Wednesday, July 23, 2008
KEEP AN EYE ON THE SKY
During the past two weeks, I was pleased when the amount of chemtrails above Los Angeles dwindled BUT today was full-fledge government exotic weapon warfare on our immune systems!! There were TONS of chemtrail lines and circles in the sky and PEOPLE ARE STILL CLUELESS. (if you're not aware of CHEMTRAILS yet, please google "chemtrails" or read this)
If you've been living in a naive bubble than you probably haven't noticed the U.S. government is trying to DELIBERITLY poison you by releasing a cocktail of fungus, aluminium, barium, titanium and magnesium into the sky from large jets. These plumes of chemicals are usually dismissed as "contrails" but if you have an ounce of common sense and average eye sight, you will see UNLIKE CONTRAILS, CHEMATRAILS DO NOT DISSAPATE - THEY SPREAD, often covering miles of sky with wispy-looking plumes that slowly spread to resemble clouds, but they are not clouds!! Look carefully and you will see a pinkish prism or rainbow of chemicals in the plumes. Real clouds are not reflective, nor do they form multiple straight lines or cross-hatching patterns - as chemtrails do when they are being spread.
The sad part is the government is blantently poisoning us in BROAD DAYLIGHT and we are still naive and allow it to happen.
This isn't a conspiracy theory. IT IS HAPPENING ALL OVER THE GLOBE:
Germany has already admitted to using chemtrails in order to "manipulate weather" and "disrupt radar signals."
The U.K. government admitted to "conducting a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public," including spraying public with harmful toxins.
Chemtrails making news in the United States who claims it is using the chemicals for "weather modification."
Think you're safe?! Let's take a look at what the toxic ingredients can do to your health:
*Fungus eats nutrients that are used to rebuild our immume system.
*Aluminium crosses the blood brain barrier, causes Alzheimer's disease and short term memory loss.
*Barium, in addition to being a known carcinogenic, knocks potassium out of the body.
*Titanium and magnesium combined together causes blood clots.
IF YOU ARE TRYING TO LIVE A HEALTHY LIFE, DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SKY AND BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUAILITY OF THE AIR YOU BREATHE.
Check out this WEBSITE containing scary ongoing evidence of chemtrails from 2003-2007 and here's the US NAVY CHEMTRAIL PATENT from 1974!!
WHAT CAN YOU DO???
*Educate others and spread the word about chemtrails.
*Keep an eye on the sky, take photos and collect evidence of chemtrails above your town/city
*File a Class Action lawsuit for public endangerment... here's how. TIP: Do not use the word “chemtrails.” Instead, focus on air safety, and the health, serenity and safety of those on the ground.
*Contact ALL local and national media.
*Contact environmental agencies or form your own group or organization.
WHEN FACED WITH ADVERCITY:
*When told by authorities that these plumes are “harmless” contrails, remind them that the supposedly “safe” artificial clouds caused by normal condensation trails can be seen as dangerous air pollution that robs the blue skies essential to good health and life, while altering weather and climate by drastically changing a region’s atmospheric heat balance. Then point to your temperature/humidity records to prove that the plumes you’re citing cannot be contrails because the upper air is too warm and too dry for any such artificial clouds to form – unless massive amounts of particulates are added to the air for moisture to coalesce around. The smaller the particles, the more clouds are formed. And the greater the human health hazard that results.
If you'd like to really research the topic, exclude the term "chemtrail" and search for "exotic weapons." There are bills that were passed by congress to allow the US government the right to test "exotic weapons" on civilians. "Chemtrails" are included as "exotic weapons."
Here is an excerpt of the bill. You could also research it yourself:
H. R. 2977
To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the United States, and to require the President to take action to adopt and implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons.
SEC. 7. DEFINITIONS.
(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--
(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(ii) chemtrails;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;
(v) laser weapons systems;
(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and
(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.
(C) The term `exotic weapons systems' includes weapons designed to damage space or natural ecosystems (such as the ionosphere and upper atmosphere) or climate, weather, and tectonic systems with the purpose of inducing damage or destruction upon a target population or region on earth or in space.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
YAY, LA... NO MORE PLASTIC BAGS IN 2010!!!!
LOS ANGLES (AFP) - The city of Los Angeles announced it will ban all plastic bags from retail stores as of July 1, 2010, following similar anti-pollution regulations already enforced in San Francisco.
The second-largest US city behind New York, Los Angeles, with its four million population, will ban plastic bagging in all supermarkets, grocery and retail stores, the Los Angeles City Council said in its new regulation.
After July 1, 2010, all store customers must provide their own bags or purchase bags made of paper or other biodegradable material from the store for 25 cents (0.25 dollar), it added.
The goal is to rid the city of some 2.3 billion non-biodegradable plastic bags that are distributed each year and end up polluting waste dumps for a long time.
San Francisco, 600 kilometers (373 miles) north of here, also in California, in 2007 became the first US city to ban plastic bags from its stores.
Both city regulations are intended to pressure state lawmakers who are considering a bill to eliminate plastic bags across the state by 2012.
Several countries around the world have already adopted laws banning plastic bags, which often end up killing animals that swallow or get caught up in them.
HECK YES. :)
The second-largest US city behind New York, Los Angeles, with its four million population, will ban plastic bagging in all supermarkets, grocery and retail stores, the Los Angeles City Council said in its new regulation.
After July 1, 2010, all store customers must provide their own bags or purchase bags made of paper or other biodegradable material from the store for 25 cents (0.25 dollar), it added.
The goal is to rid the city of some 2.3 billion non-biodegradable plastic bags that are distributed each year and end up polluting waste dumps for a long time.
San Francisco, 600 kilometers (373 miles) north of here, also in California, in 2007 became the first US city to ban plastic bags from its stores.
Both city regulations are intended to pressure state lawmakers who are considering a bill to eliminate plastic bags across the state by 2012.
Several countries around the world have already adopted laws banning plastic bags, which often end up killing animals that swallow or get caught up in them.
HECK YES. :)
Friday, June 6, 2008
DANGERS OF AMALGAM/MERCURY FILLINGS: A VIDEO BLOG
HARMFUL EFFECTS OF AMALGAM/MECURY FILLINGS:
PART 2:
VISIBLE MECURY VAPORS COMING FROM AMALGAM FILLINGS:
PART 2:
VISIBLE MECURY VAPORS COMING FROM AMALGAM FILLINGS:
MERCURY, FOUND IN CHILDHOOD VACCINES, CAUSES AUTISM.
"In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Georgia. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session -- only private invitations to fifty-two attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.
The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children.
