By policy, the FDA considers GMO foods to be substantially equivalent to their non-genetically modified counterparts, and to be generally recognized as safe. GMOs do after all, look very similar to their conventional counterparts and they are grown under somewhat similar conditions. Under FDA guidelines, this leaves foods that are newly invented to be poorly tested, and the FDA assumes them to be safe without sufficient evidence to reach such conclusions. Under the limitations of our current biotechnology, whenever genes are artificially manipulated, unintended consequences inevitably result.

Independent Scientists Are Finding That GMOs are Not Substantially Equivalent to Their Conventional Counterparts

A new study from Cambridge University demonstrates that GMO soy is less nutritious and more toxic than conventional soy. Each GMO crop is unique, and this study focused solely on one type of genetically modified soy. Undoubtedly, more research is needed on other GMOs. So far the FDA’s notions of substantial equivalence, are not holding up in independent research. As is often the case, independent science is yielding objective results, giving us the good news with the bad.

The Revolving Door Told Us GMOs Were Safe

FDA assumptions of substantial equivalence were at best based upon wishful thinking, but much more likely to have been decisions made with the intention of prioritizing profit over health. The FDA is after all, staffed by a revolving door of management level biotech and pharmaceutical employees. FDA hierarchy move back and forth between the private and public sectors, reaping huge benefits along the way. Consumer advocates don’t work at the FDA; it is the industry insiders who do. The independent scientists are doing the testing for safety that the FDA should have done.

System Biology is Yielding New Insight Into GMOs

Using a systems biology approach, two researchers from Cambridge University have demonstrated how the genetic modifications made to CP4 EPSPS, better known as Roundup Ready soy, has resulted in significant systemic changes to the plant’s nutritional value, rendering the GMO soy bean less nutritious and more toxic.

Dr. Ayyadurai and Dr. Deonikar’s results show how instead of the plant producing normal levels of enzymes and antioxidants such as glutathione and super oxide dismutase, Round Up Ready soy is almost completely devoid of glutathione. This GMO soy produces significant amounts of formaldehyde, a substance that is widely known to be toxic and a carcinogen.

Formaldehyde Is Not The Kind of Chemical That You Would Want in Your Food

Formaldehyde has a lot of uses in manufacturing. It is often used as an additive in glue, in wrinkle free shirts, as an additive in hair straighteners, and it has been used as an embalming agent for thousands of years. (It is believed that the Egyptians were the first to use formaldehyde). The chemical is falling out favor with many funeral directors. When used in embalming, great effort is made to avoid accidentally breathing in the fumes. Despite improved ventilation and modern protective gear, many funeral homes refuse to work with formaldehyde simply because it is too dangerous. Its ubiquitous use in manufacturing has come under scrutiny as well.

We can add formaldehyde as yet another one of the ingredients that is being hidden in our food. The struggle to label genetically modified soy can be thought of as the struggle to label formaldehyde laden, antioxidant deficient soy as well. There is no scientific justification to assume that GMOs are substantially equivalent to other foods. On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence that GMOs kill beneficail microbes in our gut and damage our digestive system (see Leaky Gut Syndrome and Autoimmune Diseases). Afterall, that’s what they’re designed to do.

Recommended Reading:

• Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods
• Scientists Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done The Research
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done The Research
• Celebrities Against Circumcision

Sources:

• Do GMOs Accumulate Formaldehyde and Disrupt Molecular Systems Equilibria? Systems Biology May Provide Answers – Scientific Research
• Seeding Fear – Neal Young.com
• Artificial Versus Natural Genetic Modification & Perils Of GMOs – Permaculture Research Institute
• Despite Risk, Embalmers Still Embrace Preservative – New York Times

The popularity of the organic food movement is spreading like wildfire. Who should we look to for future growth and encouragement?

Women Playing a More Active Role

The organic food movement is undergoing a revolution. Typically a male-dominated field, the food supply industry is seeing a rise in the number of women who are not only farming, but making their voices heard about issues related to the foods we eat.

The change shouldn’t come as a surprise, really.

One health expert and influential business leader, Monica Eaton-Cardone, pointed out: “In many situations, it’s women who represent the largest section of consumer spending, and yet, the majority of people making decisions in merchant companies are men.” Eaton-Cardone says that when women influence the decision-making process you see more appropriate, faster solutions to problems.

Some of the rising stars of the organic food movement are the ones who have raised awareness of the topic, either by building a platform to speak from or by using their existing platform to educate others. Let’s meet some of them.

