Dr. John Bergman – Jan 20, 2020 – Video 52 min
Sustainable Pulse – Dec 18, 2019
According the a new study, soybean production in South America now covers over 57 million hectares, more than on any other continent. The consequences for amphibians have been devastating, as is clear from the study highlights and abstract.
The authors conclude in their study: “Our work has triggered alarm
about the detrimental impact of pesticides (insecticides and herbicides)
on native amphibians inhabiting the shallow ponds of the richest
agricultural lands of South America. We documented effects caused by
pesticides on tadpoles which can compromise the viability of populations
living in agricultural landscapes. The intensive agricultural model
based on the GMO technological package currently applied in South
America is expected to expand (and intensify) over the coming years.
Therefore, it is also expected that native amphibian populations will
continue being affected. We suggest that conservation priorities should
be focused on developing a better policy legislation for pesticide use,
including not only the protection of human settlements but also native
terrestrial and wetland habitats.”
Pesticides in the real world: The consequences of GMO-based intensive agriculture on native amphibians
M. Gabriela Agostini, Ignacio Roesler, Carlos Bonetto, Alicia E.Ronco, David Bilenca
Volume 241, January 2020, 108355
• Collaborative work with farmers allowed us to test pesticide impacts on amphibians.
• Tadpole survival dramatically decreased after pesticides reached the ponds.
• 93% of surviving tadpoles exposed to insecticides, exhibited impairment of mobility.
• Glyphosate exposures caused sublethal effects, reducing tadpole mobility in 79% [of tadpoles].
• We detected pesticide impacts on amphibians in real exposure scenarios.
Pesticide use has been suggested as one of the major drivers of the global amphibian decline. Laboratory and mesocosm studies have addressed several questions to understand the mechanism by which pesticides cause detrimental effects on amphibians. However, the extrapolation of those results to natural populations may not be adequate to predict environmental impacts or to understand the role of pesticides in the amphibian decline. By using in situ enclosures, we evaluated the effects (survival and mobility) of common pesticides applied by farmers (cypermethrin, chlorpyrifos, endosulfan, glyphosate, and 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid) on tadpoles. We assessed these effects in four common amphibian species from South America across 91 ponds located in the Pampas of central Argentina. We found that survival decreased in 13 out of 20 pesticides applications concomitantly with detection of pesticides in water ponds. 48 h after applications, mixtures containing endosulfan or chlorpyrifos reduced tadpole survival to <1% while the cypermethrin mixtures reduced survival to 10%. In addition, we found impairment of mobility in all combination of pesticides, including glyphosate. The ecological context involved in our study represents the common exposure scenarios related to GMO-based agriculture practices in South America, with relevance at regional levels. We emphasize that multifaceted approaches developed to understand the role of pesticides in the amphibian decline need a conservation perspective. This will be achieved by work focusing on the integrated use of state-of-the-art techniques and resources for documenting pesticide effects over wild amphibians’ populations, allowing conservation scientists to generate better management recommendations.
What I’ve Learned – Feb 18, 2018 – Video 13:22
The gut microbiota is a huge topic and has some very significant implications for health and nutrition. Here I’ve explained just a tiny bit of the research.
A pdf with a transcript for the video and links to sources can be found here: https://www.patreon.com/posts/17115405 ________ Books: “The Good Gut” by Justin and Erica Sonnenburg – http://amzn.to/2ETThV2 “Missing Microbes” By Martin Blaser – http://amzn.to/2Hu43jh “Brain Maker” By David Perlmutter – http://amzn.to/2sF5EiO (Not mentioned in the video, but another good book on the subject)
The Intercept – Jan 8, 2020 – Lee Fang
In September 2009, over 3,000 bee enthusiasts from around the world descended on the city of Montpellier in southern France for Apimondia — a festive beekeeper conference filled with scientific lectures, hobbyist demonstrations, and commercial beekeepers hawking honey. But that year, a cloud loomed over the event: bee colonies across the globe were collapsing, and billions of bees were dying.
Bee declines have been observed throughout recorded history, but the sudden, persistent and abnormally high annual hive losses had gotten so bad that the U.S. Department of Agriculture had commissioned two of the world’s most well-known entomologists — Dennis vanEngelsdorp, a chief apiary inspector in Pennsylvania, then studying at Penn State University, and Jeffrey Pettis, then working as a government scientist — to study the mysterious decline. They posited that there must be an underlying factor weakening bees’ immune systems.
At Le Corum, a conference center and opera house, the pair discussed their findings. They had fed bees with extremely small amounts of neonicotinoids, or neonics, the most commonly used class of insecticides in the world. Neonics are, of course, meant to kill insects, but they are marketed as safe for insects that aren’t being directly targeted. VanEngelsdorp and Pettis found that even at nonlethal doses, the bees in the trial became much more vulnerable to fungal infection. Bees carrying an infection will often fly off to die, a virtuous form of suicide designed to protect the larger hive from contagion.
“We exposed whole colonies to very low levels of neonicotinoids in this case, and then challenged bees from those colonies with Nosema, a pathogen, a gut pathogen,” said Pettis, speaking to filmmaker Mark Daniels in his documentary, “The Strange Disappearance of the Bees,” at Apimondia. “And we saw an increase, even if we fed the pesticide at very low levels — an increase in Nosema levels — in direct response to the low-level feeding of neonicotinoids.”
The dosages of the pesticide were so miniscule, said vanEngelsdorp, that it was “below the limit of detection.” The only reason they knew the bees had consumed the neonicotinoids, he added, was “because we exposed them.”
Bee health depends on a variety of synergistic factors, the scientists were careful to note. But in this study, Pettis said, they were able to isolate “one pesticide and one pathogen and we clearly see the interaction.”
The evidence was mounting. Shortly after vanEngelsdorp and Pettis revealed their findings, a number of French researchers produced a nearly identical study, feeding minute amounts of the same pesticide to bees, along with a control group. The study produced results that echoed what the Americans had found.
Drifting clouds of neonicotinoid dust from planting operations caused a series of massive bee die-offs in northern Italy and the Baden-Württemberg region of Germany. Studies have shown neonicotinoids impaired bees’ ability to navigate and forage for food, weakened bee colonies, and made them prone to infestation by parasitic mites.
In 2013, the European Union called for a temporary suspension of the most commonly used neonicotinoid-based products on flowering plants, citing the danger posed to bees — an effort that resulted in a permanent ban in 2018.
In the U.S., however, industry dug in, seeking not only to discredit the research but to cast pesticide companies as a solution to the problem. Lobbying documents and emails, many of which were obtained through open records requests, show a sophisticated effort over the last decade by the pesticide industry to obstruct any effort to restrict the use of neonicotinoids. Bayer and Syngenta, the largest manufacturers of neonics, and Monsanto, one of the leading producers of seeds pretreated with neonics, cultivated ties with prominent academics, including vanEngelsdorp, and other scientists who had once called for a greater focus on the threat posed by pesticides.
The companies also sought influence with beekeepers and regulators, and went to great lengths to shape public opinion. Pesticide firms launched new coalitions and seeded foundations with cash to focus on nonpesticide factors in pollinator decline.
“Position the industry as an active promoter of bee health, and advance best management practices which emphasize bee safety,” noted an internal planning memo from CropLife America, the lobby group for the largest pesticide companies in America, including Bayer and Syngenta. The ultimate goal of the bee health project, the document noted, was to ensure that member companies maintained market access for neonic products and other systemic pesticides.
The planning memo, helmed in part by Syngenta regulatory official John Abbott, charts a variety of strategies for advancing the pesticide industry’s interests, such as, “Challenge EPA on the size and breadth of the pollinator testing program.” CropLife America officials were also tapped to “proactively shape the conversation in the new media realm with respect to pollinators” and “minimize negative association of crop protection products with effects on pollinators.” The document, dated June 2014, calls for “outreach to university researchers who could be independent validators.”
The pesticide companies have used a variety of strategies to shift the public discourse.
“America’s Heartland,” a PBS series shown on affiliates throughout the country and underwritten by CropLife America, portrayed the pollinator declines as a mystery. One segment from early 2013 on the crisis made no mention of pesticides, with the host simply declaring that “experts aren’t sure why” bees and butterflies were disappearing.
Natural News – Sept 17, 2018 – S.D. Wells
There’s one thing that most major cancer foundations and cancer drive organizations never mention when “searching for the cure” or “marching for the cure” for cancer – and that is chemicals in food. In fact, at most pink ribbon events, many of the worst cancer-causing chemicals are served up in the foods and drinks everybody is sucking down while hoping to find a cure. In fact, you’ll find nitrate-loaded (KFC) fried chicken and Mike’s hard lemonade (alcoholic style) at the Susan Komen Foundation events. They might as well serve carcinogenic diet soda and administer mercury-laden flu shots while they’re at it. Thanks Komen.
Are they sinister or just stupid? How ironic and uneducated these folks are when it comes to “searching for” the prevention and cure of the biggest human health blight this planet has ever seen.
You wouldn’t throw gasoline on a fire to try to put it out, so why eat cancer-causing foods while marching for the cure?
There are so many accidental hypocrites in America. People are literally becoming more ignorant by the day from eating the wrong foods, drinking the wrong drinks, and taking all the wrong medications, and then wondering why “God” or the nation’s “top oncologists” can’t save them with divine intervention or chemotherapy after they’re a couple decades deep into chronic inflammation and irregular cell division.
Listen folks, stop counting calories and start counting chemicals if you want to get healthy, find your ideal weight, and avoid the “disease” (it’s really a cell disorder, not a disease) that’s crippling and offing every third American.
The number one excuse people have for not regulating and filtering what they eat is that it’s too overwhelming. The number two excuse is that it’s too expensive. Hey, if you want to really be overwhelmed and bankrupt, just try getting cancer and paying the copays for surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, and prescription drugs for the rest of your shortened, miserable life.
Here’s a start – filter out the top twenty (and most common) chemicals that are concocted in laboratories, added to typical American foods and beverages, and then labeled as “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) by the FDA.
Top 20 carcinogenic agents that wreck the “search for the cure” for cancer by strangling and mutating your cells
- Nitrates and Nitrites (think of hot dogs, bacon, deli meats)
- Sodium Benzoate (think of foods in jars and sodas)
- Aspartame (think of diet drinks, most chewing gum, mouthwash and breath mints)
- Bleach (think whitened foods, like bread, flour, sugar, rice, pasta)
- Ammonia (most treated meats, including fish)
- Sucralose – an artificial sweetener (think of Splenda) – synthetic, lab-made
- FD&C industrial-based food coloring: Yellow, Blue, Red and artificial caramel coloring (think candy, cereal, cough syrup)
- Parabens – common in beer, sodas, sauces, jams, dairy products. Parabens are often found present in breast tumors
- Phthalates – commonly found in meats and cheeses that are packaged in microwaveable plastic
- Sodium Lauryl Sulfate – a.k.a. SLS – yes, it’s found in food too (not just personal products); like dried eggs, marshmallows, drink mixes – SLS serves as a thickener or emulsifier
- Fluoride (think of tap water, toothpaste, and mouthwash)
- Insecticides – most conventional food contains them
- Herbicides, especially Roundup (most conventional wheat, vegetables and fruit)
- GMOs – genetically modified organisms in food (vaccines and medicine also)
- Bisphenol A (BPA) – artificial estrogen, hormone disrupting chemical that leaches from can liners and plastic bottles
- Phosphoric Acid (think of sodas)
- Hormones in meat and dairy
- Hexane (think of hydrogenated oils)
- Aluminum (think antacids and tap water)
- Gluten (causes constipation, cancerous polyps)
Don’t eat cancer, and you won’t find yourself wondering WHY you got it or HOW to fight it
First things first: You should be shopping only around the perimeter of grocery stores, health food stores and supermarkets. That’s where the live, raw, fresh, organic produce is on display. Second: Realize that most conventional produce is genetically modified to contain pesticides inside, and then sprayed with bug killer and weed killer on the outside, and then doused daily with sodium-fluoride-laden water. That same conventional produce is grown in soil that’s depleted of nutrients by years of toxic chemical fertilizers, insecticides and herbicides. Fact: More than 90 percent of U.S. soy, corn, and canola is genetically modified.
Did you know that most meat in America comes from filthy, inhumane, confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) where there’s so much infection from E. coli and salmonella that processors have to use bleach and ammonia to kill the bacteria? Then red dye, nitrates and monosodium glutamate are added to “restore” flavor and preserve the carcasses until butchers chop it up and wrap it up and stamp it “for sale” in all the tidy display cases. That’s why pancreatic cancer has the lowest survival rate, because the pancreas can’t handle all those tissue burning toxins that Americans just keep sucking down, day in and day out.
Follow these rules of thumb when shopping and you’re off to a great start. If it’s made in a lab, don’t eat it. If you can’t pronounce the ingredients, put the product back. If the produce belong to the “dirty dozen,” they better be organic. If the meat’s not grass-fed and organic, veer clear. Lastly, avoid stress. Believe it or not, it may just be the number one cause of cancer, even though it’s not a chemical.
Urban Farmer Curtis Stone – Oct 10, 2018 – Video 10 min
Follow John and Wise Earth at @wiseearthfarm ▶️Online courses: http://theurbanfarmer.co/onlinecourses/ ▶️On-farm workshops: http://theurbanfarmer.co/pmg/ ▶️Sign Up For My Newsletter: http://theurbanfarmer.co/signup? ▶️Read my blog: https://medium.com/@urbanfarmercstone ▶️Watch us on Instagram: @greencityacres Buy my book here: http://bit.ly/AllinOnebook Use this discount code for $15 off: newsub