THE GOVERNMENT AND VACCINE MANUFACTURES KNOW VACCINES ARE CAUSING DAMAGE TO THOUSANDS."
SOURCE: JEFF (AKA: VACCINETRUTH ON YOUTUBE.COM), THE FATHER OF TWO VACCINE-INDUCED AUTISM CHILDREN
Robert Kennedy Jr talks about the cover up regarding vaccines and Autism:
Jenny McCarthy debates doctors on vaccines and autism on Larry King Live 4-2-08:
Autism Risk Linked To Distance From Power Plants, Other Mercury-releasing Sources (article from Science Daily).
Parenting website explores the dangers of vaccinations.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
*SPREAD THE WORD!!!!
*CONTACT YOUR LOCAL CONGRESSMAN/WOMAN
*CONTACT DRUG MANUFACTURERS
*CONTACT THE EPA
*CONTACT THE FDA
*DEMAND CHANGE!!!!
The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children.
THE GOVERNMENT AND VACCINE MANUFACTURES KNOW VACCINES ARE CAUSING DAMAGE TO THOUSANDS."
SOURCE: JEFF (AKA: VACCINETRUTH ON YOUTUBE.COM), THE FATHER OF TWO VACCINE-INDUCED AUTISM CHILDREN
Robert Kennedy Jr talks about the cover up regarding vaccines and Autism:
Jenny McCarthy debates doctors on vaccines and autism on Larry King Live 4-2-08:
Autism Risk Linked To Distance From Power Plants, Other Mercury-releasing Sources (article from Science Daily).
Parenting website explores the dangers of vaccinations.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
*SPREAD THE WORD!!!!
*CONTACT YOUR LOCAL CONGRESSMAN/WOMAN
*CONTACT DRUG MANUFACTURERS
*CONTACT THE EPA
*CONTACT THE FDA
*DEMAND CHANGE!!!!
SPOTLIGHT ON: ACTIVIST SEVERN CULLIS-SUZUKI
Think back to what you were doing when you were twelve years old... chances are, unless you're Severn Cullis-Suzuki, you weren't lobbying for a cleaner environment or starting your own environmental organization...
In 1992, at the age of 12, Cullis-Suzuki raised money with members of ECO, the Environmental Children's Organization (a group she founded) to attend the Earth Summit in Rio De Janeiro. Along with group members Michelle Quigg, Vanessa Suttie, and Morgan Geisler, Severn presented environmental issues from a youth perspective at the Summit, where she received a standing ovation for a speech to the delegates. The group also addressed delegates at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (source: wikipedia).see the moving speech she gave when she was twelve!! how sad is it that the world has only gotten worse???
here's a quote from Cullis-Suzuki from a 2002 article in TIME:
"...In the 10 years since Rio, I have learned that addressing our leaders is not enough. As Gandhi said many years ago, "We must become the change we want to see." I know change is possible, because I am changing, still figuring out what I think. I am still deciding how to live my life. The challenges are great, but if we accept individual responsibility and make sustainable choices, we will rise to the challenges, and we will become part of the positive tide of change.But in the 10 years since Rio, I have learned that addressing our leaders is not enough. As Gandhi said many years ago, "We must become the change we want to see." I know change is possible, because I am changing, still figuring out what I think. I am still deciding how to live my life. The challenges are great, but if we accept individual responsibility and make sustainable choices, we will rise to the challenges, and we will become part of the positive tide of change.But in the 10 years since Rio, I have learned that addressing our leaders is not enough. As Gandhi said many years ago, "We must become the change we want to see." I know change is possible, because I am changing, still figuring out what I think. I am still deciding how to live my life. The challenges are great, but if we accept individual responsibility and make sustainable choices, we will rise to the challenges, and we will become part of the positive tide of change."
Severn Cullis-Suzuki now:
Cullis-Suzuki is still an environmental activist. She earned Bachelor of Science degree in biology from Yale University and continues to promote sustainable living.here are some words of wisdom from her father, fellow activist David Suzuki:
"If we don't see that everything is interconnected, then any action has no consequences or responsibility. Most of us live in cities, in a human created environment, and many people ask me: "well, who needs nature?" So, people tell me they care about the environment, yet they drive huge SUVs and never reflect on their impact on climate or weather. We buy fresh fruits and vegetables in Canada in the middle of winter, but we never reflect on the Earth cost of shipping them from halfway around the world. So the challenge is to reconnect ourselves to the world. Everything is connected to everything else." ~taken from SASS magazine fall 2004
Want to improve your sustainable living??? Take David Suzuki's Nature Challenge.
Further proof that one person CAN make a difference by impacting social change. What have you done for the earth lately???
Monday, June 2, 2008
Childhood Cancer Most Prominent in Northeast
Here is an abbreviated version of the article posted 2 hours ago by AP Medical Writer Lindsay Tanner:
CHICAGO - Surprising research suggests that childhood cancer is most common in the Northeast, results that even caught experts off guard. But some specialists say it could just reflect differences in reporting.
The study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is based on data representing 90 percent of the U.S. population. It found that cancer affects about 166 out of every million children, a number that shows just how rare childhood cancers are.
The highest rate was in the Northeast with 179 cases per million children, while the lowest was among children in the South with 159 cases per million. Some experts suggested that could mean cases were under-reported in the South and over-reported elsewhere.
The rates for the Midwest and West were nearly identical, at 166 cases per million and 165 per million, respectively.
A total of 36,446 cases were identified in the study, which analyzed 2001-03 data from state and federal registries. The research appears in the June edition of Pediatrics, released Monday.
Dr. Rafael Ducos, a children's cancer physician at Ochsner Medical Center in New Orleans, said the South's low rates were perplexing and might simply reflect
under-reporting there and over-reporting in other regions.
"I'm at a loss to explain it," he said.
Environmental factors might play a role, including exposure to radiation, said lead author Dr. Jun Li of the CDC. Radiation has been linked with the most common types of childhood cancer — leukemia, lymphoma and brain cancers.
Radiation sources include X-rays, nuclear plant emissions and natural sources such as radon gas. But Li said research is needed to determine if these sources vary enough by region to affect childhood cancer rates.
Dr. Lindsay Frazier, a cancer specialist at Children's Hospital Boston and Dana Farber Cancer Institute, said pollution and housing stock that's older than anywhere else in the nation might help explain the Northeast's higher rates.
"As a parent raising a family in the Northeast, this does not at all increase my concern for my family or for my neighbors," Levy said, adding, "First and foremost, these are still very rare diseases in children."
Regional differences in rates for some specific cancers have been found in adults, but these are likely due to personal habits and lifestyle factors, Ward said. For example, lung cancer rates are high in the South because smoking is generally more popular there, she said.
