tiistai 7. syyskuuta 2021

Weed-killer for breakfast

  • Roundup kills bumble bees.
  • There is cascading scientific evidence linking glyphosate to a constellation of other injuries that have become prevalent since its introduction, including obesity, depression, Alzheimer’s, ADHD, autism, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s, kidney and inflammatory bowel disease, brain, breast and prostate cancer, miscarriage, birth defects and declining sperm counts.
  • Bayer’s multi-million-dollar headache.


Weed-killer for breakfast

In August 2018, samples of four oat-based UK cereals were sent to the Health Research Institute Laboratories in the US following a newspaper report about US children eating weedkiller in their oat-based cereals. The following are the results of the analysis on the four oat-based cereals sent to the laboratory.

 

 

Dr John Fagan, the director of the lab, said:

“These results are consistently concerning. The levels consumed in a single daily helping of any one of these cereals, even the one with the lowest level of contamination, is sufficient to put the person’s glyphosate levels above the levels that cause fatty liver disease in rats (and likely in people).”

Washington State University (WSU) researchers have found a variety of diseases and other health problems in the second- and third-generation offspring of rats exposed to glyphosate. In the first study of its kind, the researchers saw descendants of exposed rats developing prostate, kidney and ovarian diseases, obesity and birth abnormalities.

Michael Skinner, a WSU professor of biological sciences, and his colleagues exposed pregnant rats to the herbicide between their eighth and 14th days of gestation. The dose – half the amount expected to show no adverse effect – produced no apparent ill effects on either the parents or the first generation of offspring.

But, writing in the journal Scientific Reports, the researchers say they saw “dramatic increases” in several pathologies affecting the second and third generations. The second generation had ‘significant increases’ in testis, ovary and mammary gland diseases as well as obesity. In third-generation males, the researchers saw a 30% increase in prostate disease – three times that of a control population. The third generation of females had a 40% increase in kidney disease or four times that of the controls.

More than one-third of the second-generation mothers had unsuccessful pregnancies, with most of those affected dying. Two out of five males and females in the third generation were obese.

Skinner and his colleagues call this phenomenon generational toxicology and they have seen it over the years in fungicides, pesticides, jet fuel, the plastics compound bisphenol A, the insect repellent DEET and the herbicide atrazine. At work are epigenetic changes that turn genes on and off, often because of environmental influences.


Roundup kills bumble bees

Although Mason mainly discusses the health impacts of glyphosate in her report to Tarazona, she did mention at least one disturbing environmental impact. In April 2021, the Journal of Applied Ecology published an article ‘Roundup causes high levels of mortality following contact exposure in bumble bees.’

The article’s abstract stated that pollinators underpin global food production but are suffering significant declines across the world.


It went on to say:

“Pesticides are thought to be important drivers of these declines. Herbicides are the most widely applied type of pesticides and are broadly considered ‘bee safe’ by regulatory bodies who explicitly allow their application directly onto foraging bees. We aimed to test the mortality effects of spraying the world’s most popular herbicide brand (Roundup) directly onto bumble bees (Bombus terrestris audax).”

The authors argue that Roundup products pose a significant hazard to bees, in both agricultural and urban systems and exposure of bees to them should be limited. They added that surfactants, or other co‐formulants, in herbicides and other pesticides may contribute to global bee declines.

They called for pesticide companies to release the full list of ingredients for each pesticide formulation, as lack of access to this information hampers research to determine safe exposure levels for beneficial insects in agro‐ecosystems.

Bayer’s multi-million-dollar headache

Mason asks Tarazona whether he has been following the trials against Monsanto in the US for concealing that its herbicide Roundup caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

She explains to him that three cases have been won against Monsanto/Bayer (Bayer bought Monsanto in 2018) and in 2021 there are thousands more awaiting to have their cases heard in court.

Attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr said in 2018 that Bayer needs more than an aspirin to cure its Monsanto-sized headache.

