Welcome to Sott.net
Mon, 26 Sep 2016
The World for People who Think

Health & Wellness


Life threatening downsides to chemotherapy, says study

© AP Photo/Gerry Broome
Chemotherapy is administered to a cancer patient.
A startling study by Public Health England and Cancer Research UK has found that cancer treatment itself may be killing up to 50 percent of patients.

Chemotherapy has long been controversial, as the treatment does specifically target cancerous cells, and destroys healthy cells in the process. In a first-of-its-kind study, researchers dug deeper into cancer patients who died within 30 days of beginning their treatment, indicating that the treatment caused the death, not the cancer.

Across the nation, they found that 8.4 percent of those undergoing treatment for lung cancer, and 2.4 percent of those being treated for breast cancer, died within a month of beginning treatment.

Results varied greatly based on the hospital however, as an alarming 50.9 percent of those in Milton Keynes Hospital beginning chemotherapy treatment for lung cancer died within 30 days. Researchers noted that the total number of patients treated at the hospital was much smaller than the norm, but the numbers remain eye-opening.

"The statistics don't suggest bad practice overall but there are some outliers," said Professor David Dodwell, Institute of Oncology at St. James Hospital in Leeds, one of the researchers behind the study. "It could be data problems, and figures skewed because of just a few deaths, but nevertheless it could also be down to problems with clinical practice."


Modern life is killing our children: UK child cancer diagnoses have risen 40% in 16 years

Air pollution, obesity and a rise in electrical and magnetic fields is blamed for the surge in childhood cancer
Modern life is killing children with the number of youngsters diagnosed with cancer rising 40 per cent in the past 16 years because of air pollution, pesticides, poor diets and radiation, scientists have warned.

New analysis of government statistics by researchers at the charity Children with Cancer UK found that there are now 1,300 more cancer cases a year compared with 1998, the first time all data sets were published.

The rise is most apparent in teenagers and young adults aged between 15 and 24, where the incident rate has risen from around 10 cases in 100,000 to nearly 16.

Researchers say that although some of the rise can be explained by improvements in cancer diagnoses and more screening, the majority is probably caused by environmental factors.

Comment: See also:


"Dirtier than a toilet seat": The case for taking your shoes off at the front door

It's easy to do and I'm sure we've all done it. Perhaps we forgot something inside the house, or needed a quick bathroom break before heading out — for whatever reason, we often decide to leave our shoes on indoors to avoid wasting time taking them off and then putting them on again.

But did you know that you're putting yourself and your family at risk — especially if you have small children who play on the floor and put their hands in their mouths an average of 80 times an hour — of stomach, eye, and lung infections?

Think about where you've been today: Maybe you were at the grocery store and your foot skimmed over some bad milk, or maybe you walked to work on sidewalks where dogs defecate and racoons drag trash around. Maybe you even work in a factory with toxic chemicals or used a public bathroom at the gas station.

Arrow Down

Thanks Monsanto: Highly toxic PCB's linked to autism

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) were produced from the 1930s through the 1970s. Their high burning temperature made them a sought-after chemical for use as fire retardants and insulators, primarily in electronic devices although also in plastics, flooring and other industrial products.

After an estimated 1.5 billion pounds of PCBs were manufactured in the U.S. — the majority by Monsanto — it was revealed that they're incredibly toxic and persistent in the environment.

They were finally banned in 1979 after their carcinogenic potential and ability to accumulate in the environment were revealed, however their toxicity was known to Monsanto long before that, perhaps as early as the 1950s and likely by 1970.1

PCBs have also been linked to infertility and reproductive and endocrine damage along with neurological effects, including damage to learning and memory. They're known neurodevelopmental toxins and a recent study has also found an association with autism.



Antimicrobial soaps are not just useless for handwashing, they also contaminate the environment

To kill germs effectively, you need to spend at least 20 seconds scrubbing, about the time it takes to sing "Happy Birthday" twice through, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Many people buy soaps containing antimicrobial chemicals like triclosan (TCS) and triclocarban (TCC) in the hopes of cleaning more efficiently. However, studies show that these products are no more effective than plain soap and water. And the 20-second rule still applies.

Scientists at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have admitted that anti-bacterial soaps may pose a threat to human health.

Comment: See also:

Red Flag

Millions of Americans are drinking contaminated water - Perfluorinated chemicals that harm the immune system

© motherjones.com
C8 has been found in the drinking water in 94 counties serving more than 6 million Americans
Used in hundreds of products like Teflon, PFCs can be passed on by mothers to their children.

Fluorine-based chemicals that can cause cancer, developmental toxicity and numerous other detrimental health effects have contaminated the drinking water of millions of Americans, and the blood of people and animals worldwide. But how did these chemicals get there—and what happens when they're passed on to future generations?

A series of new, peer-reviewed studies connect the dots from the pollution sources, to drinking water supplies, to women's blood, and bolster earlier findings that these chemicals can harm the immune systems of fetuses exposed in their mothers' wombs. Perfluorinated chemicals, or PFCs, are used in Teflon, Scotchgard and hundreds of other products.

A study published recently in Environmental Science & Technology Letters points to military bases, airports, industrial sites and wastewater treatment plants as the major sources of PFCs in drinking water. PFC pollution from industrial facilities has long been known, but the new study found that drinking water contamination, detected by nationwide tests mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency, correlates strongly to military and civilian airports' use of firefighting foams.

Comment: Perfluorinated chemicals have polluted the blood of virtually all Americans:

Top Secret

Things the FDA doesn't want you to know

© daisyluther.com
There was a time when "FDA Approved" was a vote of credibility. We could purchase a product and feel safe because the government watchdogs had checked it out thoroughly before allowing it to be sold.

Now, "FDA Approved" means "The company that produced this product has enough money and clout to allow it to be sold."

Many people rely on the FDA as a source of knowledge and safety. Their recommendations mean something to folks who feel as though someone is watching out for them and that in America if something was bad, the government wouldn't allow it to be sold. They believe that the drugs are tested and approved for our benefit and that the manufacturers of Big Pharma are at the mercy of the fierce protectors who are advocating for the people.

Unfortunately, it couldn't be further from the truth. This is all part of the giant marketing deception perpetrated on a trusting public.

Comment: Surprise! More systemic corruption at the FDA
When the FDA's own scientists send a letter to Congress exposing outrageous cases of retaliation against those refusing to sign off on unsafe, unproven, ineffective products, it's clear the corruption at the FDA is far-reaching and thoroughly entrenched. Pressure to approve dangerous drugs and devices is coming from top managers with ties to big business.

Can you imagine working in an atmosphere where the honest employee fears the dishonest employee, and not the other way around?

How can anyone trust the FDA's claims that a particular food or drug or medical device is safe to eat or put in or on your body, when the former director of the agency, Margaret Hamburg, has been accused of racketeering? She's charged with suppressing important information about the antibiotic Levaquin, which has caused the death of over 500 people and seriously injured 10,000 more. If guilty, why would she do this? We don't know. But according to documents filed in federal court, her husband's hedge fund held half a billion dollars worth of stock from Johnson & Johnson, the drug's manufacturer. On May 12, 2016, after it had been on shelves for years, the FDA stated that Levaquin can result in "disabling and potentially permanent serious side effects." ...

And there is more—much more. A second letter lists close to a dozen examples of wrongdoing and corruption allegedly perpetrated by the Director of the Office of Device Evaluation, including:
  • Ordering physicians and scientists to ignore FDA Guidance documents;
  • Removing black box warnings recommended by FDA experts; and
  • Allowing subordinates to issue written threats of disciplinary action if physicians and scientists failed to change their scientific opinions and recommendations to conform to those of management.
In short, to quote the letter, the "culture of wrongdoing and cover-up is nothing new but is part of a longstanding pattern of behavior."

It remains to be seen how these recent revelations will play out. What is clear is that the FDA is in dire need of top to bottom reform. Better still would be to abolish it and start all over with food and supplements in a different agency.


CDC using the Zika virus to justify forced vaccinations, quarantines and mass aerial spraying

On August 15, 2016 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) invited "public comment" on an especially disturbing edict that will allow the federal agency alongside the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to quarantine entire geographic areas of the United States, restrict the movement and behavior of inhabitants in these areas, and ultimately require they undergo vaccination - in a voluntary manner of course - or face criminal prosecution.

In fact, municipalities need only be given a vague "precommunicable" designation to undergo an overall loss of civil liberties that can include mandatory vaccination.

This action is being unilaterally undertaken by a bureaucracy that in recent months has proceeded in a thoroughly irresponsible manner to hype the alleged dangers of the Zika virus, even promoting the aerial dispersion of a toxic substance on South Florida populations to control Zika without any scientific evidence such a measure is safe or effective.

Accompanying this, in July the Obama administration sought $1.9 billion from Congress to "fight" the Zika virus. When it failed to secure such lavish funding Obama's HHS funneled $81 million for Zika "research." To be sure, Zika's vague and difficult-to-diagnose symptoms make it an especially apt vehicle for creating widespread hysteria that could without much difficulty provide the basis for at least limited implementation of the CDC's quarantine and vaccination project.

Comment: See also: Center for Disease Control gives itself unconstitutional powers to round up and detain citizens en masse


Shocking research confirms vaccines are contaminated with Monsanto's RoundUp herbicide

© everydayhealth.com
Folks, I have written about the problems with vaccines in previous blog posts.

Now, a new serious contamination problem with our vaccines has been identified.

Researcher Anthony Samsel has published five peer-reviewed articles on the herbicide Glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup). A yet-to-be published sixth paper found various commonly-used vaccines contaminated with the herbicide glyphosate.

Yes, you read that correctly: Our vaccines are contaminated with an herbicide that the World Health Organization characterized as"probably carcinogenic to humans."

How can this happen? That answer is easy.

Many vaccines contain animal byproducts such as gelatin, bovine casein, bovine serum, bovine calf serum, or chicken egg protein. The animals from which these products come from are fed grains sprayed with glyphosate. It does not take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that these animals, fed glyphosate in their diet, would contain glyphosate in their byproducts.

Samsel sent a letter to Congress that stated:
"I have run numerous groups of vaccines and identified several vectors of contamination. These include the excipient gelatins, egg protein and or similar substrates used to grow vaccines. I have found gelatins and egg proteins contaminated with Glyphosate-based herbicides from animals fed a glyphosate contaminated diet. This contamination carries into thousands of consumer products i.e. vitamins, protein powders, wine, beer and other consumables which use gelatins as part of the product or in fining and processing."


The updated Toxic Substances Control Act - what you need to know

© blog.nema.org
"This is a big deal," said President Barack Obama as he signed into law the bill that updates — for the first time in 40 years — the nation's main chemical safety legislation. Called the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act to honor the late senator for whom this was a special cause, the law revises the Toxic Substances Control Act that gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency authority to regulate chemicals used commercially in the United States.

As Obama noted at the June 22 signing ceremony, TSCA was supposed to ensure that chemicals used in the U.S. were safe for human health and the environment. But, said the president, "Even with the best of intentions, the law didn't quite work the way it should have in practice."

In fact, TSCA allowed the approximately 62,000 chemicals already on the market when it was passed in 1976 to continue being used without safety testing. It also placed enormously high hurdles for the EPA to clear before demonstrating a chemical was hazardous enough to ban. Even asbestos has failed to meet those requirements. It was widely agreed, by industry and environmental advocates alike that TSCA was badly in need of revision.

Comment: Additional information about TSCA to consider:
The US is set for the first legislation to regulate toxic industrial chemicals in 40 years.

You might think this would be cause for celebration. However, the bill updating the Toxic Substances Control Act continues to put the industry's interests above those of the public. It does make some improvements, such as requiring new chemicals to be safe before being sold and giving the Environmental Protection Agency the power to demand safety data. But on balance, it does too little to protect Americans from chemicals that cause cancer and nervous system disorders, impaired fertility, immune system dysfunction and a host of other health problems.

In the first year under the new law, the EPA will be required to review just 10 of the tens of thousands of chemicals used in commerce that have never been tested for safety. The law fails to give the agency adequate resources and clear legal authority to take timely action. Companies could further delay things by taking the EPA to court. In short, people will still be routinely exposed to hazardous chemicals!
To the applause of the chemical industry lobby, Congress is sending a new Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) bill to President Obama. Anyone familiar with this law knows that it is the weakest of all U.S. environmental statutes, leaving the majority of the 85,000 chemicals in our toys, clothes, homes, schools, and workplaces unregulated and untested for their health effects.

And if Congress and the chemical lobby have their way, none of that will change.

Because TSCA hasn't empowered the EPA to act for the last 40 years, 38 states began regulating dangerous chemicals, including BPA,f ormaldehyde, lead, mercury and toxic flame retardants. In many cases, these state rules have benefited people across the country, especially when national firms removed dangerous chemicals from their products.

But instead of nationalizing that trend, Congress is ignoring environmental, public health, worker safety, and environmental justice leaders who have championed chemical policy reform for decades. Instead, they chose to listen to the chemical lobbyists from Dow, DuPont, Exxon and their trade associations, like the American Chemistry Council (ACC).

Why? In the ACC's own words, the chemical lobby wants "predictability, consistency, and certainty." Translation: they wanted to stop states from restricting toxic chemicals.