A toxic life - We're polluted from head to toe - `Babies aren't supposed to be born pre-polluted.'

[Guest guest]

The reporter conveys a politically correct stance by headlining " no one

knows the long-term health effects " . In contrast, recently posted were

articles linking PCBs with cognitive and behavioral problems, with

endometriosis, with breast cancer, and with type-2 diabetes - one toxin, a

neighborhood of traits. Of course, long realized and increasingly well

documented is the ability of families owning major corporations to hire

people to " muddy the waters " , to " manufacture confusion " about scientific

findings of adverse effects, ie, findings that would jeapordize profits

derived from toxic molecules. Also, enforcement of the Risk Management

rationale whereby profitable toxins are allowed into the environment at

" safe " levels that aren't safe for everyone contributes to the increase in

toxin-related diseases and, not coincidentally, to the enhancement of

profits for pharmaceutical company stockholders. These various financial

incentives create ongoing encouragement for the continuation of policies

that allow profitable but injurious intoxination, we might even refer to

HyperToxinosis, ie, a syndrome of traits induced by various combinations of

toxins within the bodies of humans. Furthermore, the more " background "

toxins in a fetus, infant, toddler, etc, the more that his or her

detoxification nutrients are likely to be diminished, thereby impairing

detoxification and immunity, thereby further increasingly the likelihood

developing of a toxin-related illness. Add thimerosal and/or the MMR or

the MMRV to a hypertoxinated infant or toddler, and neurological damage is

more likely. These considerations aside, the article provides an excellent

summary of why Toxins'R Us.

* * * *

A toxic life

We're polluted from head to toe and though scientists can now measure

minute amounts of chemicals in our bodies, no one knows the long-term

health effects

Apr. 21, 2006

NANCY J. WHITE

LIFE WRITER

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/

Article_Type1 & c=Article & cid=1145569812202 & call_pageid=968332188492

Winterton is many things: a 45-year-old mother of three teenagers, a

Toronto resident, a program director and a toxic chemical dump.

Blood and urine samples show that her body is home to 16 respiratory and 38

reproductive toxins, 19 chemicals that disrupt hormones and 27 carcinogens.

Stored in her body are traces of heavy metals, such as lead, arsenic and

uranium, and chemicals used in pesticides, flame retardants and stain

repellents. DDE and DDT, DMTP, HCB, PBDE 47 and 99, PCBs and PFOS this is

just a taste of the alphabet soup swishing through her.

She wonders about the air she breathes, the tinned food she buys, the

chemically protected mattress she sleeps on. " There are likely thousands

more chemicals in me, " she says. " It's not a great picture to have of

yourself. "

But it's as common as a snapshot.

Studies of volunteers in Europe, the U.S. and Canada show the same results.

Coursing through our bodies is a complex chemical cocktail, the by-product

of a modern life of industrial emissions, treated food and endless consumer

products microwave bags, fast food wrappers, nail polish, computer

casings laced with synthetic substances.

" We are the guinea pigs in the largest uncontrolled science experiment in

history, " says Rick , executive director of Environmental Defence.

The Toronto-based watchdog group sampled 11 volunteers across Canada

including Winterton, its program director, and Vancouver Island artist

Bateman for 88 harmful chemicals and detected 44 on average in

each person. The results of the testing, done at special labs in Quebec and

Texas for $1,500 per person, is described in the report Toxic Nation,

released last fall.

For years scientists have measured levels of toxic chemicals in wildlife

and done specific studies on breast milk, childhood lead exposure or

occupational hazards. But now this technique of sampling human tissues and

fluids, known as biomonitoring, is being used by environmental groups and

governments to get a broader sense of our body burden, or the chemicals

carried within us. Next year Health Canada will conduct its first

widespread biomonitoring testing on about 5,000 people. The Centers for

Disease Control in the U.S. has been doing it since 2001.

Biomonitoring is turning pollution into a much more personal matter and

helping to revitalize the political debate internationally. Many man-made

chemicals on the market have never been thoroughly tested for human safety.

The Canadian Environmental Protection Act is scheduled for review this

year, and many advocates want to see the law beefed up, similar to proposed

legislation in the European Union.

" Canada is increasingly falling behind, " says .

While scientists can now measure increasingly minute amounts of more

substances in humans, they're still studying what it all means. A

manufactured chemical in a person's blood or urine doesn't imply disease.

Or even risk of a disease. Only exposure.

" Just because it's there doesn't mean it's going to hurt you, " says Bruce

Caswell, senior manager of environmental health and safety with the

Canadian Chemical Producers Association.

But it doesn't mean it's not hurting you either. We experience a constant

barrage of synthetic stuff, even in the womb. Doses differ as do genetic

and physiological vulnerabilities.

" None of this belongs in our bodies. Period, " says Riina Bray, a family

physician at Women's College Hospital's Environmental Health Clinic.

`None of this belongs in our bodies. Period.'

Family physician Riina Bray

Researchers suspect these toxic chemicals have links to a number of

cancers, including breast, testicular and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, not to

mention reproductive disorders and learning disabilities. But little is

proven. Scientific consensus moves slowly and environmental health research

is tricky. It's about as clear as an oil slick.

" I don't think there is cause for alarm, like with a pandemic flu, but

there is cause for concern, " says medical epidemiologist Don Wigle, an

affiliate scientist at the University of Ottawa's McLaughlin Centre for

Population Health Risk Assessment. " We need a precautionary approach to

reduce exposures. No one wants to wait for all the answers. "

There are no roads where Masty lives. No industrial smokestacks. No

manufacturing emissions. Yet this chief of Whapmagoostui First Nation on

the shores of Hudson Bay, one of the Toxic Nation volunteers, had 51 of 88

chemicals in his body, including a high level of mercury.

" It doesn't matter where you are, " says Masty, 60. " The pollution is

transported through the air and from the products we use in our homes. "

There's the scented lotion absorbed into your skin. The coloured polish you

spread on your nails. The soft vinyl toy your child enjoys. These may be

made with phthalates, chemicals widely used to soften plastics and carry

fragrances. In laboratory animals some phthalates cause organ damage,

disrupt hormones and cause reproductive harm. Some phthalates have been

banned in children's products in Europe, and Canadian manufacturers have

agreed to remove some from soft, chewable toys here. The soup you eat from

a tin can? Bisphenol A, a hormone disruptor in rodents, can leach from the

can. Your non-stick cookware? A perfluorinated chemical that causes cancer

in rats. (See story below).

Upholstered furniture, mattresses, carpets, even the plastic casings around

the computer and television may contain brominated flame retardants. The

good news is that they slow the spread of fire. The bad news is they likely

contain polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). In rat studies, they

interfered with thyroid function, affected behaviour and caused liver

tumours. PBDEs have been found in house dust and human breast milk.

Absorbed by a woman, many chemicals can be passed on to her children

through breast milk and through the placenta.

A U.S. study of umbilical cord blood from 10 newborns found pesticides,

chemicals used in consumer products, and by-products from gasoline, garbage

and the burning of coal. The newborns averaged 200 contaminants, many of

them carcinogens, developmental toxins and neurotoxins.

" It's a big red flag, " says Jane Houlihan, vice president of research at

the Environmental Working Group in Washington, D.C., which spearheaded the

study. " Babies aren't supposed to be born pre-polluted. "

While most experts agree there's no safe exposure level to carcinogens,

it's generally believed that other chemicals have threshold doses. Below

that amount, harmful effects are unlikely. But above it, usually in large

doses, exposure may be risky.

At least that's the conventional wisdom. Medical epidemiologist Wigle

wonders if perhaps our tests are not yet sophisticated enough to pick up

subtle effects.

But even with a safe threshold, there's not a simple formula. Some

chemicals are quickly excreted, while others persist and accumulate.

There's the individual factor. " Everyone has different susceptibilities,

driven by their genetics, " says Houlihan. And the timing of exposure

counts. Humans are more vulnerable in the womb and during early childhood

and puberty.

And there's the great unknown variable: the synergy of the soup. Could the

sum of all the synthetic chemicals in our bodies be more toxic than the

parts? " That's extremely important and largely unresolved, " says Wigle.

