Monsanto Hid Roundup Cancer Evidence

Recent Monsanto studies wrestled from the EPA show Monsanto hid Roundup Cancer evidence. It’s another blow to Monsanto, which has been struggling to discredit the World Health Organization. In March 2015, the WHO classified glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen.” Glyphosate is known as the “active” ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup (as if all the others were irrelevant). That bad news for Monsanto unleashed a firestorm of protest pushed by Monsanto minions in the mainstream press. This latest cancer-link revelation adds to evidence that Roundup causes cancer and ought to be banned.

More Evidence against Monsanto, Glyphosate
Monsanto and its friends in government (FDA, USDA EPA, Congress, etc.) and other high places have flooded the “news” with the usual wearisome attacks on Science and Truth. Monsanto has claimed the WHO is out of step with science. The latest problem for Monsanto’s attacks on WHO comes from a new paper in a glyphosate series authored by Anthony Samsel and Stephanie Seneff. The two show Monsanto is flat wrong, that glyphosate is cancerous, that Roundup is disastrous. Dr. Samsel and Dr. Seneff show Monsanto’s own studies revealed clear links between glyphosate and cancer 30 years ago.

Glyphosate Pathways to Modern Diseases – via FOIA
The paper is titled, “Glyphosate, pathways to modern diseases IV: cancer and related pathologies.”  Its authors use the data from Monsanto’s own studies, which, for inexplicable reasons, had been sealed by the EPA. Dr. Samsel’s freedom of information requests finally brought them to light. Those files are a bombshell. They show glyphosate fed to rats produced tumors and cancers throughout their organs and glands.

Cancer Increases with Monsanto’s Success
Many types of cancers – thyroid, liver, bladder, pancreatic, kidney, myeloid leukemia, etc. – have risen among Americans in proportion with increased exposure to glyphosate. Glyphosate poisoning of the food crops and environment has exploded since the mid-1990s. Glyphosate has fattened Monsanto’s bank accounts as it has fattened and sickened Americans.

GMO Corn, Soy, Canola
Putting pesticides into genetically modified (GM) Roundup Ready corn, soy and canola in the US meant Americans began eating large amounts of poison for the first time in history. It was the first time so-called “herbicide” was sprayed directly on conventional crops.

Herbicide Pesticide

Monsanto calls Roundup an “herbicide.”  Roundup’s label claims that it targets an enzyme found only in plants but not in people or animals. This claim is a bald-faced lie. The very same enzyme that Roundup attacks in plants is also found in people and pets. This is why Roundup destroys human gut flora and triggers a litany of health problems. Monsanto is being sued in the state of California for false advertising in peddling this lie.

Superweeds
The heavy use of glyphosate on GM crops has caused weeds to wildly evolve. “Superweeds” are now everywhere, taking over fields. Monsanto’s answer,  of course, has been to spray more and more poison. This “solution” only exacerbates all the superweed problems, which in turn deepens the poisoning of our food supply, soil, ground water, and our public discourse, controlled as so much of it is by Monsanto money that neuters the mainstream media.

Farmers also began to use glyphosate as a drying and ripening agent just before harvesting wheat, sugarcane, peas, beans, lentils, and many other crops, greatly adding to the toxic burden on the food, soil, and themselves. Many farmers are filing Monsanto lawsuits which allege that Roundup exposure has caused them to develop non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma,  Hairy Cell Leukemia, or Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

250 Studies show Glyphosate Dangers
Citing almost 250 studies, Dr. Samsel and Dr. Seneff explain the biochemistry that shows exactly how glyphosate can trigger the rise in cancers. Glyphosate makes all-important trace minerals like manganese unavailable. The herbicide poison cuts off key metabolic pathways that rely on the (previously) absorbable minerals to function. Glyphosate is also an ill-advised antibiotic. It kills off beneficial gut bacteria like lactobacillus and bifidobacterium. Monsanto has been sued for lying about this problem. The body needs these and other bacterial casualties of glyphosate in order to produce other key components for many complex reactions. Glyphosate also damages the mitochondria. Glyphosate also derails the delicate balance of the hormonal systems.

Connecting the Glyphosate Cancer Dots
As the study authors connect the many glyphosate cancer dots, they also demonstrate how the same disruptions are likely contributing to a whole host of other diseases. Glyphosate is also likely linked with autism, diabetes, kidney disease, fatty liver disease. These and other maladies are highlighted in the previous three papers in this series by Dr. Samsel and Dr. Seneff. A videotaped interview of Dr. Seneff shows the links between glyphosate and more than a dozen diseases. A second interview discussing the second paper in the series focuses on gluten sensitivity and kidney failure as outcomes of glyphosate exposure.

Monsanto Manipulates the Low Dose Card for Hormone Disruption
In the current cancer paper, the doctor authors explain at least two ways Monsanto tries to explain away the serious health issues suffered by unfortunate laboratory animals. First, Monsanto simply ignores the low dose effects. It is well known that a certain class of chemicals called endocrine disruptors have an inexplicable counter-intuitive property. Their greatest damage to the hormonal system comes in tiny doses. In point of fact, as these chemicals increase, the hormonal effects decrease. Monsanto disingenuously tries to confuse this issue.

‘The Dose Makes the Poison’ – another Lie
In Monsanto’s studies, it was often the low dose of glyphosate that had the biggest impact on the gland, organ, or tumor prevalence. Therefore, Monsanto decided to hide behind the false concept that “The dose makes the poison.” Monsanto researchers flatly ignored findings where a lower dose had a larger effect than a higher one. Some chemical industry shills may defend Monsanto by claiming low dose endocrine effects were not understood in the 1970s and 80s. Many of these findings were first reported then, but that defense won’t wash. The low dose endocrine disruption effect has now been widely known for nearly 15 years.