But it generally takes years of exposure to lifestyle factors such as smoking before
cancer develops, she said, so this wouldn't explain children's rates.
I don't mean to sound cocky, but it doesn't take a scientist to figure out why there are higher cancer rates in the northeast portion of the United States. It is really alarming that of the scientists involved in these studies, none of them could come to the conclusion I came to immediately after reading this article. Why aren't science geniuses also blessed with the common sense gene???
HERE IS WHY THERE ARE HIGHER RATES OF CANCER IN THE NORTHEAST:
GET A LOAD OF THE PROPAGANDA THE GOVERNMENT WAS FEEDING PEOPLE IN THE 1950s. Just hide in a shelter for two weeks and rinse off fruit before eating it -- BAHAHAHA!! this one is even better:
But I regress...
Back to my point: I hope you noticed the part about the "down winds" when the map was shown in the first video. If not, here it is:
As you can see, all pollution and yes, particles from the HUNDREDS of nuclear bomb tests that have occurred in Nevada since the 1940s... get whisked to the east coast from the west by down winds. So it's no wonder why there are higher cancer rates in the northeast. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found that virtually every person who has lived in the United States since 1951 has been exposed to radioactive fallout. And the fallout hovers over the east coast longer than the west coast.
I also have a problem with the author's ending statement: "...lung cancer rates are high in the South because smoking is generally more popular there, she said. But it generally takes years of exposure to lifestyle factors such as smoking before cancer develops, she said, so this wouldn't explain children's rates." ARE YOU SERIOUSLY A MEDICAL WRITER?! AND DID YOU REALLY SPEAK WITH A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL??? Smoking wouldn't explain the children's rates?!? Nobody besides myself factored in second hand smoke (oh, the irony) nor the probability of carcinogens the child faced while in the womb?!!
THIS IS COMMON SENSE. Articles like these make me livid because it proves tax payers are funding USELESS scientific studies run by clueless scientists. Not all scientists are clueless and not all scientific studies are useless, i know, but most scientists and companies are polluting the earth by creating even MORE household chemicals (that ad agencies convince you that you need) which work their way into our water supply and contaminate our drinking water.
CHICAGO - Surprising research suggests that childhood cancer is most common in the Northeast, results that even caught experts off guard. But some specialists say it could just reflect differences in reporting.
The study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is based on data representing 90 percent of the U.S. population. It found that cancer affects about 166 out of every million children, a number that shows just how rare childhood cancers are.
The highest rate was in the Northeast with 179 cases per million children, while the lowest was among children in the South with 159 cases per million. Some experts suggested that could mean cases were under-reported in the South and over-reported elsewhere.
The rates for the Midwest and West were nearly identical, at 166 cases per million and 165 per million, respectively.
A total of 36,446 cases were identified in the study, which analyzed 2001-03 data from state and federal registries. The research appears in the June edition of Pediatrics, released Monday.
Dr. Rafael Ducos, a children's cancer physician at Ochsner Medical Center in New Orleans, said the South's low rates were perplexing and might simply reflect
under-reporting there and over-reporting in other regions.
"I'm at a loss to explain it," he said.
Environmental factors might play a role, including exposure to radiation, said lead author Dr. Jun Li of the CDC. Radiation has been linked with the most common types of childhood cancer — leukemia, lymphoma and brain cancers.
Radiation sources include X-rays, nuclear plant emissions and natural sources such as radon gas. But Li said research is needed to determine if these sources vary enough by region to affect childhood cancer rates.
Dr. Lindsay Frazier, a cancer specialist at Children's Hospital Boston and Dana Farber Cancer Institute, said pollution and housing stock that's older than anywhere else in the nation might help explain the Northeast's higher rates.
"As a parent raising a family in the Northeast, this does not at all increase my concern for my family or for my neighbors," Levy said, adding, "First and foremost, these are still very rare diseases in children."
Regional differences in rates for some specific cancers have been found in adults, but these are likely due to personal habits and lifestyle factors, Ward said. For example, lung cancer rates are high in the South because smoking is generally more popular there, she said.
But it generally takes years of exposure to lifestyle factors such as smoking before
cancer develops, she said, so this wouldn't explain children's rates.
I don't mean to sound cocky, but it doesn't take a scientist to figure out why there are higher cancer rates in the northeast portion of the United States. It is really alarming that of the scientists involved in these studies, none of them could come to the conclusion I came to immediately after reading this article. Why aren't science geniuses also blessed with the common sense gene???
HERE IS WHY THERE ARE HIGHER RATES OF CANCER IN THE NORTHEAST:
GET A LOAD OF THE PROPAGANDA THE GOVERNMENT WAS FEEDING PEOPLE IN THE 1950s. Just hide in a shelter for two weeks and rinse off fruit before eating it -- BAHAHAHA!! this one is even better:
But I regress...
Back to my point: I hope you noticed the part about the "down winds" when the map was shown in the first video. If not, here it is:
As you can see, all pollution and yes, particles from the HUNDREDS of nuclear bomb tests that have occurred in Nevada since the 1940s... get whisked to the east coast from the west by down winds. So it's no wonder why there are higher cancer rates in the northeast. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found that virtually every person who has lived in the United States since 1951 has been exposed to radioactive fallout. And the fallout hovers over the east coast longer than the west coast.
I also have a problem with the author's ending statement: "...lung cancer rates are high in the South because smoking is generally more popular there, she said. But it generally takes years of exposure to lifestyle factors such as smoking before cancer develops, she said, so this wouldn't explain children's rates." ARE YOU SERIOUSLY A MEDICAL WRITER?! AND DID YOU REALLY SPEAK WITH A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL??? Smoking wouldn't explain the children's rates?!? Nobody besides myself factored in second hand smoke (oh, the irony) nor the probability of carcinogens the child faced while in the womb?!!
THIS IS COMMON SENSE. Articles like these make me livid because it proves tax payers are funding USELESS scientific studies run by clueless scientists. Not all scientists are clueless and not all scientific studies are useless, i know, but most scientists and companies are polluting the earth by creating even MORE household chemicals (that ad agencies convince you that you need) which work their way into our water supply and contaminate our drinking water.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Low Impact Ways to Become Low-Impact.
SIX small actions even the busiest humanoid can do to make a positive impact on the earth.
Consider this your new to-do list...
1. UNPLUG ELECTRONICS AND APPLIANCES: An easy, yet easily forgotten concept. Did you know your tv, radio, computer, VCR/DVD player and cell phone charger continue to draw electricity even when they're turned off?? FACT: The wasted electricity of leaving electronics and appliances plugged in is equivalent to continuously leaving a 100-watt light bulb on. Unplugging these items when not in use will reduce your environmental impact while reducing your electricity bill. Solution: Use power strips. The on/off switch will allow you to unplug your tv, VCR/DVD player, computer and printer at the same time.