Kennedy has been involved with some of these cases and has read enough of the scientific literature on glyphosate to conclude that there is cascading scientific evidence linking glyphosate to a constellation of other injuries that have become prevalent since its introduction, including obesity, depression, Alzheimer’s, ADHD, autism, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s, kidney and inflammatory bowel disease, brain, breast and prostate cancer, miscarriage, birth defects and declining sperm counts.

He added that strong science suggests glyphosate is the culprit in the exploding epidemics of celiac disease, colitis, gluten sensitivities, diabetes and non-alcoholic liver cancer which, for the first time, is attacking children as young as 10.

As if that is not worrying enough, Kennedy noted that researchers peg glyphosate as a potent endocrine disruptor, which interferes with sexual development in children. It is also a chelator that removes important minerals from the body and disrupts the microbiome, destroying beneficial bacteria in the human gut and triggering brain inflammation and other ill effects.

Although a Monsanto scientist claimed that glyphosate is excreted unchanged from the body, Mason cites a study by Ridley & Mirly (1988) which found bioaccumulation of glyphosate in bone, marrow, blood and glands (including thyroid, testes and ovaries) and major organs (heart, liver, lungs, kidneys, spleen and stomach). The paper was commissioned by Monsanto but was not published.

In a 1990 study conducted by Monsanto between 1987 and 1989 (again unpublished), glyphosate was found to induce a statistically-significant cataractous formation in the eyes of rats. Over the course of the study, cataract lens changes were seen in the low-, mid- and high dose groups in both male and female rats. The pathologist concluded that there was a glyphosate-treated related response for lens changes to the eyes.

Mason notes that the Assessment by the Rapporteur Member States tasked with risk assessing glyphosate have concluded that, based on the available ecotoxicological information glyphosate the current classification “Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects” should be retained and the current classification as “causes serious eye damage” (H318) should be retained.”

She therefore asks: how can a chemical like glyphosate still be on the market?

Mason notes that, according to the UN’s Global Chemicals Outlook II, glyphosate was at the top of the top ten products used on major crops in the United States, by volume, in 2016. Clothianidin (also manufactured by Bayer) is number ten.

https://tapnewswire.com/2021/09/weed-killer-for-breakfast/

She notes:

“No wonder Bayer doesn’t want to lose its licence for glyphosate or for clothianidin, a long-acting neonicotinoid insecticide that is very persistent in the soil. Both chemicals are on the market illegally thanks to the corrupt EU and US regulatory authorities.

And that is an issue which Mason draws Tarazona’s attention to and will be touched on in the second part of this article.

Readers can access Rosemary Mason’s new report, with all relevant references, here.

Recommended reading for Jose Tarazona and readers who want to dig deeper into the issues: all of Rosemary Mason’s previous reports can be accessed here.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Colin Todhunter is an independent writer and analyst specialising in development, food and agriculture based in Europe/India. 

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

 

___

 

__

FOIA Release: Fauci Funded Construction Of 'Chimeric Coronaviruses' In Wuhan

 

FOIA Release: Fauci Funded Construction Of 'Chimeric Coronaviruses' In Wuhan

When Dr. Anthony Fauci confidently screamed at Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) in July - calling him a liar for accusing him of funding so-called "Gain-of-Function" (GoF) research in Wuhan, China to make coronaviruses more transmissible to humans, the argument ultimately faded due to Fauci's unsupported claim that the research didn't technically fit the definition of GoF.




Tyler Durden's Photo
BY TYLER DURDEN
TUESDAY, SEP 07, 2021 - 06:54 AM


Now, thanks to materials (here and here) released through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by The Intercept against the National Institutes of Health (which were unredacted enough to toss Fauci under the bus), we now know that Fauci-funded EcoHealth Alliance, a New York-based nonprofit headed by Peter Daszak, was absolutely engaged in gain-of-function research to make chimeric SARS-based coronaviruses, which they confirmed could infect human cells.

Peter Daszak (left), Anthony Fauci

While evidence of this research has been pointed to in published studies, the FOIA release provides a key piece to the puzzle which sheds new light on what was going on.

"This is a roadmap to the high-risk research that could have led to the current pandemic," said Gary Ruskin, executive director of U.S. Right To Know, a group that has been investigating the origins of Covid-19 (via The Intercept).

Wuhan Institute of Virology Shi 'Bat Lady' Zhengli toasts with Fauci-funded EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak (emerging viruses group photo)

And as Rutgers University Board of Governors Chemistry Professor Richard H. Ebright notes, "The documents make it clear that assertions by the NIH Director, Francis Collins, and the NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci, that the NIH did not support gain-of-function research or potential pandemic pathogen enhancement at WIV are untruthful."

In short, Fauci lied to Congress when he denied funding Gain-of-Function (GoF) research.

https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1417513366646628355?s=20


Ebright summarized The Intercept's reporting in a Monday night Twitter thread:


https://twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/1435053506474377218?s=20

Continued (emphasis ours):

"The trove of documents includes two previously unpublished grant proposals that were funded by the NIAID, as well as project updates relating to the EcoHealth Alliance’s research, which has been scrutinized amid increased interest in the origins of the pandemic."

The materials show that the 2014 and 2019 NIH grants to EcoHealth with subcontracts to WIV funded gain-of-function research as defined in federal policies in effect in 2014-2017 and potential pandemic pathogen enhancement as defined in federal policies in effect in 2017-present.

(This had been evident previously from published research papers that credited the 2014 grant and from the publicly available summary of the 2019 grant. But this now can be stated definitively from progress reports of the 2014 grant and the full proposal of the 2017 grant.)

The materials confirm the grants supported the construction--in Wuhan--of novel chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses that combined a spike gene from one coronavirus with genetic information from another coronavirus, and confirmed the resulting viruses could infect human cells.

(Recombinant DNA includes molecules constructed outside of living cells by joining natural or synthetic DNA segments to DNA molecules that can replicate in a living cell, or molecules that result from their replication. -Science Direct)

The materials reveal that the resulting novel, laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses also could infect mice engineered to display human receptors on cells ("humanized mice").

The materials further reveal for the first time that one of the resulting novel, laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses--one not been previously disclosed publicly--was more pathogenic to humanized mice than the starting virus from which it was constructed...

...and thus not only was reasonably anticipated to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity, but, indeed, was *demonstrated* to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity.

The materials further reveal that the the grants also supported the construction--in Wuhan--of novel chimeric MERS-related coronaviruses that combined spike genes from one MERS-related coronavirus with genetic information from another MERS-related coronavirus.

The documents make it clear that assertions by the NIH Director, Francis Collins, and the NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci, that the NIH did not support gain-of-function research or potential pandemic pathogen enhancement at WIV are untruthful.

*  *  *

When asked in the replies where to find specific evidence on GoF research, user @SnupSnus replied:

https://twitter.com/SnupSnus/status/1435061681034612738 

https://twitter.com/counterpopp/status/1435078479222018048?s=20

Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute, said the documents show that the EcoHealth Alliance has reason to take the lab leak theory seriously. “In this proposal, they actually point out that they know how risky this work is. They keep talking about people potentially getting bitten — and they kept records of everyone who got bitten,” Chan said. “Does EcoHealth have those records? And if not, how can they possibly rule out a research-related accident?” -The Intercept

In response to inquiries from The Intercept, EcoHealth communications manager Robert Kessler replied: "We applied for grants to conduct research. The relevant agencies deemed that to be important research, and thus funded it. So I don’t know that there’s a whole lot to say."

Stay tuned, things should get really interesting for Fauci and Daszak in the near future.

To review the history of EcoHealth, Fauci and Gain-of-Function research which we noted in March

In 2014, Peter Daszak, president of New York-based nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, received a grant from Dr. Anthony Fauci's National Institutes of Health (NIH) to work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and others to research how bat coronaviruses can 'evolve and jump into the human population.'

Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance

The grant's initial funding of $666,442 began in June 2014 with an end date of May 2019, and had paid annually to the tune of $3.7 million under the "Understanding The Risk Of Bat Coronavirus Emergence" project. Notably, the Obama administration cut funding for "gain-of-function" research in October, 2014, four months after Daszak's contract began, while the Wuhan Institute of Virology "had openly participated in gain-of-function research in partnership with U.S. universities and institutions" for years under the leadership of Dr. Shi 'Batwoman' Zhengli, according to the Washington Post's Josh Rogin.

One of the grants, titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence,” outlines an ambitious effort led by EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak to screen thousands of bat samples for novel coronaviruses. The research also involved screening people who work with live animals. The documents contain several critical details about the research in Wuhan, including the fact that key experimental work with humanized mice was conducted at a biosafety level 3 lab at Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment — and not at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as was previously assumed. The documents raise additional questions about the theory that the pandemic may have begun in a lab accident, an idea that Daszak has called “heinous.”

...

The grant was initially awarded for a five-year period — from 2014 to 2019. Funding was renewed in 2019 but suspended by the Trump administration in April 2020. -The Intercept

After Rogin exposed diplomatic cables last April expressing grave concerns over safety at WIV, he says: "many of the scientists who spoke out to defend the lab were Shi’s research partners and funders, like the head of the global public health nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak; their research was tied to hers, and if the Wuhan lab were implicated in the pandemic, they would have to answer a lot of tough questions."

In short, Daszak - who has insisted the 'lab escape' theory is impossible, and that random natural origin via intermediary animal species is the only answer - has a massive conflict of interest.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/massive-foia-release-proves-fauci-funded-wuhan-research-construct-sars-related

Further reading:

___

 

tiistai 24. elokuuta 2021

Australia’s police are running over people in their dystopian hellscape


Australia’s police are running over people in their dystopian hellscape










In Australia, an ‘illegal’ church was shut down by the police, $35 000 in fines were handed out, there is a 
9 pm curfew in greater Sydney, and the police can lockdown entire apartment buildings. The government deployed the Army to patrol the streets. Children have been tear-gassed by police.  The government is also building quarantine camps.

We have a series of examples.

It’s for your health:

https://twitter.com/mab985/status/1429370113581535232

The Man in the Elevator

In the video below, a man in an elevator, who is under arrest, is seen coughing without covering his mouth. The police chief who is narrating says he’s the ‘worst of the worst.’

Also in the video, teenagers are seen getting fined $1,000 each for going outside of their homes. They don’t appear to be sick.

The police chief comes back on to say that there are 681 penalty infringement notices issued in the last 24 hours. More than 400 of those notices were again for people being outside of their homes without a reasonable excuse.”

They were outside and that warrants a notice?

https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1429837505168388101

Australia has gone mad. They are making felons out of the ordinary working man and woman.

https://twitter.com/MermanKris/status/1429586194019540999

Truckers plan to go on strike and shut down the country until the dictators in power relent. They want to “shut down this sh-t government.”

https://twitter.com/GillianMcKeith/status/1429456942569857026

Children are being pepper-sprayed for holding a sign?

https://twitter.com/TheRightMelissa/status/1429835633602801668

A sign has to be put outside any home with a COV-afflicted person.

Australia looks like China:

https://twitter.com/OzraeliAvi/status/1429299366225846277


If this is true, this is crazy.

https://twitter.com/Thorsome4/status/1425771505992953860

Then there’s this:
https://twitter.com/Lukewearechange/status/1429087695222022147


https://www.independentsentinel.com/australias-police-are-running-over-people-in-their-dystopian-hellscape/

__


torstai 12. elokuuta 2021

Nearly half of Americans don't trust CDC and FDA — that's a problem

Nearly half of Americans don't trust CDC and FDA - that's a problem


BY ROBERT BLENDON AND MARY FINDLING, OPINION CONTRIBUTORS — 05/15/21 08:30 AM EDT
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL
© Getty Images 

As we (hopefully) see the light at the end of the COVID-19 pandemic tunnel, America appears to have a major problem. In a new survey released this week by the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, we found that America has a trust gap when it comes to public health.

We found that most Americans want to spend substantially more money on public health at the federal level and have a very high level of appreciation for the field. But at the same time, the public has extraordinarily low levels of trust in the institutions that lead this field and in the current performance of the public health system.

In the middle of this public health crisis, we found that nearly half of Americans do not have high trust in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or other major public health organizations when it comes to recommendations they make to improve health. And among Republicans, trust is even lower — only about a quarter say they have high trust in the CDC (27 percent), FDA (26 percent), or their state health departments (22 percent).

Beyond trust, only about one-third of Americans (34 percent) give positive ratings to the nation’s current system for protecting the public from health threats and preventing illness, down from 43 percent in 2009. We found 65 percent of Americans rate the nation’s public health system as fair or poor, which is concerning in the middle of a pandemic. At the same time, Americans have increased their approval rating of the U.S. medical care system during the COVID-19 pandemic, and physicians and nurses remain as the highest sources of trust for information to improve health.

We documented these low levels of trust a year into the COVID-19 pandemic, a time period when Americans collectively discovered it is significantly better to stay out of the ICU and take measures to prevent getting COVID-19 rather than be treated for it. Expanded interest in preventing illnesses has benefits for the field of public health, as a large majority of Americans believe the activities of public health agencies are very important to the nation’s health, and there is broad support for substantially increased federal funding in public health.

However, low levels of trust are related to how Americans are interpreting what is going on with the COVID-19 pandemic, how it affects their everyday lives and what the science is actually saying about the state of the outbreak.

Low levels of trust and political polarization have made moving ahead on these critical issues extremely difficult. When looking at these polarized views around public health, it is important to recognize that part of this situation reflects the overall trends in American life, where political parties are divided on many issues, and a large share of the public doesn’t trust the media as a reliable source of information, irrespective of what the facts may be.

In our poll, about one-third of Americans (32 percent) said they think the information provided by their state health departments about the health of people in their state is unreliable, which is a problem if agencies expect a large share of people to change their health behaviors based on information provided by state health departments.

And the implications for the future are clear — you cannot improve the public health system, even with more funding, until you find a way for the public to trust these institutions and the people who lead them.

Restoring public trust will be very difficult. But as we see the light at the end of the COVID-19 pandemic tunnel, we need a way to make sure that in the future, these issues are not polarized by partisan politics.

To do this, we believe that it’s going to require a series of bipartisan committees and commissions at the federal, state and local levels to examine the performance of their public health agencies, and how they interacted with the public during this pandemic. Specifically, these activities have to reach out to the broader public to understand their views on why they have become so distrustful.

Again, we recognize that this will be very difficult to accomplish, but there is a need for public agencies and media organizations to more carefully examine how they interpret the science, particularly when it is changing over time, and how to present it to their audiences so it is seen as credible.

Robert Blendon, ScD, is a professor of Health Policy and Political Analysis, emeritus, at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health and is the Executive director of the Harvard Opinion Research Program.

Mary Findling, Ph.D., is the assistant director of the Harvard Opinion Research Program at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health.



TAGS CDC FDA PUBLIC HEALTH PANDEMIC HEALTH CARE COVID-19 MASK MANDATE VACCINE VACCINATION SARS COV2



__

THE PUBLIC’S PERSPECTIVE ON THE UNITED STATES PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEM 



 

https://cdn1.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/94/2021/05/RWJF-Harvard-Report_FINAL-051321.pdf

__
eof