The low dose endocrine disruption has been well understood by every member of the scientific community who doesn’t work for companies like Monsanto. Sadly, stupidly, unconscionably – the dose fallacy is also conveniently ignored by government regulators who are often shameless Monsanto shills or former employees. The government stooges don’t require Monsanto and similar chemical poisoning companies to even test for this effect. They may fear that doing so could mark them as “activists.” That could keep them from going back through the revolving door and working for Monsanto or some other chemical industry giant. The U.S. EPA and Europe’s EFSA let chemicals like glyphosate onto the market without evaluating whether they are fouling our sex hormones, thyroid hormones, or any of the other vital hormones we need for good health.

Low Dose Worse than High Dose, so Monsanto no Longer Compares
Once Monsanto scientists, lawyers, and executives saw the low dose effects of glyphosate (Roundup) on tortured lab animals, they simply stopped testing the low dosage in subsequent trials.

Monsanto’s Improper Testing – No Control Groups
Another research ploy from Monsanto has been to avoid using a control group altogether. With no control group, there is simply no way to assess anything meaningful about the pesticide at hand. Monsanto has instead used something absurd called “historical controls.” This is an unscientific method Monsanto has used to pretend one can ignore even serious evidence of harm.

Real Science, Monsanto Science
Real science says you design an experiment to compare an experimental group with a control group under the same conditions. A legitimate scientist, for example, raises rats on the same food, same water, same environmental conditions, and even selects the same type of rat for both groups. In this manner, one can isolate the variable one wants to test. Monsanto, however, only varied the amount of glyphosate it fed the rats. The controls got zero, and various experimental groups got one of several dosage levels.

Monsanto Hid Roundup Cancer Evidence

According to the Samsel/Seneff paper, the animals who received the doses of glyphosate had a far greater number of lymph node and thyroid cancerous tumors than the controls. The results were clearly statistically significant.

In an effort to make these damaging findings vanish, Monsanto directed its research staff to cherry pick other, totally unrelated animal studies. The goal was to find cases where the control groups also had a high level of cancers (or other disorders). Then they claimed that because some other group of rats in a lab – with completely different conditions and diets – showed a similar number of problems as the group of animals fed glyphosate, one could simply ignore the findings altogether.

Junk Science = Monsanto Science
Real scientists condemn this Monsanto practice as illegitimate. Many studies have shown controls subject to contaminated diets or other environmental conditions that make their maladies far from normal. It mocks the scientific method to perform an experiment which demands careful attention to keeping the conditions the same for the experimental group and the controls, if one simply throws out the results by finding rats in other studies with which to compare results.

All Test Groups Poisoned with GMOs, Metals, Toxins
A study by Robin Mesnage entitled “Laboratory Rodent Diets Contain Toxic Levels of Environmental Contaminants: Implications for Regulatory Tests” discovered that the normal diets of lab animals, both control and experimental, are contaminated with GMOs, glyphosate, heavy metals, and other toxins. All the animal studies being conducted are potentially and even likely biased, as a result. How does one test GMOs and glyphosate contamination against GMOs and glyphosate contamination?

Ah, Science, we hardly knew ya’ before Monsanto blew your brains out.

RELATED

Share

De Niro, Kennedy challenge Vaccine Safety

Roberts De Niro de-niroand Kennedy, Jr. have challenged vaccine safety pronouncements. They have challenged the world’s entire vaccine paradigm. The two have offered a $100,000 reward for anyone who can prove vaccines are as safe and effective as they are advertised by vaccine makers and their not-so-silent partners at the Centers for Disease Control. For so many years, vaccine makers and the CDC have trumpeted the wonders of vaccines for the herd, while cruelly ignoring the many thousands of deaths and injuries that have resulted from vaccination.

Vaccine Questioners Attacked
Anyone who has questioned the safety of vaccines over the years has been roundly attacked as an anti-vaxxer in every mainstream media outlet in the United States. Each of these outlets has taken millions of dollars of advertising money from vaccine makers. That includes all the outlets with which most of us are familiar – whether Democratic mouthpieces like MSNBC and the New York Times, or Republican cheerleaders like Fox News and The Wall Street Journal, and everything in between.

Press Conference announces Safety Challenge
Into the breach has stepped Robert De Niro and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in Washington, D.C. on Feb. 15, to hold a press conference about vaccine safety.

The two want to see proof that vaccines are safe. They have teamed up to offer $100,000 to anyone who can provide such safety information.

De Niro participated in a panel discussion which challenged the prevailing wisdom that vaccination has no connection to autism, and that mercury in immunizations is especially harmful to the developing brains of children.

Related: Vaccine Fraud at CDC: film Vaxxed: “It’s ‘something people should see.”

Government defies all Logic and Common Sense
“On one hand, the government is telling pregnant women which mercury-laced fish to avoid so that they don’t harm their fetuses, and on the other, the CDC supports injecting mercury-containing vaccines into pregnant women, infants and children,” Mr. Kennedy said at the joint press conference Feb. 15. “This defies all logic and common sense.”

“Shots have caused Autism Epidemic”
The son of former kennedy-jrNew York Senator Robert F. Kennedy – a civil rights hero whose murder was disgracefully covered up by the Los Angeles police department and others – Robert Jr. insisted that journalists and the government have been colluding to cover up the truth about vaccine safety and that the “shots have caused the autism epidemic.”

Mr. De Niro and his African-American wife have an autistic son. CDC scientist turned whistleblower William Thompson, featured in the film Vaxxed, has revealed that he and his CDC colleagues destroyed documents which proved that taking the MMR vaccine raises the risk of autism for black boy babies. Both Mr. De Niro and Mr. Kennedy called out the use of thimerosal, which is a mercury-based preservative.

$100,000 Cash Challenge
The pair’s $100,000 cash challenge is offered through Mr. Kennedy’s World Mercury Project for anyone “who can find a peer-reviewed scientific study demonstrating that thimerosal is safe in the amounts contained in vaccines currently being administered to American children and pregnant women.”

A 1999 FDA study alleged that thimerosal used as a vaccine preservative posed no harm except for what the agency termed “hypersensitivity.” Pity if your child were “hypersensitive” and failed to tolerate the mercury. Rep. Dan Burton asked CDC representatives point blank if the agency had ever studied the safety of mercury in vaccines. The answer was, “No.”

The FDA phased the preservative out of many vaccines for children and it hasn’t been used since 2001, with the exception of an inactivated flu vaccine, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

De Niro, Kennedy challenge Vaccine Safety

In 2016, De Niro pulled the movie Vaxxed from the Tribeca Film Festival lineup after receiving an avalanche of protests to not let people see the movie. He later appeared on the Today show and spoke about the film.

“I think the movie is something that people should see,” Mr. De Niro said. “There’s a lot of information about things that are happening with the CDC, the pharmaceutical companies, there’s a lot of things that are not said. I, as a parent of a child who has autism, I’m concerned. And I want to know the truth. I’m not anti-vaccine. I want safe vaccines.”

Today Show parrots Mainstream Line

When Today host Willie Geist predictably parroted the party line for his corporate masters, claiming that there is lots of scientific evidence to prove vaccines don’t cause autism, Mr. De Niro replied that “It’s not that simple, and that he thinks everyone should see the movie Vaxxed and decide for themselves.

Imagine that. An American who recommends people see something for themselves and decide for themselves what the truth is. No wonder the powers that control the information and nearly every narrative want him dismissed entirely.

RELATED

Share

Talc causes Ovarian Cancer, says Expert

An expert witness Talc Powder Lawsuitfor the plaintiff testified Feb. 15, 2016 that talc causes ovarian cancer. Washington University’s Dr. Graham Colditz was on the witness stand all day at the fourth Johnson & Johnson talcum powder cancer trial in St. Louis.

Dr. Colditz discussed the body of epidemiological research comparing the cancer rates of talc and non-talc users. The plaintiff is Nora Daniels, a longtime talcum powder user who blames Johnson & Johnson talc for the cancerous tumor she developed and had removed in 2013.

Defense lawyers for J&J objected almost continuously all day as Dr. Colditz testified in regard to studies that found a higher likelihood of ovarian cancer in talc users, and medical agencies that have red flagged talc as a risk.

Talc causes Ovarian Cancer
“What opinion are you here to give today to this jury?” Ms. Daniels’ lawyer asked. Dr. Colditz responded: “At the bottom line, that talc causes ovarian cancer, based on the review of all the evidence.”

Dr. Colditz’ own epidemiology group at Washington University in St. Louis and the Siteman Cancer Center added talc to a website they run which allows people to assess their personal risk levels for certain diseases. He said they did so based on an accumulation of studies.

Misclassification of Talc
The plaintiff’s expert also showed the Nurses’ Health Study, which asked tens of thousands of RNs one question about talc use in 1982, then never mentioned it again in later data collections. Since the data were not accurately and cleanly traced over time, said Dr. Colditz, it was natural that the effect shown by the 1982 data would decay over time due to a known phenomenon in epidemiology called misclassification.

Over time, talc users could have stopped using, and nonusers could have started, but they would remain classified as they were in 1982 for lack of follow-up. However, the study researchers did continue to count the number of cancers contracted in the entire pool over the decades. Therefore, Colditz testified, the baseline cancer rates of users and nonusers would come to appear closer than they actually are over time as more and more people jumped classifications.

Direct examination also showed a July 12, 2006 letter from J&J’s supplier, Imerys Talc America – then known as Luzenac and owned by Rio Tinto – to Mark Ellis, president of the Industrial Minerals Association, in Washington, D.C. The letter revealed that Luzenac decided to abandon funding its own study, which had been set up by a scientific researcher at Crowell & Moring.

This study proposal was first brought to Luzenac’s attention in early 2005 primarily due to the diligent efforts of Bob Glenn,” a Luzenac employee wrote to Ellis. “Luzenac has engaged the consulting services of Bob (through Crowell & Moring) for several years now. Luzenac was prepared to proceed with the study primarily because there was an excellent chance that the study could be completed and a paper written [before] the IARC review in February 2006. We felt that the injection of new data into the talc/ovarian cancer debate was essential.”

But the project was beset by delays, and after it was clear it couldn’t be finished in time to influence IARC, an agency of the World Health Organization, Luzenac abandoned the initiative. IARC ended up classifying perineal talc as a possible carcinogen.

Cross Examination
On cross examination, J&J lawyers showed Colditz one study by the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium, a survey looking at many studies that altogether included 8,525 cases of the cancer and 9,859 controls with no cancer. It found a “modest increased risk of epithelial ovarian cancer”– the type Ms. Daniels had – but expressed doubts regarding the trend across decades or a lifetime.

J&J attorneys hit Colditz with documents that included recent website printouts from the National Cancer Institute and the National Toxicology Program. According to Law 360, J&J counsel fought to leave the impression that the tide of science is turning against a link.

J&J’s counsel also compared talc to other products: Aloe vera, which IARC also classifies as a possible carcinogen, as well as coffee, which was delisted from that category only recently. Then, J&J brought up the subject of two well-known carcinogens, alcohol and red meat.

No Cancer Warnings for Red Meat or Liquor?
“There’s no cancer warning for alcohol that you might buy at the store, right?” J&J attorneys asked Colditz. “You’ve never seen a warning on red meat, a cancer warning on red meat at the store, have you?”

Colditz conceded he had not, although he said they might exist “on websites that talk about causes.”