Researchers eager to know the health effects of this body burden look at

illnesses that are on the upswing. The worldwide prevalence of asthma is

rising by 50 per cent, on average, every decade. From the early 1970s to

2002, according to the Public Health Agency of Canada, the age-standardized

incidence of testicular cancer was up 54 per cent, breast cancer 19 per

cent, thyroid cancer 221 per cent, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (a cancer of

the lymphatic system) 83 per cent.

" We know our genetics haven't changed, " says Houlihan. " With rapid changes

in health, scientists suspect environmental exposures play a role. "

`Babies aren't supposed to be born pre-polluted.'

Environmental researcher Jane Houlihan

At the University of Ottawa, assistant health sciences professor

is part of a group examining chemicals known as hormone disruptors

or endocrine toxins, which interfere with hormone pathways. Human health

effects may include fertility problems, reproductive cancers and birth

defects, especially abnormal formation of the male urogenitals.

While some of these diseases and disorders have shown up in animal studies,

says , it's been at very high doses, more than the average person

would experience. The reproductive physiologist says the incidence of

diseases associated with hormone disruptors could be explained in humans by

other factors, such as improved screening techniques and rising rates of

obesity.

She did, however, point to Denmark, where young men have experienced an

increase in testicular cancer, lower sperm counts and birth defects such as

cryptorchidism, or undescended testicles, and hypospadias, where the penis

opening is located somewhere other than the tip.

" There could be an environmental factor at play, " she speculates, but adds

that more evidence is needed.

The government will start collecting some next year. As part of the

Canadian Health Measures Survey of 5,000 volunteers, biomonitoring tests

will be conducted for about 60 chemicals and heavy metals. It's Canada's

first large scale national testing for environmental contaminants, says

Rene Langlois, chief survey developer. It will provide a baseline look at

Canadians' body burden and enable researchers to track trends over time.

But environmentalists want more from Ottawa, and the Canadian Environmental

Protection Act is up for review. from Environmental Defence would

like to see timelines for the elimination of the most harmful chemicals and

more attention paid to the Great Lakes basin, a pollution hotspot.

He and other advocates believe that chemical manufacturers are not held to

a high enough safety testing standard. They point to the European Union's

REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of CHemicals) proposal,

which could be signed early next year. REACH would shift the burden of

proof for safety from government to industry and include strong incentives

to replace toxic chemicals with safe substitutes.

" It's a paradigm shift in the way chemicals are managed and controlled, "

says Beverly Thorpe, director of Clean Production Action in Montreal, a

non-profit group that promotes " green " chemistry.

Allan Godfrey, manager of the toxic substances management division at

Health Canada, does not agree that this country is lagging behind. Canada

has temporarily banned four fluorinated polymers that are precursors to the

controversial perfluorinated carboxylic acids, or PFCAs, for example.

Since 1987, new substances have undergone a government-led risk assessment

before being used. There's about 600 to 800 new substances each year, says

Godfrey.

The government is currently categorizing some 23,000 older, unassessed

chemicals to single out ones requiring further investigation. The report,

due this September, is likely to list about 5,000 substances needing more

action.

" Our categorizing (of these chemicals) is world leading, " he says. " I don't

know another country that's done it. "

Some people, impatient with government and science, are taking action

themselves. Toxic Nation volunteer Sexton from St. 's was shocked

when she saw her results: She had 49 out of 88 chemicals. She tested

positive for 31 suspected carcinogens. " It was an awakening for me, " says

the 43-year-old television producer.

She now avidly reads ingredient labels, drinks only bottled water, keeps

her house cleaner, uses biodegradable cleansers and detergents and

diligently gets her breast exams and Pap smears. Already a vegetarian,

she's bumped up her diet to 70 per cent organic. She's given up her daily

six cups of coffee worried about contaminants and thrown out her

non-stick frying pan.

She has no idea how much any of these changes will help. She does, after

all, live in a toxic world.

" If you're a walking, breathing Canadian, " says Sexton, " you're polluted. "

--------------------------------------------------------

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK

$$ Donations to help in the work - accepted by Paypal account

earthmysteriestours@... voicemail US 530-740-0561

(go to http://www.paypal.com) or by mail

Vaccines - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm

Vaccine Dangers On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccineclass.htm

Reality of the Diseases & Treatment -

http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccineclass.htm

Homeopathy On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm