Health Articles Home
You may be poisoning yourself on a daily basis.

Many of the products you use could be poisoning you. Here are some of the toxic ingredients in products that many people use every day.

AIR FRESHENERS: Most air fresheners interfere with your ability to smell by coating your nasal passages with an oil film, or by releasing a nerve-deadening agent. Known toxic chemicals found in an air freshener: 
1. Formaldehyde: Highly toxic, known carcinogen. 
2. Phenol: When phenol touches your skin it can cause it to swell, burn, peel, and break out in hives. Can cause cold sweats, convulsions, circulatory collapse, coma and even death! 

AMMONIA: It is a very volatile chemical; it is very damaging to your eyes, respiratory tract and skin. 

BLEACH: It is a strong corrosive. It will irritate or bum the skin, eyes and respiratory tract. It may cause pulmonary edema or vomiting and coma if ingested. Warning: never mix bleach with ammonia it may cause fumes which can be deadly. 

CARPET AND UPHOLSTERY SHAMPOO: Most formulas are designed to over power the stain itself; they accomplish the task but not without using highly toxic substances. Some include: 
1. Perchlorethylene: Known carcinogen; Can cause liver, kidney and nervous system damage. 
2. Ammonium Hydroxide: Corrosive, extremely irritable to eyes, skin and respiratory passages.

1. Chlorine: Contained in a dry form that is highly concentrated. Number 1 cause of child poisonings according to poison control centers. 

DRAIN CLEANER: Most drain cleaners contain lye, hydrochloric acid or trichloroethane. 
Lye: Caustic burns to skin and eyes, if ingested will damage esophagus and stomach. 
Hydrochloric Acid: Corrosive, eye and skin irritant, damages kidneys, liver and digestive tract. 
Trichloroethane: Eye and skin irritant, nervous system depressant; damages liver and kidneys 

1. Petroleum Distillates: Highly flammable, can cause skin and lung cancer. 
2. Phenol: (See Air fresheners, Phenol.) 
3. Nitrobenzene: Easily absorbed through the skin, extremely toxic. 

1. Sodium Hypochlorite: Corrosive irritates or bums skin and eyes, causes fluid in the lungs, which can lead to coma or death! 
2. Formaldehyde: Highly toxic, known carcinogen. Irritant to eyes, nose, throat, and skin. May cause nausea, headaches, nosebleeds, dizziness, memory loss and shortness of breath. 

1. Sodium Hydroxide (Lye): Caustic! Strong irritant, which can cause burns to both skin and eyes. Inhibits reflexes, will cause severe tissue damage if swallowed. 

1. Triclosan: Absorption through the skin can be tied to liver damage. 

1. Sodium or Calcium Hypocrite: Highly corrosive; irritates or burns skin, eyes or respiratory tract. 
2. Linear Alkylate Sulfonate: Absorbed through the skin. Known liver damaging agent. 
3. Sodium Tripolyphosphate: Irritates skin and mucous membranes, causes vomiting. Easily absorbed through the skin from clothes. 

1. Hydrochloric Acid: Highly corrosive, irritant to both skin and eyes. Damages kidneys and liver . 
2. Hypo Chlorite Bleach: Corrosive, irritates or burns eyes, skin and respiratory tract. May cause pulmonary edema, vomiting or coma if ingested. Contact with other chemicals may cause chlorine fumes, which may be fatal. 

PESTICIDES: Most pesticides have ingredients that affect the nervous system of insects. Imagine what these extremely poisonous chemicals do to your body, or your baby's body. 
1. Dimpylate: Better known as Diazinon, extremely toxic. Impairs the central nervous system. 
2. Chlorinate Hydrocarbons: Suspected carcinogen and mutantagen. Accumulates m food and m fatty tissue. Will attack the nervous system. 
3. Organophosphates: Toxic and poisonous. If you can smell it, your lungs are absorbing it. 

LICE SHAMPOO: * Especially vulnerable are children. 
1. Lindane: inhalation, ingestion, or absorption through the skin causes vomiting, diarrhea, convulsions and circulatory collapse. May cause liver damage, stillbirths, birth defects and cancer. 

CAR WASH AND POLISH: Petroleum Distillates: Associated with skin and lung cancer, irritant to skin, eyes, nose and lungs. Entry into the lungs may cause fatal pulmonary edema, most marked Danger -Harmful or Fatal. 

DANGER - Harmful or Fatal if absorbed by or through the skin, ingested or inhaled. One taste to a teaspoon can be FATAL to an adult! 