The case is Swann v. Johnson & Johnson, case number 1422-CC09326-01, in the 22nd Judicial Circuit of Missouri.

RELATED

Share

Talc Lobbyists derailed Carcinogen Classification

Talcum powder baby-powder-lawsuit1makers like Johnson & Johnson lobbied to “derail” efforts to classify talcum powder as a carcinogen. That’s what a Missouri jury heard Friday, Feb. 10, 2017 at a talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuit trial in St. Louis.

Talc Trial Day 1

The first day in court for cancer survivor Nora Daniels began Feb. 9 with opening arguments from her lawyer and J&J defense lawyers. Jurors then watched two hours of deposition testimony from Johnson’s baby products manager Lorena Telofski, as well as testimony from Luzenac America’s Shripal Sharma. A forerunner of co-defendant Imerys Talc America, Luzenac was owned by mining mega-giant Rio Tinto from 1988 – 2011.

Ms. Daniels’ lawyers alleged on day one that Luzenac and the talc lobbying group Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association, attacked and derailed regulator’ serious concerns through intense lobbying. According to Law 360, the lobbyists were responding to the National Toxicology Program’s 2000 nomination of talc for inclusion in its carcinogen inventory, the Report on Carcinogens, or RoC.

$10 Million per Year Potential Loss
Talc companies saw the proposed reclassification change as a make-or-break moment, said Ms. Daniels’ lawyer. An internal Luzenac PowerPoint said an NTP listing would cause a $10 million-per-year loss. A CTFA staffer issued an APB to the group’s Talc Task Force on the very day NTP announced its intent to make the talc cancer classification change.

Two NTP scientific groups had already voted overwhelmingly to list talc as a possible carcinogen. A final vote by the NTP’s Board of Scientific Counselors committee was coming in two months, according to an internal presentation by Luzenac health and safety head Steve Jarvis, shown during Sharma’s deposition. By the time that vote came, however, the talc industry had applied enough political muscle to stop the cancer listing change.

Talc Industry’s “Secret Weapon. . . very aggressive”
Mr. Jarvis boasted about “our secret weapon, [to] engage the services of the Washington-based Center for Regulatory Effectiveness,” according to the document.

Talc Companies “Very Aggressive” with Regulators
“We also became very aggressive in our communication with NTP and other federal agencies,” Mr. Jarvis’ speaking notes read. “[We] didn’t let the windows of ‘formal comment periods’ become restrictive. We sent emails, faxes, overnight letters and even telephone calls to key players in this battl. . . right up until hours before the final executive committee meeting. We achieved a very dramatic turnaround,” boasted Mr. Jarvis.  The BSC committee voted 7-3 against listing talc, and the NTP backed off its review.

Talc Companies derail IARC Classification
Meanwhile, during Telofski’s deposition, plaintiffs’ lawyers made much of a Rio Tinto materials safety data sheet that grew out of another crucial moment: the classification of the World Health Organization agency IARC, of perineal (between the legs) talc use as a possible carcinogen.

Talc Powder Product Liability Lawsuit
IARC’s determination of talc as a potential carcinogen set off a scramble in the industry. Luzenac’s product safety director Rich Zazenski revealed in a March 2006 email, as the company was deciding whether to add a warning to its Material Safety Data Sheet, how concerned the companies should be about talc as a possible carcinogen, despite whatever regulatory requirements the lobbying groups could neutralize. Mr. Zazenski said (some might say presciently said), “Just meeting the regulatory requirements is not a sufficient defense in product liability lawsuits.”

Lies from CTFA Lobbyists
In another document shown Feb. 10, Alfred Wehner of the Academy of Toxicological Science, a consultant on retainer to J&J, wrote in a 1997 letter to J&J preclinical toxicology head Michael Chudkowski that two statements by the CTFA were lies.

The CTFA (now known as the Personal Care Products Council) in 1992 put out a release saying talc posed no risk , which was “outright false,” said Mr. Wehner. In addition, he wrote that a 1994 statement calling study results “insufficient to demonstrate any real association” was “also inaccurate, to phrase it euphemistically.”

Talc Lobbyists derailed Carcinogen Classification
The case is Swann v. Johnson & Johnson, case number 1422-CC09326-01, in the 22nd Judicial Circuit of Missouri.

RELATED

Share

Americans forcefed Glyphosate

Rats with ratsgiant tumors are not the only ones being forcefed Monsanto’s glyphosate. Americans are all being exposed daily to varying levels of Roundup and glyphosate, even those “health nuts” who avoid processed foods like cereals, breads and crackers – organic or not.

Got Glyphosate?

Cheerios, Wheaties, Trix, Kellogg’s Corn Flakes, Raisin Bran, Special K, Frosted Flakes, Cheese It, Ritz Crackers, Triscuit, Oreos, Stacy’s Simply Naked Pita Chips (Frito-Lay), Doritos, Fritos, Goldfish crackers (Pepperidge Farm), Little Debbies Oatmeal Cream Pies, 365 Organic Golden Round Crackers, Back to Nature Crispy Cheddar Crackers – all these popular foods have been found contaminated with Monsanto’s glyphosate. That is the only active ingredient listed in Roundup. There are plenty more where that came from, but Monsanto doesn’t list them as active, so they remain unaccounted for, undetected. Glyphosate has also been found in premium German beer and expensive California wine, even in organic wine.

Related:  Glyphosate Unsafe on Any Plate

Glyphosate Glyphosate Everywhere
Widespread glyphosate contamination affects even organic foods. Fencing can’t stop the wind from blowing glyphosate onto everything around it. This is not good news for anyone who appreciates a healthy liver and kidneys.