2. STOP OD-ING ON NAPKINS: Same concept applies to toilet paper. It's not that difficult to "spare a square". (YES, although highly criticized, Sheryl Crow was on to something!!) My boyfriend and I lay out our wet paper towels on our kitchen counter and by the time we need another, our old paper towels are dry and ready to use again!! (We also use a large bath towel for our "kitchen towel" so we rarely have to rely on paper towels). FACT: If everyone in the US used ONE fewer napkin a day, we could save more than a BILLION pounds of napkins from landfills each year. Imagine the difference you can make if don't use any!!
3. STOP USING PLASTIC CUPS AND PLASTIC PLATES: Not only is plastic the most popular landfill material, but it's also been linked to cancer and Alzheimer's disease. Make a safer switch to reusable glass or ceramic mugs, cups and plates. Concerned with the amount of water and detergent you'll need to use to wash reusable dishware?? Turn off the water while scrubbing and use eco-friendly natural detergents like these.
4. SKIP THE WRAPPING PAPER: It's only on a package for a matter of minutes anyway. FACT: According to hotfact.com, Americans throw away up to 25% more garbage (five million tons more than the daily 3.5 pounds of garbage we usually throw away) between Thanksgiving and the New Year. About four million of those tons are made up of wrapping paper and shopping bags. Instead of wrapping paper, reuse newspapers (the comic section is always a favorite) and don't forget to recycle afterward!!
5. PLAY GAMES: Improve yourself while helping improve the lives of others simply by visiting http://www.freerice.com where you play a game to end world hunger while improving your vocabulary!! The concept: for every correct response, the United Nations World Food Program (WFP) will distribute 20 grains of rice to countries in need. "In addition to providing food, the World Food Program helps hungry people to become self-reliant so that they escape hunger for good. Wherever possible, the World Food Program buys food locally to support local farmers and the local economy." How it's possible: the money generated by the advertisements on the bottom of your game screen is used to buy the rice. Awesome.
6. CHOOSE CANVAS: The paper vs. plastic dilemma is solved by using reusable canvas bags!! Most grocery stores will offer small refunds if you bring your own bags. FACT: Using reusable bags saves 12 million barrels of oil and 14 million trees each year. If those facts aren't enough incentive, remember that canvas bags are sturdier and you will never have to worry about the handles ripping off while you carry your groceries.
All facts were found in the April 2008 edition of Women's Day. Kudos to them!! Some facts were also originally obtained by Deirdre Dolan at The Daily Green.
Consider this your new to-do list...
1. UNPLUG ELECTRONICS AND APPLIANCES: An easy, yet easily forgotten concept. Did you know your tv, radio, computer, VCR/DVD player and cell phone charger continue to draw electricity even when they're turned off?? FACT: The wasted electricity of leaving electronics and appliances plugged in is equivalent to continuously leaving a 100-watt light bulb on. Unplugging these items when not in use will reduce your environmental impact while reducing your electricity bill. Solution: Use power strips. The on/off switch will allow you to unplug your tv, VCR/DVD player, computer and printer at the same time.
2. STOP OD-ING ON NAPKINS: Same concept applies to toilet paper. It's not that difficult to "spare a square". (YES, although highly criticized, Sheryl Crow was on to something!!) My boyfriend and I lay out our wet paper towels on our kitchen counter and by the time we need another, our old paper towels are dry and ready to use again!! (We also use a large bath towel for our "kitchen towel" so we rarely have to rely on paper towels). FACT: If everyone in the US used ONE fewer napkin a day, we could save more than a BILLION pounds of napkins from landfills each year. Imagine the difference you can make if don't use any!!
3. STOP USING PLASTIC CUPS AND PLASTIC PLATES: Not only is plastic the most popular landfill material, but it's also been linked to cancer and Alzheimer's disease. Make a safer switch to reusable glass or ceramic mugs, cups and plates. Concerned with the amount of water and detergent you'll need to use to wash reusable dishware?? Turn off the water while scrubbing and use eco-friendly natural detergents like these.
4. SKIP THE WRAPPING PAPER: It's only on a package for a matter of minutes anyway. FACT: According to hotfact.com, Americans throw away up to 25% more garbage (five million tons more than the daily 3.5 pounds of garbage we usually throw away) between Thanksgiving and the New Year. About four million of those tons are made up of wrapping paper and shopping bags. Instead of wrapping paper, reuse newspapers (the comic section is always a favorite) and don't forget to recycle afterward!!
5. PLAY GAMES: Improve yourself while helping improve the lives of others simply by visiting http://www.freerice.com where you play a game to end world hunger while improving your vocabulary!! The concept: for every correct response, the United Nations World Food Program (WFP) will distribute 20 grains of rice to countries in need. "In addition to providing food, the World Food Program helps hungry people to become self-reliant so that they escape hunger for good. Wherever possible, the World Food Program buys food locally to support local farmers and the local economy." How it's possible: the money generated by the advertisements on the bottom of your game screen is used to buy the rice. Awesome.
6. CHOOSE CANVAS: The paper vs. plastic dilemma is solved by using reusable canvas bags!! Most grocery stores will offer small refunds if you bring your own bags. FACT: Using reusable bags saves 12 million barrels of oil and 14 million trees each year. If those facts aren't enough incentive, remember that canvas bags are sturdier and you will never have to worry about the handles ripping off while you carry your groceries.
All facts were found in the April 2008 edition of Women's Day. Kudos to them!! Some facts were also originally obtained by Deirdre Dolan at The Daily Green.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Contrary to popular belief, the beach isn't your ashtray.
As an avid beach goer, you can imagine my disgust when I discovered an AP article titled "Group finds 6 million pounds of trash on world's beaches."
The original article was written by Josef Hebert, but here is my Cliff Notes version:
6 million pounds of GARBAGE was found on 33,000 miles of shoreline worldwide IN ONE DAY, providing a "global snapshot of the ocean trash problem."
On average, the 378,000 volunteers collected 182 pounds of trash for every mile of shoreline in 76 countries, including the U.S. (both ocean coastlines and beaches on inland lakes and streams) and found cigarette butts, food wrappers, abandoned fishing lines and plastic bags... all of which threaten seabirds and marine mammals.
"This is a snapshot of one day, one moment in time, but it serves as a powerful reminder of our carelessness and how our disparate and random actions actually have a collective and global impact," Vikki Spruill, president of the Ocean Conservancy said in an interview.
