Note from author:
As an good example of media censorship, this was sent to South Bend Tribune and published 22jan98
Areas that were cut by the editor of the South Bend Tribune are in red. No reasons were given when asked to explain, but it is clear that the text cut would offend advertisers and the South Bend Solid Waste Department. Another article [Our Protective Agencies Vision Clouded by Bonds with Industry] describing the underhanded tactics of the multinational corporation Monsanto was totally unpublished because I refused to remove the words Monsanto, rBGH, Roundup, and Roundup Ready, which are all property of Monsanto. A later unofficial explanation was that they wished to avoid litigation by Monsanto.
As each year goes by I notice more synthetic materials and chemicals in stores, homes, schools and offices. Natural materials are increasingly displaced by synthetic materials and then sprayed with more synthetic chemicals to sanitize and control pests. Synthetics have a few advantages over natural products such as lower initial cost to consumers, longevity, strength and color diversity. Also used in the production and processing of our food, they bring us unblemished produce, longer shelf life, and the magic of fat without guilt. Our lawns are more like masters tournament golf courses than what my generation grew up with.
It would seem that synthetics are here to serve humanity, but when all costs are accounted for it becomes clear that something is terribly wrong. There are many problems throughout the life of synthetic chemicals associated with their production, use and disposal.
The consumer does not pay the true costs at the time of purchase. Not included are the costs of the effects of industrial production that pollute our land, air, water and workers’ bodies. Society bears the cruel price for this with a multitude of illnesses including decreased lung function, endocrine system problems, reduced fertility, and MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity), to mention but a few.
Hazel Henderson, cofounder of New York City's Citizen for Clean Air, and world renowned Environmental Economist, states "Our environmental impact is not really calculated in the GNP. Social and environmental costs have traditionally been externalized which is why the industrial economy has gone so far off course." As an example, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) estimates that over a million buildings in the country qualify as "sick" and are adversely affecting 20 - 70 million people.
The problems of use begin at the stores, even before we take them home. Many of you have probably noticed an uncomfortable feeling in your throat and maybe even an occasional cough or watering eyes when you go to some stores or offices. This is caused by offgassing, or gasses released from synthetic products. A good example is the smell of vinyl, pesticides or lawn care products. A person with MCS has extreme difficulty in entering most stores because of their sensitivity to this offgassing and even the to the lighting.
MCS effects all strata of society and its severity can range from being mildly noticeable to ruining once happy and productive people physically, financially and emotionally. It is just beginning to be recognized by popular medicine. Most probably it is caused by chemical damage to the central nervous system with secondary endocrine and immune system involvement.
Industry denies the existence of MCS and blames the individual’s weak body or the genetics of their family. Each year many thousands of MCS cases are misdiagnosed as so-called allergies. Industry also denies that many synthetic chemicals can be extremely toxic to the reproductive and endocrine systems at extremely low levels. Up-to-date science must be written into our out-of-date regulations by accounting for this fact. While we don't have data from experiments on humans, there is quite a bit from animal studies that illustrates effects from extremely low-dose that must be measured in parts per trillion. To understand what one part per trillion looks like, visualize one drop of water in 660 rail tank cars. that's over six miles long!
The term waste disposal is a mistake because the waste keeps coming back to us by way of the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat. Incineration of volatile toxic waste continues the cycle in Indiana as much of the paints, oils and other toxic chemicals people bring to the Household Hazardous Waste Collection drop-off station are incinerated. Incineration can make some of these chemicals even more toxic than before incineration. Then they go right up into the air we all breathe. Later they fall to the ground and into our water.
Daily we break records for usage levels of pesticides and synthetic chemicals, yet the pests persist at the same level as before the explosion of pesticides about 50 years ago. As each synthetic pesticide is banned a new one is produced by Industry to take its place. The pests become even more resistant and the cycle goes around again.
In the last 45 years the sperm count has dropped 50%, and the incidence of some cancers has grown at about 1% per year. In the same 50 year period the use of synthetic chemicals and pesticides exploded, with an estimated 75,000 new synthetic chemicals introduced. One manufacturer saw a 25% growth in sales of pesticides in just last year.
We must ask ourselves if the trade-offs for the use of these toxic chemicals is worth it. Cancer is steadily increasing year after year, while the American Cancer Association proclaims that the "rate of cancer is falling." The "rate" they are actually citing is the rate of death, not the rate of incidence. And it is the incidence, or the amount of times people get cancer, that is more important. True, we all want to cure those who have it already and those who will inevitably get it in the future, but wouldn't it be better to prevent people from getting it in the first place? Of course. So why is it that nearly 99% of research money goes to "the cure" while 1% goes to prevention? Money is the reason. Prevention is not profitable in the sense that industry's mind is set on. It doesn't fit their paradigm of a healthy business being able to profit on both the cause and the cure at the same time.
Instead of spending close to 100% of the cancer research money on curing it we should focus on preventing, and spend the money to find natural alternatives to these toxic chemicals that are so abundant.
Especially vulnerable are [the fetus], infants and children. Pregnant mothers, possibly with other infants, are frequently present at schools. Children, because of their small body size, receive greater lung and skin exposure to chemicals present on floors, carpet, grass, or dirt. Pesticides are how most schools contend with cockroaches and ants in cafeterias, classrooms, and offices, and rodents in waste storage areas and overgrown brush and weeds outdoors. While at school, children come in contact with dust particles on surfaces such as carpets, books, and plastics that can potentially harbor pesticide residues. This means that even if pesticides are applied after school hours, children are still at risk. New studies suggest that pesticides may compromise the immune system of infants and children. Potentially dangerous pesticides are routinely applied in schools with no warning to parents or school staff.
In January 1998, I led a task force to study alternatives to pesticides at a local elementary school. The use of pesticides was put on hold until alternative means of maintaining the lawns and the interior of the school were studied. The first thing we did as a group was to discuss what the community, consisting of parents, teachers and school board members who are concerned about their children’s health, expected of the interior and exterior environments. What were the perceived and real pest threats? What were the least toxic methods for dealing with the problems? The conclusion was that the expectations of the lawn needed to be adjusted. The Fuji-color green lawn was out and a natural shade of green was in. Pesticides were out and health was in.
For many years IPM (Integrated Pest Management) has been characterized as the best method of controlling pests on the farm, in the garden, and in our homes. IPM was originally promoted by environmental groups as a way to reduce pesticide use. To some extent, it did work, but it has been adopted by the chemical industry in order to prolong the use of highly toxic synthetic pesticides and fertilizers.
Many recent scientific studies have warned of the toxic effects of extremely low-doses of synthetic chemicals. The ramifications of these scientific studies has sent shivers throughout all levels and disciplines of the chemical industry. What it means is that their version of IPM, and chemical safety in general, is not valid. The concept of using less toxic pesticides and lower quantities of pesticides is not bad, however, even at extremely low doses, many synthetic chemicals used in many pesticides, plastics, pharmaceuticals, health & beauty aids, and a wide variety of consumer goods, can have the effect of being mistaken by the body as a hormone. The misinformation of the hormone look-alikes can have permanent and irreversible consequences.
Similar to the tobacco industry or alcohol industry running advertising campaigns telling teens not to use their products, IPM is generally promoted by pesticide manufacturers because they see it as a way to appear cautious. Another method of promoting toxic pesticides is to either lie or pretend that the mounting evidence against them is "junk science." The world leader in genetically engineered crops that use the pesticide Roundup is Monsanto. They have been sued for falsely advertising Roundup as "safe" and "nontoxic." They still proclaim that it's use is an environmentally sustainable method of farming. Unfortunately, Roundup is an endocrine disruptor, and Monsanto doesn't mention it in any of the product warnings.
Compare these two documents; one by Monsanto, the other by NCAP, the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides.
The difference is quite remarkable!
|
If you have come to this page from an outside location click here to get back to mindfully.org |