Roundup causes Liver and Kidney Damage
New research has shown Roundup causes liver and kidney damage in rats at a mere 0.05 parts per billion (ppb) glyphosate equivalent indicating damage. Other studies have shown levels as low as 10 ppb can have toxic effects on the livers of fish and cause significant damage to livers and kidneys of rats at 700 ppb. Alarmingly, 700 ppb is the allowable level of glyphosate found in U.S. drinking water. Cheerios, meanwhile, was found to contain levels as high as 1,125.3 ppb, and many other popular foods were also found to contain hazardous levels of Monsanto’s No. 1 poison.

It’s Raining Glyphosate
Glyphosate contaminates not only many popular foods but also our water. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has found glyphosate in more than 75 percent of rain and rainwater samples across America’s breadbasket, the Midwest. When farmers spray Roundup on the crops Americans eat, the chemicals not only run off into local rivers and streams, they also evaporate into the air, into clouds. Consequently, even people downwind hundreds of miles from the source can also be contaminated.

Monsanto-spawned Superweeds Choke the Land
Monsanto-spawned superweeds now choke the land in all directions. The weeds have evolved as corporate farm workers have sprayed greater and greater amounts of Roundup on the land. The USGS estimates glyphosate accounted for 54% of total agricultural herbicide use in 2009. More than 80 million acres of U.S. farmland are now covered with the glyphosate-resistant superweeds. Monsanto’s answer to that problem has been to use its sweetheart status with the FDA to win approval for additional “herbicides” like 2.4-D and dicamba. The result will expose us all to even greater toxic combinations of pesticides in our food and water.

Americans forcefed Glyphosate
Herbicides need quotation marks because this is a word Monsanto and other biotech giants use as a euphemism. Herbicides are supposed to target only plants but not animals or humans, but research into the actual toxic agents going to work on killing plants is also killing the plant materials in us and in animals, birds, and insects. Monsanto is being sued in California for false advertising for claiming that Roundup targets an enzyme found only in plants but not in people or pets. This claim has been shown to be demonstrably false. That very same enzyme in plants is also in us, in the (otherwise) healthy flora of the human gut. Monsanto’s Roundup attacks the healthy flora in the human gut just as it attacks plants. The result is an unhealthy gut, as rat studies have shown, and as Monsanto’s 20-year experiment on people has now shown.

Roundup Cancer Lawsuits
Some lawyers are fighting back against Monsanto’s toxic onslaught on our environment, on ourselves. Roundup Cancer Lawsuits are being filed for agriculture workers and others who have developed leukemia after being exposed to Roundup. People diagnosed with Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma (NHL), Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL), and Multiple Mylemoa have been filing lawsuits against Monsanto for their loss of health, and in some cases, life.

RELATED

Share

Shingles Vaccine Troubling Ingredients

Many people Zostovaxwho at least look at a thing and smell it before they eat it think nothing of having a mysterious liquid injected directly into their blood. Many who read food labels for every last ingredient have no idea what they are taking in a vaccine injection. The shingles vaccine, like every other, contains troubling ingredients that should give thinking people pause for reflection.

Some Common Vaccine Ingredients
Procon.org lists vaccine ingredients (found in the final vaccine product), process ingredients (things used to create the vaccine that may or may not appear in the final product), and growth mediums (substances in which vaccines are grown) for vaccines approved by the FDA and recommended by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC.) Controversial products used to make vaccines include African Green Monkey (Vero) cells, aluminum, cow products, Cocker Spaniel cells, formaldehyde, human fetal lung tissue cells, insect products, mouse brains.

Zostovax Shingles Vaccine Ingredients
Merck’s Zostavax shingles vaccine includes monosodium L-glutamate (MSG), aborted fetal cells (MRC-5*), bovine calf serum (blood taken from “domestic” cattle), Neomycin (an antibiotic used to prevent or treat bacterial infections),

Aborted Fetal Cells?
Can human beings who consider themselves “pro-life” take a guilt-free shingles vaccination? Would even those who are immune to moral arguments order anything on any menu anywhere if that ingredient were listed? It’s one thing to eat the veal calf meat of a tortured animal, but imbibing in human fetal tissue would seem beyond the pale for the morally upright.

*According to procon.org, MRC-5 (Medical Research Council 5) is a common vaccine ingredient “composed of human diploid cells (cells containing two sets of chromosomes) derived from the normal lung tissues of a 14-week-old male fetus aborted for ‘psychiatric reasons’ in 1966 in the United Kingdom, Eagle’s Basal Medium in Earle’s balanced salt solution with bovine serum.”  Even those who might prefer to bend sinister from their lofty moral high ground by accepting the vaccine maker’s dubious implication that it’s ok to abort for ‘psychiatric reasons,’ even those folks may want to consider that being injected with a mentally damaged person’s DNA material may not be the “smartest” move they’ve ever made.

Possible side effects of ZOSTAVAX?
Merck reports no moral repugnance, or even ambivalence, over its shingles Zostavax vaccine. Merck does, however, list “the most common side effects that people in the clinical studies reported after receiving the vaccine.” They include:

•  redness, pain, itching, swelling, hard lump, warmth, or bruising at the shot site
•  headache
•  allergic reactions, which may be serious and may include difficulty in breathing or swallowing. If you have an allergic reaction, call your doctor right away.
•  chickenpox
•  fever
•  hives at the injection site
•  joint pain
•  muscle pain
•  nausea
•  rash
•  rash at the injection site
•  shingles (warned since 2015)
•  swollen glands near the injection site (that may last a few days to a few weeks)

Merck also warns that you should not get ZOSTAVAX if you:

•  are allergic to any of its ingredients.
•  are allergic to gelatin or neomycin.
•  have a weakened immune system (immune deficiency, leukemia, lymphoma, HIV/AIDS).
•  take high doses of steroids by injection or by mouth.
•  are pregnant or plan to get pregnant

Shingles Vaccine Missing Warnings

Merck does not warn – as the company is not required to do so by the FDA – that the “effectiveness” of a vaccine is established not by how well the shot may work for the majority of its recipients. Effectiveness in a vaccine is determined solely by its being able to elicit an antibody response. If antibodies are produced following a vaccine, then that vaccine is determined to be “effective.” The presence of those antibodies, however, has no known causal relationship with whether or not that vaccination will offer protection against infection. If that language were in the “Warnings,” one wonders how many people would take this vaccine, or any other for that matter, without our daily avalanche of vaccine propaganda. It is certainly fair to ask how well this shingles vaccine works. It is fair to ask whether this vaccine is worth the risk of taking it.

