Tag: cancer-causing

  • Save Your Health – Skip the Bamboo Coffee Cup

    German consumer organization finds high levels of melamine and formaldehyde migration from re-useable bamboo-based cups, condemns misleading labeling advertising them as recyclable and eco-friendly.

    Looking for environmental friendly options as an alternative to paper coffee cups? Buyers are generally given the impression that they are buying natural product when purchasing and reusing a bamboo mug. With this description found easily on Amazon Prime ” BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT: Made from Biodegradable and Naturally Organic Bamboo fiber.”, producers gloss over the fact that the cups are made from a powder of finely-ground bamboo fibers that are then glued together. 
    The glue is toxic!

    All of the cups tested by a German consumer watch group contained melamine resin, a kind of plasticky glue made from formaldehyde and melamine. Melamine is suspected of causing damage to the bladder and kidneys, while formaldehyde is a known irritant and can even cause cancer if inhaled.

    The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has recently classified melamine as being “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (FPF reported).

    Even more shocking is that the cups, sold for ‘hot drinks’ actually deteriorate over time and release the toxins in higher quantities. With each cup of Joe you pour your risk of ingesting toxic chemicals increases. Until they make an environmentally friendly AND safe coffee mug, we recommend you save your health – skip the bamboo mug.

    RESOURCES:

    https://www.test.de/Bambusbecher-im-Test-Die-meisten-setzen-hohe-Mengen-an-Schadstoffen-frei-5496265-0/

    https://www.foodpackagingforum.org/news/re-useable-bamboo-cups-tested-and-criticized

    https://labdoor.com/article/melamine-an-in-depth-look-at-the-toxic-chemical-in-our-kitchen

  • Pesticides: the Big Picture

    Pesticides are used all around us, in homes and gardens, schools, parks and agricultural fields. All too often, these chemicals are allowed onto the market before their impacts are fully understood — and harms to our health and the environment are discovered years later. The science is increasingly clear that even low levels of exposure can harm human health, and children are particularly vulnerable.

    Our national rules governing pesticide use are surprisingly weak. Yet as public concern continues to grow, alternative approaches to managing pests are increasingly available and gaining ground in homes, schools and agricultural fields across the country.

    Below is a brief overview of the problem; explore our campaigns and key issue pages to find out more about how PAN and our partners are building a healthy, thriving system of food and farming — and how you can help.

    What are pesticides?

    Insecticides (bug killers), herbicides (weed killers), and fungicides (fungus killers) are all pesticides; so are rodenticides and antimicrobials. Pesticides come in spray cans and crop dusters, in household cleaners, hand soaps and swimming pools.

    Insecticides are generally the most acutely (immediately) toxic. Many are designed to attack an insect’s brain and nervous system, which can mean they have neurotoxic effects in humans as well. Herbicides are more widely used (RoundUp and atrazine are the two most used pesticides in the world) and present chronic risks. This means ongoing, low-level exposures can increase the risk of diseases or disorders such as cancer, Parkinson’s disease or infertility and other reproductive harms. Fungicides are also used in large amounts; some are more benign, some are not.

    Pesticides are also sometimes broken down into chemical classes and modes of action. For example, fumigants are pesticides applied as gases to “sterilize” soil, and systemics work their way through a plant’s tissue after being taken up at the root. Major chemical classes include: carbamates, organochlorines, organophosphates (mostly developed 70 or more years ago for chemical warfare) and triazines. Newer classes include pyrethroids and neonicotinoids, synthesized to mimic nature’s pest protection. For more details on specific pesticides, visit our online database at www.pesticideinfo.org.

    What is the “pesticide treadmill?”

    Farmers get caught on the treadmill as they are forced to use more and more — and increasingly toxic — chemicals to control insects and weeds that develop resistance to pesticides.

    As “superbugs” and “superweeds” develop in response to widespread and continous use of chemicals, a farmer will spend more on pesticides each year just to keep crop losses at a standard rate.