The most extensive cleanup was in the United States where 190,000 volunteers covered 10,110 miles and picked up 3.9 million pounds of debris on a single Saturday last September, according to the report. That's 390 pounds of trash per mile!!!
"It represents a general carelessness we have. ... We're the bad guys. Trash doesn't fall from the sky. It actually falls from our hands," said Spruill.
A third of the debris found came from smokers.
The volunteers collected and cataloged nearly 2.3 million cigarette butts, filters and cigar tips. And they found 587,827 bags; more than 1.7 million food wrappers, containers, lids, cups, plates and eating utensils; and nearly 1.2 million bottles and beverage cans.
Divers also scoured waters offshore, collecting about 160,000 pounds of debris from cigarette waste and food containers to more threatening items: abandoned fishing lines, plastic bags, rope, fishing nets and abandoned crab and lobster traps.
The International Coastal Cleanup also focused attention on the damage these items can do...
The volunteers came across 81 birds, 63 fish, 49 invertebrates, 30 mammals and 11 reptiles and one amphibian that all had become entangled in various debris including fishing line, rope or plastic bags, balloon ribbons and strings, building material, vehicle tires, wire, and beverage six-pack holders.
What bothers me the most is all out our environmental problems are self-induced. The only reason there was 6 million more pounds of garbage on our world's beaches is because people were TOO LAZY to properly dispose of their trash. This could have EASILY been prevented had those people took the 5 extra steps to the nearest trash can OR carried their garbage home with them.
WHAT YOU CAN DO: BE RESPONSIBLE AND PICK UP AFTER YOURSELF. IF YOU CARRY IN, CARRY OUT... DON'T LEAVE YOUR GARBAGE BEHIND!!!!
This study is further proof that one person does make a difference. Don't ever assume your ONE measely cigarette butt/plastic bag/balloon isn't going to matter if it's left behind. That ignorant train of thought is what contributed to there being over 6 MILLION pounds of trash on our beaches. If you want to reduce pollution, reduce laziness.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
as if you needed another reason to become a vegetarian...
i don't understand why ignorant people give vegetarians such crap about not eating meat, especially after SEEING what goes on in slaughter houses. very rarely do i ever eat meat, but i'm thinking i just ate my LAST piece of meatloaf. :(
and if the inhumane treatment doesn't bother you, this should:
"The EPA has declared that concentrated animal feeding operations are one of the chief causes of water pollution in the United States. An estimated 35,000 miles of rivers and groundwater sources in 17 states have been polluted by waste from hogs, chickens and cattle. The U.S. livestock industry produces 2.7 trillion tons of waste each year ..." -- OXFAM
so you're drinking traces of chemicals, pesticides AND animal feces (not to mention perscription drugs). and we wonder why so many people have cancer, alzheimers, birth defects, etc.
to further your disgust.
HOW YOU CAN HELP:
# 1 refuse to stay silent, spread the word that animal cruelty is still a major issue
#2 become a vegetarian and promote vegetarianism
#3 write to your congressperson and senators (not sure where to begin, START HERE!!)
#4 research PETA.com for ways to help end animal cruelty.
and if the inhumane treatment doesn't bother you, this should:
"The EPA has declared that concentrated animal feeding operations are one of the chief causes of water pollution in the United States. An estimated 35,000 miles of rivers and groundwater sources in 17 states have been polluted by waste from hogs, chickens and cattle. The U.S. livestock industry produces 2.7 trillion tons of waste each year ..." -- OXFAM
so you're drinking traces of chemicals, pesticides AND animal feces (not to mention perscription drugs). and we wonder why so many people have cancer, alzheimers, birth defects, etc.
to further your disgust.
HOW YOU CAN HELP:
# 1 refuse to stay silent, spread the word that animal cruelty is still a major issue
#2 become a vegetarian and promote vegetarianism
#3 write to your congressperson and senators (not sure where to begin, START HERE!!)
#4 research PETA.com for ways to help end animal cruelty.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
one tall glass of mood stabilizers and sex hormones... coming right up.
overmedicated americans = an overmedicated drinking supply. in a society where we over-medicate every one (including household pets) and inject steriods and antibiotics into our food supply (via chickens and cattle) it's no surprise these drugs are contaminating our already endangered water supply. educate yourself, then read on to find out how you can make a difference and help protect our water supply.
i tried to make a cliff's notes version of the article published by the AP MARCH 10, 2008, but there was just too much i didn't want to omit. but i did highlight and bold sections i thought were most astonding:
A vast array of pharmaceuticals — including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans, an Associated Press investigation shows.
Concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are far below the levels of a medical dose but the presence of so many prescription drugs — and over-the-counter medicines like acetaminophen and ibuprofen — in so much of our drinking water is heightening worries of long-term consequences to human health. Especially since researchers have found alarming effects on human cells and wildlife.
In the course of a five-month inquiry, the AP discovered that drugs have been detected in the drinking water supplies of 24 major metropolitan areas — from Southern California to Northern New Jersey, from Detroit to Louisville, Ky.
How do the drugs get into the water?
People take pills. Their bodies absorb some of the medication, but the rest of it passes through and is flushed down the toilet. The wastewater is treated before it is discharged into reservoirs, rivers or lakes. Then, some of the water is cleansed again at drinking water treatment plants and piped to consumers. But most treatments do not remove all drug residue.
Members of the AP National Investigative Team reviewed hundreds of scientific reports, analyzed federal drinking water databases, visited environmental study sites and treatment plants and interviewed more than 230 officials, academics and scientists. They also surveyed the nation's 50 largest cities and a dozen other major water providers, as well as smaller community water providers in all 50 states.
Here are some of the key test results obtained by the AP:
_Officials in Philadelphia said testing there discovered 56 pharmaceuticals or byproducts in treated drinking water, including medicines for pain, infection, high cholesterol, asthma, epilepsy, mental illness and heart problems. Sixty-three pharmaceuticals or byproducts were found in the city's watersheds.
_Anti-epileptic and anti-anxiety medications were detected in a portion of the treated drinking water for 18.5 million people in Southern California.
_Researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey analyzed a Passaic Valley Water Commission drinking water treatment plant, which serves 850,000 people in Northern New Jersey, and found a metabolized angina medicine and the mood-stabilizing carbamazepine in drinking water.
_A sex hormone was detected in San Francisco's drinking water.
_The drinking water for Washington, D.C., and surrounding areas tested positive for six pharmaceuticals.
_Three medications, including an antibiotic, were found in drinking water supplied to Tucson, Ariz.
The situation is undoubtedly worse than suggested by the positive test results in the major population centers documented by the AP.
