New USDA rule allows Feces, Bacteria and Bleach in Chicken

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is currently in the process of trying to ram through passage of a new "modernization" rule for conventional poultry production that would eliminate a large percentage of USDA inspectors and speed up the factory production process. And existing safeguards, as minimally effective as they currently are, would also be eroded, allowing for more hidden feces, pus, bacteria and chemical contaminants to persist in conventional chicken and turkey meat.

Even though salmonella rates as detected in meat and poultry have been steadily dropping year after year in the U.S., roughly the same numbers of people seem to be getting infected with the pathogen annually. The primary reason for this statistical anomaly appears to be that the current testing methods authorized by the USDA for meat and poultry are wholly inadequate and outdated and actually cover up the presence of contaminants borne on factory farms and in processing plants.

But a whole new set of guidelines being proposed by the USDA will make things even worse by allowing companies to self-inspect themselves, as well as use an even more aggressive barrage of chemicals to treat their tainted meat before selling it to consumers. This is good news for the factory poultry industry, of course, which is expected to cut its costs by about $250 million a year, thanks to its buddies at the USDA, but it's bad news for consumers who will be subjected to all the toxic consequences.

If you have ever seen any of the shocking, undercover footage showing how chickens, turkeys and other animals are treated at factory farms, then you already know the type of filth and abuse to which these poor animals are routinely subjected. Because of their horrific living conditions, factory farm animals are often teeming with harmful pathogens, which is why their meat has to undergo chemical treatments in the first place before being packaged and served on dinner tables -- it is a truly disgusting process, to say the least.

According to documented reports, after the animals are slaughtered, conventional poultry is essentially hung on long conveyor lines and sprayed, bathed and injected with all sorts of chemical solutions, including chlorine bleach, before ultimately being hauled off to the supermarket. These chemical solutions are, of course, carefully designed to kill any bacteria and render the meat "safe" for human consumption, the ultimate "don't ask, don't tell" policy for the factory food industry, if you will.

USDA intends to throw more chemicals, less regulation at poultry industry dilemma

But like all other chemical-based solutions that compliment industrial food production, this process is ultimately failing to subdue and kill pathogens the same way that it used to back in the old days. A cohort of new scientific research recently submitted to the USDA reveals that the routine processes by which the factory food industry covers its frightful tracks are no match to a whole new generation of "superbugs" that resist these chemicals -- and the USDA's proposed solutions only further add to the problem by covering it up with even more chemicals.

"If the new rule is implemented, all chicken will be presumed to be contaminated with feces, pus, scabs, and bile and washed in a chlorine solution," explains ChickenJustice.org. "Consumers will eat chicken with more chemical residue and contaminants. With faster production rates, workers' injuries will increase. They will also face breathing and skin problems from constant exposure to chlorine wash. OSHA will take the next 3 years to study the impact of the faster processing lines on workers, but USDA wants to implement the rule immediately."

To take direct action against this heinous USDA agenda for factory chicken, you can contact the White House by visiting the ChickenJustice.org "Take Action Now!" page: http://chickenjustice.org

Sources for this article include:

http://motherjones.com

http://articles.washingtonpost.com

http://naturalnews.com

http://chickenjustice.org

Source: naturalnews.com

Microwave Dangers: What You Need To Know

The first time I became skeptical of microwave ovens was when I conducted a small experiment by myself comparing the growth of plants (from seedlings) watered with regular distilled water vs. water that had been microwaved. Much to my surprise those plants that had been watered with microwaved water did not grow, or grew very poorly. Those watered with distilled water flourished, just as the rest of the plants in my house normally had. This experiment has not only been confirmed by myself, but many others as well (a simple google search will bring up numerous reports of microwaved water being quite un-suiting to grow plants with).

So what happens to the water when it is microwaved? If such an effect occurs with plants, then why are we consuming foods that are microwaved? Can our bodies even utilize the nutrients in foods that have been microwaved?

A microwave oven creates radio waves at frequencies of around 2.45 GHz. As with other wave types, a radio wave is a type of electromagnetic radiation. When matter is heated in the microwave the atoms and molecules vibrate quickly to generate kinetic energy (or heat), such as they would on the stove or in the oven. The only difference here is that microwaves have very strong electric fields. Electric fields have the ability to stretch molecules, as well as separate their charges so that the atoms lose an electron (ionization).

Electric fields in microwave ovens cause electric current to flow into food, which then has the ability to rearrange the atoms in your food, changing the molecular structure (ionization). This is one of the reasons why microwave ovens have the capability to destroy essential nutrients in your food as compared to cooking on the stove. Ionizing (displacing single electrons) is what has the ability to form free radicals in your food. Free radicals are harmful to our body and one of the major culprits in cancer formation.

Microwaved meats cause the formation of d-Nitrosodienthanolamines (1), a well-known carcinogen, as well as turning plant alkaloids from microwaved vegetables into carcinogenic matter that should not be consumed by humans (or any animal for that matter). In addition, microwaves lower nutrient content of foods by as much as 60 to 90% – in a study by Russian researchers, they found that there was marked decrease in the bio-availability of vitamin B complex, vitamin C, vitamin E, essential minerals and lipotropic factors in microwaved foods. Another study published in November 2003 found that microwaved broccoli in a little bit of water lost up to 97% of its beneficial antioxidants compared to steamed broccoli (stove-top) which lost only 11% antioxidants (2).

In 1992, Richard Quan and colleagues took freshly frozen human milk samples and microwaved them for over 30 seconds at different temperatures. They found that the milk heated at high temperatures (98ºC) had lost nearly all of it’s resistance to contamination, and when exposed to E.coli, became infected 18 times faster than unheated breast milk. Even milk heated at low temperatures (25ºC) had a chance at becoming infected five times faster by E.coli than unheated breast milk (3).

In 1989, Dr. Hans-Ulrich Hertel, a Swiss food scientist conducted a study to examine and research the effects of microwaved food on humans. He recruited nine people, including himself, and alternately exposed them to microwaved and conventionally cooked food from organic sources. Before consuming these foods, a sample of blood was drawn, as well as at certain intervals after eating.
They found that after microwaved food consumption there was a dramatic reduction of all blood hemoglobin and cholesterol values (both good (HDL) and bad (LDL)), and that LDL cholesterol levels were slightly more elevated relative to HDL cholesterol levels. In addition, lymphocyte (white blood cell) activity was considerably reduced after ingesting microwaved foods, compared to foods that had been conventionally cooked. When the blood of those who consumed microwaved foods was exposed to bacteria, the bacteria flourished, whereas blood from those who did not consume microwaved foods had much lower bacterial count. This suggests that the energy from microwaved foods has the ability to be passed onto those who consume the food (4).

Sources: Live Love Fruit

(1) Lee, L. “Health effects of microwave radiation – microwave ovens.”
(2) Vallejo, F., Tomas-Barberan, F. A., & Garcia-Viguera, C. “Phenolic compound contents in edible parts of broccoli inflorescences after domestic cooking.”
(3) Quan, R., Yang, C., Rubinstein, S., Lewiston, N., Sunshine, P., Stevenson, D., & Kerner, J. (1992) Effets of microwave radiation on anti-infective factors in human milk. Pediatrics, 89, 667-669.
(4) Wayne, A., & Newell, L. “The hidden hazards of microwave cooking.”

WARNING! All Bluefin Tuna Caught In California Are Radioactive

Every bluefin tuna tested in the waters off California has shown to be contaminated with radiation that originated in Fukushima. Every single one.

Over a year ago, in May of 2012, the Wall Street Journal reported on a Stanford University study. Daniel Madigan, a marine ecologist who led the study, was quoted as saying, “The tuna packaged it up (the radiation) and brought it across the world’s largest ocean. We were definitely surprised to see it at all and even more surprised to see it in every one we measured.”

Another member of the study group, Marine biologist Nicholas Fisher at Stony Brook University in New York State reported, “We found that absolutely every one of them had comparable concentrations of cesium 134 and cesium 137.”

That was over a year ago. The fish that were tested had relatively little exposure to the radioactive waste being dumped into the ocean following the nuclear melt-through that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in March of 2011. Since that time, the flow of radioactive contaminants dumping into the ocean has continued unabated. Fish arriving at this juncture have been swimming in contaminants for all of their lives.

Radioactive cesium doesn’t sink to the sea floor, so fish swim through it and ingest it through their gills or by eating organisms that have already ingested it. It is a compound that does occur naturally in nature, however, the levels of cesium found in the tuna in 2012 had levels 3 percent higher than is usual. Measurements for this year haven’t been made available, or at least none that I have been able to find. I went looking for the effects of ingesting cesium. This is what I found:

When contact with radioactive cesium occurs, which is highly unlikely, a person can experience cell damage due to radiation of the cesium particles. Due to this, effects such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and bleeding may occur. When the exposure lasts a long time, people may even lose consciousness. Coma or even death may then follow. How serious the effects are depends upon the resistance of individual persons and the duration of exposure and the concentration a person is exposed to.

The half life of cesium 134 is 2.0652 years. For cesium 137, the half life is 30.17 years.

The Fukushima disaster is an ongoing battle with no signs that humans are gaining the upper hand. The only good news to come out of Japan has later been proven to be false and was nothing more than attempts by Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) to mislead the public and lull them into a sense of security while the company searched vainly for ways to contain the accident. This incident makes Three Mile Island and Chernobyl pale in comparison. Those were nuclear meltdowns. A nuclear melt-through poses a much more serious problem and is one that modern technology doesn’t have the tools to address. Two and a half years later and the contaminants are still flowing into the ocean and will continue to for the foreseeable future.

The FDA assures us that our food supply is safe, that the levels of radiation found in fish samples are within safe limits for consumption. But one has to question if this is true and, if it is true now, will it remain true? Is this, like the statements issued from TEPCO, another attempt to quell a public backlash in the face of an unprecedented event that, as yet, has no solution and no end in sight?

Article republished : http://samuel-warde.com

Related article:

Radioactive Levels at Fukushima Jump 9000% in 3 Days

All You Need To Know About RoundUp (Glyphosate)

Presented below are ten sobering facts about Glyphosate (the key ingredient in Monsanto’s RoundUp weedkiller, which the majority of Monsanto’s seeds are genetically engineered to withstand):

1) Glyphosate causes disease and biological / physiological disorders in crops

Fifteen years of research by the USDA indicates that the chemical glyphosate, the key ingredient in RoundUp herbicide, is linked to fungal root disease in plants.

Article: http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/04/13/us-usa-gmos-regulators

idUSTRE63C2AJ20100413
Purdue Report about biological/physiological disorders: http://www.btny.purdue.edu/weedscience/2011/GlyphosatesImpact11.html

2) Glyphosate is no longer effective at killing weeds

Article about Superweeds: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/04/business/energy-environment/04weed.html
International Database on Glycines (Glyphosate family): http://www.weedscience.com/summary/MOA.aspx?MOAID=12
Iowa State: http://www.extension.iastate.edu/CropNews/2011/0120hartzler.htm
University of Arkansas: http://bumperscollege.uark.edu/test_cses2012/1946.php
National Academy of Sciences Report: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12804

3) Glyphosate use is increasing steadily

According to the USGS, more than 88,000 tons of glyphosate were used in the United States in 2007, up from 11,000 tons in 1992. Since the advent of “super weeds,” the use of glyphosate (and other even stronger weed killers) has risen significantly.

Article: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/31/us-glyphosate-pollution-idUSTRE77U61720110831

4) Glyphosate is not breaking down as promised

In 1996, New York’s attorney general sued Monsanto over the company’s use of “false and misleading advertising” about RoundUp. That case ended with Monsanto agreeing to stop calling Roundup “biodegradable,” and to pull ads claiming that Roundup was “safer than table salt,” “practically nontoxic,” and ”stayed where you put it.”

Two decades after the advent of “RoundUp Ready” crops and their dominance in the agricultural marketplace, the evidence of their falsehoods abound: multiple studies have found significant levels of glyphosate in streams, soil, air, rainwater, and groundwater:

Wastewater: http://toxics.usgs.gov/highlights/glyphosate_wastewater.html
Rain and Streams: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2909
Groundwater: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22101424
Soil: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/124999079/Effects-of-Glyphosate-and-Foliar-Amendments-on-Soil-Microorganisms
Atmosphere, Soil and Surface Water: http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/6444.pdf
Mississippi and Iowa Streams: https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2009AM/finalprogram/abstract_162346.htm

Glyphosate residues are also found in our food: a  recent study found that Glyphosate residues in the main foods of the Western diet – sugar, wheat, and genetically modified corn and soy – inhibit critical enzymes in mammals [which] manifests slowly over time, as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body. 
Source: http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416

No surprise, a study done in Germany in 2012 found glyphosate in all of the urine samples it took from non-agricultural workers in Berlin, at levels 5-20 times the limit for drinking water. Source: http://www.ithaka-journal.net/herbizide-im-urin?lang=en

In June 2013, another study found traces of glyphosate in the urine samples of individuals across 18 countries in Europe. Summary:  http://gmoevidence.com/dr-hans-wolfgang-hoppe-glyphosate-found-in-human-urine-across-europe/  
Original Study Report: http://gmoevidence.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/glyphosate_studyresults_june12.pdf

5) Glyphosate causes birth defects, tumors, and reproductive disorders in animals, as well as sharp declines in beneficial insects

And often at dilutions far lower than the concentrations used in agricultural and even home garden spraying…

Study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20695457
Study: http://www.scribd.com/doc/57277946
Study: http://sustainablefoodtrust.org/2012/09/.pdf
Study: http://www.mlmp.org.pdf
Study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23820267
Study: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/abstract

A June 2011 report assembled by an international team of scientists revealed that studies done as early as the 1980s by biotech and ag-industry corporations (including Monsanto) all showed that Roundup’s active ingredient glyphosate causes birth defects in laboratory animals… again, at very low exposures.

6) Glyphosate is a genotoxic endocrine disruptor to human cells and gut bacteria

Human Cells: http://www.barnstablecounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/gasnier-toxicology-elsevier-262-184-191-glyphostae-ed-human-cell-lines2.pdf

Gut Bacteria: our gut bacteria was recently discovered to contain the very same metabolic pathway in plants that is being targeted and disrupted by Glyphosate—in direct opposition to Monsanto’s claims that the human body did not contain this pathway: http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416
Glyphosate is the key ingredient in Monsanto’s RoundUp weedkiller, along with other “inert” ingredients that are potentially even more dangerous. Use vinegar instead!

Glyphosate is the key ingredient in Monsanto’s RoundUp weedkiller, along with other “inert” ingredients that are potentially even more dangerous. Use vinegar instead!

7) Glyphosate is linked to cancer

Three studies have linked glyphosate exposure with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma:

2001: http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/10/11/1155.long
2002: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12148884
2003: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1740618/

8) Glyphosate causes DNA damage

Inhalation of glyphosate was observed to cause DNA damage after short exposure to concentrations that correspond to the 450-fold dilution of spraying most commonly used in agriculture:

Study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22331240

9) The EPA is still working on Glyphosate’s human risk assessment

Although the EPA has found the time to establish a National Acceptable Daily Intake of glyphosate (5.5% per day; as cited in the study done on pregnant women), long-term human risk assessment studies are slow to emerge.

Glyphosate Detected in Pregnant Women: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22261298
EPA Study Outline and Schedule: http://pesticidetruths.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Reference-glyphosate-2009-12-00-Final-Work-Plan-EPA.pdf

10) Glyphosate resistance is the primary purpose of genetic crop engineering

GM crops have been responsible for a 527 million pound increase in herbicide use in the United States over the first 16 years of commercial use of GM crops (1996 – 2011).

Article in Reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-usa-study-pesticides-idUSBRE89100X20121002
Article compiling facts researched by Nature Magazine: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/01/the-rise-of-genetically-modified-crops-in-two-charts/

Main source for this article : GMO Awareness

For those who want as many scientific references, peer-reviewed studies, and reports as possible…

Why Glyphosate Should be Banned
A Review of its Hazards to Health and the Environment
Sirinathsinghji, E., Ho, Mae-Wan
Overview: http://permaculturenews.org/2012/11/01/why-glyphosate-should-be-banned-a-review-of-its-hazards-to-health-and-the-environment/
Full Report (ISIS Members only): http://www.i-sis.org.uk/error/login_error.php?location=Why_Glyphosate_Should_be_Banned.php
Glyphosate Fact Sheet from Beyond Pesticides
http://www.beyondpesticides.org/pesticides/factsheets/Glyphosate.pdf
Glyphosate Fact Sheet from Pesticide.org
http://www.pesticide.org/get-the-facts/pesticide-factsheets/factsheets/glyphosate
Glyphosate Fact Sheet from Mindfully.Org
http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/Roundup-Glyphosate-Factsheet-Cox.htm
Glyphosate Toxicology
Caroline Cox. Journal of Pesticide Reform, Volume 15, Number 3, Fall 1995. Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, Eugene, OR.

Radioactive Levels at Fukushima Jump 9000% in 3 Days

Like our new page on Facebook(Click Below)  
The Natural Health Page

Some of the highest levels of ionizing radiation yet detected since the disaster first occurred were recently recorded at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power facility in Japan, according to shocking new reports. The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), which runs the crippled nuclear plant, says levels of radioactive cesium in a water well were 9,000 percent higher on July 8, 2013, than they were three days earlier, and nobody knows why this is the case.

The Asahi Shimbun reports that TEPCO observed the spike after testing water in a well on the seaward side of Fukushima’s No. 2 reactor. According to readings taken, radioactive cesium levels registered at an astounding 27,000 becquerels per liter (Bq/l), which is the highest ever since March 11, 2011, when the tsunami and earthquake first struck the plant. At this point, the cause of the spike is still unknown.



“It is unclear whether the radioactive water is leaking into the sea,” said a TEPCO official, following the discovery. “After gathering needed data, we will conduct analyses.”

As you may recall, radioactive water from the No. 2 well was found to have been leaking about a month after the disaster struck in April 2011. At that time, about 9,000 Bq/l of cesium-134 and 18,000 Bq/l of cesium-137 were detected in water samples. These amounts are 150 and 200 times higher, respectively, than the maximum level legally permitted.

At the same time, levels of other harmful forms of radiation, including strontium, have remained oddly consistent, which has many officials scratching their heads. According to the most recent data, radioactive strontium levels remained mostly steady around 890,000 Bq/l both before and after the cesium spike.

“We do not know why only cesium levels have risen,” added the TEPCO official.
Radioactive tritium levels are also spiking dramatically, say officials

Besides cesium, radioactive tritium has also been detected in significantly higher amounts near the No. 2 well. According to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), tritium levels in groundwater near the reactor have jumped 17-fold since December, and are continuing to rise with each passing day. Since May, tritium levels have increased a staggering 20 percent.

“[T]he tritium level that TEPCO measured on July 5 in one of its coastal monitoring wells near reactor No. 2 is ten times above Japan’s safety standard of 60,000 becquerels per liter, and rising,” writes Phred Dvorak for the WSJ. “That’s the highest such level the company has recorded since the incident.”

What this all suggests, of course, is that the Fukushima disaster is far from over, and may only be in the early stages of unleashing massive environmental destruction. Despite the fact that more than two years have passed since the disaster’s onset, the situation appears to be intensifying with no end in sight, which could lead to much more serious problems in the future.

Meanwhile, as much as 93 billion becquerels of radioactive substances are believed to still be pouring into the Pacific Ocean every single day as a result of the Fukushima disaster. Reports from back in March indicate that, since the disaster, a total of 16.1 trillion becquerels of just cesium-137 are believed to have leaked into seawater.

“Once again, TEPCO release the bad news in a drip, drip, drip mode,” wrote one commenter on an ENENews.com report on the issue. “These destroyed nuclear reactors are going to pop and sputter for thousands of years to come. Changes in the configuration of residual melted fuel remaining in and around the plants will create ongoing criticalities, with changing cooling water and groundwater flows.”

Sources: Raw For Beauty , Natural News

Don't forget to like our new page on Facebook >> The Natural Health Page