    The recent introduction of crops genetically engineered for use with the herbicide 2,4-D provides a clear example of the pesticide treadmill. Widespread planting of RoundUp Ready crops and the associated application of RoundUp prompted weeds to develop resistance to the product. Resistant strains of “Pigweed” for instance, reportedly now grow with such vigor in southern cotton fields that the weeds can “stop a combine in its tracks.” Farmers are forced to return to use of 2,4-D — an antiquated, drift-prone chemical clearly linked to cancer and reproductive harms.

    Overall, pesticide resistance is increasing. In the 1940s, U.S. farmers lost seven percent of their crops to pests. Since the 1980s, loss has increased to 13 percent, even though more pesticides are being used. Between 500 and 1,000 insect and weed species have developed pesticide resistance since 1945.

    Rachel Carson clearly predicted the treadmill phenomenon in her 1962 book Silent Spring.

    There is another way. Agroecology is the science behind sustainable farming. This powerful approach combines scientific inquiry with place-based knowledge and experimentation, emphasizing approaches that are knowledge-intensive, low cost, ecologically sound and practical. Home use of pesticides — which on a per acre basis outpaces use on farms by a ratio of 10 to 1 — puts families across the North America at unnecessary risk. Alternatives are available to manage home, lawn and garden pests without toxic pesticides.

    Which rules govern pesticides?

    In the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has primary authority to register and regulate pesticides. The agency’s oversight of pesticides is authorized by the following federal laws:

    The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act allows EPA to register pesticides using risk/benefit standards (how much risk is balanced by how much benefit);

    The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act aims to increase protection for children and infants, including setting tolerances (maximum residues on food);

    The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) amends previous laws by establishing a single safety standard for tolerances to increase protection of children from aggregate exposures (dietary, water and residential); and

    The Endangered Species Act of 1973 which requires that pesticides that will harm these species will not be registered.

    Some states have additional, stricter rules restricting pesticide use, and in a handful of states, local cities and counties can put even stricter rules in place.

    Internationally, pesticides are regulated through two treaties that PAN played a formative role in creating:

    • Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs treaty) addresses toxins that persist, move around the world on wind and water, and bioaccumulate (DDT, for example)and
    • Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent (PIC treaty) gives countries the right to refuse the import of highly hazardous toxins.

    The PIC treaty attempts to redress the dumping of obsolete or banned pesticides on the developing world. While only 25 percent of global pesticide use takes place in developing countries, 99 percent of acute pesticide-related fatalities occur there.

    Exposure & impacts

    Pesticide exposure depends on where you live and what you do.

    Each year, an estimated one billion pounds of pesticides are applied to U.S. farms, forests, lawns and golf courses. More than 17,000 pesticide products are currently on the market — with many of them approved through “conditional registration,” a regulatory loophole that allows products on the market quickly without thorough review.

    GLYPHOSATE MAKER to pay BILLIONS IN DAMAGES TO INDIVIDUALS WITH CANCER

    Pesticide applicators, farmers and farmworkers, and communities near farms are often most at risk, but studies by the Centers for Disease Control show that all of us carry pesticides in our bodies. Golf courses use pesticides heavily, as do some schools and parks. Consumers also face pesticide exposure through food and water residues. For instance, the herbicide atrazine is found in 94% of U.S. drinking water tested by the USDA.

    This widespread, long term use of pesticides has had tremendous ecological impacts over the years, from pest and weed resistance to environmental contamination and honey bee declines.

    In terms of human health, pesticides are now linked to a range of health impacts, including increased risk of cancer, Parkinson’s disease and neurodevelopmental effects like autism and ADHD. As we highlight in our A Generation in Jeopardy report, the science shows that infants and children are most at risk.

    LEARN MORE ABOUT PESTICIDES healthandenvironment.org/environmental-health/environmental-risks/chemical-environment-overview/pesticides

  • Toxic Chemicals Contaminate Foods Marketed to Children

    The FDA refused to test our foods for contamination. EPA refuses to reduce the amount of toxins permitted on our food crops. Independent studies show that our food is filled with toxic chemicals.  

     The weedkiller, produced by Bayer-Monsanto, was detected in all 21 oat-based cereal and snack products sampled in a new round of testing commissioned by the Environmental Working Group. All but four products contained levels of glyphosate higher than what EWG scientists consider protective for children’s health with a sufficient margin of safety.