The federal government doesn't require any testing and hasn't set safety limits for drugs in water. Of the 62 major water providers contacted, the drinking water for only 28 was tested. Among the 34 that haven't: Houston, Chicago, Miami, Baltimore, Phoenix, Boston and New York City's Department of Environmental Protection, which delivers water to 9 million people.
The AP's investigation also indicates that watersheds, the natural sources of most of the nation's water supply, also are contaminated. Tests were conducted in the watersheds of 35 of the 62 major providers surveyed by the AP, and pharmaceuticals were detected in 28.
The New York state health department and the USGS tested the source of the city's water, upstate. They found trace concentrations of heart medicine, infection fighters, estrogen, anti-convulsants, a mood stabilizer and a tranquilizer. City water officials declined repeated requests for an interview.
In several cases, officials at municipal or regional water providers told the AP that pharmaceuticals had not been detected, but the AP obtained the results of tests conducted by independent researchers that showed otherwise. For example, water department officials in New Orleans said their water had not been tested for pharmaceuticals, but a Tulane University researcher and his students have published a study that found the pain reliever naproxen, the sex hormone estrone and the anti-cholesterol drug byproduct clofibric acid in treated drinking water.
Rural consumers who draw water from their own wells aren't in the clear either, experts say.
The Stroud Water Research Center, in Avondale, Pa., has measured water samples from New York City's upstate watershed for caffeine, a common contaminant that scientists often look for as a possible signal for the presence of other pharmaceuticals. Though more caffeine was detected at suburban sites, researcher Anthony Aufdenkampe was struck by the relatively high levels even in less populated areas.
He suspects it escapes from failed septic tanks, maybe with other drugs. "Septic systems are essentially small treatment plants that are essentially unmanaged and therefore tend to fail," Aufdenkampe said.
Even users of bottled water and home filtration systems don't necessarily avoid exposure. Bottlers, some of which simply repackage tap water, do not typically treat or test for pharmaceuticals, according to the industry's main trade group. The same goes for the makers of home filtration systems.
Contamination is not confined to the United States. More than 100 different pharmaceuticals have been detected in lakes, rivers, reservoirs and streams throughout the world. Studies have detected pharmaceuticals in waters throughout Asia, Australia, Canada and Europe — even in Swiss lakes and the North Sea.
For example, in Canada, a study of 20 Ontario drinking water treatment plants by a national research institute found nine different drugs in water samples. Japanese health officials in December called for human health impact studies after detecting prescription drugs in drinking water at seven different sites.
In the United States, the problem isn't confined to surface waters. Pharmaceuticals also permeate aquifers deep underground, source of 40 percent of the nation's water supply. Federal scientists who drew water in 24 states from aquifers near contaminant sources such as landfills and animal feed lots found minuscule levels of hormones, antibiotics and other drugs.
Perhaps it's because Americans have been taking drugs — and flushing them unmetabolized or unused — in growing amounts. Over the past five years, the number of U.S. prescriptions rose 12 percent to a record 3.7 billion, while nonprescription drug purchases held steady around 3.3 billion, according to IMS Health and The Nielsen Co.
"People think that if they take a medication, their body absorbs it and it disappears, but of course that's not the case," said EPA scientist Christian Daughton, one of the first to draw attention to the issue of pharmaceuticals in water in the United States.
Some drugs, including widely used cholesterol fighters, tranquilizers and anti-epileptic medications, resist modern drinking water and wastewater treatment processes. Plus, the EPA says there are no sewage treatment systems specifically engineered to remove pharmaceuticals.
One technology, reverse osmosis, removes virtually all pharmaceutical contaminants but is very expensive for large-scale use and leaves several gallons of polluted water for every one that is made drinkable.
Another issue: There's evidence that adding chlorine, a common process in conventional drinking water treatment plants, makes some pharmaceuticals more toxic.
Human waste isn't the only source of contamination. Cattle, for example, are given ear implants that provide a slow release of trenbolone, an anabolic steroid used by some bodybuilders, which causes cattle to bulk up. But not all the trenbolone circulating in a steer is metabolized. A German study showed 10 percent of the steroid passed right through the animals.
Water sampled downstream of a Nebraska feedlot had steroid levels four times as high as the water taken upstream. Male fathead minnows living in that downstream area had low testosterone levels and small heads.
Other veterinary drugs also play a role. Pets are now treated for arthritis, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, allergies, dementia, and even obesity — sometimes with the same drugs as humans. The inflation-adjusted value of veterinary drugs rose by 8 percent, to $5.2 billion, over the past five years, according to an analysis of data from the Animal Health Institute.
Ask the pharmaceutical industry whether the contamination of water supplies is a problem, and officials will tell you no. "Based on what we now know, I would say we find there's little or no risk from pharmaceuticals in the environment to human health," said microbiologist Thomas White, a consultant for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
Recent laboratory research has found that small amounts of medication have affected human embryonic kidney cells, human blood cells and human breast cancer cells. The cancer cells proliferated too quickly; the kidney cells grew too slowly; and the blood cells showed biological activity associated with inflammation.
Also, pharmaceuticals in waterways are damaging wildlife across the nation and around the globe, research shows. Notably, male fish are being feminized, creating egg yolk proteins, a process usually restricted to females. Pharmaceuticals also are affecting sentinel species at the foundation of the pyramid of life — such as earth worms in the wild and zooplankton in the laboratory, studies show.
"It brings a question to people's minds that if the fish were affected ... might there be a potential problem for humans?" EPA research biologist Vickie Wilson told the AP. "It could be that the fish are just exquisitely sensitive because of their physiology or something. We haven't gotten far enough along."
With limited research funds, said Shane Snyder, research and development project manager at the Southern Nevada Water Authority, a greater emphasis should be put on studying the effects of drugs in water.
"I think it's a shame that so much money is going into monitoring to figure out if these things are out there, and so little is being spent on human health," said Snyder. "They need to just accept that these things are everywhere — every chemical and pharmaceutical could be there. It's time for the EPA to step up to the plate and make a statement about the need to study effects, both human and environmental."
While Grumbles said the EPA had analyzed 287 pharmaceuticals for possible inclusion on a draft list of candidates for regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act, he said only one, nitroglycerin, was on the list. Nitroglycerin can be used as a drug for heart problems, but the key reason it's being considered is its widespread use in making explosives.
Our bodies may shrug off a relatively big one-time dose, yet suffer from a smaller amount delivered continuously over a half century, perhaps subtly stirring allergies or nerve damage. Pregnant women, the elderly and the very ill might be more sensitive.