WARNING -Harmful or Fatal if absorbed by or through the skin, ingested or inhaled. One teaspoon to an ounce can be FATAL to an adult! 

CAUTION -Harmful or fatal if absorbed by or through the skin, ingested or inhaled. One ounce to a pint can be FATAL to an adult! 

What keeps you from just relaxing? What makes you feel so tired? Why do you get sick so much? What is causing your allergies? What is keeping you awake or from sleeping soundly? The Answer? Drugs and toxins in your body We are living in a drug and chemical age. The use of prescription and over-the-counter drugs, "recreational" drugs like marijuana and cocaine, psychiatric drugs, and street drugs has reached epidemic proportions and is crippling the lives of millions of people. The use of these drugs deadens awareness, reduces the learning rate, clouds the thinking and generally makes a person less able to cope with life around them. Additionally, there are over 3,000 chemicals added to the foods we eat found in any supermarket. There are Pesticides that pollute our environment every year, and over 700 different chemical compounds in our common drinking water, not to mention the thousands of chemicals used in cleaning and personal care products and construction materials. Research reveals that drugs and toxic chemicals entering the body by inhalation, skin absorption, and ingestion, stay in the body long after they enter it. Stored in the body; they continue to affect you adversely, making you feel dead, dull, and lifeless. They even cause weight gain. Some chemicals have an immediate impact on the people, but all can be deadly and dangerous in the long term. 

Invest in a safer, healthier future; replace the common toxic household cleaners and personal care products with humanly safe, natural botanical cleansers. These are some of the reported results: 
Able to feel better. 
Feel rested in the morning. 
More in control of life. 
Increase enjoyment. 
Able to do more. 
By replacing the toxic (poisonous) chemicals in the home, yard, and workplace, you reap the benefits of not getting sick as often. 
For safer alternatives visit:
Excerpts from "Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation" 
Dr. Paul Connett
Monday, September 6, 2010

1) Fluoride is not an essential nutrient. No disease has ever been linked to a fluoride deficiency. Humans can have perfectly good teeth without fluoride.

2) Where fluoridation has been discontinued in communities from Canada, the former East Germany, Cuba and Finland, dental decay has not increased but has actually decreased.

3) Modern research (e.g. Diesendorf 1986; Colquhoun 1997, and De Liefde, 1998) shows that decay rates were coming down before fluoridation was introduced and have continued to decline even after its benefits would have been maximized. Many other factors influence tooth decay. Some recent studies have found that tooth decay actually increases as the fluoride concentration in the water increases (Olsson 1979; Retief 1979; Mann 1987, 1990; Steelink 1992; Teotia 1994; Grobleri 2001; Awadia 2002 and Ekanayake 2002).

4) The US fluoridation program has massively failed to achieve one of its key objectives, i.e. to lower dental decay rates while holding down dental fluorosis (mottled and discolored enamel), a condition known to be caused by fluoride. The goal of the early promoters of fluoridation was to limit dental fluorosis (in its mildest form) to 10% of children (NRC 1993, pp. 6-7). A major US survey has found 30% of children in optimally fluoridated areas had dental fluorosis on at least two teeth (Heller 1997), while smaller studies have found up to 80% of children impacted (Williams 1990; Lalumandier 1995 and Morgan 1998). The York Review estimates that up to 48% of children in optimally
fluoridated areas worldwide have dental fluorosis in all forms and 12.5% with symptoms of aesthetic concern (McDonagh,

5) Dental fluorosis means that a child has been overdosed on fluoride. While the mechanism by which the enamel is damaged is not definitively known, it appears fluorosis may be a result of either inhibited enzymes in the growing teeth (Dan Besten 1999), or through fluoride's interference with G-protein signaling mechanisms (Matsuo 1996). In a study in Mexico, Alarcon-Herrera (2001) has shown a linear correlation between the severity of dental fluorosis and the frequency of bone fractures in children.

6) Fluoride is a cumulative poison. On average, only 50% of the fluoride we ingest each day is excreted through the kidneys. The remainder accumulates in our bones, pineal gland, and other tissues. If the kidney is damaged, fluoride accumulation will increase, and with it, the likelihood of harm.

7) Fluoride is very biologically active even at low concentrations. It interferes with hydrogen bonding (Emsley 1981) and inhibits numerous enzymes (Waldbott 1978). 

8) When complexed with aluminum, fluoride interferes with Gproteins (Bigay 1985, 1987). Such interactions give aluminumfluoride complexes the potential to interfere with many hormonal and some neurochemical signals (Strunecka and Patocka 1999, Li 2003).

9) Fluoride has been shown to be mutagenic, cause chromosome damage and interfere with the enzymes involved with DNA repair in a variety of cell and tissue studies (Tsutsui 1984; Caspary 1987; Kishi 1993 and Mihashi 1996). Recent studies have also found a correlation between fluoride exposure and chromosome damage in humans (Sheth 1994; Wu 1995; Meng 1997 and Joseph 2000).

10) Fluoride forms complexes with a large number of metal ions,
which include metals which are needed in the body (like calcium and magnesium) and metals (like lead and aluminum) which are toxic to the body. This can cause a variety of problems. For example, fluoride interferes with enzymes where magnesium is an important co-factor, and it can help facilitate the uptake of aluminum and lead into tissues where these metals wouldn't otherwise go (Mahaffey 1976; Allain 1996; Varner 1998).

11) Rats fed for one year with 1 ppm fluoride in their water, using either sodium fluoride or aluminum fluoride, had morphological changes to their kidneys and brains, an increased uptake of aluminum in the brain, and the formation of beta amyloid deposits which are characteristic of Alzheimers disease (Varner 1998).

12) Animal experiments show that fluoride accumulates in the brain and exposure alters mental behavior in a manner consistent with a neurotoxic agent (Mullenix 1995). Rats dosed prenatally demonstrated hyperactive behavior. Those dosed postnatally demonstrated hypoactivity (i.e. under activity or "couch potato" syndrome). More recent animal experiments have reported that fluoride can damage the brain (Wang 1997; Guan 1998; Varner 1998; Zhao 1998; Zhang 1999; Lu 2000; Shao 2000; Sun 2000; Bhatnagar 2002; Chen 2002, 2003; Long 2002; Shivarajashankara 2002a, b; Shashi 2003 and Zhai 2003) and impact learning and behavior (Paul 1998; Zhang 1999, 2001; Sun 2000; Ekambaram 2001; Bhatnagar 2002).

13) Five studies from China show a lowering of IQ in children
associated with fluoride exposure (Lin Fa-Fu 1991; Li 1995; Zhao 1996; Lu 2000; and Xiang 2003a, b). One of these studies (Lin Fa-Fu 1991) indicates that even just moderate levels of fluoride exposure (e.g. 0.9 ppm in the water) can exacerbate the neurological defects of iodine deficiency.

14) Studies by Jennifer Luke (2001) showed that fluoride accumulates in the human pineal gland to very high levels. In her Ph.D. thesis Luke has also shown in animal studies that fluoride reduces melatonin production and leads to an earlier onset of puberty (Luke 1997).

15) In the first half of the 20th century, fluoride was prescribed by a number of European doctors to reduce the activity of the thyroid gland for those suffering from hyperthyroidism (over active thyroid) (Stecher 1960; Waldbott 1978). With water fluoridation, we are forcing people to drink a thyroid-depressing medication which could, in turn, serve to promote higher levels of hypothyroidism (underactive thyroid) in the population, and all the subsequent problems related to this disorder. Such problems include depression, fatigue, weight gain, muscle and joint pains, increased cholesterol levels, and heart disease. It bears noting that according to the Department of Health and Human Services (1991) fluoride exposure in fluoridated communities is estimated to range from 1.6 to 6.6 mg/day, which is a range that actually overlaps the dose (2.3 - 4.5 mg/day) shown to decrease the functioning of the human thyroid (Galletti & Joyet 1958). This is a remarkable fact, particularly considering the rampant and increasing problem of
hypothyroidism in the United States (in 1999, the second most
prescribed drug of the year was Synthroid, which is a hormone replacement drug used to treat an underactive thyroid). In Russia, Bachinskii (1985) found a lowering of thyroid function, among otherwise healthy people, at 2.3 ppm fluoride in water.

16) Some of the early symptoms of skeletal fluorosis, a fluoride induced bone and joint disease that impacts millions of people in India, China, and Africa , mimic the symptoms of arthritis (Singh 1963; Franke 1975; Teotia 1976; Carnow 1981; Czerwinski 1988; DHHS 1991). According to a review on fluoridation by Chemical & Engineering News, "Because some of the clinical symptoms mimic arthritis, the first two clinical phases of skeletal fluorosis could be easily misdiagnosed" (Hileman 1988). Few if any studies have been done to determine the extent of this misdiagnosis, and whether the high prevalence of arthritis in America (1 in 3 Americans have some form of arthritis - CDC, 2002) is related to our growing fluoride exposure, which is highly plausible. The causes of most forms of arthritis (e.g. osteoarthritis) are unknown.