    EWG’s petition, currently under consideration by EPA, calls on the agency to return to its health-protective 1993 standard. But it could take years for EPA to act, and the agency has been caught colluding with Monsanto to promote the claim that the chemical is safe.
    The only way to quickly remove this cancer-causing weedkiller from foods marketed to children is for companies like General Mills and Quaker to use oats from farmers who do not use glyphosate as a desiccant.


    More than 236,000 people have signed a petition directed at these food companies, calling on them to take action to protect consumers’ health. 

    SIGN THE PETITION

    To read more about allowable glyphosate levels and the chemical’s effects, read “Glyphosate: Unsafe on Any Plate

    Additional Resources:

    From DDT to Glyphosate

    Glyphosate is Proven to Cause Cancer. It is Contaminating Our Vaccines

    Glyphosate Detox Exposure is Inescapable

    Dr Seneff video interview: 

  • Second Jury Finds Monsanto Glyphosate Causes Cancer

    A second U.S. jury on Tuesday found Bayer AG’s glyphosate-based Roundup weed killer caused cancer. The case was only the second of some 11,200 Roundup lawsuits to go to trial in the United States. The jury from the first trial eight months ago issued a $289 million verdict. Johnson vs Monsanto.  

    The previous jury found unanimously that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup weed killer caused Mr. Johnson to develop NHL, and that Monsanto failed to warn of this severe health hazard. Importantly, the jury also found that Monsanto acted with malice, oppression or fraud and should be punished for its conduct.  (see internal documents from Monsanto revealed during court proceedings)

    Monsanto Co. continues to refuse to warn consumers of the dangers of its multi-billion-dollar product Roundup despite the world’s foremost authority on cancer—the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)—listing glyphosate as a probable carcinogen in 2015.

    Quick Stats on Glyphosate

    • Glyphosate has contaminated our planet, and is now found in our children’s urine, mother’s milk, our bloodstreams, and our food and water. 
    • In 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization found that glyphosate “is a probable human carcinogen”.
    • In July of 2017 the California State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) added glyphosate to its prop 65 list of known carcinogens.
    • In October of 2017, after over 1 million Europeans requested a ban, 72% of the Members of the European Parliament voted to BAN glyphosate and EU Member states have refused to renew the license.
    • Four countries have banned glyphosate: Malta, Sri Lanka, The Netherlands, and Argentina. 
    • Many U.S. school districts and cities have already discontinued the use of glyphosate.

    Glyphosate has been found in VACCINES: (5) vaccines were sent out for testing and came back positive for #glyphosate 

    #influenza shot for FLU 

    #MMR. Combo shot for Measles, Mumps, Rubella

    #TDap. Combo shot for Tetanus, Diphtheria, & Pertussis 

    #HepB. For Hepatitis B

    #Pneumococcal for pneumonia

    New Study Shows Link between herbicide and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma

    The noose is tightening on Bayer/Monsanto’s glyphosate herbicide (commonly sold as  Roundup), as yet another epidemiological study has found a link between exposure to the herbicide and a type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma called diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). See the abstract and key points below.

    This study is published as the jurors in the Roundup cancer litigation in the US are deliberating their verdict.

    Pesticide use and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoid malignancies in agricultural cohorts from France, Norway and the USA: a pooled analysis from the AGRICOH consortium
    https://academic.oup.com/ije/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ije/dyz017/5382278

    Contaminated Foods

    There is NO level of safe glyphosate -Because glyphosate has been shown to bioaccumulate, and has been shown in the parts per trillion, to increase the growth of breast cancer cells, regardless of what the EPA and Monsanto say is NO safe level. http://www.stopsprayingnb.ca/resources/42.pdf

    GOOD NEWS

    Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) introduced legislation March 15, 2019 to dramatically limit American children’s exposure to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller, in food. The bill would not only ban pre-harvest spraying of glyphosate on oats but also require the federal government to test foods popular with children for the herbicide, which has been linked to cancer.

    Key provisions in DeLauro’s bill include:

    • Prohibiting the spraying of glyphosate as a pre-harvest drying agent on oats.
    • Lowering by 300-fold the permissible level of glyphosate residues on oats, restoring the legally allowed level to just 0.1 parts per million, or ppm.
    • Requiring the Department of Agriculture to regularly test fruits, vegetables and other foods routinely fed to infants and children for glyphosate residues

    Read more on this legislation at Sustainablepulse.com

    MORE RESEARCH RESOURCES:

    Why we must detox from Glyphosate

    Organic Foods Contaminated with Glyphosate

    Petition against Glyphosate :Glyphosate use poses a significant threat to the health of our planet and the people on it..it’s high time that the EPA prohibits the pre-harvest use of glyphosate on every farm across the country”https://buff.ly/2ybW4Dm

    RoundUp Toxicity is NOT just the Glyphosate

  • Breakfast with a Dose of Roundup?

    EWG’s new report, Breakfast With a Dose of Roundup?, reveals alarming levels of glyphosate in popular cereals, granola bars and instant oatmeals. Glyphosate is the cancer-causing key ingredient in Monsanto’s signature herbicide, Roundup. Recently, a San Francisco court ordered Monsanto to pay $289 million in damages after ruling glyphosate played a key role in causing a school groundskeeper’s cancer. 

    EPA has denied that glyphosate may increase the risk of cancer, and documents introduced in the recent California trial showed how the agency and Monsanto worked together to promote the claim that the chemical is safe. EWG has been urging the EPA to review all evidence linking glyphosate to increased cancer risk and other adverse health effects in human and animal studies. The EPA should limit the use of glyphosate on food crops, including pre-harvest application.

    Each year, more than 250 million pounds of glyphosate are sprayed on American crops, primarily on “Roundup-ready” corn and soybeans genetically engineered to withstand the herbicide. But when it comes to the food we eat, the highest glyphosate levels are not found in products made with GMO corn.

    Increasingly, glyphosate is also sprayed just before harvest on wheat, barley, oats and beans that are not genetically engineered. Glyphosate kills the crop, drying it out so that it can be harvested sooner than if the plant were allowed to die naturally.

    Monsanto’s cancer-causing chemical shouldn’t be anywhere near our food!

    Quick Stats on Glyphosate

    • In 2016, the non-profit Food Democracy Now tested for glyphosate in single samples of a variety of popular foods. “Alarming levels” of glyphosate were found in a number of cereals and other products, including more than 1,000 ppb in Cheerios. More recently, the Center for Environmental Health tested single samples of 11 cereal brands and found glyphosate levels ranging from about 300 ppb to more than 2,000 ppb.
    • Glyphosate has contaminated our planet, and is now found in our children’s urine, mother’s milk, our bloodstreams, and our food and water. 
    • In 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization found that glyphosate “is a probable human carcinogen”.
    • In July of 2017 the California State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) added glyphosate to its prop 65 list of known carcinogens.
    • In October of 2017, after over 1 million Europeans requested a ban, 72% of the Members of the European Parliament voted to BAN glyphosate and EU Member states have refused to renew the license.
    • Four countries have banned glyphosate: Malta, Sri Lanka, The Netherlands, and Argentina. 
    • Many U.S. school districts and cities have already discontinued the use of glyphosate.

    Read the full report to find out if glyphosate is in any of your favorite foods. Check out the resources below to protect your family and tell food giants to get glyphosate out of our food!

    GLYPHOSATE Resources:

    Glyphosate Herbicides Contain Toxic Levels of Arsenic 

    Glyphosate: Its inert ingredients are just as toxic

    Nampa commits to reduction of Glyphosate in Parks

  • Carcinogen Pollutes Mountain Home AFB Tap Water Supplies

    Drinking water supplies for 14 million Americans are contaminated with a cancer-causing industrial solvent made notorious by the book and film “A Civil Action,” according to a new EWG analysis of tests from public utilities nationwide.  Drinking TCE-contaminated (trichloroethylene) water has been linked to birth defects; damage to the brain and the nervous, reproductive and immune systems; and increased risk of cancer. The EPA’s legal limit for TCE in drinking water is 5 parts per billion, or ppb. That limit was set in 1987, but more recent research suggests TCE could be harmful at much lower levels. 

    In 2015, the latest year for which comprehensive data are available, TCE was detected in EPA-mandated tests by 321 public water systems in 36 states. EWG’s Tap Water Database, which aggregates test results from utilities nationwide, shows that in about half of those systems, average annual levels of TCE were above what some health authorities say is safe for infants and developing fetuses. EWG’s interactive map shows the location of all systems with TCE contamination in 2015.

    Mountain Home Air Force Base

    • Population served: 6,500
    • TCE average: 0.58 ppb

    In June 2018, the EPA released so-called problem formulation documents that refine the scope of the risk evaluations for the first batch of chemicals, including TCE, to be assessed under the recently updated TSCA law. But for TCE and three other chemicals, the EPA excluded key exposures from polluted air, water and soil from the scope of its safety assessments. This approach could dramatically underestimate the total number of Americans who are exposed to TCE and the other chemicals the agency is assessing.

    People whose water is polluted with TCE can inhale the chemical during bathing, showering, washing dishes and other everyday activities. The health risk from TCE is greatest for children because of their small size – on a body weight basis, they breathe in more air and drink more water each day than older children or adults.

    “The health risk from TCE is greatest for children because of their small size – on a body weight basis, they breathe in more air and drink more water each day than older children or adults.”

    Levels of pollutants in the water flowing from customers’ taps fluctuate during the year, so the annual averages shown on EWG map reflect the overall level of concern for TCE contamination in a given water supply. For our calculations, we treated samples reported as “no detection” as having no TCE contamination, even though TCE may have been detected in concentrations below the minimum reporting levels required by the EPA or state agencies.

    TCE exposure is particularly harmful during pregnancy and childhood. TCE exposure during pregnancy has been linked with heart malformations in the fetus. And it’s not just from drinking water: TCE volatizes from water into indoor air.

    Don’t Wait For Government Action – Protect Your Family 

    The EPA should include exposures from all TCE uses in its safety assessment, and take immediate steps to protect American workers and communities from this dangerous chemical. The EPA should also establish a new federal drinking water standard for TCE at a level that would protect children’s health. Getting government action can take time. Treating a single TCE-contaminated water source can cost between $100,000 and $200,000 a year. For a water utility, the costs add up quickly, because TCE-removing treatment may be needed at multiple wells, and the level of TCE in a well may rise as the contaminated groundwater plume spreads. Full remediation of contaminated groundwater and installation of modern water treatment plants that can tackle contamination in the long term can cost tens or hundreds of millions of dollars.Many people – especially pregnant women and families with infants or small children – may not want to wait until their public water system installs TCE treatment.

    Test and Treat at Home

    TCE contamination of tap water can be remedied. Granular activated carbon and air stripping or aeration are the two most common approaches for removing TCE. But it’s expensive and the cost depends on how much the source water is contaminated and the treatment method used.

    As an immediate, in-home solution, TCE can be removed from tap water with an inexpensive carbon-based filter. Minnesota health officials also recommend ventilating indoor air while bathing/showering, cooking, and while running the dishwasher or washing machine as an effective way to reduce the amounts of TCE in indoor air.

    Well Water Doesn’t Make You Safer

    TCE is also a serious health concern for those who depend on private wells for their drinking water supply. U.S. Geological Survey data from 2006 suggest that almost 3.5 percent of private domestic wells may be at risk of TCE contamination. Because more than 40 million Americans rely on private wells for their water, up to 1.5 million people may be affected. The actual number of private wells with TCE contamination is likely much higher because private wells aren’t tested regularly.

    EWG’s advice for families

    • If TCE is found in your water, even at levels below the federal legal limit, EWG highly recommends filtering your water. Look for a carbon-based filter that is certified to remove TCE.
    • All public water utilities are required to provide consumers with an annual Consumer Confidence Report, but these reports often don’t give the full results of tests for contaminants. You should contact your utility to learn about the full range of the most recent tests for TCE, and ask what the utility is doing to remove TCE from tap water if it is present.
    • If TCE is measured in your indoor air, contact your state health department about recommendations for ongoing monitoring or the need for a mitigation system.
    • If you have a private well, and suspect any sources of contamination or hear of TCE detections in your area, get your well tested. The  This information can be helpful in deciding for which other contaminants, in addition to TCE, you may need to test.


    ‘A Civil Action’ Carcinogen Pollutes Tap Water Supplies for 14 Million Americans Under Trump, EPA Retreats From Proposed Ban on Key Uses of TCE TUESDAY, JULY 24, 2018

    EWG mapped public water systems according to the information available in the EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Information System. The mapped locations may not exactly match the service area. Instead, they are intended to show the general location of a public water system. Information about the size of the population served also comes from the EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Information System. 

    National Library of Medicine ToxMap lets users look up hazardous and contaminated sites in their communities, and find out which chemicals have been found.

    Original Article By Tasha Stoiber, PhD, Senior Scientist and Olga Naidenko, PhD, Senior Science Advisor for Children’s Environmental Health

  • Monsanto Faces Man Dying of Cancer in Roundup Trial

    Doctors didn’t think he’d live long enough to testify in court that exposure to Monsanto Co.’s Roundup weed killer caused his deadly cancer. But the 46-year-old is now first in line to go to trial against the agrochemical giant among thousands of people across the U.S. who blame its herbicide for their disease.As groundskeeper for the school district in Benicia, California, about 40 miles east of San Francisco, Johnson mixed and sprayed hundreds of gallons of Roundup. He was diagnosed with cancer in 2014, and in July, after chemotherapy and other treatment, his oncologist gave him six months to live.  A pretrial ruling allows Johnson’s lawyers to try to use internal Monsanto correspondence to show that the company has long been aware of the risk its herbicides are carcinogenic.

    Monsanto knows “the cat is out of the bag” and there is no more hiding or pretending. We know that the majority of researches that claim safety of glyphosate are performed by scientists who are funded by Monsanto. Monsanto and its financial beneficiaries should be ashamed aware of the toxicity of their product they are poisoning our nation with glyphosate its residue found in soy, sugar, corn or wheat, orange juice and more. 

     

    #ELIMINATEGLYPHOSATE AROUND SCHOOLS AND IN PARKS – sign the HFI PETITION

    Glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup, was first approved for use in Monsanto’s weed killer in 1974. According to rodale.com, in U.S. alone, homeowners and farmers use about 100 million pounds of Roundup herbicide every year. At the same time, weeds are becoming more resistant to Roundup, so farmers are using more and more chemicals to deal with super-pests and super-weeds. From 1994 to 2005, the use of glyphosate has increased by 1,500 percent. As it grew to become the world’s most popular and widely used herbicide, the question of whether it causes cancer has been hotly debated by environmentalists, regulators, researchers and lawyers — even as Monsanto has insisted for decades that it’s perfectly safe. Now, a jury will decide in a case set to start this week in San Francisco state court.

    The case is Dewayne Johnson v. Monsanto Co., CGC-16-550128, California Superior Court (San Francisco).

    Biologist and cancer survivor Sandra Steingraber comments on the links between cancer and pesticides in the President’s Cancer Panel report:

    We have sprayed pesticides … throughout our shared environment. They are now in amniotic fluid. They’re in our blood. They’re in our urine. They’re in our exhaled breath. They are in mothers’ milk … What is the burden of cancer that we can attribute to this use of poisons in our agricultural system? … We won’t really know the answer until we do the other experiment — which is to take the poisons out of our food chain, embrace a different kind of agriculture, and see what happens.

    Steingraber’s book (and documentary film) Living Downstream tells the story of her own “journey” as a cancer survivor, and documents her scientific investigations that expose a simple, tragic truth: As a society, we are so busy treating cancer and searching diligently for a cure that we’re failing to tackle its causes.

    Read more at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-18/monsanto-squares-off-with-man-dying-of-cancer-in-roundup-trial

    MORE ABOUT GLYPHOSATE:

    RoundUp Toxicity it isn’t just the carcinogenic glyphosate

    Farmers Sue Monsanto 2016

  • VACCINE SAFETY Part 1: Responsibility for Vaccine Safety lies SQUARELY On the Shoulders of US Department of Health and Human Services

    Unlike nearly every other company in America, pharmaceutical companies have almost no liability for injuries caused by their vaccine products.