Many concerns about chronic low-level exposure focus on certain drug classes: chemotherapy that can act as a powerful poison; hormones that can hamper reproduction or development; medicines for depression and epilepsy that can damage the brain or change behavior; antibiotics that can allow human germs to mutate into more dangerous forms; pain relievers and blood-pressure diuretics.
Some experts say medications may pose a unique danger because, unlike most pollutants, they were crafted to act on the human body.
"These are chemicals that are designed to have very specific effects at very low concentrations. That's what pharmaceuticals do. So when they get out to the environment, it should not be a shock to people that they have effects," says zoologist John Sumpter at Brunel University in London, who has studied trace hormones, heart medicine and other drugs.
And while drugs are tested to be safe for humans, the timeframe is usually over a matter of months, not a lifetime. Pharmaceuticals also can produce side effects and interact with other drugs at normal medical doses.
"We know we are being exposed to other people's drugs through our drinking water, and that can't be good," says Dr. David Carpenter, who directs the Institute for Health and the Environment of the State University of New York at Albany.
article source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336286,00.html
HOW YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE:
#1 DO NOT FLUSH UNUSED PERSCRIPTION AND OVER-THE-COUNTER DRUGS DOWN THE TOILET OR DRAIN!! the drugs will find their way into your drinking water.
#2 DO NOT DISCARD USUSED PERSCRIPTION AND OVER-THE-COUNTER DRUGS IN WITH YOUR REGULAR TRASH!! they will only wind up in a landfil and contaminate ground water.
#3 INSTEAD: return unused perscription and over-the-counter drugs to your pharmacist or drug store for proper disposal or dispose of them at local hazardous waste drop-off sites.
#4 VOICE YOUR CONCERN: contact Benjamin H. Grumbles, assistant administrator for water at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
You can send mail to:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water (4101M)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
or leave a comment at: http://www.epa.gov/water/comments.html
#5 CONTACT Thomas White, a microbiologist consultant for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. who thinks "Based on what we now know, I would say we find there's little or no risk from pharmaceuticals in the environment to human health" and tell him otherwise.
#6 CONTACT Mary Buzby — director of environmental technology for drug maker Merck & Co. Inc. support her theory there is a concern and inspire her to take action within her company.
i tried to make a cliff's notes version of the article published by the AP MARCH 10, 2008, but there was just too much i didn't want to omit. but i did highlight and bold sections i thought were most astonding:
A vast array of pharmaceuticals — including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans, an Associated Press investigation shows.
Concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are far below the levels of a medical dose but the presence of so many prescription drugs — and over-the-counter medicines like acetaminophen and ibuprofen — in so much of our drinking water is heightening worries of long-term consequences to human health. Especially since researchers have found alarming effects on human cells and wildlife.
In the course of a five-month inquiry, the AP discovered that drugs have been detected in the drinking water supplies of 24 major metropolitan areas — from Southern California to Northern New Jersey, from Detroit to Louisville, Ky.
How do the drugs get into the water?
People take pills. Their bodies absorb some of the medication, but the rest of it passes through and is flushed down the toilet. The wastewater is treated before it is discharged into reservoirs, rivers or lakes. Then, some of the water is cleansed again at drinking water treatment plants and piped to consumers. But most treatments do not remove all drug residue.
Members of the AP National Investigative Team reviewed hundreds of scientific reports, analyzed federal drinking water databases, visited environmental study sites and treatment plants and interviewed more than 230 officials, academics and scientists. They also surveyed the nation's 50 largest cities and a dozen other major water providers, as well as smaller community water providers in all 50 states.
Here are some of the key test results obtained by the AP:
_Officials in Philadelphia said testing there discovered 56 pharmaceuticals or byproducts in treated drinking water, including medicines for pain, infection, high cholesterol, asthma, epilepsy, mental illness and heart problems. Sixty-three pharmaceuticals or byproducts were found in the city's watersheds.
_Anti-epileptic and anti-anxiety medications were detected in a portion of the treated drinking water for 18.5 million people in Southern California.
_Researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey analyzed a Passaic Valley Water Commission drinking water treatment plant, which serves 850,000 people in Northern New Jersey, and found a metabolized angina medicine and the mood-stabilizing carbamazepine in drinking water.
_A sex hormone was detected in San Francisco's drinking water.
_The drinking water for Washington, D.C., and surrounding areas tested positive for six pharmaceuticals.
_Three medications, including an antibiotic, were found in drinking water supplied to Tucson, Ariz.
The situation is undoubtedly worse than suggested by the positive test results in the major population centers documented by the AP.
The federal government doesn't require any testing and hasn't set safety limits for drugs in water. Of the 62 major water providers contacted, the drinking water for only 28 was tested. Among the 34 that haven't: Houston, Chicago, Miami, Baltimore, Phoenix, Boston and New York City's Department of Environmental Protection, which delivers water to 9 million people.
The AP's investigation also indicates that watersheds, the natural sources of most of the nation's water supply, also are contaminated. Tests were conducted in the watersheds of 35 of the 62 major providers surveyed by the AP, and pharmaceuticals were detected in 28.
The New York state health department and the USGS tested the source of the city's water, upstate. They found trace concentrations of heart medicine, infection fighters, estrogen, anti-convulsants, a mood stabilizer and a tranquilizer. City water officials declined repeated requests for an interview.
In several cases, officials at municipal or regional water providers told the AP that pharmaceuticals had not been detected, but the AP obtained the results of tests conducted by independent researchers that showed otherwise. For example, water department officials in New Orleans said their water had not been tested for pharmaceuticals, but a Tulane University researcher and his students have published a study that found the pain reliever naproxen, the sex hormone estrone and the anti-cholesterol drug byproduct clofibric acid in treated drinking water.
Rural consumers who draw water from their own wells aren't in the clear either, experts say.
The Stroud Water Research Center, in Avondale, Pa., has measured water samples from New York City's upstate watershed for caffeine, a common contaminant that scientists often look for as a possible signal for the presence of other pharmaceuticals. Though more caffeine was detected at suburban sites, researcher Anthony Aufdenkampe was struck by the relatively high levels even in less populated areas.
He suspects it escapes from failed septic tanks, maybe with other drugs. "Septic systems are essentially small treatment plants that are essentially unmanaged and therefore tend to fail," Aufdenkampe said.
Even users of bottled water and home filtration systems don't necessarily avoid exposure. Bottlers, some of which simply repackage tap water, do not typically treat or test for pharmaceuticals, according to the industry's main trade group. The same goes for the makers of home filtration systems.
Contamination is not confined to the United States. More than 100 different pharmaceuticals have been detected in lakes, rivers, reservoirs and streams throughout the world. Studies have detected pharmaceuticals in waters throughout Asia, Australia, Canada and Europe — even in Swiss lakes and the North Sea.
For example, in Canada, a study of 20 Ontario drinking water treatment plants by a national research institute found nine different drugs in water samples. Japanese health officials in December called for human health impact studies after detecting prescription drugs in drinking water at seven different sites.
In the United States, the problem isn't confined to surface waters. Pharmaceuticals also permeate aquifers deep underground, source of 40 percent of the nation's water supply. Federal scientists who drew water in 24 states from aquifers near contaminant sources such as landfills and animal feed lots found minuscule levels of hormones, antibiotics and other drugs.
Perhaps it's because Americans have been taking drugs — and flushing them unmetabolized or unused — in growing amounts. Over the past five years, the number of U.S. prescriptions rose 12 percent to a record 3.7 billion, while nonprescription drug purchases held steady around 3.3 billion, according to IMS Health and The Nielsen Co.
"People think that if they take a medication, their body absorbs it and it disappears, but of course that's not the case," said EPA scientist Christian Daughton, one of the first to draw attention to the issue of pharmaceuticals in water in the United States.
Some drugs, including widely used cholesterol fighters, tranquilizers and anti-epileptic medications, resist modern drinking water and wastewater treatment processes. Plus, the EPA says there are no sewage treatment systems specifically engineered to remove pharmaceuticals.
One technology, reverse osmosis, removes virtually all pharmaceutical contaminants but is very expensive for large-scale use and leaves several gallons of polluted water for every one that is made drinkable.
Another issue: There's evidence that adding chlorine, a common process in conventional drinking water treatment plants, makes some pharmaceuticals more toxic.
Human waste isn't the only source of contamination. Cattle, for example, are given ear implants that provide a slow release of trenbolone, an anabolic steroid used by some bodybuilders, which causes cattle to bulk up. But not all the trenbolone circulating in a steer is metabolized. A German study showed 10 percent of the steroid passed right through the animals.
Water sampled downstream of a Nebraska feedlot had steroid levels four times as high as the water taken upstream. Male fathead minnows living in that downstream area had low testosterone levels and small heads.
Other veterinary drugs also play a role. Pets are now treated for arthritis, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, allergies, dementia, and even obesity — sometimes with the same drugs as humans. The inflation-adjusted value of veterinary drugs rose by 8 percent, to $5.2 billion, over the past five years, according to an analysis of data from the Animal Health Institute.
Ask the pharmaceutical industry whether the contamination of water supplies is a problem, and officials will tell you no. "Based on what we now know, I would say we find there's little or no risk from pharmaceuticals in the environment to human health," said microbiologist Thomas White, a consultant for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
Recent laboratory research has found that small amounts of medication have affected human embryonic kidney cells, human blood cells and human breast cancer cells. The cancer cells proliferated too quickly; the kidney cells grew too slowly; and the blood cells showed biological activity associated with inflammation.
Also, pharmaceuticals in waterways are damaging wildlife across the nation and around the globe, research shows. Notably, male fish are being feminized, creating egg yolk proteins, a process usually restricted to females. Pharmaceuticals also are affecting sentinel species at the foundation of the pyramid of life — such as earth worms in the wild and zooplankton in the laboratory, studies show.
"It brings a question to people's minds that if the fish were affected ... might there be a potential problem for humans?" EPA research biologist Vickie Wilson told the AP. "It could be that the fish are just exquisitely sensitive because of their physiology or something. We haven't gotten far enough along."
With limited research funds, said Shane Snyder, research and development project manager at the Southern Nevada Water Authority, a greater emphasis should be put on studying the effects of drugs in water.
"I think it's a shame that so much money is going into monitoring to figure out if these things are out there, and so little is being spent on human health," said Snyder. "They need to just accept that these things are everywhere — every chemical and pharmaceutical could be there. It's time for the EPA to step up to the plate and make a statement about the need to study effects, both human and environmental."
While Grumbles said the EPA had analyzed 287 pharmaceuticals for possible inclusion on a draft list of candidates for regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act, he said only one, nitroglycerin, was on the list. Nitroglycerin can be used as a drug for heart problems, but the key reason it's being considered is its widespread use in making explosives.
Our bodies may shrug off a relatively big one-time dose, yet suffer from a smaller amount delivered continuously over a half century, perhaps subtly stirring allergies or nerve damage. Pregnant women, the elderly and the very ill might be more sensitive.
Many concerns about chronic low-level exposure focus on certain drug classes: chemotherapy that can act as a powerful poison; hormones that can hamper reproduction or development; medicines for depression and epilepsy that can damage the brain or change behavior; antibiotics that can allow human germs to mutate into more dangerous forms; pain relievers and blood-pressure diuretics.
Some experts say medications may pose a unique danger because, unlike most pollutants, they were crafted to act on the human body.
"These are chemicals that are designed to have very specific effects at very low concentrations. That's what pharmaceuticals do. So when they get out to the environment, it should not be a shock to people that they have effects," says zoologist John Sumpter at Brunel University in London, who has studied trace hormones, heart medicine and other drugs.
And while drugs are tested to be safe for humans, the timeframe is usually over a matter of months, not a lifetime. Pharmaceuticals also can produce side effects and interact with other drugs at normal medical doses.
"We know we are being exposed to other people's drugs through our drinking water, and that can't be good," says Dr. David Carpenter, who directs the Institute for Health and the Environment of the State University of New York at Albany.
article source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336286,00.html
HOW YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE:
#1 DO NOT FLUSH UNUSED PERSCRIPTION AND OVER-THE-COUNTER DRUGS DOWN THE TOILET OR DRAIN!! the drugs will find their way into your drinking water.
#2 DO NOT DISCARD USUSED PERSCRIPTION AND OVER-THE-COUNTER DRUGS IN WITH YOUR REGULAR TRASH!! they will only wind up in a landfil and contaminate ground water.
#3 INSTEAD: return unused perscription and over-the-counter drugs to your pharmacist or drug store for proper disposal or dispose of them at local hazardous waste drop-off sites.
#4 VOICE YOUR CONCERN: contact Benjamin H. Grumbles, assistant administrator for water at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
You can send mail to:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water (4101M)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
or leave a comment at: http://www.epa.gov/water/comments.html
#5 CONTACT Thomas White, a microbiologist consultant for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. who thinks "Based on what we now know, I would say we find there's little or no risk from pharmaceuticals in the environment to human health" and tell him otherwise.
#6 CONTACT Mary Buzby — director of environmental technology for drug maker Merck & Co. Inc. support her theory there is a concern and inspire her to take action within her company.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