Clare Leschin-Hoar

Clare Leschin-Hoar has built a following and a reputation by focusing her writing on the issues surrounding the convergence of the environment, food, and health.

A national writer, speaker and moderator, she has waded into the complicated waters of sustainable seafood and fishing to bring insight and thought into an emotionally charged topic.

She’s covered some of this generation’s toughest food questions: antibiotics in food production, food waste, and regulations for food suppliers. Her work has appeared in publications such as The Guardian, Scientific American, and Time.

Follow her: 

Carey Gillam

Reuter’s reporter Carey Gillam doesn’t shy away from the tough topics related to farming. She focuses on genetic engineering, reporting on issues surrounding GMOs, Monsanto, and DuPont.

Despite pressure from her opponents, Gillam strives to be fair in her reporting and refuses to avoid asking tough questions of both sides of an issue. Her work can be found on C-Span and in the Washington Journal, to name a few.

Follow her:  

Melanie Warner

Author of Pandora’s Lunchbox: How Processed Food Took Over the American Meal, Melanie Warner is a freelance reporter for the New York Times. Her career as a food science writer began when she questioned how an individually wrapped slice of cheese could remain the same for years.

A former business reporter, she used her investigative skills to look into the inner workings of the food industry and was horrified by what she found. Her years of research into the new realities of food science have helped bring to light the true nature of processed food and have helped fuel the cry for a return to “real food.”

Follow her:  

Vani Hari

According to Time Magazine, Vani Hari (author of The Food Babe) is one of the most influential people on the Internet. Food activist, blogger and author, Hari has come under fire for her activism regarding food science.

Her interest in food science began after a health scare related to her diet landed her in the hospital. Determined to change her eating habits, she started investigating the food she ate and shared her findings on her blog. Since her beginning, Hari has amassed a huge following: a single tweet from her account can garner over 50,000 signatures on a petition in a matter of hours.

Critics claim she specializes in pseudoscience, using scare tactics to propel the public to action, while supporters point to her successes as proof of her legitimacy. Either way, she is bringing attention to the issues of food science on a national level.

Follow her:  

Conclusion

Historically, the food industry has operated largely unchecked, even as the idea of food merged into food science. Writers such as the ones named above are working to turn the public’s attention to this phenomenon, demanding answers and raising awareness to what is happening behind the scenes at farms, grocery stores, and laboratories across the nation.

If you truly “are what you eat”, these women are making sure you know exactly what you’re becoming.

Recommended Reading:

• 8 Easy Steps to Health
• Total Nutrition – Make your own Homemade Multivitamin and Mineral Formula

Sources:

• “Educate women on opportunities”, says Monica Eaton-Cardone – Security News Desk
• Author Clare Leschin-Hoar’s contributions – Future Food 2050
• Biotech’s Assault on Balanced Journalism – Organic Consumers
• Interview with Melanie Warner – Author of Pandora’s Lunchbox – 100 Days of Real Food
• Food Babe blogger Vani Hari taking heat over health science – The Denver Post
• Taking On the Food Industry, One Blog Post at a Time – The New York Times

“The doctor of the future will give no medication, but will interest his patients in the care of the human frame, diet and in the cause and prevention of disease. ~ ”

― Thomas A. Edison

Becoming a doctor of chiropractic is no small undertaking. In most states it requires eight years of schooling – four years of undergraduate study, mostly focusing on the sciences and four years of chiropractic school. On average, chiropractic school requires 372 more hours of classroom time than medical school. More time is spent studying anatomy, physiology, diagnostics, and orthopedics in chiropractic school than in medical school. In addition, twenty hours of continual training is required each year, but most chiropractors get more.

Chiropractors are well-educated healers who have varied opinions on vaccines and pharmaceuticals. But, trained in medicine, with a more holistic perspective, chiropractors tend to be, on average, a great deal more skeptical of vaccines than physicians.

The following chiropractors are speaking up to inform the public about the dangers of vaccines.

Dr. David Jockers, D.C.

Vaccines are one of medicine’s prized attempts to improve human performance.  They use artificial laboratory derived medical technology to produce an immune response within the body in hopes it will lead to a long-term positive antibody response.

The vaccine ideology is based on the belief that people are created with inferior immune systems that are unable to keep up with the demands of the environment and need modern technology in the form of man-made vaccine formulations in order to bolster immunity.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, “The following substances are found in flu vaccines:  aluminum, antibiotics, formaldehyde, human aborted fetal apparatus (dead human tissue), monosodium glutamate (MSG), and thimerosal (mercury).”  Many of these same ingredients are in childhood vaccines.  They are all very toxic for human physiology and have a track record for insulting the body’s immune system. 

I would prefer to trust the innate ability of the body to overcome infectious microorganisms and I will fully support my body through healthy diet and lifestyle along with natural supplements and proper spinal alignment.  I absolutely reject the idea that injecting a group of toxic, immune insulting chemicals into my bloodstream will improve someone’s long-term immune response.

Corrective Care and Chiropractic    

Nancy Tarlow, D.C.

When you inject chemicals into your body that are toxic, there will be an effect. It may not be obvious at first. A child might have a fever that the doctor says is “normal”, but it isn’t. A fever or screaming could be that the brain is swelling and causing damage. The real problem is that children cannot convey to us how they feel. It’s not like an adult who can tell us that they felt great prior to a vaccination but then started having health problems.

mBody Health Chiropractic & Nutrition    

Dr. Haroot Tovanyan, D.C.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KPtPTy2bfg

I am a doctor of Chiropractic and I primarily work with autistic children.

… Every single parent in my practice that has an autistic child has the same story. Child was born normal; child was developing normal. Child went in for their 12-month, 18-month, normal usually 24 or 36-month shots and regressed. This may be anecdotal, but when you hear it over and over and over again, there’s something to be said. These are children that have severe neurological issues. They’re not verbal; 8-10-year-old children that are still wearing diapers.

I have a quadriplegic niece in my family who received 4 shots, a total of 10 vaccines in 1 day. She was born normal. She developed normal until about a year and a half. At a year and a half she received 4 shots, 1, 2, 3, 4, and she … This was 1990 when they started doing multiple vaccines and they also quadrupled the number of shots that you’re normally receiving. She basically regressed. She’s a vegetable. I mean, she became a quadriplegic. Nowhere in nature would your child go to get exposed to let’s say 6 or 7 or 8 or 9, or in the case of my niece, 10 viruses and bacteria at the same time.

In nature that just doesn’t happen. They don’t co-exist like that. It’s not natural to put a combination of vaccines, combinations of viruses and bacteria that just don’t belong together or don’t co-exist in nature in a vial and inject it into a child and expect them to be healthy. The CDC schedule has never been tested for safety. There have never been double-blind studies. It’s never been tested for synergistic effect. They’ve refused to study un-vaccinated versus vaccinated.

This is one of the biggest problems that I have with vaccines. I have a 5-year-old beautiful daughter and I have a 3-year-old son, handsome, that are very healthy. They have been sick. They’ve had the common cold here and there. They’ve never had the flu, no ear infections.

Majority of children that are vaccinated, they have chronic ear infections. One of the ways that I know that they’re different from the majority of other children is my son is 3 years old and in daycare out of all the other 3-year-olds, he’s pretty much the only one that has a full vocabulary. It just tells you the difference between vaccinated children, which is the majority of the population, in California 97%, compared to un-vaccinated children.

We detoxify them and get these toxins out of their body that were put in there by vaccines and other environmental factors. Genetically modified foods and glyphosate have a lot to do with it as well. When we change their diet, first and foremost, we detoxify them, we see the children improve. I have several children under my care that went from non-verbal to verbal.

…They completely change. They become more focused. They develop cognitive skills again. They want to be social. It’s really rewarding to see a child and a parent; a parent that has lost all hope and usually us Chiropractors are the last resort for most parents that have autistic children. It’s really rewarding to see them … They’re like the sparkle in their eye when the children are improving, when their children are starting to talk. When their children are able to go to the bathroom on their own, and their 12-year-old son or daughter doesn’t have to wear diapers any more. For the average neuro-typical child, this may not be tremendous successes, but for a child that’s a teenager and isn’t talking, these are huge steps, leaps and bounds forward compared to what they’ve experienced. Most pediatricians meanwhile, they become doctors to help patients, to help children be healthy, but they’re also misinformed. They just don’t know. 

…I’ve asked our pediatrician, “What’s in a vaccine?” They don’t know. They just don’t know the risk that carries with them. If I were a parent and I was on the fence, I would definitely read books. “Vaccination Is Not Immunization,” “Educate Before You Vaccinate.” Also, read the vaccine insert. Just compare what your protecting against and what the possible side-effects might be. Honestly, if something in those is really good for you, Uncle Sam would not mandate it. That’s just the way I feel. If something was going to make us healthier, I don’t think they would make it mandatory.

Kare 4 Kids Chirpractic  

Dr. Greg Cartmell, D.C.

