Study: EPA-approved GMO insecticide responsible for killing off bees, contaminating entire food chain

Early last year, leaked documents obtained by a Colorado beekeeper exposed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) illegitimate approval of clothianidin, a highly-toxic pesticide manufactured by Bayer CropScience that the regulatory agency knew was capable of killing off bees (http://www.naturalnews.com/030921_EPA_pesticides.html). Now, a new study out of Purdue University in Indiana has not only confirmed, once again, that clothianidin is killing off bees, but also that clothianidin's toxicity is systemic throughout the entire food chain, which could one day lead to the catastrophic destruction of the food supply.

The study, which was published in the online journal PLoS ONE, investigated the various methods and routes by which a class of insecticides known as neonicotinoids, which includes clothianidin, are harming honey bees. They discovered that both clothianidin and thiamethoxam, another component of neonicotinoid insecticides, persist in "extremely high levels" in planter exhaust material produced during the planting of crops treated with these insecticides, which runs contrary to industry claims that the chemicals biodegrade and are not a threat.

The research team also found neonicotinoid compounds in soil, including in fields where the chemicals were not even sprayed, as well as on various plants and flowers visited by bees. Based on their analysis, the researchers involved with the study determined that bees actively transfer contaminated pollen from primarily neonicotinoid-treated corn crops, and bring it back to their hives. The bees also transfer neonicotinoid compounds to other plants and crops not treated with the chemicals, which shows just how persistent these chemicals truly are in the environment.

You can read the entire report for yourself at the following link:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3250423/?tool=pubmed

"This research should nail the coffin lid shut on clothianidin," said Laurel Hopwood, chairwoman of the Sierra Club's Genetic Engineering Action Team, who is petitioning the EPA to finally ban these chemicals after years of needless delay. "Despite numerous attempts by the beekeeping industry and conservation organizations to persuade the EPA to ban clothianidin, the EPA has failed to protect the food supply for the American people."

Without bees, which are now dying off at an alarming rate due to exposure to clothianidin and various other insecticides and fungicides, one third or more of the food supply will be destroyed, including at least 100 varieties of fruits and vegetables that rely on bees for pollination. This is why Dr. Neil Carman, Ph.D., scientific advisor to Sierra Club, has put out a call for the EPA to immediately ban the use of clothianidin and the other neonicotinoid insecticides for the sake of protecting the food supply from irreversible destruction.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3250423/?tool=pubmed

http://iowa.sierraclub.org/Agriculture/agriculture.htm

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=6919

http://www.naturalnews.com/030921_EPA_pesticides.html

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035511_insecticide_bees_collapse.html#ixzz1rhKjmkOE

America's Toxic Flu shots: 250 times EPA mercury limit

Thimerosal is a widely used vaccine preservative that is present in the majority of flu shots and other vaccines. Thimerosal is 49% mercury by volume, an extremely toxic chemical element that wreaks havoc on the nervous system, neurological function, and overall biological function [1]. Each dose of flu vaccine contains around 25 micrograms of thimerosal, over 250 times the Environmental Protection Agency's safety limit of exposure.

Mercury, a neurotoxin, is especially damaging to undeveloped brains. Considering that 25 micrograms of mercury is considered unsafe by the EPA for any human under 550 pounds, the devastating health effects of mercury on a developing fetus are truly concerning.

Though thimerasol is not entirely mercury, the mercury content is still extremely high, making it very toxic to the human body. Despite highly exceeding the EPA safety standards for mercury content by over 250 times, flu shots are still recommended for children over 6 months and pregnant women.

It seems that the age groups that are urged to receive the flu shot are actually most affected by mercury exposure. Young children, pregnant women, and elderly are the 'targeted' demographic of flu shot manufacturers, and these individuals also happen to have the least defense against the elemental neurotoxin mercury.

Dr. Russel Blaylock, a leading neurologist, explains:

A recent study looked at the immune reaction in newborn infants up to the age of one year who had received the HepB vaccine to see if their immune reaction differed from adults getting the same vaccine. What they found was that the infant, even after age one year, did react differently. Their antibody levels were substantially higher than adults (3-fold higher) and it remained higher throughout the study.

In essence, they found that the babies responded to the vaccine by having an intense Th2 response that persisted long after it should have disappeared, a completely abnormal response.

In 2004, the The Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs petitioned the FDA to limit the use of thimerosal in vaccine citing safety concerns. In a reply made public years later, the FDA denied the request despite overwhelming evidence that mercury is harmful to the human body [2] [3] [4].

In addition to mercury, vaccines also contain other toxic fillers and preservatives that have been linked to health conditions such as cancer:

-- Aluminium: Also a neurotoxin, aluminum has been linked to Alzheimer's disease [5] and other cognitive diseases [6].

-- Formaldehyde: Among the 8 new substances to be added to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services list of carcinogens.

-- Antibiotics: Various forms include neomycin, streptomycin, and gentamicin.

-- Triton X-100: A detergent that should not be injected into the human bloodstream.

By recommending flu shots to the public, the CDC and vaccine manufacturers are ignoring the warnings of not only major studies conducted by prominent universities, but also the EPA. The EPA's safety limit of mercury exposure is being exceeded by over 250 times each shot. In addition to a number of other 'recommended' vaccines, flu shots are dished out each year to the public, meaning that this exposure increases to 250 times the limit each year. Over a 10 year period, it is possible to exceed the limit by 2500 times simply by receiving a yearly flu shot.

Sources:
1. Frustaci A, Magnavita N, Chimenti C, et. al; Marked elevation of myocardial trace elements in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiology 1999;33:1578-83
2. Chang YC, Yeh C, Wang JD. Subclinical neurotoxicity of merucyr vapor revcelaed by a multimodality evoked potential study of chloralkali workers. Amer J Ind Med 1995;27(2):271-279.
3. Yang Y-J, Huang C-C, Shih T-S, et al . Chronic elemental mercury intoxication:clinical and field studies in lampsocked manufacturers. 1994;Occup Environ Med 57(1):245-247.
4. Bluhm RE, Bobbitt RG, Wlech LW, et al. Elemental mercury vapour toxicity, treatment and prognosis after acute intensive exposure in chloraklali plant workers. Part 1I. History, neuropsychological findings and chelator effects. Hum Exp Toxicol 1992 11(3):201-210.
5. Bertholf, R. Aluminum and Alzheimer's disease: prospectives for a cytoskeletal mechanism. CRC-Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 25:195, 1987
6. Krishnan, S. Aluminum toxicity to the brain. Sci Total Environ 71:59, 198

Internet site reference: http://www.sott.net/articles/show/235750-Flu-Shots-Contain-More-than-250-Times-the-EPA-s-Safety-Limit-for-Mercury

Use of potentially harmful chemicals kept secret under law...

By Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 4, 2010; A01

Of the 84,000 chemicals in commercial use in the United States -- from flame retardants in furniture to household cleaners -- nearly 20 percent are secret, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, their names and physical properties guarded from consumers and virtually all public officials under a little-known federal provision.

The policy was designed 33 years ago to protect trade secrets in a highly competitive industry. But critics -- including the Obama administration -- say the secrecy has grown out of control, making it impossible for regulators to control potential dangers or for consumers to know which toxic substances they might be exposed to.

At a time of increasing public demand for more information about chemical exposure, pressure is building on lawmakers to make it more difficult for manufacturers to cloak their products in secrecy. Congress is set to rewrite chemical regulations this year for the first time in a generation.

Under the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, manufacturers must report to the federal government new chemicals they intend to market. But the law exempts from public disclosure any information that could harm their bottom line.

Government officials, scientists and environmental groups say that manufacturers have exploited weaknesses in the law to claim secrecy for an ever-increasing number of chemicals. In the past several years, 95 percent of the notices for new chemicals sent to the government requested some secrecy, according to the Government Accountability Office. About 700 chemicals are introduced annually.

Some companies have successfully argued that the federal government should not only keep the names of their chemicals secret but also hide from public view the identities and addresses of the manufacturers.

"Even acknowledging what chemical is used or what is made at what facility could convey important information to competitors, and they can start to put the pieces together," said Mike Walls, vice president of the American Chemistry Council.

Although a number of the roughly 17,000 secret chemicals may be harmless, manufacturers have reported in mandatory notices to the government that many pose a "substantial risk" to public health or the environment. In March, for example, more than half of the 65 "substantial risk" reports filed with the Environmental Protection Agency involved secret chemicals.

"You have thousands of chemicals that potentially present risks to health and the environment," said Richard Wiles, senior vice president of the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization that documented the extent of the secret chemicals through public-records requests from the EPA. "It's impossible to run an effective regulatory program when so many of these chemicals are secret."

Of the secret chemicals, 151 are made in quantities of more than 1 million tons a year and 10 are used specifically in children's products, according to the EPA.

The identities of the chemicals are known to a handful of EPA employees who are legally barred from sharing that information with other federal officials, state health and environmental regulators, foreign governments, emergency responders and the public.

Last year, a Colorado nurse fell seriously ill after treating a worker involved at a chemical spill at a gas-drilling site. The man, who later recovered, appeared at a Durango hospital complaining of dizziness and nausea. His work boots were damp; he reeked of chemicals, the nurse said.

Two days later, the nurse, Cathy Behr, was fighting for her life. Her liver was failing and her lungs were filling with fluid. Behr said her doctors diagnosed chemical poisoning and called the manufacturer, Weatherford International, to find out what she might have been exposed to.

Weatherford provided safety information, including hazards, for the chemical, known as ZetaFlow. But because ZetaFlow has confidential status, the information did not include all of its ingredients.

Mark Stanley, group vice president for Weatherford's pumping and chemical services, said in a statement that the company made public all the information legally required.

"It is always in our company's best interest to provide information to the best of our ability," he said.

Behr said the full ingredient list should be released. "I'd really like to know what went wrong," said Behr, 57, who recovered but said she still has respiratory problems. "As citizens in a democracy, we ought to know what's happening around us."

The White House and environmental groups want Congress to force manufacturers to prove that a substance should be kept confidential. They also want federal officials to be able to share confidential information with state regulators and health officials, who carry out much of the EPA's work across the country.

Walls, of the American Chemistry Council, says manufacturers agree that federal officials should be able to share information with state regulators. Industry is also willing to discuss shifting the burden of proof for secrecy claims to the chemical makers, he said. The EPA must allow a claim unless it can prove within 90 days that disclosure would not harm business.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is trying to reduce secrecy.

A week after he arrived at the agency in July, Steve Owens, assistant administrator for the EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, ended confidentiality protection for 530 chemicals. In those cases, manufacturers had claimed secrecy for chemicals they had promoted by name on their Web sites or detailed in trade journals.

"People who were submitting information to the EPA saw that you can claim that virtually anything is confidential and get away with it," Owens said.

The handful of EPA officials privy to the identity of the chemicals do not have other information that could help them assess the risk, said Lynn Goldman, a former EPA official and a pediatrician and epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

"Maybe they don't know there's been a water quality problem in New Jersey where the plant is located, or that the workers in the plant have had health problems," she said. "It just makes sense that the more people who are looking at it, they're better able to put one and one together and recognize problems."

Independent researchers, who often provide data to policymakers and regulators, also have been unable to study the secret chemicals.

Duke University chemist Heather Stapleton, who researches flame retardants, tried for months to identify a substance she had found in dust samples taken from homes in Boston.

Then, while attending a scientific conference, she happened to see the structure of a chemical she recognized as her mystery compound.

The substance is a chemical in "Firemaster 550," a product made by Chemtura Corp. for use in furniture and other products as a substitute for a flame retardant the company had quit making in 2004 because of health concerns.

Stapleton found that Firemaster 550 contains an ingredient similar in structure to a chemical -- Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, or DEHP -- that Congress banned last year from children's products because it has been linked to reproductive problems and other health effects.

Chemtura, which claimed confidentiality for Firemaster 550, supplied the EPA with standard toxicity studies. The EPA has asked for additional data, which it is studying.

"My concern is we're using chemicals and we have no idea what the long-term effects might be or whether or not they're harmful," said Susan Klosterhaus, an environmental scientist at the San Francisco Estuary Institute who has published a journal article on the substance with Stapleton.

Chemtura officials said in a written statement that even though Firemaster 550 contains an ingredient structurally similar to DEHP does not mean it poses similar health risks.

They said the company strongly supports keeping sensitive business information out of public view. "This is essential for ensuring the long-term competitiveness of U.S. industry," the officials said in the statement.

Staff researcher Madonna Lebling contributed to this report.
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/03/AR2010010302110_pf.html