RELATED

•  Shingles Vaccine? Really

•  Shingles Vaccine Lawsuit

•  Vaccines.ProCon.org

•  Vaccines.procon.org/zoster

•  Shingles Vaccine Troubling Ingredients

Share

Monsanto wants to add new poison

Monsanto wantsmonsanto-sign to add new poison to its toxic assault on our food. Monsanto’s Roundup (glyphosate) has spawned superweeds which have grown resistant to Roundup. Monsanto’s answer to this problem it has created has been to lobby the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to give Monsanto permission to put more and different poisons into our food supply.

Glyphosate contaminates Everything

Glyphosate has been found virtually everywhere contaminating our food and water. As Roundup is being sprayed daily on crops and public areas, we are almost constantly breathing, drinking, and eating it. Testing throughout the world proves our constant exposure, whether in California wineGerman beer, or General Mills Granola bars. The U.S. EPA rolled over on Monsanto’s latest request as it usually does for Monsanto, granting the biotech bully license to further pollute and poison the country, its people, pollinating insects, plants, animals (what else you got?).

Environmental Groups move against Monsanto

To slow this endless onslaught, environmental groups have asked the Ninth Circuit court to strike down the U.S. EPA’s approval of Monsanto’s toxic answer to its self-created problem — a new weed killer aimed at killing the Roundup-resistant weeds. On Jan. 23, 2017, the groups told the court that the new Monsanto poison could lead to “superweeds” resistant to both the older and the newer poisonous products.

According to Law 360, the Center for Food Safety, National Family Farm Coalition, Center for Biological Diversity and Pesticide Action Network North America filed their petition on Jan. 23. It seeks to overturn the FDA’s conditional registration for a new use of dicamba, an herbicide (plant poison) now being sold under the brand name XtendiMax. FDA issued its rubber stamp approval in November 2016. XtendiMax had previously been approved for pre-planting, during planting and as a “pre-emergent.” The latest approval allows it to be sprayed directly on Monsanto’s dicamba-resistant cotton and soybeans.

FDA Violated U.S. Law for Monsanto

The environmental groups’ petition said FDA violated the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act when it approved XtendiMax. The agency also violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in order to address potential threats to wildlife or critical habitat.

Earthjustice, which represents the environmental groups, said in a Jan. 23 statement that dicamba will only continue the problem of weed resistance started by Monsanto’s Roundup.

Earthjustice Statement

The Earthjustice Statement reads: “The huge increase in dicamba spraying will trigger an outbreak of dicamba resistance in weeds, just as massive use of Roundup on first generation [genetically engineered] crops created an epidemic of weeds immune to glyphosate. (While) Monsanto spins its new dicamba crops as a fix to the current weed resistance problems its own Roundup Ready crop system caused, many scientists, and even the U.S. Department of Agriculture, predict the opposite: the rapid emergence of more superweeds, resistant to both herbicides.”

Monsanto Statement

In a November 2016 statement announcing XtendiMax’ approval, Monsanto said it “is intended to provide farmers with more consistent, flexible control of weeds, especially tough-to-manage and glyphosate resistant weeds, and to help maximize crop yield potential.”

The EPA tepidly addressed the issue of weed resistance in its approval for the pesticide in November. The agency said herbicide resistance has become a “significant issue to growers” and required Monsanto to come up with an Herbicide Resistance Management plan as a condition of the approval.

EPA Statement

In genuflecting to Monsanto as it typically does, the EPA said that if the new product is not working, Monsanto must “investigate the issue.” It is hard to imagine a more toothless, industry friendly stance than this one taken by the  U.S. EPA. You will be hard pressed to find such an agency in all the world as industry friendly as this one entrusted with our food supply. France, for one, has moved to ban glyphosate, acknowledging that Roundup causes liver disease. Roundup has also been found to raise the risk of cancer; it has  triggered Roundup Cancer Lawsuits.

The EPA did, however, throw us all a bone, setting the registration to automatically expire in November 2018, unless EPA determines before then that it’s not causing unintended problems. (What about intended problems, which will only trigger more toxic spraying, as Roundup already has, in order to battle the superweeds it has created, along with the cancer?)

Dicamba increases Farmer Cancers

The environmental groups also said in their statement that dicamba has been linked to increased cancer in farmers, though the EPA said in its November 2016 approval that it has classified the chemical as “not likely” to be carcinogenic in humans. The EPA drew that conclusion following the results of Monsanto’s own laboratory studies on mice and rats. Third party studies have found the opposite is true. The EPA also claims glyphosate is safe, while the World Health Organization classifies it as “probably carcinogenic.”

Center for Food Safety Statement

Center for Food Safety attorney George Kimbrell said in a Jan. 23 statement: “Federal regulators have abandoned the interests of farmers, the environment, and public health,”  “We won’t allow our food to be dragged backward into a pesticide-soaked nightmare — not without a hell of a fight.”

A spokeswoman for Monsanto reached for comment by Law 360 defended XtendiMax in an emailed statement: “[F]armers need new tools for weed control, and the EPA approved XtendiMax with VaporGrip Technology for in-crop use after more than seven years of exhaustive scientific review and evaluation. Dicamba-based herbicides have a 40-year history of safe use, and we are confident the government’s exhaustive assessment will prevail.”

Those “40-year history” studies, of course, were virtually all done by employees of Monsanto or by scientists hired by Monsanto. Researchers not working for Monsanto have found kidney and liver damage and tumors in rats, other life-threatening “side effects.” Monsanto has also been sued for false advertising, for a blatant lie which it prints on the Roundup label. It claims glyphosate targets an enzyme found only in plants, but not in people or pets.  The scope of that lie is astonishing, as elementary science  shows that same enzyme Roundup targets also lives in the guts of humans and animals.

Monsanto wants to add new poison

The plaintiffs are represented by George Andreas Kimbrell of the Center for Food Safety and Paul Achitoff of Earthjustice.

The EPA is represented by Jon Michael Lipshultz of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The case is National Family Farm Coalition, et al v. USEPA, et al, case number 17-70196 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

RELATED

Share

Record Oklahoma Earthquakes shake State

Oklahoma’s ok-quakes-bar-graphold license tags read, “Oklahoma is OK,” but “Oklahoma is not OK” hits closer to home now. (“Oklahoma is Rocking” is more apropos, though perhaps misleading in a state not known for music, despite Jazz genius Chet Baker’s birth in Yale.) Oklahoma suffered 623 magnitude 3+ earthquakes in 2016, according to earthquakes.ok.gov. That’s the second-highest number of earthquakes since natural gas drillers began fracturing Oklahoma shale formations far below the surface of the new earthquake state. Oklahoma now experiences more quakes than the long shaky state leader, California. Here’s a look at quakes in Oklahoma since 2013:

Oklahoma Earthquake Numbers
2016 – 623
2015 – 903
2014 – 579
2013 – 109

This rise in OK’s seismic events has caught the attention of independent scientists, citizens, policymakers, media, and industry. The governor of Oklahoma has also shown some interest in his state’s violent shaking.

Oklahoma Governor Fallin calls for Quake Investigation
In September 2014, Oklahoma Governor Fallin directed the Oklahoma Secretary of Energy and Environment to assemble the Coordinating Council on Seismic Activity. The council’s responsibility is mainly to develop solutions, identify gaps in resources, coordinate efforts among state agencies, researchers and the state’s oil and gas industry. “Cooperatively,” of course, because the earthquake state has long counted on oil and natural gas drilling for much of its industry.

The council has delivered scant success thus far. In 2015, Oklahoma broke its previous record for earthquakes, nearly doubling its total from the previous year.

What Changed in Oklahoma to cause so many Earthquakes?
The state of Oklahoma had scant few earthquakes for more than 100 years. But in 2008, the state began to be violently shaken by multiple quakes.

The Rise in Drilling and Injection
In 2009, earthquake frequency in Oklahoma rose wildly, in direct proportion with the introduction of massive fracking operations. The state suffered an average of fewer than two (2) 3.0+ magnitude earthquakes yearly since 1978. Then it began to feel a huge increase every year beginning in 2013. Since 2009, thousands of earthquakes have rocked Oklahoma as well as nearby parts of southern Kansas and North Texas. Scientific studies trace the earthquake increase to wastewater injected during oil extraction. The water is injected deep into the ground, upsetting shale formations.

Two of the most damaging earthquakes were a November 5, 2011 Prague shaker east of Oklahoma City area and a September 3, 2016 earthquake near Pawnee, north of Prague. The 2011 Prague blast, a reported 5.6 magnitude, was then the strongest earthquake ever recorded in Oklahoma. The 2016 Pawnee earthquake was first reported to be an identical 5.6 magnitude, but this was later determined to be a 5.8, making it Oklahoma’s strongest ever recorded. The USGS also upgraded the Prague earthquake’s magnitude to 5.7. Several seismologists had advised local residents of an even greater risk of earthquakes in 2014.

In response to the major earthquake increase in the Central United States, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) began developing a new seismic hazard model to account for risks linked with induced seismicity. By June 26, 2014, more than six individual earthquake sequences in Oklahoma had been identified and named by the Oklahoma Geological Survey (OGS).

Peer Reviewed Papers: Quakes caused by Waste Injection
In March 2013, a peer-reviewed paper published by a University of Oklahoma research team led by seismologist Katie Keranen was published in the scientific journal Geology. The paper reported that “the volume of fluid injected into the subsurface related to the production of unconventional resources continues to rise.” The paper concluded there was a link between the “zone of injection and the seismicity” potentially triggering the Prague earthquake.

The USGS on March 28, 2016 released the USGS National Seismic Hazard Map. It concluded that the primary cause of the earthquake in Oklahoma in 2011 was pressure on fault lines from cumulative effects of injecting oil drilling wastewater under high pressure into the underground. Although the 2011 earthquake was the largest then on record, the USGS reported that the central and eastern U.S. (CEUS) had undergone the most dramatic increase in seismic activity in the United States since 2009 with an average of 318 earthquakes of magnitude 3.0 a year, up from 24 a year from 1973 to 2008.

Record Oklahoma Earthquakes shake State

These numbers, and clear common sense, don’t lie. Injecting wastewater into the earth is causing Oklahoma earthquakes. Frackers consequently face liability lawsuits for the property damage. Oklahoma homeowners have been injured financially, and sometimes physically, by these industry-caused earthquakes. These people deserve compensation for their injuries.

RELATED

Share

Houston Bus Kills Walker

The first Houston pedestrian-killed-khou-photopedestrian to be killed in 2017 lost his life around 6:30 Tuesday, Jan. 11. The man was hit by an empty METRO bus in downtown Houston at the intersection of Congress Avenue and Milam Street.

Police, still investigating the crash, said the walking man died at the scene. Authorities told KHOU that the bus contained no passengers. The driver is reported to have worked with METRO for more than 10 years.

Related:   Houston Pedestrian Accident Attorney

Record Number of Houston Pedestrians Killed in 2016
The latest bus accident death suggests that Houston is entering 2017 the way it left 2016, as one of the country’s most dangerous cities to walk. Houston set a record for pedestrian deaths in 2016, when more than 71 walkers were killed by Houston cars, trucks and buses.

U.S. Dangerous for Pedestrians
The entire United States is not a very safe place to walk. Roughly a dozen people a day are murdered by car, truck, or bus drivers. While “terrorism” threats scream daily in all the national headlines in the mainstream media, on television and in fake newspapers such as the Washington Post and New York Times (which both trumpeted U.S. Government lies about Iraq ‘s non-existent WMD’s to justify illegal and endless war, among other transgressions), none seem interested in the deaths of some 4,400 walking Americans each year. That numbers represents way more Americans than are killed by “terrorists” each year. Where is the public outcry for all these walkers’ deaths? Where is the outrage? Why is this huge number of senseless deaths acceptable?

Houston Bus Kills Walker

The man killed yesterday was not a statistic any more than the thousands of Americans and dozens of Houstonians killed each year by cars, trucks, and buses. He was a human being, with a family, friends, and hopes and desires just like any of us.  It’s easy, perhaps, to imagine that  any of us reading this will not be hit by a Houston bus, truck, or automobile; it’s much harder to imagine that Houston and our country have our priorities in order when so many of us are allowed to be murdered by motorcars.

RELATED

Houston Pedestrian Accident Deaths Increase

Share

Roundup Lymphoma Lawsuit Filed

A Virginia man Rounduphas filed a Monsanto lawsuit in Missouri after developing a rare form of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. His lawsuit petition alleges that his cancer was caused by Monsanto’s weedkiller Roundup. The man developed splenic marginal zone lymphoma, which attacks the spleen and bone marrow, after long exposure to Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer.

Michael Dowling filed a product liability lawsuit against Monsanto in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri in December 2016. Mr. Dowling alleges Monsanto failed to adequately warn about risks associated with exposure to glyphosate and surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA), a Roundup ingredient.

Mr. Dowling’s petition states that he began using Roundup in the mid-1980s. He sprayed the weedkiller on a regular and consistent basis for many years before being diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

Splenic Marginal Zone Lymphoma
Splenic marginal zone lymphoma, a type of B-cell lymphoma associated with Roundup exposure, is extremely rare. It accounts for about 1% of all cases of non-Hodgkins lymphoma. If the cancer is limited to the spleen, it can sometimes be successfully sent into remission through spleen excision. Without removing the spleen, it can sometimes be successfully treated through a cancer drug called Rituxan.

WHO declares Glyphosate a Probable Carcinogen
According to his petition, Mr. Dowling was unaware of the link between Roundup and cancer until last year, when the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) determined that glyphosate in Roundup likely causes cancer. The IARC report linked Roundup with an increased risk of non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

Roundup Lawsuits Grow
Mr. Dowling’s case joins a growing list of Roundup lawsuits filed against Monsanto by farmers, landscapers, agricultural workers and others exposed to Roundup throughout the country. Each plaintiff raises similar allegations. All indicate their various forms of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) were caused by Monsanto’s reckless promotion of carcinogenic Roundup. Monsanto’s blitzkreig promotions pushed more and more Roundup saturation without disclosure of the potential health risks. Monsanto is also charged in the petitions with providing insufficient safety instructions to minimize exposure.

Monsanto Response
Monsanto has denied that there is a link between Roundup and lymphona. The company has called the IARC’s findings “junk science,” which is exactly what many critics of Monsanto call the pesticide maker’s own research into the toxic effects of Roundup and Monsanto’s genetically modified organisms and seed programs.

Roundup Lymphoma Lawsuit Filed
Mr. Dowling’s lawsuit states:

“[S]cientific evidence has established a clear association between glyphosate and genotoxicity, inflammation, and an increased risk of many cancers, including, but not limited to, NHL, Multiple Myeloma, and soft tissue sarcoma. Despite the IARC’s classification of glyphosate as a class 2A probable carcinogen, Defendant continues to maintain that glyphosate and/or Roundup is safe, noncarcinogenic, non-genotoxic, and falsely warrants to users and the general public that independent experts and regulatory agencies agree that there is no evidence of carcinogenicity or genotoxicity in glyphosate and Roundup.”

Roundup Poisons All
A recent U.S. Geological Survey on glyphosate used nationwide found some 2.6 billion pounds of the herbicide has been sprayed on American land since the mid-1990s, when Monsanto first produced “Roundup Ready” crops. These crops are engineered to survive glyphosate spraying, which is meant to kill only the weeds but not the crops. Of course it also kills pollinators and birds and other bright and necessary creatures, along with human gut microbes which humans require in order to remain healthy. (Though that’s not what this lawsuit is about.)

Monsanto Failed to Warn
Monsanto “failed to warn” is the charge in every Monsanto lawsuit. Roundup lawsuit plaintiffs all allege that they might have avoided being diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or other cancers if they had been warned about Roundup risks for farmers, landscapers and other agricultural industry workers. Had they been properly warned, they could have taken safety precautions or used other products or methods to manage weeds.

Roundup Lawsuits Consolidated in California

Mr. Dowling’s lawsuit will be consolidated with all the other Roundup cases pending in the federal court system. They are now all centralized before U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria in the Northern District of California, for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings. After coordinated proceedings, if parties don’t reach Roundup settlements or some other resolution, each separate complaint may be remanded back to the federal courts where they were originally filed.

RELATED

Share