17) In some studies, when high doses of fluoride (average 26 mg per day) were used in trials to treat patients with osteoporosis in an effort to harden their bones and reduce fracture rates, it actually led to a HIGHER number of fractures, particularly hip fractures (Inkovaara 1975; Gerster 1983; Dambacher 1986; O’Duffy 1986; Hedlund 1989; Bayley 1990; Gutteridge 1990. 2002; Orcel 1990; Riggs 1990 and Schnitzler 1990). The cumulative doses used in these trials are exceeded by the lifetime cumulative doses being experienced by many people living in fluoridated communities.

18) Fluoride administered to animals at high doses wreaks havoc on the male reproductive system - it damages sperm and increases the rate of infertility in a number of different species (Kour 1980; Chinoy 1989; Chinoy 1991; Susheela 1991; Chinoy 1994; Kumar 1994; Narayana 1994a, b; Zhao 1995; Elbetieha 2000; Ghosh 2002 and Zakrzewska 2002). While studies conducted at the FDA have failed to find reproductive effects in rats (Sprando 1996, 1997, 1998), an epidemiological study from the US has found increased rates of infertility among couples living in areas with 3 or more ppm fluoride in the water (Freni 1994), and 2 studies have found a reduced level of circulating testosterone in males living in high fluoride areas (Susheela 1996 and Barot 1998).

19) Once fluoride is put in the water it is impossible to control the dose each individual receives. This is because 1) some people (e.g. manual laborers, athletes, diabetics, and people with kidney disease) drink more water than others, and 2) we receive fluoride from sources other than the water supply. Other sources of fluoride include food and beverages processed with fluoridated water (Kiritsy 1996 and Heilman 1999), fluoridated dental products (Bentley 1999 and Levy 1999), mechanically deboned meat (Fein 2001), teas (Levy 1999), and pesticide residues on food (Stannard 1991 and Burgstahler 1997).

20) Fluoridation is unethical because individuals are not being asked for their informed consent prior to medication. This is standard practice for all medication, and one of the key reasons why most of western Europe has ruled against fluoridation (see appendix 2). As one doctor aptly stated, "No physician in his right senses would prescribe for a person he has never met, whose medical history he does not know, a substance which is intended to create bodily change, with the advice: 'Take as much as you like, but you will take it for the rest of your life because some children suffer from tooth decay.’ It is a preposterous notion."

21) The early studies conducted in 1945 -1955 in the US, which
helped to launch fluoridation, have been heavily criticized for their poor methodology and poor choice of control communities (De Stefano 1954; Sutton 1959, 1960 and 1996; Ziegelbecker 1970). According to Dr. Hubert Arnold, a statistician from the University of California at Davis, the early fluoridation trials "are especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain muddleheadedness and hebetude." In 2000, the British Government’s “York Review” could give no fluoridation trial a grade A classification – despite 50 years of research

22) The US Public Health Service first endorsed fluoridation in 1950, before one single trial had been completed (McClure 1970)!

23) Since 1950, it has been found that fluorides do little to prevent pit and fissure tooth decay, a fact that even the dental community has acknowledged (Seholle 1984; Gray 1987; PHS 1993; and Pinkham 1999). This is significant because pit and fissure tooth decay represents up to 85% of the tooth decay experienced by children today (Seholle 1984 and Gray 1987).

24) The chemicals used to fluoridate water in the US are not pharmaceutical grade. Instead, they come from the wet scrubbing systems of the superphosphate fertilizer industry. These chemicals (90% of which are sodium fluorosilicate and fluorosilicic acid), are classified hazardous wastes contaminated with various impurities. Recent testing by the National Sanitation Foundation suggest that the levels of arsenic in these chemicals are relatively high (up to 1.6 ppb after dilution into public water) and of potential concern (NSF 2000 and Wang 2000).

25) Studies by Masters and Coplan (1999, 2000) show an association between the use of fluorosilicic acid (and its sodium salt) to fluoridate water and an increased uptake of lead into children's blood. Because of lead’s acknowledged ability to damage the child’s developing brain, this is a very serious finding yet it is being largely ignored by fluoridating countries.

26) The recent Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology, Dr. Arvid Carlsson (2000), was one of the leading opponents of fluoridation in Sweden, and part of the panel that recommended that the Swedish government reject the practice, which they did in 1971. According to Carlsson: "I am quite convinced that water fluoridation, in a not-too-distant future, will be consigned to medical history...Water fluoridation goes against leading principles of pharmacotherapy, which is progressing from a stereotyped medication - of the type 1 tablet 3 times a day - to a much more individualized therapy as regards both dosage and selection of drugs. The addition of drugs to the drinking water means exactly the opposite of an individualized therapy" (Carlsson 1978).

27) Many scientists, doctors and dentists who have spoken out publicly on this issue have been subjected to censorship and intimidation (Martin 1991). Most recently, Dr. Phyllis Mullenix was fired from her position as Chair of Toxicology at Forsythe Dental Center for publishing her findings on fluoride and the brain; and Dr. William Marcus was fired from the EPA for questioning the government’s handling of the NTP’s fluoride cancer study (Bryson 2004). Tactics like this would not be
necessary if those promoting fluoridation were on secure scientific ground.

28) The Union representing the scientists at US EPA headquarters in Washington DC is now on record as opposing water fluoridation (Hirzy 1999). According to the Union’s Senior Vice President, Dr. William Hirzy: "In summary, we hold that fluoridation is an unreasonable risk. That is, the toxicity of fluoride is so great and the purported benefits associated with it are so small - if there are any at all - that requiring every man, woman and child in America to ingest it borders on criminal behavior on the part of governments."

When it comes to controversies surrounding toxic chemicals, invested interests traditionally do their very best to discount animal studies and quibble with epidemiological findings. In the past, political pressures have led government agencies to drag their feet on regulating asbestos, benzene, DDT, PCBs, tetraethyl lead, tobacco and dioxins. With fluoridation we have had a fifty year delay. Unfortunately, because government officials have put so much of their credibility on the line defending fluoridation, and because of the huge liabilities waiting in the wings if they admit that fluoridation has caused an increase in hip fracture, arthritis, bone cancer, brain disorders or thyroid problems, it will be very difficult for them to speak honestly and openly about the issue. But they must, not only to protect millions of people from unnecessary harm, but to protect the notion that, at its core, public health policy must be based on sound science not political expediency. They have a tool with which to do this: it's called the Precautionary Principle. Simply put, this says: if in doubt leave it out. This is what most European countries have done and their children's teeth have not suffered, while their public's trust has been strengthened. It is like a question from a Kafka play. Just how much doubt is needed on just one of the health concerns identified above, to override a benefit, which when quantified in the largest survey ever conducted in the US, amounts to less than one tooth surface (out of 128) in a child's mouth? For those who would call for further studies, I say fine. Take the fluoride out of the water first and then conduct all the studies you want. This folly must end without further delay.

Fluoride spill at water facility literally burns holes in parking lot cement.
Ethan A. Huff,
Natural News
March 30, 2011

A recent chemical spill at a water treatment facility in Rock Island, Ill., required the assistance of an emergency relief crew decked in the very same type of hazmat suits being worn by workers at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant in Japan. Except instead of radiation, the leaked chemical at the water plant was actually hydrofluorosilicic acid, a chemical fluoride component commonly added to drinking supplies for the stated purpose of preventing cavities. This fluoride chemical is so hazardous that it actually began to burn through parking lot cement in Rock Island before emergency crews arrived on the scene.

According to reports from WQAD News 8 in Moline, a tanker truck delivering the fluoride began to overflow, leaking the chemical directly onto the parking lot where it spilled down towards the street. And before emergency crews arrived on the scene in full hazmat suits and gas masks, the fluoride had actually begun to burn a hole right through the concrete.

“It’s a corrosive agent that the water treatment plant uses,” said Rock Island assistant fire chief Jeff Yerkey, concerning the spilled fluoride. He explained that the crews had to use earthen berms, dirt, sand, and commercial broom equipment to stop the leak. Yerkey also added that there was no “inhalation hazard” from the incident, and no evacuation of local residents was required.

What is truly amazing about the incident is that this very same fluoride, which fire chief Yerkey specifically called a “corrosive agent,” is deliberately added to drinking water supplies across the nation. This highly-toxic chemical that, when spilled, requires similar protective equipment as does a radioactive fallout situation, is being added to millions of Americans drinking water supplies every single day in the name of promoting health.

In reality, the events surrounding this fluoride spill are more than enough proof for any rationally-minded person that adding this poison to water supplies is a bad idea. Anything that requires the use of a protective suit and gas mask in order to handle — and that burns a hole directly through concrete — simply cannot be good for the body when ingested.

Additional information on fluoride
Charles Eliot Perkins, a prominent U.S. industrial chemist, was sent by the U.S. government to help reconstruct the I.G. Farben chemical plants in Germany at the end of the war. In 1954, he wrote a letter to the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, stating that he had learned that the Nazi regime had used sodium fluoride as a means of "mass control." "I want to make this very definite and very positive," Perkins wrote. "The real reason behind water fluoridation is not to benefit children's teeth.... The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty. Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluorine will in time gradually reduce the individual's power to resist domination by slowly poisoning and narcotizing this area of brain tissue, and make him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him.... I say this with all the earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years' research into the chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology of 'fluorine.' ....Any person who drinks artificially fluoridated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person, mentally or physically."

Most people do not realize that fluoride is a key ingredient in Prozac and many other psychotropic drugs. Prozac, whose scientific name is fluoxetine, is 94 percent fluoride.

Excerpts from the book Poisoned For Profit by Philip and Alice Shabecoff

The chemical-manufacturing industry is both the single largest manufacturing sector and the single largest source of chemicals that can harm our children's bodies and brains. Also the nuclear power industry even in their day-to-day management, often create hazards to our communities. A whole new industry has been created to "manufacture doubt" about the dangers of industrial products. With sales of $650 billion a year, the chemical industry has enormous resources with which to overwhelm its critics.

The rising tide of childhood illness is linked to the rapid toxification of the world in which children are now conceived and born. The United States now produces or imports at least 27 trillion pounds of chemicals a year which is 74 billion pounds of chemicals per day! Oil is the base for 90 percent of the chemicals. Today there are 900 active pesticide ingredients which are formulated into 18,000 different pesticide products. Genetically engineered crops require 25 percent more pounds of pesticides per acre than conventional varieties. In addition, there are 82,000 industrial chemicals formulated into more than 10 million products.

Ten newborns from different regions of the country, tested in late summer 2004, all carried a body burden of between 154 and 231 chemicals in their umbilical cord blood, meaning that these chemicals had entered their fetal bodies. There were chemicals found that had been banned before the babies' parents were born.

Over half of the most heavily used industrial chemicals are known to be toxic to the brain and nervous system.

In the United States industrial chemicals are rarely tested for health and safety before they are sold and used. Whether an industrial chemical is toxic or not is not available for most chemicals because the manufacturers withhold a lot of information as "trade secrets". Industrial chemicals are considered innocent until proven guilty. The manufacturer is under no obligation to study a chemical's effects on people or the environment.

A chemical, once approved, may be put to any other use by anyone else in any quantity without notifying the EPA, but with a handful of exceptions.

Cosmetic products and ingredients are not subject to any governmental approval with the exception of color additives. Recalls are voluntary. Chemicals identified as hazardous under other regulations are exempt from disclosure when incorporated into cosmetics.

Government "risk analysis" follows a cost-benefit analysis in which health is allotted equal weight with "economic costs" which are the assumed lost profits to corporations and the economy if the manufacturers are required to change or withdraw the chemical. This process reduces life and health to a monetary value.

Research scientists have found that more than 120 diseases have been linked definitively to pollution while another 33 illnesses have a good link to pollution. The latest report of the biennial "Report on Carcinogens" lists 246 chemicals as either "known human carcinogens" or "reasonably anticipated to cause cancer in humans."

A Texas study found that for every one thousand pounds of mercury released in the environment, autism rates rose by 61 percent and the demand for special education grew by 43 percent, and that the closer to the source of mercury emissions, the higher the autism rates. Mercury is also in vaccines. Coal fired power plants pour out much of this mercury into the atmosphere. There is a way to make coal plants safer but it comes at a big cost. 

Labeling is not required for household consumer products. The recipes are considered confidential business information.

Indoor air is often more polluted than outdoor air. A test of homes on Cape Cod detected sixty-six chemical compounds in the dust and fifty-two in the air.

Schools are exempt from federal drinking water regulations and need not test their drinking water. Of the forty-eight pesticides most commonly used in schools, twenty-four are carcinogens and twenty-five cause learning disabilities. Half of the nation's schools have unhealthy indoor air. Often schools are built on the cheapest piece of land. Schools get built next to or on some of the most poisoned places in America. In Marion, Ohio, a middle school and a high school were built on an old military depot; at their ten-year reunion, former students discovered they shared an unusual number of leukemias and rare cancers. 

More than half of the population live in or around areas that violate clean air standards.

When the U.S. Geological Survey, which monitors water quality across the country, tested a sampling of waterways in thirty states, it found ninety-five components of treated human sewage. These included antiseizure drugs, testosterone, estrogen, naproxen, DEET, antibiotics, and the breakdown products of cigarettes. Despite the limited reach of the water laws, chemical factories and manufacturing plants have violated them more than half a million times in the last five years alone. There's a strong link between water pollution and rising male fertility problems. The recent, first national analysis of tap water concludes that 137,000 miscarriages a year may be attributed to the byproducts of chlorinated drinking water.

Companies that manufacture pesticides outlawed in the United States continue to produce and export these chemicals, which are then applied overseas to crops imported back into the United States, in what's been named "a circle of poison."

Ninety percent of human exposure to dioxin occurs through your diet of meat, dairy, eggs, and fish. Consumer Reports found that an average jar of meat-based baby food contains more than one hundred times the EPAs so-called daily limit for dioxins. That limit is based on cancer risks and does not take into account brain damage or other dioxin-linked health effects.

Most certified food colors are synthetics derived from petroleum. A single artificial flavoring can be made up of anywhere from a few to hundreds of separate chemicals, mostly petroleum based. Artificial colors and flavorings are the give-away signs that the product probably contains no real food. All of the additives in food are affecting the maturation of our children; young girls' big bosoms are just one symptom. Additives have also been identified as a factor in ADHD and other illnesses.

Very few diseases are caused solely by a defective inherited gene. In most cases of chronic illness it also involves the environment. Environment can impair the workings of the genes. In families with one child with a birth defect the risk of having another child with a birth defect dropped by half if the mother moved to another town out of the reach of some toxicant in the environment a study demonstrated. Dr. Jeff Murray feels that 70 percent of the cases of birth defects are likely to be a mixture of genes and the environment. 

Cancer can be triggered by a disruption of the body's normal gene expression. Many hormone-disrupting chemicals have been shown to work their ill effects by changing gene expression. Hormones that disrupt normal gene expression might also alter the way cells communicate. Learning and behavioral problems, deformities of the male reproductive tract, and male and female infertility can also be traced to the disruption of hormones. Sixty percent of all herbicides disrupt hormones yet remain widely used in agriculture. One of the hormones these chemicals upset is the thyroid hormone. Even just a slight difference in the mother's level of the thyroid hormone during pregnancy can lead to significant changes in the child's brain development in the womb.

Much of disease is seeded in fetal life. The fetus is at highest risk to even miniscule amounts of exposure to some chemicals at key periods of development. The environment of the womb influences human development so powerfully that it seems to set a person's cellular code for life and cause illness at any time from conception until old age. Almost all childhood leukemias and many other childhood cancers begin before birth. These problems can affect numerous generations. Your health problem could be due to an exposure that your grandparent had.

It is worth considering the possibility, even the probability, that our nation's struggle with early school dropouts, substance abuse, unemployment, crime, and incarceration is in part the result of the toxins pervading our children's early lives. Neurologists are seeing younger and younger children with extreme behavior.

Animal studies bear out the premise that toxicants can produce extreme behavior. Dr. Masters theorizes that children with mental problems are at particular risk of turning to drinking and drugs. 

Too many big corporations get away time and again with polluting our environment. Companies such as GE, Monsanto, Dow Chemical, Union Carbide, Ciba-Geigy, DuPont, Syngenta to name a few. Monsanto was the producer of PCBs and in Anniston, Alabama, Monsanto routinely dumped millions of pounds of toxic waste, chiefly PCBs for almost forty years. These were dumped into streams and open landfills. A boy named Manuel Washington, whose family lived next to the Monsanto plant as a young boy, played in an open meadow and waded in a stream next to the plant. By age nine Manuel was blacking out and having seizures. When he reached his late thirties, he was too weak to feed himself. As his life reached an end, he was completely blind and suffered from psychosis, imagining himself attacked by monsters. He died of heart failure in a nursing home at age forty. The autopsy report listed his death as "acute PCB intoxication in long standing that damaged his pancreas, liver, kidneys and brain." There was a class action lawsuit and the $7,000 that the family of Manuel received, as their share of the settlement with the company, did not even pay for his funeral expenses. Monsanto never acknowledged wrongdoing. Monsanto, like many other big industrial companies, has left its toxic imprint on many communities.

A lawyer by the name of Roger Pardieck was representing two families that had children  that had been exposed to products containing chlorpyrifos and had grown sick. One family was the Ebling family who had a small son A.J. and daughter Christina. They moved into a new apartment complex that was repeatedly sprayed with Dursban and another pesticide called Creal-O. Both of the children were healthy when they moved in. But soon after moving in both of the children bagan to have seizures. The girl began to show severe neurological problems. She could not color between the lines in preschool. If she left the classroom to go to the bathroom, she could not find her way back. She became incontinent. The little girl continued on a downhill slide cognitively and behaviorally. She is sixteen and has the capacity of about a three-year-old. The little boy will be twelve and has an IQ of 44.

Joshua Herb came into the world a healthy, happy baby but now is a ten-year-old paraplegic, confined to his home with twenty-four-hour nursing care, an oxygen system to breathe, and health care bills of about $30,000 a month. As an infant, Joshua was exposed to Dursban, a particularly potent pesticide.

DuPont has been one of the chief contributors to the explosion of synthetic organic chemicals introduced into the marketplace since World War II. By 1980, the company was included on the EPAs list of the nation's top twenty emitters of cancer-causing substances. It was also the foremost producer of chlorofluorocarbons, the chemical that was found to be destroying the planet's protective ozone layer. One of DuPont's most popular products is Teflon. Teflon has a chemical called PFOA which is highly persistent in the environment and in the human body. A study of newborn babies at Johns Hopkins Hospital found that nearly all of them had detectable levels of PFOA in their blood. DuPont failed to disclose for decades that PFOA from its plants was contaminating water supplies and getting into the air and soil.

Dr. Bill Shelton became concerned about pollution in the area following massive fish kills in nearby Lake Sam Rayburn, one of the state of Texas biggest bodies of water. When tested, he said, the fish were found to contain high levels of dioxin and mercury. He began to notice a very high incidence of cancer and neurological disease among residents of a low-income community called Rivercrest at one end of the lake. People in the community depend for some of their subsistence on the fish they catch from the lake. Dr. Shelton said that from practicing medicine for many years he knows that almost every single adult from Rivercrest has either cancer or a neurological problem and every child is in special education.

There are arms of the federal government that are themselves major polluters whose activities and wastes harm the environment and children. The U.S. military is one, and so is NASA. The chemicals and other materials that are used in weapons and other devices employed by the armed forces are often exceedingly dangerous. The Pentagon has estimated that it would take seventy years and $20 billion just to clean up former military facilities contaminated with toxic, radioactive, and other hazardous substances. Over 130 bases around our country are so contaminated they have been designated as Superfund sites.

Members of the military and their families, including their children, are exposed to this pollution. So are those that live in the neighborhood of the bases and depots. In recent years the Defense Department and the industries that supply it have resisted broad cleanup efforts. In the name of national security, the administration sought to ease environmental rules for the military or exempt it from some regulations.

In 2001 the EPA found that a chemical called TCE which is in many communities drinking water is five to sixty-five times more toxic than an estimate made nearly two decades earlier. TCE is at least partly responsible for thousands of cancers and birth defects every year around the nation. The National Academy of Sciences took on a study of TCE which concluded that the evidence is stronger than ever that the chemical causes cancer.

Atrazine is a herbicide used to kill weeds. It is sprayed over tens of millions of U.S. acres. It contaminates streams in at least twenty-three states. A Swiss company manufactures it but it was never allowed in Switzerland and it is banned in the European Union. There has been evidence from independent researchers that atrazine was turning male frogs into hermaphrodites. Studies have shown that exposure to atrazine during their fetal stage at levels thirty times lower than currently permitted in water converted frogs' male hormones to female, causing the male testes to produce eggs rather than sperm. Atrazine is a potent endocrine disruptor. Atrazine has also been linked to cancer.

The chemical industry has paid scientists to state that their products do not do harm. Just as the pharmceutical industry has done. It has come out more and more that much of this supposed scientific work is actually false to make people believe that their products are OK so that people blindly go on using them. Unfortunately for too many people their god is money and they will do almost anything for the right price. 

When Dr. C. Everett Koop, the former U.S. surgeon general, came out saying that latex was safe, such as latex gloves, it was shown that he had a $1 million contract with a leading manufacturer of latex gloves. The CDC study that he cited stating that latex was safe had never been done. A visit to any hospital will demonstrate that latex has indeed been identified as a potentially harmful substance.

Nuclear energy has been touted as safe and clean but it has been found that many of the nuclear plants in this country release radioactive substances into the air and ground on a regular basis. Anyone living in close proximity to a nuclear plant has a good reason to be concerned. A "definitive" report by the National Academy of Sciences in 1990, however, found that there was no safe thresholds for exposure  to radiation. It stated that "the smallest dose of radiation is capable of causing mutations within DNA and therefore capable of causing cancer."


Be careful who you are supporting with your money and if you invest in the stock market understand about the companies that you are buying stock from. Your money is supporting what they do. For the very best products to support you in all areas of wellness visit: