Tag Archives: health risks

It’s NOT In Your Head: It’s All Around You

Posted on by

Merriam Webster Adds “Microwave Sickness” to the Dictionary. EMF + WiFi = Microwave Sickness

July 4, 2020

By B.N. Frank

Last year, the World Health Organization (WHO) issued warnings that high levels of Electromagnetic Frequencies (EMF) in 1st world countries could affect 30% of the population. “Microwave Sickness” from exposure to EMF and “Electrosmog” was recognized as a medical illness several decades ago. It also affects animals. By 1971, The U.S. Naval Medical Research Institute had published research that exposure to non-ionizing radiation (aka cell phone and wireless WiFi radiation) was biologically harmful. In 1984, the U.S. EPA warned about various significant human health risks from exposure. In 1985, CNN reported that Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) had been used in weapons for what they described as “mind control.” It’s been widely reported that American Embassy workers in China and Cuba were also injured by microwave frequency weapons.

Thanks to Merriam Webster for adding “Microwave Sickness” to their dictionary.

From 5G Crisis:

Microwave sickness has now been formally added to the Merriam Webster dictionary. Read the definition here.

“Microwave Sickness” is often referred to as ”Electromagnetic Sensitivity” (see 1, 2). For many years health experts have been recommending that we reduce our exposure in order to reduce our risk of illness. Unfortunately involuntary exposure to increasing sources is a worldwide problem during the highly opposed and totally insidious “Race for 5G”.

Activist Post reports regularly about health risks from all sources of “Electrosmog.” For more information, visit our archives and the following websites:

From:    https://www.activistpost.com/2020/07/merriam-webster-adds-microwave-sickness-to-the-dictionary-emf-wifi-microwave-sickness.html

Please Refer to  THE ELECTRIC RAINBOW by Arthur Firstenberg for a history of electricity, EMF, WiFi and the effects on your health, its relation to “pandemics”, cancer, diabetes, heart disease, etc..

Water Fluoridation & Your Health

Posted on by

Why Water Fluoridation Is A Forced Experiment That Needs To Stop

By.  

The United States stands almost entirely alone among developed nations in adding industrial silicofluorides to its drinking water—imposing the community-wide measure without informed consent. Globally, roughly 5% of the population consumes chemically fluoridated water, but more people in the U.S. drink fluoride-adulterated water than in all other countries combined. Within the U.S., just under a third (30%) of local water supplies are not fluoridated; these municipalities have either held the practice at bay since fluoridation’s inception or have won hard-fought battles to halt water fluoridation.
Dozens of studies and reviews—including in top-tier journals such as The Lancet—have shown that fluoride is neurotoxic and lowers children’s IQ.

The fluoride chemicals added to drinking water are unprocessed toxic wasteproducts—captured pollutants from Florida’s phosphate fertilizer industry or unregulated chemical imports from China. The chemicals undergo no purification before being dumped into drinking water and often harbor significant levels of arsenic and other heavy metal contamination; one researcher describes this unavoidable contamination as a “regulatory blind spotthat jeopardizes any safe use of fluoride additives.”

Dozens of studies and reviews—including in top-tier journals such as The Lancet—have shown that fluoride is neurotoxic and lowers children’s IQ. Fluoride is also associated with a variety of other health risks in both children and adults. However, U.S. officialdom persists in making hollow claims that water fluoridation is safe and beneficial, choosing to ignore even its own research! A multimillion-dollar longitudinal study published in Environmental Health Perspectives in September, 2017, for example, was largely funded by the National Institutes of Health and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences—and the seminal study revealed a strong relationship between fluoride exposure in pregnant women and lowered cognitive function in offspring. Considered in the context of other research, the study’s implications are, according to the nonprofit Fluoride Action Network, “enormous”—“a cannon shot across the bow of the 80 year old practice of artificial fluoridation.”

According to declassified government documents summarized by Project Censored, Manhattan Project scientists discovered early on that fluoride was a leading health hazard to bomb program workers and surrounding communities.