…As a clinician, on a day-to-day basis, I educate my patients on health and maintaining health and preventative health and to be clear with families and be clear with the parents in making informed choices about vaccinating their children. It’s very important to me.

I’ve seen some tragedies, I’ve seen before and afters. About 6 years ago, I had a patient come in with her daughter who was just vibrant, bouncing off the walls, perhaps 2 at the time, and just very sweet and loving and accepting my adjustments, the whole family. She received her boosters. I hadn’t seen them in about 6 months, and she had developed autism, full blown autism to where she had to go to a speech therapist. She was afraid of me; whereas, before, she was very smiling and calm and bright and talkative, and she was afraid of me. It was disheartening, to say the least. It was almost as if the light switch had flipped off on her.

… Just recently, I had a little boy come in, working on his neck area, he’s clicking and popping in his neck and jaw. Again, maybe 6 years old, 6 or 7, came in, I started working on him. He was very responsive, loved the chiropractic. He came in one day with his folks because his folks were getting adjusted as well, and he seemed off. He seemed like he was staring off into space, comatose. They had to explain that he just came from the pediatrician and gotten a booster shot. It was clear that something had taken place.

It was just hard to describe other than just comatose.

…It was just very, very hard to believe the difference in these children, and it’s disheartening. If you’re a parent, I strongly urge you to please do your research. Look at both sides. I urge you to look at vaccination injury and the stats on that and look into the ingredients and look into the reasons why they think they need to do a vaccination schedule as they propose.

Healthgrades®     

Dr. David LaRocco, D.C.

Apparently people just want to bully you into believing vaccines are all sunshine and rainbows.

…I’m not a vaccination expert.

I don’t care about the vaccine debate. I care about the truth. I care about the safety, I care about the effectiveness. I’m solely here to empower and educate people on how they can promote health and happiness in their life.

…Doctors are great people and they truly care but when was the last time your doctor actually showed you the insert of the chickenpox vaccine? I highly doubt they even know what it looks like.

I know what it looks like because I’ve taken the time to educate myself.

…I stand firmly against injecting aborted fetal tissue and anti-freeze into my body or my children’s body.

The Greater Wellbeing      

Conclusion

Check out further reading below for more on this subject and other articles within the series. If you’ve been vaccinated, see How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children.

Further Reading:

• Celebrities Against GMOs
• Celebrities Against Circumcision
• More Doctors Against Vaccines
• Scientists Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Doctors Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Scientists Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Celebrities Who Have Spoken Out Against Vaccines

Sources:

• Thomas A. Edison Quotes – Good Reads
• Dr. David Jockers, D.C. – Drjockers
• Dr. Nancy Tarlow – mBody Health
• Dr. David LaRocco, D.C. – The Greater Well-Being
• Educational Requirements for Admission to Medical and Chiropractic College – Your Medical Detective
• Dr. Haroot Tovanyan, D.C. – Kare 4 Kids Chiropractic
• Chiropractor Witnesses Vaccine and Autism Connection Through HIs Patients – Larry Cook
• Chiropractor Witnesses Normal Children Be Injured By Vaccines & Vaccination – Larry Cook
• Dr. Greg Cartmell, D.C. – http://www.cartmellchiropractic.com/

Human parasites are unwanted inhabitants of the gastrointestinal system that have the potential to cause serious damage to their host.  These pathogens consume key nutrients from the foods we eat and release waste products that harm the human body.  They also puncture holes in the intestinal membrane which leads to leaky gut syndrome and chronic inflammation.  Use natural herbal remedies to reduce inflammation and restore integrity to your digestive system (1)

Parasites can range from 10 foot long tapeworms to microscopic amoeba.  These organisms can drop their eggs into the gut lining where they can enter the circulation and travel to major organs such as the liver and cause serious harm.

The Power of Anti-Microbial Herbs

Various different forms of herbs have antimicrobial factors that reduce pathogenic bacteria, yeast and parasites.  These herbs can be used to reduce the microbial load and be an important part of reestablishing a healthy microbial balance.  Here are some unique ones that are clinically proven to be effective:

Sweet Wormwood

Also known as Artemisia annua, sweet wormwood is one of the bitterest herbs on the planet and this bitterness works to drive out worms and parasites.

This is also a potent anti-malarial agent and can kill the most deadly malarial parasite, Plasmodium falciparum (2).  It works to break down iron bridges in the pathogenic organism, causing massive oxidative stress and death of the parasite.

Pumpkin Seed

Pumpkin seed extract is a rich source of zinc and B vitamins and helps to reduce parasite formation.  The vermifugal properties have been demonstrated in studies to be extremely effective at reducing gastrointestinal nematode (roundworm) levels (3).

Grapefruit Seed Extract  

Grapefruit Seed Extract (GSE) has very high amounts of disease-fighting, free-radical eliminating antioxidants and phytonutrients called bioflavonoids. One of these powerful bioflavonoids (plant antioxidants) include the chemical component hesperidin, a well-known natural immune system stimulator and booster.

A recent study from The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine found that grapefruit seed extract was effective in killing over “800 bacterial and viral strains, 100 strains of fungus, and a large number of single and multi-celled parasites.” (4) No other naturally occurring anti-microbial can come close to these results.

Wormseed

Wormseed, also called Chenopodium ambrosioides, are seeds that contain a compound called ascaridoles, which is highly toxic to fungus (5).  Wormseed has been shown to reduce skin infecting fungus and fungal spores on food (6, 7).  It has also been shown to be very effective against gastrointestinal worms (8).

Guarana

These seeds contain a strong antimicrobial and anti-oxidant effect against a wide variety of microorganisms (9).  These seeds have a similar nutritional makeup as cacao and are a natural source of caffeine so they are stimulating and speed up metabolism and fat burning properties.

They also contain cardiac stimulants such as theophylline and theobromine and polyphenol anti-oxidants catechin and epicatechin (ECGC also found in cacao and green tea).

Passion Flower  

This herb has been used for centuries to treat anxiety, hypertension, and insomnia.  It has mild sedative qualities that improve mood and relaxation.  This herb contains plant alkaloids, phenols, glycoside flavonoids, and cyanogenic compounds that have been shown to have profound antimicrobial effects against pathogenic microorganisms (10).

Lavender

This popular essential oil has great anti-microbial, anti-fungal, sedative, antidepressant, and carminative effects in the body (11). Research has shown it is effective against antibiotic-resistant staph infections (12).  Other research has shown that it is highly effective against yeast overgrowth (13).

For more information on testing and overcoming parasitic overgrowth see What Type of Parasites do You Have?

Recommended Reading:

• Common Parasites and How to Kill Them
• How to Kill Fungal Infections
• How to Kill Candida and Balance Your Inner Ecosystem
• Inexpensive, Easy Detox – The One Gallon Challenge

Sources:

1. History of Human Parasitology – American Society for Microbiology
2. Artemisinins: their growing importance in medicine – PubMed.gov
3. Anthelmintic efficacy of pumpkin seed (Cucurbita pepo Linnaeus, 1753) on ostrich gastrointestinal nematodes in a semiarid region of Paraíba State, Brazil. – PubMed.gov
4. The effectiveness of processed grapefruit-seed extract as an antibacterial agent: II. Mechanism of action and in vitro toxicity. – PubMed.gov
5. Composition and antifungal activity of the essential oil of the Brazilian Chenopodium ambrosioides L. – PubMed.gov
6. Fungitoxicity of essential oils against dermatophytes. – PubMed.gov
7. In vitro and in vivo antifungal activity of essential oils of Cymbopogon martini and Chenopodium ambrosioides and their synergism against dermatophytes. – PubMed.gov
8. Effects of aqueous extracts of Mentha piperita L. and Chenopodium ambrosioides L. leaves in infective larvae cultures of gastrointestinal nematodes of goats. – PubMed.gov
9. Antioxidant and antimicrobial activity of guarana seed extracts – Science Direct.com
10. Antibacterial properties of Passiflora foetida L. – a
    common exotic medicinal plant. – Academic Journals.org
11. Biological activities of lavender essential oil. – PubMed.gov
12. The antimicrobial activity of high-necrodane and other lavender oils on methicillin-sensitive and -resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA and MRSA). – PubMed.gov
13. Antifungal activity of Lavandula angustifolia essential oil against Candida albicans yeast and mycelial form – PubMed.gov

One hundred seventy-nine million dogs and cats live in the U.S. That’s more than the number of people who called this place home in 1959. Back in the days of doo-wop, pets roamed free and did their business wherever. Outdoor cats buried their droppings discretely; we never saw it. Nobody cleaned up after dogs.  Our job was to not step in it.

Fast forward to 2015. The U.S. pet population has grown to nearly half the human population, the highest concentration of pets in the world. Urban dogs and cats are no longer free range. We’re now expected to clean up after our pets, a process expedited by biodegradable poop bags, fragrant clay litter, and kitty bum wipes.

Yes, we’ve commodified pet care big time. The American Pet Products Association estimates that we’ll spend $60.59 billion on our pets in 2015. But we do a disservice to our pets – lights of our lives, best friends, playmates and family members – as long as we deny our responsibility as their environmental stewards. Much has been written about our pets’ conspicuous consumption and carbon paw prints. But we overlook what’s in plain sight:  the simple fact that we have no sensible, sustainable infrastructure in place for disposing of pet waste.

There’s no way around it; the rascals generate mounds of poo.  Our 83 million dogs produce 11 million tons of waste each year—enough to fill more than 100 football fields 10 feet deep.  Our 93 million cats download five million tons (500,000 dump trucks full) of poop and litter per year.

Sixty percent of dog waste and most cat waste is bundled in plastic and trashed: streamed to sealed local landfills where it takes generations to degrade while emitting methane, a powerful greenhouse gas.  The plastic wrap is a forever gift to the universe. As for the 40% of dog waste left at ground zero, don’t kid yourself, poo is potent stuff.

For a small bay watershed (up to 20 square miles), two to three days of droppings from a population of 100 dogs contribute enough bacteria, nitrogen, and phosphorus to temporarily close a bay to swimming. Dog poop left along trails or walkways threatens native plants while spoiling urban landscapes. And it’s still your job to not step in it.

Eco-minded pet removal services, dog day cares, shelters, dog park managers, and vets search for alternatives to dumpsters.  No one but trash haulers will take pet waste.  Food scrap and yard waste recycling programs list pet waste on the “no” side of acceptable refuse. Water treatment plants won’t process large offerings of pet poo. Biodigesters and other trash-to-energy operations are scarce in the U.S.

The EPA says “go for it” – go ahead and flush that dog doo down the toilet. Not real convenient or appealing, right?  The feds leave pet waste disposal to the states, which often delegate responsibility to local jurisdictions (“You take it…no, you take it”). Some districts offer residents rebates to purchase pet waste composting systems or sponsor pet waste recycling classes. Most say trashing is the only option, cautioning pet owners to “double bag it.”

Ah – but don’t we have bigger dogs in the race to zero waste?  Aren’t our huge quantities of food scraps and yard waste a bigger priority?  According to the EPA’s “Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2013 Fact Sheet,” food accounts for 14.6% of residential waste and has a paltry 2.1% recovery rate.  We have a better handle on recycling yard trimmings, which make up 13.5% of refuse but have a 23.6% recovery rate thanks to longstanding municipal collections and traditional composters.

A 2006 San Francisco analysis found that pet poop comprised nearly 4% of residential waste. This might be a conservative figure since trash from pet business and parks wasn’t part of the tally. Why should we be concerned with 4% of the pie chart when food and yard waste add up to 28%?

For one thing, carnivore waste, like raw human waste, involves serious sanitation and pollution issues. Collecting and recovering organics containing harmful pathogens require due diligence, systematic treatment and testing.  Most organics recycling facilities aren’t technologically or financially equipped to accommodate potentially hazardous source material.

But, when it comes to long-range planning, let’s be practical.  While we’re developing systems to efficiently boost food and yard waste recycling, shouldn’t we be combining pet waste and disposable diaper recovery with these two other source materials? Shouldn’t we be thinking our way around comingled pet waste, plastic bags, and clay litter at the product source?

The average dog poops more per day than the average person.  The average cat produces somewhat less waste but also generates an indeterminate amount of trashed litter. Throw in the tons of plastic we use in a foolhardy attempt to sanitize this absurd process.

Add it up and you find that U.S. pets in 2015 generate roughly the same amount of solid waste as the U.S. human population in 1959. Can you imagine an advanced country in 1959 not providing a practical sanitary disposal system that works for its 178 million people? I have a hard time wrapping my head around that one and hope you do, too.

Pet Poop Facts

Human population in 1959: 177,829,628 – U.S. Census Bureau

Current pet population: 83 million dogs, 96 million cats in the U.S., total 179 million – U.S. Humane Society

Pet population concentrations

Top Ten Countries With Most Pet Dog Population
Top Ten Countries With Most Pet Cat Population

Pet products spending

Pet Industry Market Size & Ownership Statistics

Pet waste quantities

• Average dog produces .75 lbs. of waste per day (U.S. Dept. of Agriculture)
• Average cat produces .3 lbs. of waste per day (no data, based on author verification)
• Dog waste weighs average of 35 lbs. per sq. ft. (no data, based on weight provided by Sam Johnson, owner, Pet Scoop, Denver, Colorado)
• Assumption: cat waste and dog waste have similar weight

Football field math / dogs

• 83M dogs x .75 = 62,250,000 lbs. per day or 22,721,250,000 lbs. per year or 11,360,625  tons per year or  around 11.4 M tons of dog waste per year
• 1 football field = 57,600 sq. ft. (includes end zones)
  dogs produce 22,721,250,000 lbs. waste per year
• 1 cu. ft. of dog waste = 35 lbs.
  22,721,250,000 lbs. divided by 35 lbs. = 649,178,571.429 cu. ft. 649,178,571.429 cu. ft. covers 64,917,857.1429 sq. ft. and is 1 ft. deep 64,917,857.1429 sq. ft. divided by 57,600 sq. ft. = 1,127.04613095  football fields 1 ft. deep or 112.704613095 football fields 10 ft. deep

Dump truck math / cats

• 96M cats X .3 = 28,800,000 lbs. per day or 10,368,000,000 lbs. per year or 5,184,000 tons per year or 5.2M tons of cat waste per year. 5,200,000 tons divided by 500,000 = 10.4 tons, average dump truck capacity

Dog waste water pollution

“For a small bay watershed (up to 20 square miles), 2 to 3 days of droppings from a population of 100 dogs contribute enough bacteria, nitrogen, and phosphorus to temporarily close a bay to swimming and shellfishing.”  Pollution Prevention Management Measure

Human waste quantities

On average humans excrete 128 g (.28 lb.) of fresh feces per person per day – Rose, C.; Parker, A.; Jefferson, B.; Cartmell, E. (2015). “The Characterization of Feces and Urine: A Review of the Literature to Inform Advanced Treatment Technology”. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 45 (17): 1827–1879.doi:10.1080/10643389.2014.1000761. ISSN 1064-3389.

(.28 lbs. vs. .75 ave. dog)

But that’s an educated guess. Because, as it turns out, there are no definitive figures. In his book Nanomedicine, Dr. Robert A. Freitas Jr. cites three studies in putting his daily figure at 100-200 grams — that is, .22 to .44 pounds a day. A 1992 study in Gastroenterology found an average of 106 grams a day among 220 UK residents, but with the caveat that “data from other populations of the world show average stool weight to vary from 72 to 470 g/day.” The Merck Manual says that Westerners grunt out 100-300 grams a day (.22 – . 66 or .44 lb.). See more

Further reading:

• The Pet Poo Pocket Guide: How to Safely Compost and Recycle Pet Waste, Rose Seemann, New Society Publishers

Lately, there have been claims that radiation from Wi-Fi technology can lead to certain types of cancer and other diseases, especially in children under 5 years of age.

France recently banned Wi-Fi in day care centers to protect the children from exposure to electromagnetic wave radiation and reduce their risk of incurring cancer or other diseases.

Though there is no concrete scientific proof that relates diseases to the use of Wi-Fi technology, a British radiofrequency and electromagnetic fields expert, Dr. Erica Mallery-Blythe, is advocating for relinquishing wireless gadgets.

In 2009, Dr.Mallery-Blythe noticed the increase of certain ailments among people exposed to wireless technology. Some of these issues include insomnia, fatigue, headaches, palpitation, and even neurological disorders, like Alzheimer’s and autism.

One of her strongest cases was a nine-year-old girl who experienced headaches and other neurological symptoms in 2011. Dr. Mallery-Blythe determined the culprit was the wireless technology close to the young student’s classroom seat.

According to the school, the Wi-Fi exposure in their building adheres to internationally accepted standards set by the government. Dr Simon Mann of the Department of Health said that they stand by Public Health England (PHE), that there is no evident reason Wi-Fi shouldn’t be used in schools and other places.

Claims of Harmful Effects

There has been a lot of literature about the harmful effects of wireless technology on the biological system. The powerful Council of Europe committee, which is composed of 47 member states, claimed back in 2011 that devices with wireless capabilities have “potentially harmful” effects on people and should be banned from schools. The Council had been calling for the ban since 2011, even before France did.

Germany has taken steps to persuade people to avoid using wireless technology whenever possible, so has Los Angeles in the USA.  In 2007, a BBC Panorama programme found that the readings next to a classroom laptop showed radiation at double the level only 100 metres from a mobile phone mast.

According to studies, children who are five years old and below absorb up to 60 percent more radiation than adults because they have thinner skulls and their brains still have a high water content. In some Western countries, brain tumours have become a more prevalent health condition among children than leukaemia. Glioma, a brain cancer related to mobile phone usage, has increased fivefold among people age 20 and below since 2008.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer and some parts of the World Health Organization claim that electromagnetic fields can be carcinogenic. The Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure further claims that EMF is even more harmful to children and foetuses.

Disputes Against EMF’s Harmful Effects to Humans

There may be a lot of claims from the growing anti-wireless technology groups about how EMF can harm humans, but there are also a lot of disputes over these claims and there are studies that conclude these fears of adverse effects are actually myths.

The Australian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Agency, the Australian government’s agency that looks into radiation, claims that there is no scientific evidence that “low” RF-EMF from WiFi technology has any adverse effects on children and human beings. According to the agency, WiFi radiation in schools is low powered.

EMF expert Dr. Vitas Anderson from Two Fields Consulting reassured people that there is no need to relinquish their wireless gadgets. He claims that France’s ban on Wi-Fi in schools is “over the top.” Anderson said there were two views when it comes to EMF: the government’s view of WHO claiming that EMF exposure below the international limits is safe and the minority view that asserts Wi-Fi is dangerous. And just like climate change, even if there is a consensus of 98 percent that it actually exists, sceptics will still find studies to prove otherwise.

Suggestions

Dr. Mallery-Blythe recommends keeping your mobile device switched off unless it is really needed and to avoid carrying it close to your body. She suggests using Ethernet cable instead of Wi-Fi and disabling the Wi-Fi if possible. The Australian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Agency suggests the same protocol if you are skeptic about Wi-Fi safety.

Recommended Reading:

• Earthing – Ground Your Body for Optimal Health
• Children, Cell Phones & Health
• Understand Hypothyroidism – Prevention and Natural Remedies

Sources:

• Is Wi-Fi making your child ill? – telegraph.co.uk

The Grocery Manufacturers Association is one of the largest organizations representing the food industry. As of 2013, they had over 300 member businesses in food and beverage production as well as biotech and seed companies.

The Grocery Manufacturers Association is one of the leading opponents of GMO labeling. They have poured millions of dollars into defeating bills to label GMOs introduced in various states and are big supporters of the DARK Act, a bill made to make labeling GMOs illegal at the federal level. In the 2012 ballot initiative in California (Proposition 37) and 2013 ballot initiative in Washington (Proposition 522), the Grocery Manufacturers Association and its members donated over 54 million dollars, just to fight labeling.

This organization spends millions of dollars a year lobbying at the federal and state level, primarily to fight GMO labeling. In 2014, they poured money into fighting the GMO labeling initiatives in Colorado (Proposition 92) and Oregon (Proposition 105). The GMA spent big dollars convincing the public that labeling GMOs will increase overall food prices. Unfortunately, their efforts have been successful, though by a narrow margin. Of the 68 companies and organizations listed that funded opposition to these four propositions, only seven were not members of the Grocery Manufacturers Association as of 2013. These 7 organizations are identified.

Full List of Right To Know Opponents

**GMA member donations included in list

In 2013, the Grocery Manufacturers Association took down the publicly available list of members from their website. The 2013 membership directory is archived online and available here.

The Food and Water Watch, a consumer advocacy group, listed the 2012 Board of Directors of the Grocery Manufacturers Association and the amount of money each group contributed. These companies are some of the biggest opponents of GMO labeling. Additionally, these companies are supporting the GMA’s lawsuit against the State of Vermont. In a democratic process the people of Vermont have spoken, and they want GMOs labeled, the GMA is suing to subvert the results of this democratic process. These companies spend big dollars blocking your right to know, not just through the GMA but by direct campaign donations as well.

In these matters, money talks. However, there was a good reason that the Grocery Manufacturers Association no longer publicizes their list of members; it is becoming increasingly expensive to ignore the will of the people. The companies are obviously worried about damage to their image from blocking your right to know what is in your food. If we don’t vote with our dollars, organizations like Monsanto, the GMA, Pepsi, and other companies will vote with our dollars for us, and not with any regard to our wishes.

Recommended Reading:

• Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods
• Scientists Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done The Research
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done The Research
• Celebrities Against Circumcision

Sources:

• Industry Profile: Grocery Manufacturers Association – Food & Water Watch
• Who are the companies fighting our right to know? – Just Label It!
• GMO Labeling Initiative By State – Just Label It!
• Grocery Manufacturers Association – Source Watch
• Grocery Manufacturers Association – Key Facts – U.S. Right to Know
• GMA Members – Internet Archive

http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/GMA_Profile1.pdf#_ga=1.199922478.1015463669.1441382848