    By granting immunity from actual or potential liability from injuries caused by vaccines, Congress eliminated the market forces that are generally relied upon to assure the safety of all other products. As the 1986 Act expressly provides: “No person may bring a civil action … against a vaccine administrator or manufacturer in a State or Federal court for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.” Every pediatric vaccine recommended by the CDC creates for its manufacturer a liability-free captive market of 78 million children with guaranteed payment. So, who is there making sure vaccines are SAFE since manufacturers have no financial incentive do to so.


    ICANspent months researching the state of vaccine safety in the United States. The shocking result of this effort was presented to the heads of the National Institutes of Health with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in May of 2017.

    The information contained in that presentation has been distilled into an easy to read, thorough white paper that goes through many of the shortcomings and failures of the vaccine safety program. This is PART 2 of that paper.

    In 2016, the IOM formally changed its name to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Explained by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) 1, by 1986, the “litigation costs associated with claims of damage from vaccines had forced several companies to end their vaccine research and development programs as well as to stop producing already licensed vaccines.”2

    Instead of letting market forces compel vaccine makers to create safer vaccines, Congress granted pharmaceutical companies, financial immunity from injuries caused by vaccines recommended by the CDC. 3 Congress did so by passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (the 1986 Act). 4

    By granting immunity from actual or potential liability from injuries caused by vaccines, Congress eliminated the market forces that are generally relied upon to assure the safety of all other products.

    As the 1986 Act expressly provides: “No person may bring a civil action… against a vaccine administrator or manufacturer in a State or Federal court for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.”5

    The 1986 Act even shields vaccine makers from liability where it is clear and unmistakable that the vaccine in question could have been designed safer. 6As recently explained in a U.S. Supreme Court opinion: [N]o one—neither the FDA nor any other federal agency, nor state and federal juries—ensures that vaccine manufacturers adequately take account of scientific and technological advancements. This concern is especially acute with respect to vaccines that have already released and marketed to the public. Manufacturers… Will often have little or no incentive to improve the designs of vaccines that are already generating significant profit margins.7

    Recognizing that the 1986 Act eliminated the incentive for vaccine makers to assure the safety of their vaccine products, the 1986 Act explicitly places this responsibility in the hands of the United States Department of Health & Human Services (HHS).8  

    As provided in the 1986 Act, HHS is responsible for “research … to prevent adverse reactions to vaccines,” “develop[ing] the techniques needed to produce safe … vaccines,” “safety … testing of vaccines,” “monitoring … adverse effects of vaccines,” and “shall make or assure improvements in … the licensing, manufacturing, processing, testing, labeling, warning, use instructions, distribution, storage, administration, field surveillance, adverse reaction reporting, … and research on vaccines in order to reduce the risks of adverse reactions to vaccines.”9

    Since passage of the 1986 Act, the number of required pediatric vaccines has grown rapidly. In 1983, the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule included 11 injections of 4 vaccines.10

    As of 2017, the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule includes 56 injections of 30 different vaccines. It is only when the CDC adds a vaccine to its recommended vaccine schedule that the manufacturer is granted immunity from liability for vaccine injuries.

    And due to a federal funding scheme, CDC recommended vaccines are then made compulsory to American children under state laws and subsidized by the Federal government for children unable to afford the vaccine.13

    The end result is that under the 1986 Act, every pediatric vaccine recommended by the CDC creates for its manufacturer a liability-free captive market of 78 million children with guaranteed payment. This incentive structure is unequal in the marketplace and eliminates the normal market forces driving product safety. Hence the 1986 Act’s transferred essentially all responsibility for vaccine safety from the pharmaceutical companies to HHS.


    Read this important letter putting Health and Human Services on notice for failing to conduct proper science to demonstrate vaccine safety. “ICAN lays out the provisions of the (1986 Act) that legally require HHS to conduct science that reduces the risk of all vaccine injury. Failure to do so could result in legal action against HHS on behalf of the American public.”
    http://www.icandecide.com/white-papers/ICAN-HHS-Notice.pdf

    READ MORE ABOUT VACCINE SAFETY IN OUR SERIES  PART 1  | PART 2PART 3


    2 https://www.nap.edu/read/2138/chapter/2#2
    3 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-1 et seq.
    4 Ibid.
    5 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11
    6 Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC, 562 U.S. 223 (2011)
    7 Ibid.
    8 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-2; 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-27
    9 Ibid.
    10 https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/images/schedule 1983s.jpg
    11 https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adol escent.html (note that the influenza vaccine is different every year)
    12 The rapid growth of CDC’s vaccine schedule is excepted to accelerate since there were 271 new vaccines under development in 2013 and far more currently under development. http://www.phrma.org/press-release/medicines-in-developme nt-vaccines (listing 2,300 trials in search for “vaccines” between 2013 and 2017)
    13 See Section IV below.
    14 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/103795s5503lbl.pdf
    15 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2009/020702s056lbl.pdf
    16 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/103000s5302lbl.pdf

  • Citizens concerns causes city officials to stop the use of cancer-causing Round Up

    “It might mean more dandelions, but the bottom line is a dandelion won’t kill my daughter, poison will,” a mom said. This is the point. We don’t need the poison in our parks. Have you contacted your Parks and Rec or City to ask what they use for weed killer and what can be done to make a change for the sake of health? City of Caldwell has said that parents have to find a viable alternative and present it to the city for them to consider a change. Moral of the story? Things won’t change unless we speak up!

    LA Times Reports: 

    Burbank Mayor Will Rogers and several residents made it clear Tuesday that they don’t want the herbicide Roundup used in any city park.

    “I don’t want that crap anywhere near our parks,” Rogers said, which was followed by applause from about 30 people in the audience.

    Council members came to a consensus Tuesday to direct city staff to stop using the glyphosate-containing product that’s used to kill weeds in city parks and areas where the public gathers, such as the Chandler Bikeway, for one year.

    Roundup was recently placed on the state’s Proposition 65 list of known carcinogens.

    However, city officials will allow the Public Works Department to continue using the weed killer from Monsanto on sidewalks, alleys and street medians.

    During the one-year ban, council members directed the Parks and Recreation and Public Works departments to try alternative and safer products to remove weeds and to come back with a report about whether a replacement to Roundup was found.

    In March, Burbank Unified school officials decided to stop using the weed killer after several concerned parents and residents called for the end of its use. Since then, the district has been using Avenger, an organic herbicide.

    Glendale Unified officials also announced that month that the district would stop using any weed-killing product that contains glyphosate.

    Over-the-counter, not commercial-strength, Roundup is still being used by the city of Glendale, but only when needed by the city’s parks department, said Glendale spokesman Tom Lorenz in an email. He added that city staff has been testing some organic solutions to remove weeds.

    Jim Biery, the interim public works director for Burbank, told council members that the city had been using Roundup since the late 1980s and it was the most effective product to remove weeds.

    He added that public works employees who use the herbicide are trained and are told to not use the product when it is windy or raining and to wait until the chemical has fully dried before leaving the treated area.

    “The staff that uses it is highly trained to apply Roundup,” Biery said. “They do it in small doses under very controlled conditions.”

    However, several Burbank parents and residents told council members during a lengthy public comment period on Tuesday that they disagreed with the city’s staff report about the use of Roundup, saying that agencies such as the World Health Organization have determined that using glyphosate can lead to cancer.

    “I personally feel that it would be reckless to continue using Roundup when there are now so many viable, cost-effective, organic alternatives that don’t carry the same public-health concerns,” said resident Leigh Ann Kato. “It is true that not all Proposition 65 chemicals carry such great risk, but I would ask you to keep in mind, in this instance, children, adults and pets do not have a choice about their exposure to this toxin. That should never be the case in a cancer-causing agent.”

    Burbank resident Erin Vierra said there have been several people in her family who have died from some form of cancer and she is concerned about the future of her 4-year-old son and 16-month-old daughter, “who is notorious about eating grass at our public park.”

    After learning about the potential harm that Roundup can do to her family, Vierra said the city needs to switch to something safer for her children and for everyone in the community.

    “It might mean more dandelions, but the bottom line is a dandelion won’t kill my daughter, poison will,” she said.

    This article originally appeared at: http://www.latimes.com/socal/burbank-leader/news/tn-blr-me-roundup-stopped-20170713-story.html.