A little history

During World War II, fluoride (a compound formed from the chemical element fluorine) came into large-scale production and use as part of the Manhattan Project. According to declassified government documents summarized by Project Censored, Manhattan Project scientists discovered early on that fluoride was a “leading health hazard to bomb program workers and surrounding communities.” In order to stave off lawsuits, government scientists “embarked on a campaign to calm the social panic about fluoride…by promoting its usefulness in preventing tooth decay.”

To prop up its “exaggerated claims of reduction in tooth decay,” government researchers began carrying out a series of poorly designed and fatally flawed community trials of water fluoridation in a handful of U.S. cities in the mid-1940s. In a critique decades later, a University of California-Davis statistician characterized these early agenda-driven fluoridation trials as “especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain muddleheadedness and hebetude.” As one example, a 15-year trial launched in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1945 used a nearby city as a non-fluoridated control, but after the control city began fluoridating its own water supply five years into the study, the design switched from a comparison with the non-fluoridated community to a before-and-after assessment of Grand Rapids. Fluoridation’s proponents admitted that this change substantially “compromised” the quality of the study.

In 1950, well before any of the community trials could reach any conclusions about the systemic health effects of long-term fluoride ingestion, the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) endorsed water fluoridation as official public health policy, strongly encouraging communities across the country to adopt the unproven measure for dental caries prevention. Describing this astonishingly non-evidence-based step as “the Great Fluoridation Gamble,” the authors of the 2010 book, The Case Against Fluoride, argue that:

“Not only was safety not demonstrated in anything approaching a comprehensive and scientific study, but also a large number of studies implicating fluoride’s impact on both the bones and the thyroid gland were ignored or downplayed” (p. 86).

In 2015, Newsweek magazine not only agreed that the scientific rationale for putting fluoride in drinking water was not as “clear-cut” as once thought but also shared the “shocking” finding of a more recent Cochrane Collaboration review, namely, that there is no evidence to support the use of fluoride in drinking water.

Bad science and powerful politics

The authors of The Case Against Fluoride persuasively argue that “bad science” and “powerful politics” are primary factors explaining why government agencies continue to defend the indefensible practice of water fluoridation, despite abundant evidence that it is unsafe both developmentally and after “a lifetime of exposure to uncontrolled doses.” Comparable to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s book, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak, which summarizes studies that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and “credulous journalists swear don’t exist,” The Case Against Fluoride is an extensively referenced tour de force, pulling together hundreds of studies showing evidence of fluoride-related harm.

… death rates in the ten most fluoridated U.S. states are 5% to 26% higher than in the ten least fluoridated states, with triple the rate of Alzheimer’s disease.

The research assembled by the book’s authors includes studies on fluoride biochemistry; cancer; fluoride’s effects on the brain, endocrine system and bones; and dental fluorosis. With regard to the latter, public health agencies like to define dental fluorosis as a purely cosmetic issue involving “changes in the appearance of tooth enamel,” but the International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology (IAOMT)—a global network of dentists, health professionals and scientists dedicated to science-based biological dentistry—describes the damaged enamel and mottled and brittle teeth that characterize dental fluorosis as “the first visible sign of fluoride toxicity.”

The important 2017 study that showed decrements in IQ following fluoride exposure during pregnancy is far from the only research sounding the alarm about fluoride’s adverse developmental effects. In his 2017 volume, Pregnancy and Fluoride Do Not Mix, John D. MacArthur pulls together hundreds of studies linking fluoride to premature birth and impaired neurological development (93 studies), preelampsia (77 studies) and autism (110 studies). The book points out that rates of premature birth are “unusually high” in the United States. At the other end of the lifespan, MacArthur observes that death rates in the ten most fluoridated U.S. states are 5% to 26% higher than in the ten least fluoridated states, with triple the rate of Alzheimer’s disease. A 2006 report by the National Research Council warned that exposure to fluoride might increase the risk of developing Alzheimer’s.

