`ASPARTAME - MONSANTO DIET DRINK POISON(Aspartame: also known as Aspartamine, NutraSweet ® , Equal ® , Spoonful ® )Commonly found in diet drinks and other artificially sweetened "diet" foods.Introduction: There are a number of people who have E-mailed us stating that the following articleis an “urban legend” (untrue) and have provided links to “acclaimed medical expert” websites. Invisiting these links, the pages provided little or no information substantiating their claims that thefollowing article by Nancy Markel is untrue.It is our opinion that whether or not every small detail of the article is correct, the essence of thearticle is relevant. The essence is that aspartame contains methanol (and methanol cannot be madenon-poisonous) which breaks down in the body. The methanol and its metabolic byproducts arebound to have damaging effects on the human body if taken in consistently high doses. Those whoconsume a lot of diet sodas or cook with Nutri-Sweet are the most likely to have the symptoms. Andwhile the symptom list she provides is quite extensive, remember that the symptoms of methanolpoisoning are also extensive.WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE and the MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS FOUNDATION IS SUINGFDA FOR COLLUSION WITH MONSANTO!Article written by Nancy MarkleI have spent several days lecturing at the WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE onASPARTAME marketed as NutraSweet, Equal, and Spoonful ". In the keynote address by theEPA, they announced that there was an epidemic of multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus, and theydid not understand what toxin was causing this to be rampant across the United States. I explainedthat I was there to lecture on exactly that subject.When the temperature of Aspartame exceeds 86 degrees F, the wood alcohol in ASPARTAMEcoverts to formaldehyde and then to formic acid, which in turn causes metabolic acidosis. (Formicacid is the poison found in the sting of fire ants).The methanol toxicity mimics multiple sclerosis; thus people were being diagnosed with havingmultiple sclerosis in error. The multiple sclerosis is not a death sentence, where methanol toxicityis.In the case of systemic lupus, we are finding it has become almost as rampant as multiple sclerosis,especially Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi drinkers. Also, with methanol toxicity, the victims usuallydrink three to four 12 oz. cans of these per day, some even more.In the cases of systemic lupus, which is triggered by ASPARTAME, the victim usually does notknow that the aspartame is the culprit. The victim continues its use aggravating the lupus to such a
degree that sometimes it becomes life threatening. When we get people off the aspartame, thosewith systemic lupus usually become asymptomatic. Unfortunately, we can not reverse this disease.On the other hand, in the case of those diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, (when in reality, thedisease is methanol toxicity), most of the symptoms disappear. We have seen cases where theirvision has returned and even their hearing has returned. This also applies to cases of tinnitus. During a lecture I said "If you are using ASPARTAME (NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, etc.) andyou suffer from fibromylagia symptoms, spasms, shooting pains, numbness in your legs,cramps, vertigo, dizziness, headaches, tinnitus, joint pain, depression, anxiety attacks, slurredspeech, blurred vision, or memory loss-- you probably have ASPARTAME DISEASE!"People were jumping up during the lecture saying, "Ive got this, is it reversible?" It is rampant. Someof the speakers at my lecture even were suffering from these symptoms. In one lecture attended bythe Ambassador of Uganda, he told us that their sugar industry is adding aspartame! He continued bysaying that one of the industry leaders son could no longer walk - due in part by product usage!We have a very serious problem. Even a stranger came up to Dr. Espisto (one of my speakers) andmyself and said, "Could you tell me why so many people seem to be coming down with MS?"During a visit to a hospice, a nurse said that six of her friends, who were heavy Diet Coke addicts,had all been diagnosed with MS. This is beyond coincidence. Here is the problem. There wereCongressional Hearings when aspartame was included in 100 different products. Since this initialhearing, there have been two subsequent hearings, but to no avail. Nothing as been done.The drug and chemical lobbies have very deep pockets. Now there are over 5,000 productscontaining this chemical, and the PATENT HAS EXPIRED!!!!! At the time of this first hearing,people were going blind. The methanol in the aspartame converts to formaldehyde in the retina ofthe eye.Formaldehyde is grouped in the same class of drugs as cyanide and arsenic-- DEADLYPOISONS!!!Unfortunately, it just takes longer to quietly kill, but it is killing people and causing all kinds ofneurological problems.Aspartame changes the brains chemistry. It is the reason for severe seizures. This drug changesthe dopamine level in the brain. Imagine what this drug does to patients suffering from ParkinsonsDisease. This drug also causes Birth Defects.There is absolutely no reason to take this product.It is NOT A DIET PRODUCT!!!The Congressional record said, "It makes you crave carbohydrates and will make you FAT". Dr.
Roberts stated that when he got patients off aspartame, their average weight loss was 19 poundsper person. The formaldehyde stores in the fat cells, particularly in the hips and thighs.Aspartame is especially deadly for diabetics.All physicians know what wood alcohol will do to a diabetic. We find physicians that believe thatthey have patients with retinopathy, when in fact, the condition is caused by the aspartame. Theaspartame keeps the blood sugar level out of control, causing many patients to go into a coma.Unfortunately, many have died. People were telling us at the Conference of the American Collegeof Physicians, that they had relatives that switched from saccharin to an aspartame product and howthat relative had eventually gone into a coma. Their physicians could not get the blood sugar levelsunder control. Thus, the patients suffered acute memory loss and eventually coma and death.Memory loss is due to the fact that aspartic acid and phenylalanine are neurotoxic without the otheramino acids found in protein. Thus it goes past the blood brain barrier and deteriorates the neurons ofthe brain. Dr. Russell Blaylock, neurosurgeon, said, "The ingredients stimulates the neurons of thebrain to death, causing brain damage of varying degrees.Dr. Blaylock has written a book entitled "EXCITOTOXINS: THE TASTE THAT KILLS" Dr.H.J. Roberts, diabetic specialist and world expert on aspartame poisoning, has also written a bookentitled "DEFENSE AGAINST ALZHEIMERS DISEASE".Dr. Roberts tells how aspartame poisoning is escalating Alzheimers Disease, and indeed it is. Asthe hospice nurse told me, women are being admitted at 30 years of age with Alzheimers Disease.Dr. Blaylock and Dr. Roberts will be writing a position paper with some case histories and will postit on the Internet. According to the Conference of the American College of Physicians, "We aretalking about a plague of neurological diseases caused by this deadly poison".Dr. Roberts realized what was happening when aspartame was first marketed. He said, "his diabeticpatients presented with memory loss, confusion, and severe vision loss". At the Conference of theAmerican College of Physicians, doctors admitted that they did not know this.They had wondered why seizures were rampant (the phenylalanine in aspartame breaks down theseizure threshold and depletes seretonin, which causes manic depression, panic attacks, rage andviolence).Just before the Conference, I received a FAX from Norway, asking for a possible antidote for thispoison because they are experiencing so many problems in their country. This poison is nowavailable in 90 PLUS countries worldwide. Fortunately, we had speakers and ambassadors at theConference from different nations who have pledged their help. We ask that you help too.Print this article out and warn everyone you know. Take anything that contains aspartame back tothe store. Take the "NO ASPARTAME TEST" and send us your case history.I assure you that MONSANTO, the creator of aspartame, knows how deadly it is.
MONSANTO funds the American Diabetes Association, American Dietetic Association, Congress,and the Conference of the American College of Physicians. The New York Times, on November 15,1996, ran an article on how the American Dietetic Association takes money from the food industry toendorse their products. Therefore, they can not criticize any additives or tell about their link toMONSANTO.How bad is this? We told a mother who had a child on NutraSweet to get the child off the product.The child was having grand mal seizures every day. The mother called her physician, who calledthe ADA, who told the doctor not to take the child off the NutraSweet.We are still trying to convince the mother that the aspartame is causing the seizures. Every time weget someone off of aspartame, the seizures stop.If the baby dies, you know whose fault it is, and what we are up against. There are 92 documentedsymptoms of aspartame, from coma to death. The majority of them are all neurological, because theaspartame destroys the nervous system.Aspartame Disease is partially the cause to what is behind some of the mystery of the Desert Stormhealth problems. The burning tongue and other problems discussed in over 60 cases can be directlyrelated to the consumption of an aspartame product. Several thousand pallets of diet drinks wereshipped to the Desert Storm troops. (Remember heat can liberate the methanol from the aspartame at86 degrees F). Diet drinks sat in the 120-degree F Arabian sun for weeks at a time on pallets. Theservice men and women drank them all day long. All of their symptoms are identical to aspartamepoisoning.Dr. Roberts says "consuming aspartame at the time of conception can cause birth defects". Thephenylalanine concentrates in the placenta, causing mental retardation, according to Dr. Louis Elsas,Pediatrician Professor - Genetics, at Emory University in his testimony before Congress.In the original lab tests, animals developed brain tumors (phenylalanine breaks down into DXP, abrain tumor agent). When Dr. Espisto was lecturing on aspartame, one physician in the audience, aneurosurgeon, said, "when they remove brain tumors, they have found high levels of aspartame inthem".Stevia, a sweet food, NOT AN ADDITIVE, which helps in the metabolism of sugar (which wouldbe ideal for diabetics), has now been approved as a dietary supplement by the FDA. For years, theFDA has outlawed this sweet food because of their loyalty to MONSANTO.Organic Steviahttp://stevitastevia.comIf it says "SUGAR FREE" on the label-- DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT!!!!!!
Senator Howard Metzenbaum wrote a bill that would have warned all infants, pregnant mothers andchildren of the dangers of aspartame. The bill would have also instituted independent studies on theproblems existing in the population (seizures, changes in brain chemistry, changes in neurologicaland behavioral symptoms).It was killed by the powerful drug and chemical lobbies, letting loose the hounds of disease anddeath on an unsuspecting public.Since the Conference of the American College of Physicians, we hope to have the help of someworld leaders. Again, please help us too. There are a lot of people out there who must be warned,please let them know this information.~Comments Continued from the beginning:My wife who is board certified in Internal Medicine as well as Ambulatory Care (EmergencyMedicine) and who is also a diabetics and geriatrics expert, occasionally sees patients who exhibitthe symptoms mentioned in the article. Often, stopping consumption of aspartame (mostfrequently NutriSweet laden diet drinks) reduces or eliminates the symptoms. Some unfortunatelycannot be reversed, once the process begins.The Success seminars have a variety of prominent speakers on a wide range of subject; one seminarincluded President and First Lady Bush (Sr.). A prominent physician speaking at the one I attendedin ’95, made the comment that Aspartame is “#1 cause of complaints to the U.S. Food and DrugAdministration (FDA).”Weve received lots of interesting E-mail accounts from others whove read that article. Here are afew samples [I removed the authors names]”==================================Subject: Article by Nancy Markle re: AspartameMy name is D.C. from Silver Lake N.Y. I read the e-mail article regarding Aspartame by NancyMarkle approximately 2 weeks ago. It was forwarded to me by my sister who knew that I wasexperiencing problems with my eyes. I regularly used 3-6 packets of Equal sweetener in my coffeeon a daily basis for years! That with other "diet" products.On September 8th, 1998, I experienced a sudden loss of vision in my right eye where only "colorfulblurs" could be seen. After extensive testing including MRI, head x-rays, and vision testing of allsorts, the doctors told me they could not figure out what was wrong and recommended that I justreplace the lens in my eye glasses to accommodate my new prescription.I did just that.
After reading the article on Aspartame, I immediately discontinued its use. After 5 days, I startedfeeling better and Praise the Lord, my eyesight started to CLEAR UP! I put the old lens back intomy glasses on May 1, 1999 because the "new" lens clouded my vision and I could see better withoutmy glasses. Coincidence? I think not.Thank you for sharing this valued article. I have forwarded it to everyone I know and have givencopies to friends without e-mail.God Bless you all! D.C.======================================Subject: Help PleaseIn last 2 years I have been diagnosed with "Lupus like" diseases as follows: Polymyalgia-Fibromyalgia- Diabetes- Rheumatoid Arthritis with visual problems. I now have to wear glassesdue to not being able focus; also no treatments are effective thus far.I drank about 6-10 diet drinks a day and have for about 20 years, my drink of choice was Diet Coke!!!!!!The doctor checks me for Lupus frequently, because when I first got sick, first symptom wasbutterfly rash on face, but all tests are negative this far. My sediment rate run very high. Is there atest for toxicity from NutraSweet? Please contact me either way. My doctor says diseases areprogressing rapidly.==================================Some thoughts about the medical establishment:I grew up in medical doctor’s family, with 3 of 4 siblings following my father into a medicallyrelated field. The medical community surrounded me. My wife is a practicing doctor. And ingeneral we have high respect for the medical field. However, as she was going through her medicaltraining at one of the top medical schools in the USA, she was told that half of what she would betaught over the next 4 years would later be found to be inaccurate, they just didn’t know which half.In other words, there is a necessity for a sharp doctor to be flexible to accept new discoveries thatreplace old ones (that’s why they call it the “practice” of medicine”). Several “truths” that have beendebunked since she went through medical school were that the brain and heart are static; they don’tchange or heal. Now of course we know that the heart can repair if given the right environment.Further that the brain is not static, but ever changing (neuroplasticity). Even though ADD, dyslexicchildren are often treated with psychotropics such as Ritalin or Adderall, the National Institutes ofHealth (NIH), after a detailed study concluded that they don’t help academic performance longterm at all!Neural-Cognitive Therapy is much more effective as far as academics are concerned. My wife wastaught by some of her wise associates that if something didnt make sense, to "follow the money or
the power" to find out why a medical concept, product or medication was being backed by certainauthorities.So while truth may be absolute, knowledge of the truth may be ever changing.~DIRTY SECRETS of the Food Processing Industryhttp://scribd.com/doc/48259922~``Racketeering charges have been filed against Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld,Monsanto, NutraSweet Co., the American Diabetes Association and Dr Robert Moser fordistributing toxic aspartame, in a class action representing many plaintiffs, filed in the US District Court for theNorthern District of California seeking $350 million in damages.The suit charges the defendants with manufacturing and marketing a deadly neurotoxin unfit forhuman consumption, while they assured the pubic that aspartame (also known as NutraSweet/Equal)
contaminated products are safe and healthful, even for children and pregnant women. Present USSecretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, is mentioned throughout the lawsuit.As evidence, an explosive affidavit from a former translator for the GD Searle company - thedeveloper of aspartame - was made recently public and revealed the following.For 16 years, the Food and Drug Administration denied approval of aspartame because ofcompelling evidence of its contributing to brain tumours and other serious disabilities.Donald Rumsfeld left President Fords administration as Chief of Staff to become the CEO ofaspartame-producer GD Searle Co. in 1981. Shortly after, Rumsfeld became the CEO, and the dayafter President Reagan took office, aspartame was quickly approved by FDA Commissioner ArthurHayes over the objections of the FDAs Public Board of Inquiry. Hayes had been recently appointedby the Reagan Administration. Shortly after aspartames approval by the FDA, Hayes joinedNutraSweets public relations firm under a 10-year contract at $1,000 a day.In January 1977, the FDA wrote a 33-page letter to US Justice Department Attorney Sam Skinner:"We request that your office convene a Grand Jury investigation into apparent violations of theFederal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act." Skinner allowed the Statute of Limitations to run. ThreeFDA Commissioners and eight other officers and Skinner took jobs in the aspartame industry shortlyafter it was approved.The FDA once listed 92 adverse reactions from 10,000 consumer complaints and would send thelist to all inquirers. In 1996 the FDA stopped taking complaints and now denies the existence of thereport. Seizures, blindness, sexual dysfunction, obesity, testicular, mammary and brain tumoursand death, plus dozens of other dread diseases named in the suit, arise from the consumption ofthis neurotoxin.Defendant Moser, past CEO of NutraSweet, is cited for misrepresenting facts to public andcommercial users with full knowledge of the deceptions. Aspartame/Nutrasweet is sold to Bayer,Con Agra Foods, Dannon, Smucker, Kellogg, Wrigley, PepsiCo, Kraft Foods (Crystal Light),Conopco (Slim-Fast), Coke, Pfizer, Wal-Mart and Wyeth (to name a few), who use it in some oftheir products, including childrens vitamins. These entities are named in other suits now inCalifornian courts.Defendant American Diabetes Association is meant to care for diabetics. A 35-year ADA member,diabetic specialist HJ Roberts, MD, FACP, discovered aspartame can precipitate or aggravatediabetes and its complications, or simulate the complications (especially neuropathy andretinopathy).His report, intended for the Annual Scientific Meeting of the ADA, was rejected for presentation -and even publication of the abstract - but was later published in another medical journal.`The Bush Administration could be called the Monsanto Cabinet, per Robert Cohen,author of “Milk, The Deadly Poison” which details the horrid politics behind the contamination of
our nations milk and beef supply with bovine growth hormone.Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was president of Searle Pharmaceuticals, a company ownedby Monsanto. Rumsfeld was also the Secretary of Defense under President Ford.Rumsfeld is believed to have earned around US$12 million from the sale of Searle to Monsanto.Attorney General John Ashcroft reportedly received $10,000 for his senatorial campaign fromMonsanto in the mid 90s. Ashcrofts contribution from Monsanto was five times that of any othercongressional hopeful. Ashcroft, and Sr. Bush Supreme Court appointee Clarence Thomas wereinstrumental in gaining Food and Drug Administation (FDA) approval for Monsantoscontroversial artificial sweetener aspartame, which has been linked to over 200 ailments thatinclude Alzheimers disease, juvenile diabetes, depression, epileptic seizures, blindness, memoryloss, excitability, weight gain, multiple sclerosis and lupus (The Idaho Observer, November,2000).Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman was on the board of directors of Calgene Pharmaceutical,another company currently owned by Monsanto.Secretary of Health Tommy Thompson is the fourth member of the Bush cabinet to have direct tiesto Monsanto. The former governor of Wisconsin designated his state as a “biotech zone” for the useof Monsantos bovine growth hormone even though dairy farmers in his state opposed thedesignation by a 9-1 ratio. Thompson reportedly received $50,000 from biotech companies duringhis election campaign.Bovine growth hormone, which does increase the productivity of dairy cows, has also been linkedto many health problems in children and adults (The Idaho Observer, November, 2000) andmakes cows sick.Bovine growth hormone has been outlawed in most countries, but not the U.S.And as Cohen points out, another player in the Monsanto-studded Cabinet is Rep. Richard Pombo,who will head the Agriculture Subcommittee on Dairy, Livestock and Poultry. Pombo is also aMonsanto boy, having taken campaign money from it while stalling a 1994 bill to make labelingmandatory for milk or milk products containing Bovine Growth Hormones. Pombo helped kill thebill in committee.Monsanto also holds the patent on the “terminator gene” which prevents plants from producingviable seed so that farmers, and therefore, people will be dependent upon the multinationalcorporation for their food supply.Monsanto has proven to be one of the most greedy, ruthless and environmentally irreverentcorporations in world history.One cannot serve the interests of Monsanto and serve the interests of people at the same time.
`BiblePlushttp://bibleplus.org/health/ms_lupus.htmDVD: Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World; director: Cori Bracketthttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/74846448DVD: Sweet Remedy: The World Reacts to an Adulterated Food Supply; directors: JT Waldronhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/191050404``Organic Diabetic Sweetener - Steviahttp://www.stevitastevia.com
book: The World According to Monsanto; by Marie-Monique Robinhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/286490848http://www.librarything.com/work/5155236http://books.google.com/books?id=7RqYQwAACAAJDVD: The World According to Monsantohttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/317415694book: The Last Farmer: How One Man Took on Monsanto to Save the Future of Food; by JohnParkhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/435418555http://www.librarything.com/work/9879147http://books.google.com/books?id=L1aHQAAACAAJbook: Fast Food Nation; by Eric Schlosserhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/45248356http://www.librarything.com/work/3735http://books.google.com/books?id=Z_IO20TJBN8Cdvd: Fast Food Nation; director: Richard Linklaterhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/77539187dvd: Foodmatters; director: James Colquhounhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/428736140book: Empty Harvest; by Bernard Jensenhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/170954616http://www.librarything.com/work/1237077http://books.google.com/books?id=Fp7eN8Ghg60Cbook: Fatal Harvest: The Tragedy Of Industrial Agriculture; Andrew Kimbrellhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/48013826http://www.librarything.com/work/241618http://books.google.com/books?id=plTcVDph_SQCbook: Fateful Harvest: The True Story of a Small Town, a Global Industry, and a Toxic Secret;by Duff Wilsonhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/46565121http://www.librarything.com/work/569636http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fateful_Harvesthttp://www.safefoodandfertilizer.org/index.htmlbook: Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills; by Russell L Blaylockhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/44960035
http://www.librarything.com/work/854055http://books.google.com/books?id=gav_LL7olqQCbook: The Truth About Caffeine; by Marina Kushnerhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/61209940http://www.librarything.com/work/1269843http://books.google.com/books?id=_xkjQaPrDxkCbook: The Truth About Coffee; by Marina Kushnerhttp://www.librarything.com/work/8358177http://books.google.com/books?id=0lh1PgAACAAJbook: Silent Spring; by Rachel Carsonhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/561302http://www.librarything.com/work/23937http://books.google.com/books?id=HeR1l0V0r54Cdvd: Food Inc; director: Robert Kennerhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/429531017http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/297529846http://www.librarything.com/work/8401882http://www.foodincmovie.comhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food,_Inc.http://www.scribd.com/doc/43528259dvd: King Corn; director: Aaron Woolfhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/213373700http://www.kingcorn.nethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Corn_%28film%29http://www.sustainabletable.org/features/articles/kingcorn/book: Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry Lies About the Safety of the GeneticallyEngineered Foods Youre Eatinghttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/53122034http://www.librarything.com/work/453446http://books.google.com/books?id=ltpSPgAACAAJhttp://www.seedsofdeception.comhttp://www.responsibletechnology.orgbook: Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods; byJeffrey Smithhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/77541620http://www.librarything.com/work/3361962http://gmwatch.orghttp://www.scribd.com/doc/41584887http://books.google.com/books?id=EctxAAAACAAJ
dvd: Food Fight; director: Chris Taylorhttp://www.foodfightthedoc.comdvd: Ingredients; producer: Brian Kimmelhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/608387521http://www.ingredientsfilm.comhttp://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=101225708412¬es_tab=app_2347471856book: Animal Factory: The Looming Threat of Industrial Pig, Dairy, and Poultry Farms toHumans; by David Kirbyhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/428027213http://www.librarything.com/work/9398107http://books.google.com/books?id=VQ9sXDyYN64Cdvd: The Future of Food; by Deborah Koons Garciahttp://www.thefutureoffood.comhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/63134852book: Disconnect: The Truth about Cell Phone Radiation; by Devra Davishttp://www.environmentalhealthtrust.orghttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/526057538http://www.librarything.com/work/10261957http://books.google.com/books?id=x671QwAACAAJdvd: Super Size Me; director: Morgan Spurlockhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/56582138book: Dont Eat This Book: Fast Food and the Supersizing of America; by Morgan Spurlockhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/57694996http://www.librarything.com/work/18410http://books.google.com/books?id=LLLuAAAAMAAJdvd: Killer at Large, Why obesity is Americas greatest threat; director: Steven Greenstreethttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/317962830http://www.facebook.com/pages/Killer-at-Large-Why-Obesity-Is-Americas-Greatest-Threat/109343939089227book: We Dont Die We Kill Ourselves: Our Foods Are Killing Us!; by Roger L De Haanhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/83766162http://www.librarything.com/work/2633326http://books.google.com/books?id=jGlPAAAACAAJbook: Politically Incorrect Nutrition; by Michael Barbeehttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/55803425
http://www.librarything.com/work/607609http://books.google.com/books?id=KTGzxKdJ7hYCbook: The ADHD Fraud: Children are dying from ADHD Drugs; by Fred A. Baughmanhttp://www.adhdfraud.orghttp://www.ritalindeath.comhttp://www.feingold.orghttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/71817204http://www.librarything.com/work/1486426http://books.google.com/books?id=3R4XCP1Dwi8Cbook: Living Downstream: A Scientists Personal Investigation of Cancer and theEnvironment; by Sandra Steingraberhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/435418465http://www.librarything.com/work/587300http://books.google.com/books?id=SNLEbFK2_B0Cbook: The Fluoride Deception; by Christopher Brysonhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/53870969http://www.librarything.com/work/1926469http://books.google.com/books?id=q3v_JgjZ6fsChttp://www2.fluoridealert.orghttp://www.lovethetruth.com/truth_about_fluoride.htmhttp://www.gatesofhorn.com/blog/the_fluoride_cover_uphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoride_poisoningbook: The Case Against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water; byPaul Connetthttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/642278620http://www.librarything.com/work/10119111http://books.google.com/books?id=DEqDaoNTo2ICbook: The Devils Poison: How fluoride is Killing You; by Dean Murphyhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/278376305http://www.librarything.com/work/8408241http://books.google.com/books?id=YXKjNwAACAAJbook: Fluoride: Drinking Ourselves to Death; by Barry Groveshttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/47726037http://www.librarything.com/work/278546http://books.google.com/books?id=CvpFAAAAYAAJbook: Fluoride: The Freedom Fight; by H.C. Moolenburghhttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/23350208http://www.librarything.com/work/10041318http://books.google.com/books?id=rblpAAAAMAAJ
book: The Fluoride Question: Panacea or Poison; by Anne-Lise Gotzschehttp://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1111450http://books.google.com/books?id=RP1pAAAAMAAJ~MONSANTO MEN in the USA Government`The Bush administrations could be called the Monsanto Cabinet, per Robert Cohen, author of“Milk, The Deadly Poison” which details the horrid politics behind the contamination of ournations milk and beef supply with bovine growth hormone.Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was president of Searle Pharmaceuticals, a company ownedby Monsanto. Rumsfeld was also the Secretary of Defense under President Ford.Rumsfeld is believed to have earned around US$12 million from the sale of Searle to Monsanto.Attorney General John Ashcroft reportedly received $10,000 for his senatorial campaign fromMonsanto in the mid 90s. Ashcrofts contribution from Monsanto was five times that of any othercongressional hopeful. Ashcroft, and Sr. Bush Supreme Court appointee Clarence Thomas wereinstrumental in gaining Food and Drug Administation (FDA) approval for Monsantoscontroversial artificial sweetener aspartame, which has been linked to over 200 ailments thatinclude Alzheimers disease, juvenile diabetes, depression, epileptic seizures, blindness, memoryloss, excitability, weight gain, multiple sclerosis and lupus (The Idaho Observer, November,2000).Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman was on the board of directors of Calgene Pharmaceutical,another company currently owned by Monsanto.Secretary of Health Tommy Thompson is the fourth member of the Bush cabinet to have direct tiesto Monsanto. The former governor of Wisconsin designated his state as a “biotech zone” for the useof Monsantos bovine growth hormone even though dairy farmers in his state opposed thedesignation by a 9-1 ratio. Thompson reportedly received $50,000 from biotech companies duringhis election campaign.Bovine growth hormone, which does increase the productivity of dairy cows, has also been linkedto many health problems in children and adults (The Idaho Observer, November, 2000) andmakes cows sick.Bovine growth hormone has been outlawed in most countries, but not the U.S.And as Cohen points out, another player in the Monsanto-studded Cabinet is Rep. Richard Pombo,who will head the Agriculture Subcommittee on Dairy, Livestock and Poultry. Pombo is also aMonsanto boy, having taken campaign money from it while stalling a 1994 bill to make labelingmandatory for milk or milk products containing Bovine Growth Hormones. Pombo helped kill the
bill in committee.Monsanto also holds the patent on the “terminator gene” which prevents plants from producingviable seed so that farmers, and therefore, people will be dependent upon the multinationalcorporation for their food supply.Monsanto has proven to be one of the most greedy, ruthless and environmentally irreverentcorporations in world history.One cannot serve the interests of Monsanto and serve the interests of people at the same time.~Racketeering charges have been filed against Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, Monsanto,NutraSweet Co., the American Diabetes Association and Dr Robert Moser for distributing toxicaspartame, in a class action representing many plaintiffs, filed in the US District Court for theNorthern District of California seeking $350 million in damages.The suit charges the defendants with manufacturing and marketing a deadly neurotoxin unfit forhuman consumption, while they assured the pubic that aspartame (also known as NutraSweet/Equal)contaminated products are safe and healthful, even for children and pregnant women. Present USSecretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, is mentioned throughout the lawsuit.As evidence, an explosive affidavit from a former translator for the GD Searle company - thedeveloper of aspartame - was made recently public and revealed the following.For 16 years, the Food and Drug Administration denied approval of aspartame because ofcompelling evidence of its contributing to brain tumours and other serious disabilities.Donald Rumsfeld left President Fords administration as Chief of Staff to become the CEO ofaspartame-producer GD Searle Co. in 1981. Shortly after, Rumsfeld became the CEO, and the dayafter President Reagan took office, aspartame was quickly approved by FDA Commissioner ArthurHayes over the objections of the FDAs Public Board of Inquiry. Hayes had been recently appointedby the Reagan Administration. Shortly after aspartames approval by the FDA, Hayes joinedNutraSweets public relations firm under a 10-year contract at $1,000 a day.In January 1977, the FDA wrote a 33-page letter to US Justice Department Attorney Sam Skinner:"We request that your office convene a Grand Jury investigation into apparent violations of theFederal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act." Skinner allowed the Statute of Limitations to run. ThreeFDA Commissioners and eight other officers and Skinner took jobs in the aspartame industry shortlyafter it was approved.The FDA once listed 92 adverse reactions from 10,000 consumer complaints and would send thelist to all inquirers. In 1996 the FDA stopped taking complaints and now denies the existence of thereport. Seizures, blindness, sexual dysfunction, obesity, testicular, mammary and brain tumoursand death, plus dozens of other dread diseases named in the suit, arise from the consumption of
this neurotoxin.Defendant Moser, past CEO of NutraSweet, is cited for misrepresenting facts to public andcommercial users with full knowledge of the deceptions. Aspartame/Nutrasweet is sold to Bayer,Con Agra Foods, Dannon, Smucker, Kellogg, Wrigley, PepsiCo, Kraft Foods (Crystal Light),Conopco (Slim-Fast), Coke, Pfizer, Wal-Mart and Wyeth (to name a few), who use it in some oftheir products, including childrens vitamins. These entities are named in other suits now inCalifornian courts.Defendant American Diabetes Association is meant to care for diabetics. A 35-year ADA member,diabetic specialist HJ Roberts, MD, FACP, discovered aspartame can precipitate or aggravatediabetes and its complications, or simulate the complications (especially neuropathy andretinopathy).His report, intended for the Annual Scientific Meeting of the ADA, was rejected for presentation -and even publication of the abstract - but was later published in another medical journal.~MONSANTO Genetically Engineered Food: How DANGEROUS to children?`Listing of the flaws and of the suppressed information regarding Genetically Engineered Food(GM). Listing of the Alternative Farming Methods that will eliminate Global Hunger.~Report from: Korea-Japan Joint Resolution Against GM WheatTo: Wheat Farmers and Traders of the USA and Canada:We, consolidated consumers of wheat products and organic farmers of Korea and Japan, are stronglyagainst GM wheat that contains not only Roundup-Ready herbicide-resistant protein but alsoantibiotics and the virus protein CaMV, all of them having potential of harming human healthand causing irreversible damage to the whole of nature, of which we are part.We will never eat even one piece of such grain, nor will we allow one bit to reach our lands. Pleasestop using GM wheat and keep using conventional non-GM wheat, the variety that we have acceptedand enjoyed. If any news that GM wheat is commercially grown reaches us, we win launch amassive rally to replace wheat with staple rice for any purpose of grain use.We sincerely wish you would take our voice into consideration when you make the choice ofwhether to go with GM wheat or conventional non-GM wheat.--The Coalition of Farmers and Consumers against GM Food in JapanA two-year-old Japanese study has now made it into an English translation. This document from theHealth Ministry of Japan ought to rattle a few cages and cause Cheney-Stokes palpitations in the
breasts of scientists, both the perpetrators of fraud and the dupes who bought into the fiction beingpurveyed as science.In the Japanese report MONSANTOs dangerous logic may take this one-two punch withoutdistress, but literate farmers will recoil if they pause to follow the trail Japanese scientists havemarked with iron-clad clarity.Briefly, the desire to harvest more bins and bushels has prompted scientists to install a toxin into thebean itself via the agency of genetic engineering. With systemic resistance in tow, low-inputcultivation and cropping could be simplified. To achieve this goal, MONSANTO created a soybeanmutant resistant to their bestseller, the organophosphate Roundup. Glyphosate is the effectiveingredient in Roundup.The resistant strains developed seriously hampered enzymatic activity of ESPS (5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase) The technical nature of the development does not needto detain us. Suffice it to say that one of the enzymes works to synthesize the aromatic amino acidstyrosine, phenylalanine and tryptophan, for which reason the soybean failed to thrive.GENETIC ENGINEERINGGenetic engineering was the rage at the time of the initial experiments. The idea was to breed unlikespecies at the molecular level, this technology having developed in the wake of Watson and Cricksmodeling of DNA in 1953.The company scientists found a microorganism in glyphosate factory sewage. It was a soil bacteriumcapable of synthesizing aromatic amino acids in the presence of glyphosate. The resultant productwas quite different from natures blueprint. It took a powerful protein from a cauliflower virus tomake the gene insert perform. Additionally, a signal peptide carries the necessary protein to the locusof the enzyme. These few notes are necessarily an aside, perhaps a bow to the ingenious craft of theengineer. But the mix of genes from several unrelated plants assumes understanding of a naturalsystem so complex that no computer in the world could handle even a fraction of the informationcontained within a blade of grass.The genetically modified soybean has never existed in nature. It appropriated the genetic material ofthe bean and tampered with it in defiance of natural evolution. The Japanese study tells us that "239(17.51 percent) nucleotides out of 1,365 total were manually converted into different bases . . . inorder for the protein synthetic machinery of the soybean cell to decipher the bacterial gene across thespecies barrier."All this is interesting, a bit esoteric, and possibly a broadside designed to confuse the grower andhand off convincing evidence that Norman Borlaug is right, the world has to have geneticengineering and greater profits for the brilliant redesigners of nature.The Japanese paper said, "It is with good reason that genetically modified plants are calledFrankenstein plants in Europe."
ARE THEY SAFE?According to the FDA, modified beans are as safe as those designed by natural evolution. Are they?For field tests, soybeans were grown without herbicides. The Roundup Ready soybean is usuallysprayed with Roundup. "It was a surprise to find that both the genetically modified soybean 40-3-2strain and the parent strain, A5403, used for field tests were not sprayed with Roundup herbicide intheir cultivation. What MONSANTO has produced with Roundup application was a minimalamount, enough to test glyphosate residues in the harvested forage. Several tons of soybeans used insafety assessments were not produced with Roundup. The reason is not stated in the documents."Based on such data, the Japanese study asserts, it is not possible to assess the safety of soybeans thathuman beings and animals consume on the premise that glyphosate is missing, this when the toxin isused to inhibit plant enzyme ESPS and its effects on other metabolic pathways.One conclusion flows logically from the facts.Test results based on a product other than the one that is marketed are worthless.The protein analyzed was from E. coli, not from RR soybeans. The protein expressed in thebioengineered product does not have the same amino acid sequence as the soil bacterium from whichthe gene was harvested. There is the matter of "post-transnational modification after expression," theJapanese study said. In short, the whole procedure can run amok.Apparently it has, as on-scene sow breeding experiences in Iowa have revealed. The Japanese studynoted that "amino acid sequence" was not determined."What MONSANTO has sequenced was only 15 amino acids from N-terminal of the protein thatwas expressed in E. coli. The rest of the sequence was an assumption from the nucleotide sequenceof the bacterial DNA. They determined only 33 percent of an expected total of 455 amino acids thatthe protein is not of soybean."Further: "The real sequence of CP4ESPS protein in the soybean we are eating is still unknown."Further: "Acute toxicity tests on rats are also carried out by the protein expressed in E. coli." WhatMONSANTO says in the application document is that extracting large amounts of CP4ESPS proteinfrom soybeans is difficult.The Japanese find this a poor excuse. The paper goes on to define the proper procedure. The papersfiled with the U.S. government stand accused of conjectural science, science converted to the needsof a corporation that apparently sees science as malleable."The experiments described are fundamentally invalid," the report concludes. Yet the business ofgenetic engineering was loaded into American agriculture with hardly a single reference to the
American constituency that the government was obligated to consult.ANIMAL TESTSThere were animal tests using cows, chickens, rats, catfish and quail. All seem to have beeninadequate. Toasted soybeans were fed to only 10 rats in each group for 28 days. Cross-generation orchronic toxicity was not measured by such a limited scope.Even so, weight and welfare of kidneys, liver, etc., exhibited differences. Short-term tests ofuntoasted soybeans did not exhibit a difference between GMOs and natural, and this became a pegon which hangs the claim of "no difference." The statistical differences were evident just the same,the Japanese say, but were ignored:Even with these far-from-satisfactory experiments, the data for body and organ weight of liver,kidney and testicles show obvious differences in the male rats between both groups, wild strainA5403 and bio-engineered strain 40-3-2 soybean.The groups fed raw soybeans showed no difference, but the male group fed toasted soybean 40-3-2exhibited 6.7 percent lower body weight than the A5403-fed group and 13 percent less than thegroup fed commercial feed mix at the end of test period of 28 days. Although this difference isdescribed as statistically significant in the data sheet, the conclusion ignores these results and statesthat "no statistical significance is observed."The experiments are far from satisfactory in terms of both the samples and the statistical methodused. Our group transcribed all raw data and redid the statistical analysis using the Turkey multiplemethod. The result again showed the apparent growth obstacle for body and kidney weight in malerats fed with toasted 40-3-2 soybean. We wondered why there is no such difference in the female ratsgroup. The answer to this question seemed to be the amount of feed intake: where males took 25 to30 grams/day, female rats took only 18 to 20grams/day (approximately 70 percent of male intake). Itis highly possible that female rats would also show significant growth difference if the experimentwere conducted on a much larger scale and with a longer feeding period.TOASTING, ETC.Much of this report has been abstracted in depth to make it readable for the average farmer. Theconclusion needs no explanation, for it speaks with damning finality:We found a highly intentional misinterpretation in ignoring obvious differences between theA5403 and 40-3-2 hybrids in the documents. Raw soybeans showed no difference in the analysisbetween genes modified 30-4-2 and non-modified A5403 soybeans. Difference is observed in toastedsoybeans. Besides such main components as water, protein, fat, fiber and ash, trypsin-inhibitor, lectinand urease, which are called harmful physiologically, active substances as feed are detected in theanalysis. Urease is used as an indicator of protein denaturation by heat treatment.
Obvious differences appeared after toasting at actual feed processing conditions (108 C for 30minutes). While the concentrations of total protein and potassium were not changed, theconcentrations of trypsin-inhibitor, urease and lectin are significantly higher in the toastedglyphosate-tolerant bean 30-4-2 compared to that of the A5403 normal bean.These physiologically active substances remained active even after heat treatment in the geneticallymodified soybean, whereas those of the herbicide-sensitive normal bean were easily denatured andinactivated. The high activity of these elements does not usually satisfy as feed.This result prompted MONSANTO to claim that "the modified soybeans were not toastedsufficiently in the experiment," and they returned and asked for retreatment of the sample by theTexas A&M laboratory that processed the beans. MONSANTO ordered the condition of retoast at220 C for 25minutes, which is considerably higher than normal processing of 100 C for 10 minutes.Retoasting, however, further widened the difference in activity between the two strains. The hybrid61-67-1, another genetically modified soybean inserted with bacterial CP4EPSPS, showed a highheat-resistant property.Scientists would usually conclude in such a case that there was substantial difference between thetwo types, but MONSANTO concluded that the second toasting was still not enough.In the end, they toasted twice further and finally got the result they wanted, i.e., all proteins weredenatured and inactivated. With this result, they concluded that genetically modified and non-modified soybeans have equivalent properties.No protein can withstand repeated heat treatment and stay active. This is a common knowledge ofprotein chemistry. The results at normal feed-processing conditions is required - no more, no less.MONSANTO based their conclusions on the presumption that "they cant be different" and theireconomic need that "they shouldnt be different." Their translation of the experiment is based on adesired-outcome attitude and not at all scientific. The English-language report did not show analysisdata of the third and fourth heat treatments, but the summary report in Japanesehas a graph, as ifthere were data, showing the final loss of activity, stating, "The data from insufficient heat treatmentsis not adopted" and "No substantial difference observed." If one reviews only the summary volumein Japanese and does not look into the English data, one would be ushered to the conclusion "safe."However, we found in the first and the second analyses data a fact indicative of regular heattreatment. Granulated soybean, when heated, loses weight as water and other volatile componentsevaporate, and as a result, relative concentration of non-volatile substance such as total protein andash increases. The data shows clearly that the modified 40-3-6 and 61-67-1 and the non-modifiedA5403 have gone through same level of heat treatment. The decrease of water content also certifiesthis fact.MONSANTO concluded that the residual herbicide in a crop increases, therefore the safety standardshould be slackened. Adopting the Roundup-tolerant soybean would increase the herbicideconcentration in the soybean plants and seeds, because the herbicide is directly sprayed on the plantby post-emergence application before harvest. MONSANTO studied in detail the results of changingfactors such as spraying times, the concentration of the active ingredient, glyphosate, the duration of
harvest after spraying, and growing locations.The data show clearly that the concentration of glyphosate and AMPA (a degraded metabolite ofglyphosate) in forage and hay increase greatly by post-emergence application of the herbicidecompared to that of conventional pre-emergence application, although the residual concentration inthe plant differed from place to place.The largest value of the combined glyphosate and AMPA was 40.187 ppm in forage, considerablyhigher than the U.S. safety standard at the time of application to FDA and USDA (1994) of 15 ppmin forage and hay. The maximum combined concentration of glyphosate and AMPA in soybean seedwas 13.178 ppm, less than the 20 ppm U.S. standard at that time. The concentration of residualglyphosate increased in accordance with the application, from two to three times. As a result,cultivating Roundup ready soybeans may sometimes violate U.S. safety standardsWe found a surprising statement in the document to address this problem. In its conclusion,MONSANTO says that "The maximum combined glyphosate and AMPA residue level ofapproximately 40 ppm in soybean forage resulting from these new uses exceeds the currentlyestablished tolerance of 15 ppm. Therefore, an increase in the combined glyphosate and AMPAtolerance for residues in soybean forage will be requested." They know very well that adoption of anherbicide-tolerant crop took precedence over safety standards. In fact, the U.S. tolerance standard ofcombined glyphosate and AMPA in soybean forage was changed to 100 ppm after they approved thegenetically engineered soybean.As for the Japanese government, they revised the safety standard of combined glyphosate andAMPA in soybean seed from 6 ppm to 20 ppm in April 2000 at the request of the U.S. government.Japan could thus import soybeans from the United States without violation of the law.Thus, MONSANTO, in their rush to verify safety, patchworked the results of experiments andanalyses that are as full of holes as an incomplete puzzle. Their product was asserted safe throughmanipulation of experimental results.Even more troubling, rather than trying to meet legal safety standards, they requested - and weregranted - the revision of these standards to fit their needsWe have managed to find facts showing inadequate and incomplete safety assessment in theapplication document by MONSANTO, even though our work was limited and took place underdifficult conditions. The process of genetic recombination and the results of other animalexperiments remain uninspected by us.TEST OF REASONThe matter of genetically modified canola is being tested in Canadas high court. The U.S. courtshave handed down incredible decisions, most of which carry out a reversal as greatly denounced asthe Dred Scott ruling. For now it is up to the American farmer to shun GMOs. The Japanese seem tohave taken the position that they want to see what happens to a generation of Americans before they
rush to judgment.The original paper cited, abstracted, and quoted above is titled "Fraudulent Conclusion: FactsFound by Inspection of the Safety Assessment of GM Roundup Tolerant Soybean, MONSANTOsDangerous Logic as Seen in the Application Documents Submitted to the Health Ministry of Japan."The credit line reads, Masaharu Kawata, Assistant Professor, School of Science, Nagoya University,Japan. A subtitle says, "What Is Herbicide-Resistant Soybean by MONSANTO?"CONCLUSION:MONSANTO Genetically Engineered Food is VERY DANGEROUS.Stop the Monsanto BUTCHERS from KILLING your CHILDREN and GRANDCHILDREN.~School Food is DangerousDear John,Is anybody doing anything to change the food in schools? It’s terrible. Last week I took my 8-year-old to a school picnic. It was a lovely day, but they served bologna and cheese sandwiches on whitebread, with mayonnaise. Plus cookies and ice cream. And, of course, enormous plastic jugs of Coke.In class, pupils earn credits for good behavior, which they can use to get candy and Cokes. Help!FriedaDear Frieda,My, oh my. That is a shame. Maybe you and your child could wear one of the T-shirts to school thatsays “If you love me, don’t feed me junk food.”I wish these parents and teachers and administrators could understand what they are doing to theprecious children in their care.Fortunately, there are some people trying to change things. The chairperson of the Senate AgricultureCommittee, Senator Tom Harkin, has proposed that the government subsidize the cost of givingaway fruit and vegetables in school cafeterias as an alternative to candy and snacks that are sold invending machines.Los Angeles Unified School District, which has 748,000 students on its 677 campuses, prohibitscarbonated drink sales at elementary schools. And recently, the board of the nation’s second-largestschool district extended the ban, effective January, 2004, to also include the district’s approximately200 middle and high schools.
The Board voted unanimously for this step, despite the vehement opposition of the National SoftDrink Association.Up until now, most Los Angeles Unified Schools have relied on soda sales to fund student activitiessuch as sports and field trips. Sodas sold in vending machines and student stores have generated anannual average profit of $39,000 per high school.Wouldn’t it make far more sense to fund our schools adequately in the first place, so they don’t haveto sell soft drinks and other junk food to cover their costs?Change is painfully slow, but it is starting. In 2001, Berkeley, California, schools went all organic.In 2002, the Oakland school district banned vending machines, candy, soda pop and other junk foodfrom its campuses. In the fall of 2002, Palo Alto (California) Unified School District went allorganic.I know it’s frustrating seeing the junk kids all-too-often eat in schools.But here’s a recent report about how things can indeed change, written by Jon Rappaport, titled:A Miracle In WisconsinIn Appleton, Wisconsin, a revolution has occurred.It’s taken place in the Central Alternative High School.The kids now behave. The hallways aren’t frantic. Even the teachers are happy.The school used to be out of control.Kids packed weapons.Discipline problems swamped the principal’s office.But not since 1997.What happened?Did they line every inch of space with cops? Did they spray valium gas in the classrooms? Did theyinstall metal detectors in the bathrooms? Did they build holding cells in the gym?Afraid not.In 1997, a private group called Natural Ovens began installing a healthy lunch program.Huh?
Fast-food burgers, fries, and burritos gave way to fresh salad and whole grain bread.Fresh fruits were added to the menu.Good drinking water arrived. Vending machines were removed.As reported in a newsletter called Pure Facts, “Grades are up, truancy is no longer a problem,arguments are rare, and teachers are able to spend their time teaching.”Principal LuAnn Coenen, who files annual reports with the state of Wisconsin, has turned in somestaggering figures since 1997.Drop-outs? Students expelled? Students discovered to be using drugs? Carrying weapons?Committing suicide?Every category has come up ZERO. Every year.Mary Bruyette, a teacher, states, “I don’t have to deal with daily discipline issues…I don’t havedisruptions in class or the difficulties with student behavior I experienced before we started the foodprogram.”One student asserted, “Now that I can concentrate I think it’s easier to get along with people.What a concept---eating healthier food increases concentration.Principal Coenen sums it up:I can’t buy the argument that it’s too costly for schools to provide good nutrition for theirstudents.I found that one cost will reduce another.I don’t have the vandalism. I don’t have the litter. I don’t have the need for high security.At a nearby middle school, the new food program is catching on. A teacher there, Dennis Abram,reports, “I’ve taught here almost 30 years. I see the kids this year as calmer, easier to talk to. Theyjust seem more rational.I had thought about retiring this year and basically I’ve decided to teach another year---I’m havingtoo much fun!”~Monsantos Agent Orange - DEAD BABIES & DEAD VETERANS`THE ISSUE THAT WONT GO AWAY
`The enduring presence of Agent Orange is just one terrible legacy of Vietnams ill-fated war.The USA used the toxic defoliant to unmask guerrilla fighters by stripping forest cover.But children are still being born with terrible deformities.Families are denied compensation from the USA.The USA denies responsibility.Stop the baby killersNote, some of the above companies (or their subsidiaries) produce drugs, toxic chemical, herbicides,insecticides and fertilizer.Most chemicals are made from fossil fuels.First, they poisons you with their Chemicals. Then, they will help you with their drugs for anexorbitant price.~AGENT ORANGE SIDE EFFECTSThe potentially deadly Agent Orange side effects recognized by the Veteran Affairs include:• Prostate Cancer• Respiratory Cancers• Multiple Myeloma• Type II Diabetes• Hodgkin’s Disease• Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma• Soft Tissue Sarcoma• Chloracne• Porphyria Cutanea Tarda• Peripheral Neuropathy• Spinal Bifidia in Vietnam veteran children exposed to Agent OrangeAGENT ORANGE BIRTH DEFECTSBirth defects were found to occur in Vietnam veterans that were exposed to Agent Orange.The birth defects included Spinal Bifidia and Peripheral Transient Neuropathy, and have continuedto affect third generations.
"TCDD (dioxin) has been shown to be extremely toxic to a number ofanimal species. Mortality does not occur immediately.it appears thatthe animals environment suddenly becomes toxic to them."~CASARETT AND DOULLS TOXICOLOGY, 1996From 1962 to 1970, the US military sprayed 72 million liters ofherbicides, mostly Agent Orange, in Vietnam. Over one millionVietnamese were exposed to the spraying, as well as over 100,000Americans and allied troops. Dr. James Clary, a scientist at theChemical Weapons Branch, Eglin Air Force Base, who designed theherbicide spray tank and wrote a 1979 report on Operation Ranch Hand(the name of the spraying program), told Senator Daschle in 1988,"When we (military scientists) initiated the herbicide program in the1960s, we were aware of the potential for damage due to dioxincontamination in the herbicide. We were even aware that the militaryformulation had a higher dioxin concentration than the civilianversion due to the lower cost and speed of manufacture. However,because the material was to be used on the enemy, none of us wereoverly concerned. We never considered a scenario in which our ownpersonnel would become contaminated with the herbicide."quoted by Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt, 1990WHAT DID WE KNOW ABOUT DIOXIN, AND WHEN DID WE KNOW IT?The first reported industrial dioxin poisoning occurred in Nitro, WestVirginia in 1949. The exposed workers complained of rash, nausea,headaches, muscle aches, fatigue and emotional instability. A 1953accident elsewhere resulted in peripheral neuropathies.A 1969 report commissioned by the USDA found Agent Orange showed a"significant potential to increase birth defects." The same year, theNIH confirmed that it caused malformations and stillbirths in mice. In1970, the US Surgeon General warned it might be hazardous to "ourhealth." The same day, the Secretaries of the Departments ofAgriculture, the Interior, and HEW jointly announced the suspension ofits use around lakes, recreation areas, homes and crops intended forhuman consumption. DOD simultaneously announced its suspension of alluses of Agent Orange.When dioxin contaminated material spread on a Missouri farm in 1971,
hundreds of birds, 11 cats, 4 dogs and 43 horses died.In 1978 the EPA suspended spraying Agent Orange in national forests,due to increases in miscarriages in women living near forests that hadbeen sprayed.A 1979 study published in the JAMA by Bogen et al looked at 78 Vietnamveterans who reported Agent Orange exposures. Eighty percent reportedextreme fatigue. Over 60% had peripheral neuropathies, 73% haddepression, and 8% had attempted suicide. Forty-five per cent reportedviolent rages. Sudden lapses of memory were seen in 21%.A 1981 study by Pazderova et al. found one half of 80 exposed workershad metabolic disturbances, 23% peripheral neuropathies, and themajority, psychiatric changes, primarily depression and fatigue.In 1979, 47 railroad workers were exposed to PCBs including dioxin inMissouri when cleaning up a spillage from a damaged tank car that hadbeen filled with these chemicals. All were followed medically for sixyears. Their initial complaints included fatigue and muscle aches. Twocommitted suicide. Careful evaluations at Rush-Presbyterian Hospital,in Chicago, confirmed peripheral neuropathies (in 96%), depression(69%), tremors (78%), abnormal fatigue (91%), and muscle aches orcramp (51%). Half had cognitive problems, including problems withattention and concentration (50%) and slowed reaction times.These studies are all consistent with each other, and describe a verysignificant, multi-system illness affecting all parts of the nervoussystem, and causing fatigue and muscle aches. Some of the studiesdocumented additional organ dysfunction. This syndrome could be verydisabling.WHAT DID IT TAKE TO FORGET WHAT WE KNEW?By 1983, 9170 veterans had filed claims for disabilities that they said were caused by Agent Orange.The VA denied compensation to 7709, saying that a facial rash was the only disease associated withexposure.Congress passed the Veterans Dioxin and Radiation Exposure Compensation Standards Act of 1984in response. It required the VA to appoint a Veterans Advisory Committee on EnvironmentalHazards to review the literature on dioxin and submit recommendations to the head of the VA.According to Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, "The VA.directly contradicted its own established practice,promulgating instead the more stringent requirement that compensation depends on establishing acause and effect relationship," improperly denying the bulk of the claims.
Four groups of impartial scientists were asked by Zumwalt to review the Advisory Committeetranscripts. Their comments are telling, and include the following:"The work of the Advisory Committee.has little or no scientific merit.""an inadequate process is being used to evaluate scientific publications for use in public policy.""less than objective."Unfortunately, the flawed scientific reviews didnt end with the VA committee. The CDC wasbrought in to add weight to the bogus analysis of dioxins effects. After 4 years and $63 million infederal funds, CDC concluded that an Agent Orange study could not be done based on militaryrecords, and furthermore concluded, without data, that veterans were never exposed to harmful dosesof Agent Orange!When the CDCs protocols were examined, however, it was found that three changes had been madeto its study in 1985, in an apparent attempt to dilute any negative effect that might be found.Congress learned in 1986 that administration officials, not scientists, had forestalled CDC researchon the effects of dioxin.In 1990, Senator Daschle disclosed additional political interference in the Air Forces Ranch Handstudy of Agent Orange effects. A 1984 draft reports conclusion was substantially altered, and thestudy was described as "reassuring."The Ranch Hand study is still ongoing, despite new allegations of fraudulent methodologies comingto light every few years. It will cost taxpayers over $100 million.Monsanto, a manufacturer of Agent Orange, was happy to duplicate the methods of federally fundedstudies. By omitting five deaths in the exposed group and putting four exposed workers in the controlgroup, they were able to hide a 65% higher death rate in the workers exposed at the Nitro plant.Another study of workers exposed in 1953 at a BASF plant was also shown to be falsified, as all thedata had been supplied by the BASF company.Thanks to the efforts of Admiral Zumwalt, who as the commanding Navy Admiral in Vietnam wasresponsible for some of the spraying, and whose son died from lymphoma, probably as a result ofdioxin exposure, many more illnesses were finally linked to Agent Orange, and have been madeservice-connectable over the past decade.But Zumwalt did not succeed at clearing the air regarding dioxins actual toxicity, nor did he stopfurther scientific shenanigans carried out by government and industry to hide the toxic effects ofother products, especially those to which our servicemen and women are exposed.In April 2000, the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences tried to release a reportlisting dioxin as a carcinogen, but it was blocked by a lawsuit filed by an industry group. NIEHS hadtried to list dioxin as a carcinogen in 1991, but was not allowed to do so then. John Bucher, deputy
director of the NIEHS, says, "Dioxin tends to increase the likelihood of all types of cancers" whileindustry representatives continue to claim there is insufficient evidence to link dioxin to healthproblems.Ellen Silbergeld, a University of Maryland toxicologist, responded, "I think the public should be madas hell about the [dioxin review] process and the way its been abused."AGENT ORANGE: 2002US and Vietnamese government scientists and international experts met last week in Hanoi todiscuss the effects of the "last significant ghost" of the Vietnam War: Agent Orange.Vietnam wants US help performing research and obtaining compensation. It blames Agent Orangefor tens of thousands of birth defects. The US and Vietnam did sign an agreement during the meetingto carry out joint research studies. But US ambassador Raymond Burghardt noted that developingresearch studies "that are definitive and address the underlying causes of disease in Vietnam" will bea "difficult task."Reporting on the conference, Reuters pointed out, "Observers say conclusive research could havefar-reaching and expensive consequences in terms of compensation claims for the US and AgentOrange makers, Dow Chemical and Monsanto."However, the US seems to think it has an ace in the hole. The US embassy made clear, at the time ofthe conference, that "US-Vietnam relations were normalized in 1995 after Vietnam dropped claimsof war reparations/compensation. At the time of normalization, neither compensation nor reparationswere granted or contemplated for the future."And, anyway, the US government has a fallback position. "Washington argues there is no hardevidence showing the defoliant caused specific illness," Reuters reported last week. And USgovernment scientists chimed in that any linkages to birth defects "would take many more years toprove."The well-documented story of dioxin and scientific perfidy provide a guidepost for how to assessgovernment-sponsored research, advisory committees, and regulatory decisions that impact on thehealth effects of toxic exposures, especially when the government may be liable for damages."Those Who Cannot Remember the Past Are Condemned to Repeat It"--George SantayanaRECOMMENDED READINGZumwalt ER. Report to the Secretary of the Department of VeteransAffairs on the association between adverse health effects and exposure
to Agent Orange. DVA Report, 1990.Echobichon DJ. Toxic Effects of Pesticides, in Casarett and DoullsToxicology. Klaassen CD ed, McGraw-Hill, NY. 1996.Klawans HL et al. Neurologic problems following exposure to TCDD,dioxin. In Neurotoxins and their pharmacological implications, ed.Jenner P, 1987. Raven Press, NY.Welch, Craig. Dioxin debate growing hotter. Seattle Times May 29, 2000Agent Orange help needed now, Vietnam Red Cross says. Reuters, March5, 2002.~Agent Orange DangersThe most toxic dioxin was used in Agent Orange, the herbicide developed for military use. An April2003 study performed by Columbia University sought to re-examine military records of the VietnamWar. What the study found was that about 21 million gallons of herbicides were sprayed from 1961-1971, adding up to 1.84 million gallons.This figure was 10% greater than previously believed, and over half of the herbicides sprayed wereAgent Orange. Deadly illnesses associated to Agent Orange was not acknowledged by the Pentagonuntil years after Vietnam veterans were exposed to the dangerous herbicide. Laboratory studiesperformed in 1969 found that birth defects was linked to Agent Orange exposure, however the use ofthe herbicide was not discontinued until two years later, exposing 2.4 million Vietnam veterans to it,in addition to 5 million acres of forest with the majority of them still unrestored to date.According to the VA site, Agent Orange was sprayed from 1965 to April 1970. According to thepresident of Vietnam Veterans of Central Florida, “When it was being sprayed you knew it. It waseverywhere, for people who were on the ground, you could actually see it on their skin,” (OrlandoSentinel, 6/9/03). Dow, Monsanto, Diamond Shamrock Corporation, Hercules Inc., Uniroyal inc., T-H Agricultural & Nutrition Company, and Thompson Chemical Corporation all produced AgentOrange for military use and were included in the Agent Orange settlement.The Department of Veterans Affairs announced in 2003 that the link to chronic lymphocyticleukemia to Agent Orange exposed Vietnam veterans is so strong that benefits would automaticallybe given to any new diagnoses of it. There are as many as 1,000 new patients for chroniclymphocytic leukemia alone expected amongst Vietnam veterans. Since many of the diseasesassociated to Agent Orange exposure can take 20-30 years to develop, thousands of Vietnamveterans may have been excluded from the Agent Orange settlement in 1985.In 1993, the National Academy of Sciences issued a report linking Agent Orange to multiplemyeloma and other conditions. As more Agent Orange studies were performed more illnesses were
linked to the herbicide. The VA has listed prostate cancer, respiratory cancers, multiple myeloma,type II diabetes, Hodgkin’s disease, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, soft tissue sarcoma, chloracne,porphyria cutanea tarda, peripheral neuropathy, and spinal bifidia in children of veterans exposed toAgent Orange as side effects of the herbicide.The recent Supreme Court issuance of Vietnam veterans to seek compensation from chemicalmanufacturers will allow the ability for justice to be given to victims unjustly exempted from theAgent Orange settlement. For years, Vietnam veterans have been unable to collect any damagesdespite the deadly illnesses suffered. Despite the lapse of time that has unfolded since the end of theVietnam War, illnesses are still being diagnosed and Vietnam veterans that have served theircountry have been denied rights.~Monsanto Keeps Up Attack on Seed Saving Farmers`As if U.S. farmers werent in enough trouble, now the "seed police" are after them. Monsanto, theworld leader in genetically modified grains, is pursuing fines and jail sentences for farmers who usetheir seed in noncontractual ways-such as saving it and sowing it the next season. The Center forFood Safety has released an investigative review of Monsantos use of U.S. patent law to crack downon farmers. Monsanto has filed 90 lawsuits against U.S. farmers in 25 states that involve 147 farmersand 39 small businesses or farm companies, according to the report.*500: The number of U.S. farmers under investigation annually by Monsanto.*$10 million: Monsantos annual budget (plus 75 staff) devoted to investigating and prosecuting U.S.farmers.*$15,253,602: The total recorded judgments granted to Monsanto for farmerlawsuits.*$3,052,800: The largest recorded judgment in favor of Monsanto as a result of a farmer lawsuit.*8 months: The prison sentence given to a Tennessee farmer convicted of violating an agreementwith Monsanto.Sources: "Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers 2005" (The Center for Food Safety); The Associated Press.http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/CFSMOnsantovsFarmerReport1.13.05.pdf~The Story of Agent Orange`PART 1
It is the war that will not end. It is the war that continues to stalk and claim its victims decades afterthe last shots were fired. It is the war of rainbow herbicides, Agents Orange, Blue, White, Purple,Green and Pink.This never-ending legacy of the war in Vietnam has created among many veterans and their familiesdeep feelings of mistrust of the U.S. government for its lack of honesty in studying the effects of therainbow herbicides, particularly Agent Orange, and its conscious effort to cover up information andrig test results with which it does not agree.STUDY CANCELEDOn August 2, 1990, two veterans groups filed suit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.,charging that federal scientists canceled an Agent Orange study mandated by Congress in 1979because of pressure from the White House.The four year, $43 million study was canceled, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)in Atlanta, because it could not accurately determine which veterans were exposed to the herbicideused to destroy vegetation in Vietnam.The American Legion, Vietnam Veterans of America and other veterans groups are charging amassive government cover-up on the issue of herbicide exposure because of the hundreds of millionsof dollars in health care and disability claims that would have to be paid.The results of the scientific studies are rigged, claim many veterans, to exonerate the governmentwhich conducted the spraying and the chemical companies which produced the herbicides. Untilthere is a true study of the effects of Agent Orange, say the veterans - a study devoid of governmentinterference and political considerations, the war of the rainbow herbicides will go on.Charges of a White House cover-up have been substantiated by a report from the House GovernmentOperations Committee. That report, released August 9, 1990, charges that officials in the Reaganadministration purposely "controlled and obstructed" a federal Agent Orange study in 1987 becauseit did not want to admit government liability in cases involving the toxic herbicides.Government and industry cover-ups on Agent Orange are nothing new, though. They have beengoing on since before the herbicide was introduced in the jungles of Vietnam in the early 1960s.PLANTS GIVEN CANCERAgent Orange had its genesis as a defoliant in an obscure laboratory at the University of Chicagoduring World War II. Working on experimental plant growth at the time, Professor E.J. Kraus,chairman of the schools botany department, discovered that he could regulate the growth of plantsthrough the infusion of various hormones. Among the discoveries he made was that certain broadleafvegetation could be killed by causing the plants to experience sudden, uncontrolled growth. It wassimilar to giving the plants cancer by introducing specific chemicals. In some instances, deterioration
of the vegetation was noticed within 24-48 hours of the introduction of the chemicals.Kraus found that heavy doses of the chemical 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) could inducethese growth spurts. Thinking this discovery might be of some use in the war effort, Kraus contactedthe War Department. Army scientists tested the plant hormones but found no use for them before theend of the war.Civilian scientists, however, found Kraus plant hormones to be of use in everyday life after the war.Chemical sprays that included 2,4-D were put on the market for use in controlling weeds in yards,along roads and railroad rights of way.ARMY EXPERIMENTS WITH DEADLY DEFOLIANTSThe Army continued to experiment with 2,4-D during the 1950s and late in the decade found a potentcombination of chemicals which quickly found its way into the Armys chemical arsenal.Army scientists found that by mixing 2,4-D and 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4,5-T) andspraying it on plants, there would be an almost immediate negative effect on the foliage. What theydidnt realize, or chose to ignore, was that 2,4,5-T contained dioxin, a useless by-product of herbicideproduction. It would be twenty more years until concern was raised about dioxin, a chemical theEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA) would later call "one of the most perplexing and potentiallydangerous" known to man.According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "The toxicity of dioxin renders it capable of killing somespecies of newborn mammals and fish at levels of five parts per trillion (or one ounce in six milliontons). Less than two millionths of an ounce will kill a mouse. Its toxic properties are enhanced by thefact that it can pass into the body through all major routes of entry, including the skin (by directcontact), the lungs (by inhaling dust, fumes or vapors), or through the mouth. Entry through any ofthese routes contributes to the total body burden. Dioxin is so toxic, according to the encyclopedia,because of this: "Contained in cell membranes are protein molecules, called receptors, that normallyfunction to move substances into the cell. Dioxin avidly binds to these receptors and, as a result, israpidly transported into the cytoplasm and nucleus of the cell, where it causes changes in cellularprocession."After minimal experimentation in 1961, a variety of chemical agents was shipped to Vietnam to aidin anti-guerilla efforts. The chemicals were to be used to destroy food sources and eliminate foliagethat concealed enemy troop movements.RAINBOW HERBICIDESThe various chemicals were labeled by color-coded stripes on the barrels, an arsenal of herbicidesknown by the colors of the rainbow, including Agent Blue (which contained arsenic), Agent White,Agent Purple, and the lethal combination of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T, Agent Orange.
On January 13, 1962, three U.S. Air Force C-123s left Tan Son Nhut airfield to begin OperationHades (later called Operation Ranch Hand), the defoliation of portions of South Vietnams heavilyforested countryside in which Viet Cong guerrillas could easily hide. By September, 1962, thespraying program had intensified, despite an early lack of success, as U.S. officials targeted the CaMau Peninsula, a scene of heavy communist activity. Ranch Hand aircraft sprayed more than 9,000acres of mangrove forests there, defoliating approximately 95 percent of the targeted area. Thatmission was deemed a success and full approval was given for continuation of Operation RanchHand as the U.S. stepped up its involvement in Vietnam.SIX TO TWENTY-FIVE TIMES STRONGER THAN RECOMMENDEDOver the next nine years, an estimated 12 million gallons of Agent Orange were sprayed throughoutVietnam. The U.S. military command in Vietnam insisted publicly the defoliation program wasmilitarily successful and had little adverse impact on the economy of the villagers who came intocontact with it.Although the herbicides were widely used in the United States, they usually were heavily dilutedwith water or oil. In Vietnam, military applications were sprayed at the rate of three gallons per acreand contained approximately 12 pounds of 2,4-D and 13.8 pounds of 2,3,5-T.The military sprayed herbicides in Vietnam six to 25 times the rate suggested by the manufacturer.In 1962, 15,000 gallons of herbicide were sprayed throughout Vietnam. The following year thatamount nearly quadrupled, as 59,000 gallons of chemicals were poured into the forests and streams.The amounts increased significantly after that: 175,000 gallons in 1964, 621,000 gallons in 1965 and2.28 million gallons in 1966.The pilots who flew these missions became so proficient at their jobs that it would take only a fewminutes after reaching their target areas to dump their 1,000-gallon loads before turning for home.Flying over portions of South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia that had been sprayed, the pilots couldsee the effects of their work. Many of them adopted a grim fatalism about the job. Over the door ofthe ready room for Ranch Hand pilots at Tan Son Nhut Airport near Saigon hung this sign: "OnlyYou Can Prevent Forests."MAKERS KNEW OF DANGER TO HUMANSUnknown to the tens of thousands of American soldiers and Vietnamese civilians who were living,eating and bathing in a virtual omnipresent mist of the rainbow herbicides, the makers of thesechemicals were well aware of their long-term toxic effects, but sought to suppress the informationfrom the government and the public, fearing negative backlash.Of particular concern to the chemical companies was Agent Orange, which contained dioxin.Publicly, the chemical companies said dioxin occurred naturally in the environment and was notharmful to humans.
Privately, they knew otherwise.A February 22, 1965 Dow Chemical Corporation internal memorandum provided a summary of ameeting in which 13 executives discussed the potential hazards of dioxin in 2,4,5-T. Following thatmeeting, Dow officials decided to meet with other makers of the chemical and formulate a stance onAgent Orange and dioxin.In March 1965, Dow official V.K. Rowe convened a meeting of executives of Monsanto, HookerChemical, which operated the Love Canal dump, Diamond Alkali, the forerunner of Diamond-Shamrock, and the Hercules Powder Co., which later became Hercules, Inc.According to documents uncovered only years later, the purpose of this meeting was "to discuss thetoxicological problems caused by the presence of certain highly toxic impurities" in samples of 2,4,5-T. The primary "highly toxic impurity" was 2,3,7,8 TCDD, one of 75 dioxin compounds.CONCERN OVER DIOXINS KEPT QUIETThree months later, Rowe sent a memo to Ross Mulholland, a manager with Dow in Canada,informing him that dioxin "is exceptionally toxic, it has a tremendous potential for producingchloracne (a skin disorder similar to acne) and systemic injury." Rowe ordered Mulholland in apostscript to the letter that "Under no circumstances may this letter be reproduced, shown or sent toanyone outside of Dow." Among those in attendance at one of the meetings of chemical companyofficials was John Frawley, a toxicologist for Hercules, Inc. In an internal memorandum for Herculesofficials, Frawley wrote in 1965 that Dow was concerned the government might learn of a Dowstudy showing that dioxin caused severe liver damage in rabbits. Dow was concerned, according toFrawley, that "the whole industry will suffer." Frawley said he came away from the meeting with thefeeling that "Dow was extremely frightened that this situation might explode" and lead togovernment restrictions.The concern over dioxins was kept quiet and largely out of the public view. The U.S. governmentand the chemical companies presented a united front on the issue of defoliation, claiming it wasmilitarily necessary to deprive the Viet Cong of hiding places and food sources and that it caused noadverse economic or health effects to those who came into contact with the rainbow herbicides,particularly Agent Orange.AIR FORCE KNEW OF HEALTH DANGERBut, scientists involved in Operation Ranch Hand and documents uncovered recently in the NationalArchives present a somewhat different picture. There are strong indications that not only weremilitary officials aware as early as 1967 of the limited effectiveness of chemical defoliation, theyknew of potential long-term health risks of frequent spraying and sought to keep that informationfrom the public by managing news reports.
Dr. James Clary was an Air Force scientist in Vietnam who helped write the history of OperationRanch Hand. Clary says the Air Force knew Agent Orange was far more hazardous to the health ofhumans than anyone would admit at the time."When we (military scientists) initiated the herbicide program in the 1960s," Clary wrote in a 1988letter to a member of Congress investigating Agent Orange, "we were aware of the potential fordamage due to dioxin contamination in the herbicide. We were even aware that the `militaryformulation had a higher dioxin concentration than the `civilian version, due to the lower cost andspeed of manufacture. However, because the material was to be used on the `enemy, none of us wereoverly concerned. We never considered a scenario in which our own personnel would becomecontaminated with the herbicide. And, if we had, we would have expected our own government togive assistance to veterans so contaminated."MILITARY DOWNPLAYS USE OF HERBICIDESAware of the concern over the use of herbicides in Vietnam, particularly the use of Agent Orange,the U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV), attempted to put the proper publicrelations spin on information concerning Operation Ranch Hand by announcing a "revision" in itspolicy on the use of herbicides.It was not so much a revision of the policy as it was an appearance of a revision of the policy as itwas an appearance of revision, as is evident in a memorandum signed by Gen. R.W. Komer, deputyto Gen. William Westmoreland for civil operations and RD support (CORDS)."The purpose of this exercise would be to meet criticisms of excessive use of defoliants by clarifyingthat they will no longer be used in large areas, while in reality not restricting our use of defoliants(since they are not now normally used in this area anyway). In addition, there would be an escapeclause . . . which would permit the use of defoliants even in the prohibited area provided that a strongcase could be made to MACV/JGS."Appearing to restrict the use of defoliants in this manner would (a) help meet US and Vietnamesecriticism of these operations; (b) increase peasant confidence so that they would grow more rice; (c)be of psywar (psychological warfare) value by suggesting that large areas were sufficiently pacifiedby now that large scale defoliants use was no longer necessary."But the idea that the spraying of herbicides could be confined to a limited area as suggested in thismemo was known to be futile as early as 1962.MIST DRIFTOne of the first defoliation efforts of Operation Ranch Hand was near a rubber plantation in January,1962.According to an unsigned U.S. Army memorandum dated January 24, 1966, titled "Use of
Herbicides in Vietnam," studies showed that within a week of spraying, the trees in the plantation"showed considerable leaf fall.""The injury to the young rubber trees occurred even though the plantation was located some 500yards away and upwind of the target at the time of the spray delivery."The memo went on to say that "vapors of the chemical were strong enough in concentration to causethis injury to the rubber." These vapors, "appear to come from `mist drift or from vaporization eitherin the atmosphere or after the spray has settled on the vegetation."The issue of "mist drift" continued to plague the defoliation program. How far would it drift? Howfast? Wind speed and direction were of major concerns in answering these questions. Yet, there wereother questions, many of which could not be answered.What happened in humid weather?How quickly did the chemicals diffuse in the atmosphere or were they carried into the clouds anddropped dozens of miles away? How long would the rainbow herbicides linger in the air or on theground once they were sprayed?A November 8, 1967 memorandum from Eugene M. Locke, deputy U.S. ambassador in Saigon, onceagain addressed the problem of "mist drift" and "significant damage" to rubber plantations fromspraying earlier in the year.According to Locke, "the herbicide damage resulted from a navigational error; some trees in anotherplantation had been defoliated deliberately in order to enhance the security of a U.S. military camp.The bulk of the herbicide damage must be attributed, however, to the drift of herbicide through theatmosphere. This drift occurs (a) after the spray is released from the aircraft and before it reaches theground, and/or (b) when herbicide that has already reached the ground vaporizes during the heat ofthe day, is carried aloft, then moved by surface winds and eventually deposited elsewhere."There is a lack of agreement within the Mission regarding the distances over which the two kinds ofdrift can occur. When properly released (as required at 150 feet above the target, with winds of nomore than 10 mph blowing away from nearby plantations) herbicide spray should fall withreasonable accuracy upon its intended target. The range of drift of vaporized herbicide, however, hasnot been scientifically established at the present time. In recognition of this phenomenon and tominimize it, current procedures require that missions may be flown only during inversion conditions,i.e., when the temperature on the land and in the atmosphere produces downward currents of air.Estimates within the Mission of vaporized herbicide drift range from only negligible drift todistances of up to 10 kilometers and more."Ten kilometers and more. More than six miles. In essence, troops operating more than six miles fromdefoliation operations could find themselves, their water and their food doused with chemical agents,including dioxin-laced Agent Orange. And they wouldnt even know it.More than four months later, on March 23, 1968, Gen. A.R. Brownfield, then Army Chief of Staff,
sent a message to all senior U.S. advisors in the four Corps Tactical Zones (CTZ) of Vietnam.Brownfield ordered that "helicopter spray operations will not be conducted when groundtemperatures are greater that 85 (degrees) Fahrenheit and wind speed in excess of 10 mph."But the concern was not for any troops operating in the areas of spraying, as was evident in thememo, but for the rubber plantations. The message ordered that "a buffer distance of at least two (2)kilometers from active rubber plantation must be maintained." No such considerations were given forthe troops operating in the area.PROJECT PINK ROSEOne of the U.S. governments worst planned and executed efforts to use herbicides was a secretoperation known as "Project Pink Rose."According to a recently declassified report on "Project Pink Rose," the operation had its genesis inSeptember 1965 when the Joint Chiefs of Staff received a recommendation from the Commander inChief Pacific "to develop a capability to destroy by fire large areas of forest and jungle growth inSoutheast Asia."On March 11, 1966, a test operation known as "Hot Tip" was documented at Chu Pong mountainnear Pleiku when 15 B-52s dropped incendiaries on a defoliated area. According to the declassifiedmemo, "results were inconclusive but sufficient fire did develop to indicate that this technique mightbe operationally functional."What neither the government nor the chemical companies told anyone was that burning dioxinssignificantly increases the toxicity of the dioxins. So, not only was the government introducingcancer causing chemicals into the war, it was increasing their toxicity by burning them.Nevertheless, "Project Pink Rose" continued.In November, 1966, three free strike target areas were selected: one in War Zone D and two in WarZone C. Each target was a box seven kilometers square. The target areas were double and triplecanopy jungle. The areas were heavily prepped with defoliants, the government dumping 255,000gallons on the test sites.The three sites were bombed individually, one on January 18, 1967, another January 28, 1967 andthe last on April 4, 1967. According to the memo, "the order and dates of strikes were changed toproperly phase Pink Rose operations with concurrent ground operations."Which means that U.S. and Vietnamese troops were living and fighting in these test sites on which255,000 gallons of cancer causing defoliants had been dumped.The results of "Project Pink Rose" were less than favorable.
According to the memo, "The Pink Rose technique is ineffective as a means of removing the forestcrown canopy."The conclusion: "Further testing of the Pink Rose technique in South Vietnam under the existingconcept be terminated."DEFOLIANTS DUMPED ON PEOPLE AND INTO WATER SUPPLIESIn addition to the planned dumps of herbicides, accidental and intentional dumps of defoliants overpopulated areas and into the water supplies was not unusual, according to government documents.A memorandum for the record dated October 31, 1967, and signed by Col. W.T. Moseley, chief ofMACVs Chemical Operations Division, reported an emergency dump of herbicide far from theintended target.At approximately 1120 hours, October 29, 1967, aircraft #576 made an emergency dump ofherbicide in Long Khanh Province due to failure of one engine and loss of power in the other.Approximately 1,000 gallons of herbicide WHITE were dumped from an altitude of 2,500 feet.No mention was made of wind speed or direction, but chemicals dropped from that height had thepotential to drift a long way.Another memorandum for the record, this one dated January 8, 1968 and signed by Col. John Moran,chief Chemical Operations Division of MACV, also reported an emergency dump of herbicide, thistime into a major river near Saigon."At approximately 1015 hours, January 6, 1968, aircraft #633 made an emergency dump over theDong Nai River approximately 15 kilometers east of Saigon when the aircraft experienced severeengine vibration and loss of power. Approximately 1,000 gallons of herbicide ORANGE weredumped from an altitude of 3,500 feet."CHEMICAL COMPANY EMPLOYEES DEVELOP SKIN PROBLEMSThe chemical companies continued to insist that the herbicides in general, and Agent Orange inparticular, had no adverse effects on humans. This despite Dows concerns about human exposure toAgent Orange expressed internally in 1965 but hidden from the government. And this despiteevidence at the plants producing Agent Orange that workers exposed to it suffered unusual healthproblems.The Diamond Alkali Co. in Newark, New Jersey, was one of the major producers of Agent Orangefor the government. Spurred by Pentagon officials to make their production schedules to "help thewar effort," patriotic employees at Diamond Alkali eagerly sought to fill their quotas.But some of Diamond Alkalis employees began suffering what were described as "painful and