Neonicotinoids, a class of pesticide linked to the decline of bee populations worldwide, have also been linked to declining bird populations. Researchers from the University of Saskeccthwan exposed a population of migrating white-crowned sparrows to imidacloprid (a neonicotinoid manufactured by Bayer). Birds given the highest dosage lost significant percentages of their body weight and necessary fat storage with hours of exposure. The same group of birds also deviated from usual eating patterns, and many of the sparrows took an extra 3.5 days to continue their migration. This is a big deal for bird populations. According to Christy Morrissey, an ecotoxicologist at the University of Saskatchewan and a co-author of the study,

There is a major systematic population decline in farmland birds, and these commonly-used pesticides are an identifying mechanism.”

What It Means

Migration is a critical and dangerous time in a bird’s life. There are increased numbers of predators, and timing migration correctly is crucial to successful reproduction. Birds that arrive later than the others will arrive to find that many mates and quality nesting spots have already been chosen. Neonicotinoid exposure caused many birds to delay their migration by an extra 3.5 days, more than enough to negatively affect migrating bird populations. How is the insecticide doing that?

This study found that birds exposed to imidacloprid stopped eating and lost up to six percent of their overall body weight and about seventeen percent of their fat reserves. The stored fat is especially important for migration, as it provides the energy necessary for long migrations. The research team in charge of this study previously reported on the detrimental effects of imidacloprid on birds in 2017, where the birds experienced weight loss and disorientation. Four of the birds in that study died within 24 hours of receiving their last dose of the pesticide, with researchers euthanizing two due to breathing difficulties and foaming at the crop (a pocket in the throat where birds temporarily store food).

Unpleasant, Yet Unsurprising

The majority of research and concern surrounding neonicotinoids has dealt with bees. The European Union voted to ban these types of pesticides with the exception of use in covered greenhouses in order to protect bee populations. Major Canadian cities like Montreal and Vancouver have also banned the insecticide. Bees exposed to neonicotinoids are reported to have more difficulties surviving the winter, maintaining their hive and larvae, experienced problems reproducing, and have compromised immune systems, among other issues.

A 2019 study also found that bees exposed to imidaclopridexperienced flight difficulties for bees in a controlled environment. Like this recent study on birds, researchers found that the bees experienced disruptions in the usual flight patterns. Whereas the birds waited until they were more able to complete their migration, the bees in the study from Imperial College London exhibited hyperactive behaviors for the first portion of their flight which then dropped off, resulting in shorter flights. Daniel Kenna is the first author of the study,

Neonicotinoids are similar to nicotine in the way they stimulate neurons, and so a ‘rush’ or hyperactive burst of activity does make sense…However, our results suggest there may be a cost to this initial rapid flight, potentially through increased energy expenditure or a lack of motivation, in the form of reduced flight endurance.”

Regulating these Pesticides

Neonicotinoids are one of the widely used groups of pesticides in the world. In the U.S., they’ve been sprayed on up to 95% of corn and canola, as well as other crops like soybeans, cotton, sorghum, sugar beets, cereal grains, rice, nuts, wine grapes, and assorted fruits and vegetables. These chemicals have been proven to disrupt bee and bird populations, crucial parts of a working ecosystem. In 2017, the rusty patched bumblebee became the first bee on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) endangered species list, but little else has changed in the U.S. In fact, things are likely to get worse.

The previous administration’s FWS announced plans to phase out neonicotinoid usage by January of 2016. The Trump administration reversed that ban in 2018. The Environmental Protection Agency’s approval of sulfoxaflor, another pesticide shown to harm bee populations, confirms that this administration is unconcerned with the damage these insecticides do to our necessary pollinators.

Sources:

• Decline of migrating birds could be partly due to pesticides – New Scientist
• A Widespread Pesticide Causes Weight Loss and Delayed Migration in Songbirds – Audubon
• Common pesticide makes migrating birds anorexic – Science
• Two Widely Used Pesticides Found to Disorient and Sicken Migrating Songbirds – Audubon
• Bees Exposed to Neonicotinoid Pesticide Become Hyperactive Before Crashing Out, Reducing their Ability to Forage – Newsweek
• Trump administration sued over controversial rollback of insecticide ban – The New Food Economy
• Trump administration to approve pesticide that may harm bees – The Guardian

I got curious about carbon sequestration and did some math.

According to my sources, we have about 770,000,000,000 (770 billion) tons of excess carbon dioxide that we need to remove from our atmosphere.

One ton of carbon equals 3.67 tons of carbon dioxide (carbon dioxide has two oxygen molecules for every carbon).

So we need to remove 210,000,000,000 tons of carbon from the air.

One tree removes 13 pounds of carbon per year. Let’s give it a ten-year lifespan for this purpose. One tree sequesters 130 pounds of carbon in a ten year time period.

A forest contains about 100 trees per acre.

So an acre of trees over a ten year period can sequester 13,000 pounds or 6.5 tons of carbon.

Recommended: How to Eliminate IBS, IBD, Leaky Gut

So we need about 32,300,000,000 (32.3 billion) acres of trees planted to capture the excess carbon within a decade.

And this assumes we don’t add any more C02 to the atmosphere. Plus we are losing 200,000 acres of rainforest every day (73,000,000 acres a year), so that too would have to stop.

What about hemp?

Glad you asked! An acre of hemp can absorb 4.2 tons of carbon per year per acre. That’s 42 tons in a decade. But we can’t just chop down the hemp, let it decompose, and plant more. We need to do something with the hemp, or else much of that carbon goes back into the air. That’s where hempcrete (we need this bad, look it up!) and a variety of textiles and other uses come in! We can make much better concrete out of hemp and concrete is a massive source of C02 output (Cement is the source of about 8% of the world’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions).

So if we only planted hemp instead of the trees we need (obviously we should do both) we would need 5,000,000,000 (5 billion) acres of hemp. Let’s add another billion acres for fertilizer production and transportation and other production-C02 costs.

If you want to correct my math drop me a comment:

Sources:

• How much carbon emissions would 1 acre of hemp absorb? – Quora
• Hemp: The Solution for Global Warming – SunStrands
• Facts and information on the Amazon Rainforest – Raintree Nutrition
• We need to get rid of carbon in the atmosphere, not just reduce emissions – The Conversation
• How many trees would I have to plant to solve Global Warming? – Stack Exchange

The Environmental Protection Agency has rejected a proposal to ban the use of chlorpyrifos, a pesticide that is already classified as moderately hazardous and that has been linked to neurological issues in young children. This is no the first time the EPA has blocked a ban of this pesticide, with Scott Pruitt denying a petition to ban the pesticide back in 2017. These rejections are contrary to recommendations from the EPA’s own experts.

Chlorpyrifos has been banned in Europe since 2008. States in the U.S. are also working towards banning the pesticide. Hawaii voted to ban the chemical in 2018, California Governor Gavin Newsom has proposed 5.7 million towards finding safer alternatives to chlorpyrifos, and the New York state legislature has passed a bill banning all use of the pesticide by December of 2021.

Related: Foods Most Likely to Contain Glyphosate

Bad Guy

Chlorpyrifos has been linked to several health issues, the most egregious being neurological conditions in small children. A study conducted by researchers from Columbia University followed measured chlorpyrifos levels in mother’s umbilical cords and gave their children intelligence tests later in childhood. Higher chlorpyrifos levels corresponded with decreased mental development. The chemical has also been linked to attention deficit disorder, lower IQs, and other developmental, altered thyroid levels, and learning disorders in children and lung cancer and immune disorders in adults.

The chemical has also been linked repeatedly to the struggles facing pollinators, specifically bees. Honeybees exposed to chlorpyrifos experience memory and learning deficits, making them less effective pollinators.

Related: How to Eliminate IBS, IBD, Leaky Gut 

Ignoring Science

Chlorpyrifos is toxic. The Obama administration made efforts to ban the pesticide. Yet Trump and his administration seem determined to treat this like they do other Obama era policies – destroy it. Unfortunately, the president’s destructive behavior is frequently a detriment to the health and safety of the country.

Sources:

• Trump administration won’t ban pesticide tied to childhood brain damage – The Guardian
• New York Passes Bill to Ban Dow’s Brain-Damaging Pesticide Chlorpyrifos – Friends of the Earth
• Hawaii Becomes First State To Ban Widely-Used Pesticide Found To Be Harmful To Kids – HuffPost
• Widely Used Pesticide in Food Production Damages Children’s Brain – Beyond Pesticides
• EWG: ‘Just because chemical agribusiness wants to use a brain-damaging pesticide doesn’t mean they should’ – Environmental Working Group
• Bees ‘dumb down’ after ingesting tiny doses of the pesticide chlorpyrifos – Science Daily

Due to concerns that the insecticide can harm the brain and nervous system, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banned chlorpyrifos for household uses in 2000 but agricultural companies are still allowed to spray it on our food.

In August of 2015 public health groups petitioned the agency to reconsider their decision, stating the pesticide should be banned from agriculture. In August 2018, a federal court ordered the EPA to review a petition. The EPA has reviewed the decision and decided not to ban chlorpyrifos.

EPA has determined that their objections must be denied because the data available are not sufficiently valid, complete or reliable to meet petitioners’ burden to present evidence demonstrating that the tolerances are not safe.”

CNN

Related: Foods Most Likely to Contain Glyphosate

It is a tragedy that this administration sides with corporations instead of children’s health. But this is only a setback. Lawmakers in states like Hawaiʻi and New York are now showing the rest of the country that banning this dreadful pesticide is not only possible, but inevitable.”

Attorney Patti Goldman of Earthjustice – represents the groups that took the issue to court

Chlorpyrifos is a neurotoxic pesticide that kills a number of pests including insects and worms. By inhibiting the acetylcholinesterase enzyme it destroys the nervous systems of insects. The enzyme also regulates nerve impulses in the human body. Acute poisoning causes convulsions, respiratory paralysis, and sometimes death. Chlorpyrifos is one of the pesticide most frequently linked to pesticide poisonings.

Related: How to Eliminate IBS, IBD, Leaky Gut 

Chlorpyrifos is associated with neurodevelopmental harms in children. Prenatal exposures to chlorpyrifos can lead to “lower birth weight, reduced IQ, loss of working memory, attention disorders, and delayed motor development.”

It shouldn’t be a surprise but, of course, it still needs to be reported. The kid’s cereals and other packaged marketed to children still contain alarming amounts of glyphosate, the cancer-causing ingredient in Roundup, the herbicide produced by Bayer-Monsanto. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) detected the carcinogen in all 21 oat-based cereal and snack products sampled in their latest testing.

Nearly two dozen popular children’s cereals and other snack products tested and show to contain glyphosate.

Organic oats were not exempt from glyphosate contamination either.

EWG noted that only four products “contained levels of glyphosate higher than what EWG scientists consider protective for children’s health with a sufficient margin of safety.”

The new tests were performed by independent laboratories and they confirm the findings from EWG’s testing in July and October of last year. Honey Nut Cheerios and Medley Crunch showed the two highest levels of glyphosate at between 729 and 833 parts per billion. The EWG “children’s health benchmark” is 160 ppb.

EWG-commissioned independent laboratory tests of oat-based products found glyphosate present in 95 percent of samples made with conventionally grown oats and 31 percent of samples made with organic oats. Conventional products had much higher glyphosate levels than their organic counterparts.

It is common practice for conventional oats to be sprayed with glyphosate prior to harvest, as a desiccant that kills all crops uniformly. Organic oats are not treated that way, but may become contaminated by glyphosate drifting from nearby conventional crops.

How Does EWG Set a ‘Health Benchmark’ for Glyphosate Exposure?

Related: Foods Most Likely to Contain Glyphosate

Products testing positive include:

• Honey Nut Cheerios (147 ppb)
• Cheerios Toasted Whole Grain Oat Cereal (729 ppb)
• Chocolate Peanut Butter Cheerios (400ppb)
• Cheerios Oat Crunch Cinnamon (283 ppb)
• Honey Nut Cheerios Medley Crunch (833 ppb)
• Multi Grain Cheerios (216 ppb)
• Nature Valley Baked Oat Bites (389 ppb)
• Nature Valley Granola Peanut Butter Creamy & Crunchy (198 ppb)
• Nature Valley Granola Protein Oats n Dark Chocolate (261 ppb)
• Nature Valley Fruit & Nut Chewy Trail Mix Granola Bars, Dark Chocolate & Nut (76 ppb)
• Nature Valley Fruit & Nut Chewy Trail Mix Granola Bars – Dark Chocolate Cherry (275 ppb)
• Nature Valley Sweet & Salty Nut granola bars – Cashew (158 ppb)
• Nature Valley Crunchy granola bars – Oats and Honey (320 ppb)
• Nature Valley Crunchy granola bars – Peanut Butter (312 ppb)
• Nature Valley Crunchy granola bars – Maple Brown Sugar (566 ppb)
• Nature Valley Soft-Baked Oatmeal Squares – Blueberry (206
  ppb)
• Nature Valley Soft-Baked Oatmeal Squares – Cinnamon Brown Sugar (124 ppb)
• Nature Valley Granola Cups – Almond Butter (529 ppb)
• Nature Valley Granola Cups – Peanut Butter Chocolate (297 ppb)
• Nature Valley Biscuits with Almond Butter (194 ppb)
• Fiber One Oatmeal Raisin soft-baked cookies (204 ppb).

Related: How to Eliminate IBS, IBD, Leaky Gut 

EWG purchased products via online retail sites. Approximately 300 grams of each product were packed in our Washington, D.C., office and shipped to Anresco Laboratories in San Francisco. Glyphosate levels were analyzed by a liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry method described here.

In New Round of Tests, Monsanto’s Weedkiller Still Contaminates Foods Marketed to Children

Researchers at Emory University have recently had a study published in the journal Public Health Nutrition that found that in comparison to organic milk, conventional milk samples contained more pesticide and antibiotic residues. In addition to that, some of the samples collected contained residue levels above the federally recognized limits for antibiotic residues. Study researchers explained…

To our knowledge, the present study is the first study to compare levels of pesticide in the U.S. milk supply by production method (conventional vs. organic)…It is also the first in a decade to measure antibiotic and hormone levels and compare them by milk production type.”

Fewer Pesticides, Fewer Antibiotics

The study looked at 69 total samples of organic (34) and conventional (35) milk from all different regions of the United States. Of the 14 pesticides researchers tested for, both organic and conventional samples tested positive for legacy pesticides, chemicals that are no longer allowed in the United States but remain in our environment and food supply (DDT, DDE, and hexachlorobenzene). In addition to those, conventional milk also contained atrazine, chlorpyrifos, cypermethrin, diazinon, and permethrin.

Related: Foods Most Likely to Contain Glyphosate

There was an even more clearcut difference between organic and conventional milk when researchers examined antibiotic residues. Organic milk samples did not test positive for antibiotics, while conventional milk samples tested positive for 5 different kinds of antibiotics, amoxicillin, oxytetracycline, sulfamethazine, sulfadimethoxine, and sulfathiazole. One of the conventional samples contained levels of amoxicillin above federal limits, while 37 percent of samples had higher than legal amounts sulfamethazine. Twenty-six percent of those samples also contained high levels of sulfathiazole.

Critics of this study have pointed out the involvement of The Organic Center, a non-profit research organization. Be that as it may, it’s hard to deny the facts. Organic milk has fewer pesticides and antibiotics, and some conventional milk contains verified unsafe levels of these chemicals.

Related: How to Eliminate IBS, IBD, Leaky Gut

Chasing the Pesticide Free Life

You would think that I would be urging you to live a pesticide-free life, seeing that this is Organic Lifestyle Magazine. And I will. Organic milk will always be better than conventional milk from the viewpoint of someone trying to avoid pesticides and unnecessary antibiotics in their food. It seems an added insult to conventional milk to reveal that some of that product isn’t even meeting the basic federal requirements for those chemical residues. But it’s difficult to realize that both types of milk contain pesticides banned in 1972 (DDT). These samples were collected in 2015, the same year the International Agency for Research on Cancer finally classified as “probably carcinogenic” and 43 years after the pesticide was banned. How pesticide free can we truly be at this point?

Sources:

• Production-related contaminants (pesticides, antibiotics and hormones) in organic and conventionally produced milk samples sold in the USA – Cambridge Core
• Study finds residue of pesticides, antibiotics and growth hormone in non-organic milk – USA Today
• New study shows that choosing organic is an easy way to avoid pesticide, antibiotic, and synthetic growth hormone residues in milk – The Organic Center
• The differences between organic and conventional milk – Feed the Wisely

The Trump administration wants to exempt many new genetically engineered crops from regulation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Trump wants it to be easier for genetically engineered plants and animals to enter the food supply. He signed an executive order on June 11th to have federal agencies simplify the “regulatory maze” for genetically modified food producers.

The administration says it wants to cut the cost of genetically modified crop development and exempt crops that have similar traits to plants that could be produced through hybridization (traditional plant breeding). GMO companies would be allowed to determine if their products are exempt from regulation.

Related: Foods Most Likely to Contain Glyphosate

The administration argues the approach will allow regulators to focus on ‘increasingly complex products which, in turn, may pose new types of risks.’ “

Bloomberg

Crops produced with the newer gene-editing technologies wouldn’t automatically be subject to special oversight under the proposed rule. GMO companies say gene-editing makes it so that they can easily and more precisely alter the DNA of plants and animals, and that these changes to the DNA could be done with conventional breeding techniques.

Jaydee Hanson of the Center for Food Safety warns that these new gene editing techniques can make significant changes, “including those that would never happen in nature,” and says that the companies need oversight.

The proposed rules are open for public comment through Aug. 5 before the department issues a final regulation.

The Trump Administration has been friendly to companies like Bayer (formerly Monsanto) in the past. In 2019 Trump’s administration lifted Obama’s ban on GMOs and bee-killing chemicals in wildlife refuges.