The word is out

Pregnancy and Fluoride Do Not Mix shows that the Institute of Medicine, National Research Council, Harvard’s National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Toxicology Program all are well aware of the substantial evidence of fluoride’s developmental neurotoxicity, yet no action has been taken to warn pregnant women. Instead, scientists with integrity, legal professionals and the public increasingly are taking matters into their own hands. A Citizens Petitionsubmitted in 2016 to the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act requested that the EPA “exercise its authority to prohibit the purposeful addition of fluoridation chemicals to U.S. water supplies.” This request—the focus of a lawsuit to be argued in court later in 2019—poses a landmark challenge to the dangerous practice of water fluoridation and has the potential to end one of the most significant chemical assaults on our children’s developing bodies and brains.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

from:    https://www.collective-evolution.com/2019/01/10/why-water-fluoridation-is-a-forced-experiment-that-needs-to-stop/

Tritum Particles Released near Chicago

Posted on by

1/30/2012 — Nuclear plant vents RADIOACTIVE steam onto DOWNTOWN CHICAGO

Posted on January 31, 2012

Watch the video update here:

———————————————–

ALERT!

If you were outside today in Downtown Chicago — Any time after about 1030am CST — 1/30/2012 — chances are , you may have been exposed to NUCLEAR RADIOACTIVE FALLOUT from the steam that was vented by the  Byron Illinois / Exelon Nuclear power plant.

More specifically, aerosolized particulates of Tritium were in the clouds of steam released—- those clouds then blew down into Chicago area proper.  As to whether people inhaled these particles — only time will tell now.

(links below):

Here is the full story:

http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/300465/3/Illinois-nuclear-reactor-loses-power-venting-steam-

Here is a screenshot of the current prevailing winds:

————————————————

Overlay the two maps above and you’ll see that ANYTHING vented from that Nuclear plant DID INDEED blow into Chicago proper.

————————————————-

More about Tritium here:

https://www.google.com/search?q=tritium&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Tritium (play/ˈtrɪtiəm/ or /ˈtrɪʃiəm/; symbol T or 3
H, also known as hydrogen-3) is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. Thenucleus of tritium (sometimes called a triton) contains one proton and twoneutrons, whereas the nucleus of protium (by far the most abundant hydrogen isotope) contains one proton and no neutrons. Naturally occurring tritium is extremely rare on Earth, where trace amounts are formed by the interaction of the atmosphere with cosmic rays. The name of this isotope is formed from the Greek word “tritos” meaning “third.”

Health risks

Tritium is an isotope of hydrogen, which allows it to readily bind tohydroxyl radicals, forming tritiated water (HTO), and to carbon atoms. Since tritium is a low energy beta emitter, it is not dangerous externally (its beta particles are unable to penetrate the skin), but it is a radiation hazard when inhaled, ingested via food or water, or absorbed through the skin.[14][15][16][17] HTO has a short biological half-life in the human body of 7 to 14 days, which both reduces the total effects of single-incident ingestion and precludes long-term bioaccumulation of HTO from the environment[16].

Tritium has leaked from 48 of 65 nuclear sites in the United States, detected in groundwater at levels exceeding the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking water standards by up to 375 times.      

 

for more, go to:    http://sincedutch.wordpress.com/

 

GM Mosquitoes, GMO Foods, Health, etc.

Posted on by

Refuse to Eat These Foods – They Could Destroy Your Reproductive Organs

Posted By Dr. Mercola | January 10 2012 | 274,282 views

Story at-a-glance

  • Avoid genetically engineered (GE) corn and soy, which have already been shown to reduce fertility in animals
  • Private firm plans release of genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes into the environment of the Florida Keys, sometime this month
  • In an effort to reduce the mosquito population, the mosquitoes are genetically modified with a gene designed to kill them unless given an antibiotic known as tetracycline. Offspring of the GM mosquitoes will thus die before reaching adulthood
  • Genetic engineering (GE) of both plants and animals is in full swing. As a result, virtually ALL processed foods and beverages contain at least one genetically engineered ingredient. Animal-based foods are also affected, such as meat and eggs, as conventionally-raised livestock are typically fed GE feed; the toxins of which tend to bioaccumulate in the animal
  • What will happen when we increasingly begin to replace natural-born life forms with genetically engineered versions? Based on the best evidence available, that the end result is bound to be less than ideal for human survival
  • Animal studies have linked GE crops to a wide variety of health problems, from abnormal immune responses and organ disruptions to reproductive problems in both males and females. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, used in large doses on GE RoundupReady crops, has also been linked to fertility problems in male and female rats, along with a 35 percent drop in testosterone levels at otherwise non-toxic glyphosate levels

 

By Dr. Mercola

Genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes could be released into the U.S. environment as early as January 2012.

A private firm is planning to initiate the release of the GM mosquitoes in the Florida Keys.

The first GM mosquito release took place in the Cayman Islands in 2009, and the second in Malaysia in 2010.

Now, residents of the Florida Keys, like those of the Cayman Islands and Malaysia, will be subjected to these genetically manipulated insects, without having any say in the matter.

Natural Society reports:

“The mosquitoes are genetically modified with a gene designed to kill them unless given an antibiotic known as tetracycline.

Offspring of the GM mosquitoes will receive this same lethal gene which will kill the offspring before it can ever reach adulthood.

As more genetically modified mosquitoes mate with wild mosquitoes, the idea is that more and more offspring will be produced with the lethal gene, thereby reducing the mosquito population.

Of course the risks these mosquitoes post … are highly unknown …

With the release of genetically modified insects could come the downfall of both local and global ecosystems …”

While the biotech industry remains steadfast in their official stance that genetically engineered foods and animals are safe and provide valuable benefits, realityis telling us otherwise…

Genetic Engineering of Plants and Animals is in Full Swing

Unfortunately, many people are still completely in the dark about the genetic engineering taking place, both in plants and animals.

I’ve written numerous articles about the health dangers of genetically engineered (GE) foods, and while I’ve not covered the issue of genetically modified animals to any great extent, this too is taking place. For example, sheep that are 15 percent human have already been developed in an effort to create spare parts for organ transplants, and goats have been engineered to deliver spider silk in their milk.

Cows have also been genetically engineered to create something more akin to human breast milk, in an effort to make cows milk more nutritious…The list goes on, but you probably get the gist.

While the rationale behind all of these experiments appears altruistic, the fact of the matter is that we’re playing with and artificially altering carefully balanced systems. And when we do so, unexpected ramifications are virtually guaranteed to occur, because we simply do not understand all there is to know as of yet…

As for the release of genetically engineered “suicide” mosquitoes, what will happen to the local ecosystem when the mosquito population decreases or is eliminated entirely? While you and I may abhor mosquitoes, and while they do carry diseases like dengue fever and malaria, they are also primarily a food source for other life forms… Taking the myopic view that we simply want to eradicate a disease-carrying insect is dangerous in the extreme once you start to contemplate the impact it may have on the entire food chain, from the bottom to the top!

What exactly will happen when we increasingly begin to replace natural-born life forms with genetically engineered versions?

The truth is, we don’t know! But we can make educated guesses, based on the best evidence available, that the end result will likely be less than ideal for human survival… It may seem obvious that no one would trade financial gains for the extermination of all life on earth, but that is in essence the path we’ve set ourselves on, with the ever-expanding array of genetically modified seeds and animals.

Genetically Modified Foods Already Linked to Reduced Fertility

Genetically engineered (GE) corn- and soy have already been shown to reduce fertility in animals, and glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s weed killer Roundup, which is heavily used on GE crops, has also been shown to alter fertility.

For example, female rats fed GE (Roundup Ready) soy for 15 months showed significant changes in their uterus and reproductive cycle, compared to rats fed organic soy or those raised without soy. According to researchers, if women experience similar changes in the uterus lining and altered hormonal levels, it might increase the risk of retrograde menstruation, in which menstrual discharge travels backwards into your body rather than through your uterus. This can cause a disease known as endometriosis, which may lead to infertility.

The disorder can also produce pelvic and leg pain, gastrointestinal problems, chronic fatigue, and a wide variety of other symptoms.Genetically modified soybeans are called Roundup Ready.

They contain a bacterial gene that allows the plants to survive a normally deadly dose of Roundup herbicide. Although the spray doesn’t kill the plant, its active ingredient, glyphosate, actually accumulates in the beans themselves, which are then consumed by livestock and humans. There is actually so much glyphosate in GE soybeans that when they were introduced, Europe had to increase their allowable residue levels 200-fold!

