating organic foods and using safe personal-care products such as organic, non-toxic shampoos, soaps, toothpastes, deodorants, and skin creams are a must. There are safe alternatives for most of the dangerous products we use. Remember, there are only two causes of disease: deficiency and toxicity. Both of these causes are under your control.

With a modicum of education and a willingness to put it to work, almost anyone can improve their nutrition, reduce their toxic load, get well, and stay well.

Recommended Reading:

• Detox Cheap and Easy Without Fasting – Recipes Included
• Gluten, Candida, Leaky Gut Syndrome, and Autoimmune Diseases
• 8 Easy Steps to Health
• Hot & Cold Hydrotherapy

Our oceans cover 70% of the Earth. Home to untold species of plants and animals, these waters have provided food for mankind since time immemorial. Bountiful, abundant, teeming with life – the oceans have always seemed and endless resource.

Today’s unsustainable fishing practices and high levels of pollution are destroying aquatic life and the ocean habitat. Our waters are becoming cesspools of waste with floating “islands” of plastic debris. Countless species of fish, turtles, plants, and animals are endangered or newly extinct. Coral reefs are dying.

In 1999, a forward-thinking group of environmental foundations commissioned a study which revealed startling information. Less than ½ of one percent of all U.S. environmental dollars were being spent on ocean advocacy, and there wasn’t one single organization working on a global scale to address the needs of the oceans. This group founded Oceana, creating the world’s first and only international oceanic environmental organization.

Under the leadership of CEO Andrew Shrimp Boat Sharpless and a diverse board of directors which includes foundation members, scientists, entertainers, and activists, Oceana carefully selects and designs its campaigns.

“To achieve real change for the oceans, Oceana conducts focused, strategic campaigns,” says Sharpless. “We are different than most non-profits. We resist the temptation to spread ourselves thinly across too many objectives, doing just enough to lose. We focus.”

Through careful investigation of a need and its causal factors, Oceana determines a strategy that includes a broad, multi-level response with clearly defined, achievable goals that can be reached within 3-5 years. Rather than simply alert the global community about a problem, Oceana provides education and alternative action. It advocates for change, demands accountability, and takes steps to change existing laws and regulations to ensure success.

“We manage scientists, lawyers, press people, organizers, and advocates in tightly focused campaigns,” says Sharpless. “It works. We have won more than a dozen policy victories that are helping restore abundant oceans.”

Oceana doesn’t tilt at windmills. Battles are carefully chosen. But even global warming is not too unwieldy a challenge for this group, barnacles not when the problem is so dire and solutions are so readily available.

Oceana tells us that ocean waters have absorbed 80% of the heat added to the atmosphere as well as 1/3 of the CO2 we have produced since the beginning of the industrial age. As the oceans absorb more CO2 their waters become more acidic, which affects coral reefs and shell-producing animals, interfering with their ability to make skeletons and shells. More acidic waters also look likely to catastrophically disrupt marine food webs and ecosystems.

Oceana is raising awareness of the shipping industry’s effect on global warming. If the industry were a country, it would rank in sixth place as a CO2 emitter, surpassed only by the United States, China, Russia, India, and Japan.

According to the International Maritime Organization, ocean-going vessels released 1.12 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in 2007, an amount equal to that produced by 205 million cars. (Compare this number to the 135 million cars registered in the United States in 2006). This pollution Cruise Ship continues to be emitted and remains unregulated, while the shipping industry grows at an alarming rate of 5% each year.

Out of every industry that burns fossil fuels, the shipping industry uses the dirtiest fuel. (The fuel is so unrefined it can be solid at room temperature, so solid you can walk on it.) This dirty fuel releases a high rate of CO2, other greenhouse gases, and black carbon (soot). Black carbon is believed to be responsible for 30% of Arctic warming. Oceana is raising awareness about this problem and how we can dramatically reduce emissions by changing to cleaner fuel, using available technology to decrease emissions, and decreasing the amount of fuel used.

A 10% reduction in speed results in a 23.3% reduction in emissions. Ships can turn off their diesel engines while in port. Ships can utilize sail or kite technology, harnessing wind energy while out at sea. A special coating can be added to propellers, which reduces fuel requirements by 4%-5%. Oceana is educating the shipping industry about these and other energy saving and pollution reduction strategies. And voluntary changes are being made. But Oceana is also teaming up with Earthjustice, Friends of the Earth, and the Center for Biological Diversity to create regulatory change through the Environmental Protection Agency. A formal petition, which was ignored by the EPA, has been followed by a letter of intent to sue. If the EPA refuses to take action, the next step will be a lawsuit.

Commercial fishing creates enormous waste. Sixteen billion pounds of by-catch fish are wasted each year and hundreds of thousands of sea turtles, marine mammals, and seabirds are killed. U.S. commercial fishing operations alone throw away more than one million metric tons of fish each year, nearly a third of its annual commercial catch.

“Fishermen end up throwing fish and other sea life away for several reasons – they’ve caught the wrong species, gone over quota, or simply incidentally caught untargeted wildlife like sharks, sea turtles, and marine mammals,” says Sharpless. “To give one example, the pollock fishery in Alaska has incidentally caught tens of thousands of king salmon, a commercially important and vulnerable species, in its trawls.”

Oceana advocates a “count, cap and control” approach to reduce by-catch. This includes documenting the amount of by-catch, setting strict limits on acceptable levels, and taking measures to control and reduce it through interventions such as changes in fishing gear or by restricting fishing in areas with a history of high by-catch levels.

Sharpless tells us, “The federal government, following campaigning by Oceana, is evaluating establishing a cap, count and control program to limit salmon by-catch in the pollock fishery.”

Bottom trawling is a particularly destructive practice Oceana targets. “Trawlers used to raise their nets and heavy gear up over the rocks so they wouldn’t get destroyed, but now the technology is so sophisticated that they don’t have to, and the weight of the gear destroys everything on the seafloor, including coral beds and other living creatures that provide the nooks and crannies where little fish grow up into the bigger fish we enjoy eating,” says Sharpless. “Scientists believe that the extensive use of bottom trawls and dredges by commercial fishing causes more direct and avoidable damage to the ocean floor than any other human activity in the world.” As a direct result of Oceana’s advocacy efforts, more than 1 million square miles of seafloor is now protected from bottom trawling.

Mercury contamination is also a serious problem. When Oceana began its campaign to urge chlorine companies to switch to mercury-free technology, there were nine plants using outdated technology. In the last five years, that number has been reduced to four—which Oceana calls the “foul four.” These four plants are still dumping thousands of pounds of mercury into the environment each year.

Through Oceana’s Grocery Store Campaign, consumers are warned about high levels of mercury in predatory fish like tuna and swordfish, and are urged to limit their consumption.

Oceana’s current campaigns include efforts to save sea turtles, bluefin tuna, and sharks.

If you’re not a scientist or a politician, if you’re landlocked and thinking the only thing you can do to help the oceans is to reduce your carbon footprint—think again. Andrew Sharpless says, “Join Oceana! Sign up to be a Wavemaker at www.Oceana.org/join. We’ll email you when we need you to contact your member of Congress to help pass positive ocean legislation, and we’ll keep you up to date on Oceana news, challenges, and victories.”

Oceana is certainly making waves. And in their wake, the whole world reaps the benefits of Oceana’s hard work and dedication.

Oceana’s North American website 

Oceana’s international website

Success Stories

May 2004: Potty Training Royal Caribbean – Eleven months after the launch of Oceana’s Stop Cruise Pollution campaign, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines agreed to major reform of its waste treatment practices.

DECEMBER 2008: Sharks Get a Boost in Rome – Thanks in part to Oceana’s work, the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) in Rome, Italy, decided to boost conservation initiatives for four migratory shark species: the porbeagle, spurdog, shortfin mako and longfin mako. Nearly half of all migratory shark species are threatened with extinction due to overfishing and habitat degradation.

JANUARY 2009: Dr. Lark Caves – After more than a year of pressure from Oceana, Dr. Susan Lark announced that she will sell cosmetic products containing squalene derived from olives rather than deep sea sharks. More than 15,000 wavemakers contacted Lark, telling her it was unconscionable to sacrifice already at-risk shark populations for the sake of beauty.

AUGUST 2008: Costco Joins Green List — Costco Wholesale Corporation commits to warn its customers about mercury contamination in fish by posting the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) mercury advice on signs at seafood counters in all its stores. The move, prompted by requests from Oceana and Costco members, follows similar action by other major grocery chains nationwide.

JULY 2008: Freezing the Bering Sea’s Footprint – The National Marine Fisheries Service announces that it will adopt Oceana’s “freeze-the-footprint” approach by closing nearly 180,000 square miles of the Bering Sea to destructive bottom trawling to protect important seafloor habitats and marine life.

JULY 2008: U.S. House Protects Sharks – After campaigning by Oceana, the U.S. House of Representatives passes the Shark Conservation Act of 2008, which improves existing laws to prevent shark finning by requiring that sharks be landed with their fins still naturally attached in all U.S. waters.

JULY 2008: Saving Bluefin Tuna – Oceana launches a new campaign to document the plight of the bluefin tuna and to establish a sanctuary in the Mediterranean Sea, one of the world’s key breeding grounds for the species. Without intervention, scientists believe that bluefin tuna populations are headed for collapse.

JUNE 2008: Reducing Salmon By-catch in Pollock Fishery – The world’s largest fishery has taken the first step toward reducing wasteful king salmon by-catch. After pressure from Oceana and its allies, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council moved forward in June on capping salmon by-catch in the Alaska pollock fishery.

FEBRUARY 2008: Banning Mediterranean Driftnetting – The European Court of Justice rejects any further requests by the French government for exemptions from the EU ban on driftnetting in the Mediterranean Sea. This ruling will spare 25,000 juvenile bluefin tuna annually, along with 10,000 non-targeted marine species caught annually in the driftnets.

JANUARY 2008: Safer Seafood – Kroger and Harris Teeter grocery stores are added to Oceana’s Green List after agreeing to post the FDA advice about mercury in seafood. The Green List now accounts for almost 30% of the major market share of grocery companies.

MAY 2007: Cutting Fishing Subsidies – After campaigning by Oceana, the U.S. Congress passes resolutions supporting worldwide cuts in harmful fishing subsidies that lead to overcapacity in fishing fleets and thus to overfishing. Oceana is working with nations in the current World Trade Organization negotiations to end these harmful taxpayer handouts.

JANUARY 2007: Italy Closes Loopholes on Illegal Driftnetters – Two months after Oceana presented its findings to the scientific committee ACCOBAMS, the Italian Attorney General announced new efforts to crack down on illegal driftnetting by declaring it illegal for vessels to carry driftnets on board, regardless of whether or not they are being used when detected.
DECEMBER 2006: Pioneer Industries Switches to Mercury-Free Technology – Since early 2005, Oceana has urged chlorine companies to use mercury-free technology. Of the original nine plants that were using the outdated technology, Pioneer Industries is the fourth to convert.

DECEMBER 2006: New Magnuson-Stevens Act Passed – Oceana helped campaign for new legislation that significantly improves the protection of deep-sea corals and sponges from bottom trawling and other destructive fishing gear. This bill as passed makes marginal improvements to the existing Magnuson-Stevens Act.

SEPTEMBER 2006: Protecting Sharks from Finning – Oceana and other members of the Shark Alliance scored a major victory for sharks in the European Parliament when the Parliament decided to reject a recommendation from its own Fisheries Committee to increase the allowable ratio of shark fins to bodies from 5% to 6.5%.

JULY 2006: Saving the “Dolphin Deadline” – After months of persistent campaigning by Oceana, the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation that maintains an important deadline for protecting tens of thousands of dolphins, whales, and other beloved ocean creatures from dirty fishing gears and practices.

MARCH 2006: Protecting Pacific Krill – The Pacific Fishery Management Council voted to prohibit commercial krill fishing in the federal waters off of California, Oregon, and Washington. More than 5,000 Oceana activists contacted the Council to support a prohibition on krill fishing in the Pacific to protect our ocean ecosystem food web.

SEPTEMBER 2005: Limiting Destructive Trawling – After two years of intensive lobbying by Oceana staff in Brussels and Madrid, the European Union prohibited destructive fishing practices, including bottom trawling, in over 250,000 square miles around the Azores, Madeira, and the Canary Islands.

MAY 2005: Stopping Illegal Oil Dumping – Responding to intensive advocacy by Oceana Europe, the EU Parliament approved new legislation to punish violators of international oil dumping laws.

MAY 2005: Protecting Pacific Corals – In an historic conservation move, the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council adopted the Oceana approach and closed nearly one million square kilometers of ocean to destructive trawling.

MAY 2005: Ending Backroom Deals in Fisheries – Oceana’s lawyers won a change in the rules for fishery policy-making in Chile that will stop government officials from keeping secrets. Now they must publicly disclose the information they use to set quotas and other rules for commercial fishing companies operating along Chile’s massive coastline.

APRIL 2005: Establishing an Observer Program – In Chile, for years a law to place professional observers aboard fishing fleets existed, but was ignored. Oceana successfully convinced the government to enforce the law and professional observers are now at last beginning to monitor Chile’s commercial fishing operations.

MARCH 2005: Protecting Marine Mammals – After lobbying by Oceana and other conservation organizations, the Chilean congress added ten new marine mammals to the government’s protected species list.

JANUARY 2005: Saving Dolphins and Whales from Active Sonar – After requests from Oceana, both the European Parliament and the Spanish Government took action to prohibit the U.S., NATO, and other navies from using active sonar in European waters.

February 2003: Saving 60,000 Sea Turtles – Oceana successfully pressured the government to require larger TEDs (turtle excluder devices) on shrimp nets in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Ocean, saving some 60,000 sea turtles a year.

People who understand that there is only one disease, malfunctioning cells, are decades ahead of their doctors. While this may sound mundane, it is actually quite profound. Likewise there are only two causes of disease: deficiency and toxicity. When deficient, cells aren’t getting everything they need to support normal cell function. When toxic, cells are getting something they don’t need, which damages normal function.

Most people immediately think of toxins as things coming from outside the body, like pesticides and prescription drugs. But the truth is most of our toxic load comes from the body itself. Normal healthy metabolism produces lots of metabolic waste products, just as a factory produces industrial waste. Abnormal metabolism produces even more toxins. In fact detoxification is the biggest single item in our biochemical budget, not only for handling outside toxins, but for getting rid of metabolic products like used hormones and neurotransmitters. Otherwise, these can build up in the body and cause cellular malfunction and disease.

At some point, we have to get rid of nearly every molecule that the body encounters. To do this, our detoxification system involves a complex process to render a molecule inactive. This system is entirely dependent on the foods we eat for the raw materials it needs.

Our detoxification systems are designed to keep us in good health. Problems occur when we eat poor diets and fail to supply the system with what it needs or if we overload the system beyond its capacity with too many toxins. In today’s world, virtually every American is in some degree of toxic overload.

To achieve optimal health we have to nutritionally support the detox systems and reduce their loads to manageable levels. The first step in learning how to reduce our toxic loads is to recognize that the tens of thousands of man-made chemicals that make our every day living possible are not harmless. Many of these chemicals are invisible, odorless, and tasteless so we may not even be aware of their presence. We are exposed to toxic man-made chemicals from everyday items like magazines, newspapers, carpets, pillows, mattresses, clothes, cosmetics, toothpaste, and processed foods.

Toxic chemicals are responsible for many of our 20th century disease problems, especially the new syndromes that mystify our doctors. Fatigue, headaches, digestive upsets, flu-like symptoms, aching joints can all be caused by environmental chemicals. High blood pressure and even fatal cardiac arrhythmias can be caused by chemicals ranging from solvents to pesticides. People who wake up feeling sluggish may not realize that the cause is right under their nose, the polyester chemicals coming off their pillow.

Short of going back to living in mud huts, what can we do to protect our health? The answer is a lot! We can minimize our toxic loads. We can supply our body’s detoxification systems with the raw materials needed for efficient operation. This means eating a varied diet of fresh, whole organic foods, avoiding processed foods, and foods with known high toxic contents like meat and dairy. We can supplement our diets with high quality nutrients like folic acid, vitamin B6, magnesium, essential fatty acids, vitamin B12, methionine, reduced glutathione, alpha ketoglutarate, dietary fiber, and vitamin C. Minimize toxic loads by avoiding pesticides, prescription drugs, tap water, and packaged foods with their additives and packaging chemicals. Don’t breathe the fumes when putting gasoline in the car. Buy clothes, furniture, carpets, bedding, and personal care products made from all natural materials.

By getting adequate nutrition and avoiding toxins, average people can reduce their toxic loads to levels their bodies can handle, thereby pushing their personal equations toward health.

Halloween has been totally hijacked by ecologically damaging consumerism. From the expensive shop-bought costumes made from petroleum based materials and the plastic pumpkins to the chemical-laden sweets and the toxic face paints, we spend our money on things that damage our children’s health and our planet. I know, so far I sound like a party pooper. But with a little thought, you can have a Halloween that doesn’t cost the earth, your health, or your pocket. And you’ll have a lot more fun.

Fabulously freaky costumes can be created from clothing found at thrift stores or the back of your wardrobe. Is there an old sheet dying to be a ghost? A dark shawl? A black paper hat and a branch saved from the bonfire would make a fine witch. With a few ribbons, some feathers, safety pins, or even recycled tin foil, you and your children are all set for a creative afternoon’s work! You will feed their imaginations, and their sense of achievement will far exceed any “perfect” off-the-peg creation.

Use cardboard from old boxes, paint, and decorations to make masks. If you choose to use face paint, there are some lovely natural, plant-based versions on the market. Try Lyra face paints, which come in pencil, crayon, or paint.

Next comes the Halloween centre piece: the pumpkin. Think of how many fields were devoted to growing pumpkins this year, most of them sprayed with pesticides. An organic pumpkin, especially at this time of year, will barely cost you more. Not only will your choice make a statement to the growers, you’ll have all the scrapings from inside your pumpkin for a yummy meal after trick-or -treating.

For a quick delicious soup, just add water, milk, and nutmeg to the pulp. Heat and blend. Even the seeds are great roasted with some Eco-friendly Costume soy sauce or salt. Younger children love to rinse the slimy seeds in a colander. You could even create a longer-term project with the kids by saving a handful of seeds, drying them in paper bag in a warm dry place, and planting them in the spring for next year.

Conventional pumpkins will probably be hybrids, with seeds that won’t reproduce properly if they grow at all.

Halloween was originally a festival to mark the end of the growing season and the beginning of the dark, ‘dead’ months ahead. So surround yourself with the last of the year’s bright outdoor colours! To decorate your house, take a walk in the woods. Fallen tree boughs, moss, bright fall leaves, and apples will look wonderful. So will paper garlands cut in ghoulish shapes, made from paper scraps you have saved.

You can even cut your electric costs for the night by turning off the lights and filling the room with candles. Choose deliciously scented beeswax candles rather than petroleum-based ones. Just keep them safe from the children and all those lovingly-made paper garlands!

Last but certainly not least, come the candies and treats. Most of today’s Halloween candy comes heavily packaged. Some of it is made with genetically modified foods, and most of it is full of artificial colours, flavorings, and preservatives. But there are plenty of great alternatives nowadays, available in natural food supermarkets or online. My favorite is Yummy Earth’s organic candies, which come in so many fantastic, natural flavors. You could also try your hand at homemade candy apples for some sticky fun. Roasted nuts are a great