Glyphosate Poses Risk to Female Reproductive Health

Although there are only a handful of studies on the safety of GE soybeans, there is considerable evidence that glyphosate—especially in conjunction with the other ingredients in Roundup—wreaks havoc with the endocrine and reproductive systems.

Glyphosate throws off the delicate hormonal balance that governs the whole reproductive cycle. It interferes with aromatase, which produces estrogen, and it’s also highly toxic to the placenta in pregnant women. In a 2009 French study, scientists discovered that glyphosate can kill the cells in the outer layer of the human placenta (the trophoblast membrane), which in turn can kill the placenta. A mere 1/500th the amount needed to kill weeds was able to kill these cells! The amount is so small, according to the study’s authors, that the “residual levels to be expected, especially in food and feed derived from Roundup formulation-treated crops” could be enough to “cause cell damage and even [cell] death.”

If the endocrine function of the placenta is destroyed, then ovarian and endometrial function may also suffer, and the end result could be a miscarriage.

It’s important to remember that glyphosate can accumulate in your body, allowing its toxic effects to grow worse with repeated consumption of foods containing these Roundup Ready crops. Clearly, this may become a serious concern for the next generation, as most young children—girls and boys alike—growing up today are fed processed foods containing GE ingredients on a daily basis, year after year…

Glyphosate Affects Testosterone and Harms Male Reproductive Health Too

Last month, an animal study published in the journal Toxicology in Vitro, found that glyphosate induces necrosis and apoptosis (cell death) in rat testicular cells in vitro, and decreases testosterone production even at low exposure levels. The authors write:

“Roundup is being used increasingly in particular on genetically modified plants grown for food and feed that contain its residues. Here we tested glyphosate and its formulations on mature rat fresh testicular cells from 1 to 10,000 ppm, thus from the range in some human urine and in environment to agricultural levels.

We show that from 1 to 48 hours of Roundup exposure Leydig cells are damages. Within 24-48 hours this formulation is also toxic on the other cells, mainly by necrosis, by contrast to glyphosate alone, which is essentially toxic on Sertoli cells. Later it also induces apoptosis at higher doses in germ cells and in Sertoli/germ cells co-cultures.

At lower non toxic concentrations of Roundup and glyphosate (1ppm), the main endocrine disruption is a testosterone decrease by 35 percent. The pesticide has thus an endocrine impact at very low environmental doses, but only a high contamination appears to provoke an acute rat testicular toxicity. This does not anticipate the chronic toxicity which is insufficiently tested, and only with glyphosate in regulatory tests.”

GMOs Have Never Been Proven Safe, Nor Beneficial…

Last year, I interviewed Dr. Philip Bereano on the topic of genetic engineering. Dr. Bereano has spent the last 30 years investigating genetic engineering of crops, animals, and humans. His work led him to participate in the negotiation of two international treaties under the United Nations that dealt with issues relating to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In that interview, he shares his perspective on the complete lack of safety of GE foods, stating:

“First of all, we need to understand what we mean by the word safe. Actually, in terms of the academic literature, “safe” refers to “an acceptable level of risk.” It doesn’t refer to situations where there is no risk. Most of us drive in cars all the time and consider it to be safe even though we know that people are killed and injured in automobiles frequently. We have to understand that safe equals acceptable risk.

The problem with calling genetically engineered organisms safe is that there are no valid risk assessments being done on them. There is no research, really, being done into the health or environmental effects of a genetically engineered organism. Certainly no work that is published in the open peer-reviewed literature, or that isn’t proprietary. Corporations promoting these things claim that they have done research, but you can’t get any information on it because it’s all claimed to be proprietary.

Under what is known now as the precautionary principle—which is what your grandparents used to teach you about “looking before you leap”—the only prudent course of action is to NOT proceed with something which has potential risks and onlypotential benefits until you know a little bit more about it.”

I couldn’t agree more.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/10/genetically-modified-food-reduce-fertility.aspx?e_cid=20120115_SNL_MV_1to read more, go to: